The Effect of Different Foliar Biostimulant Treatment Programs on the Quality and Post-Harvest Durability of Cherry Fruits ‘0900 Ziraat’


Abstract views: 13 / PDF downloads: 4

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46291/ISPECJASvol6iss2id302

Keywords:

Prunus avium, plant nutrition, fruit size, firmness, storage

Abstract

The size of cherry fruits is one of the most important quality parameters and it is desirable that the cherry fruits to be exported should be large. In this study, it was aimed to determine the effects of different foliar biostimulant treatment programs on fruit size, quality, and post-harvest durability of cherry trees. Foliar treatments were applied to cherry trees of ‘0900 Ziraat’ with programs created by combining Nutri Activ (NA, 2 mL L-1), Multi-K (MK, 2 mL L-1), Nutri Growth (NG, 2 mL L-1), Glofert 30.10.10 (GL, 2 g L-1) and Flozin (FL, 1.5 g L-1) in 3 different periods, immediately after fruit set, fruits in chickpea size and color turning stage. In the commercial program, GA3 (20 ppm) and Sweet (3 ml L-1) were applied at the stage of chickpea size and color turning, respectively and those that were not treated were accepted as controls. Some measurements and analyzes were done after harvest and 21 days of storage of cherry fruits harvested during the complete maturation period. The treatment of the NA, NG+GL, MK+FL (RZ 3) and NA, NG+GL, MK+FL+NG+GL (RZ 4) programs increased the diameter and total soluble solids (TSS) content of cherry fruits, and the treatment of the RZ 3 program increased the firmness. When all the data were evaluated, it was found that the treatment of the RZ 3 program was successful because it increased the fruit diameter, firmness and the TSS content and maintained these positive effects after storage.

References

Altuğ Onoğur, T. 2011. Gıdalarda duyusal değerlendirme. Sidas Yayınları, Türkiye.

Anonim. 2022. Ege İhracatçı Birlikleri. https://www.eib.org.tr/tr (Erişim Tarihi 01.01.2022).

Benzie, I.E.F., Strain, J.J. 1996. The ferric reducing ability of plasma (FRAP) as a measure of ‘‘antioxidant power’’: the FRAP assay. Analytical Biochemistry 239: 70-76.

Bujdoso, G., Hrotko, K. 2017. Cherry Production. (Edss: J. Quero-García, A. Iezzoni, J. Pulawska, G. Lang) Cherries: Botany, Production and Uses. CABI, Oxfordshire UK, pp. 1-13.

Crisosto, C.H., Crisosto, G.M., Metheney, P. 2003. Consumer acceptance of ‘Brooks’ and ‘Bing’ cherries is mainly dependent on fruit SSC and visual skin color. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 28: 159–167.

Einhorn, T.C., Y. Wang, J.T. 2013. Sweet cherry fruit firmness and postharvest quality of late-maturing cultivars are improved with low-rate, single applications of gibberellic acid. Hort Science, 48: 1010-1017.

Eroğul, D. 2016. İzmir İlinde yetiştirilen bazı önemli kiraz çeşitlerinin fiziksel ve kimyasal özelliklerinin belirlenmesi. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 26 (4): 579-585.

Eroğul, D., Yılmaz, C., Şen, F. 2021. Determining the effects of different treatments on the flowering of sweet cherry trees and fruit quality. ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences 5(1): 40-47.

Facteau, T.J., Rowe, K.E., Chestnut, N.E. 1985. Firmness of sweet cherry following multiple applications of gibberellic acid. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 110: 775–777.

Faostat. 2020. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. “Statistics Division”, www.fao.org. (Erişim Tarihi: 13.12.2021).

Hedhly, A., Hormaza, J.I., Herrero, M. 2007. Warm temperatures at bloom reduce fruit set in sweet cherry. Journal of Applied Botany and Food Quality, 81: 158–164.

Hampson, C.R., Stanich, K., McKenzie, D.L., Herbert, L., Lu, R., Li, J., Cliff, M.A. 2014. Determining the optimum firmness for sweet cherries using Just-About-Right sensory methodology. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 91: 104–111.

Herrero, M., Rodrigo, J., Wünsch, A. 2017. Flowering, Fruit Set and Development. (Eds: J. Quero-García, A. Iezzoni, J. Pulawska, G. Lang) Cherries: Botany, Production and Uses. CABI, Oxfordshire UK, pp. 14-35.

