Performance of 17 Peach and Nectarine Cultivars in a Southern-Ontario, Non-Traditional Growing Region
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71318/apom.2012.66.3.133Abstract
The horticultural performance of 17 peach ( Prunus persica(L.) Batsch) and nectarine cultivars ( Prunus persicavar. nucipersica) was evaluated for seven years in Simcoe, Ontario, a non-traditional region for growing peaches. The trees were established at a spacing of 2.5 m x 4.5 m in 2004 and trained as a central leader supported on a post and wire