Horvitz, S., Godoy, C., Lopez Camelo A.F., Yommi, A., Godoy, C. 2003. Application of gibberellic acid to ‘Sweetheart’ sweet cherries: effects on fruit quality at harvest and during cold storage. Acta Horticulturae, 628: 311-316.

Kappel, F., Toivonen, P., Stan, S., McKenzie, D.L. 2006. Resistance of sweet cherry cultivars to fruit surface pitting. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 86: 1197–1202.

Karaçalı, İ. 2016. Bahçe ürünlerinin muhafazası ve pazarlanması. Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Yayınları No: 494, Bornova-İzmir 486.

Lenahan, O.M., Whiting, M.D., Elfving, D.C. 2006 Gibberellic acid inhibits floral bud induction and improves ‘Bing’ sweet cherry fruit quality. Hort Science, 41: 654–659.

McGuire, R.G. 1992. Reporting of objective color measurements, Hort Science, 27(12): 1254-1255.

Olmstead, J.W., Iezzoni, A.F., Whiting, M.D. 2007. Genotypic differences in sweet cherry fruit size are pri- marily a function of cell number. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 132: 697–703.

Ozkan, Y., Ucar, M., Yildiz, K., Ozturk, B. 2016. Preharvest gibberellic acid (GA3) treatments play an important role on bioactive compounds and fruit quality of sweet cherry cultivars. Scientia Horticulturae, 211: 358-362.

Pehluvan, M., Ramazan Bozhüyük, M.R., Doğru, B., Özden, E., Aslantaş, R. 2012. Giberalik Asit (GA3) uygulamalarının 0900-ziraat kiraz çeşidinin bazı meyve özelliklerine etkileri. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 43(1): 7-11

Thaipong, K., Boonprakob, U., Crosby, K., Cisneros-Zevallos, L., Byrne, D.H. 2006. Comparison of ABTS, DPPH, FRAP, and ORAC assays for estimating antioxidant activity from guava fruit extracts. Journal of Food Composition Analysis, 19: 669-675.

USDA-FAS, 2021. Fresh Peaches and Cherries: World Markets and Trade. US Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service. https://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/circulars/StoneFruit.pdf. Erişim: Aralık 2021.

Whiting, M.D., Lang, G.A. 2004. ‘Bing’ sweet cherry on the dwarfing rootstock ‘Gisela 5’: crop load affects fruit quality and vegetative growth but not net CO2 exchange. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 129: 407–415.

Whiting, M.D., Ophardt, D. 2005. Comparing novel sweet cherry crop load management strategies. Hort Science, 40: 1271–1275.

Whiting, M.D., Lang, G., Orphardt, D. 2005. Rootstock and training system affect cherry growth, yield, and fruit quality. Hort Science, 40: 582–586.

Yamaguchi, M., Sato, I., Takase, K., Watanabe, A., Ishiguro, M. 2004. Differences and yearly variation in number and size of mesocarp cells in sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) cultivars and related species. Journal of the Japanese Society for Horticultural Science, 73: 12–18.

Yener, H., Altuntaş, Ö. 2021. Effects of potassium fertilization on leaf nutrient content and quality attributes of sweet cherry fruits (Prunus avium L.). Journal of Plant Nutrition, 44(7): 946-957.

Zhang, C., Whiting, M.D. 2011. Improving ‘Bing’ sweet cherry fruit quality with plant growth regulators. Scientia Horticulturae, 127: 341–346.

Zheng, W., Wang, S.Y. 2001. Antioxidant activity and phenolic compounds in selected herbs. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 49: 5165–5170.

Zhao, Y., Collins, H.P., Knowles, N.R., Oraguzie, N. 2013. Respiratory activity of ‘Chelan’, ‘Bing’ and ‘Selah’ sweet cherries in relation to fruit traits at green, white-pink, red and mahogany ripening stages. Scientia Horticulturae, 161: 239–248.

Zoffoli, J.P., Toivonen, P., Wang, Y. 2017. Postharvest biology and handling for fresh markets. (Edss: J. Quero-García, A. Iezzoni, J. Pulawska, G. Lang) Cherries: Botany, Production and Uses. CABI, Oxfordshire UK, pp. 460-484.

Published

2022-06-15

How to Cite

ŞEN, F., EROĞUL, D. ., & ALTUNTAŞ, Ömer . (2022). The Effect of Different Foliar Biostimulant Treatment Programs on the Quality and Post-Harvest Durability of Cherry Fruits ‘0900 Ziraat’. ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 6(2), 375–386. https://doi.org/10.46291/ISPECJASvol6iss2id302

Issue

Section

Articles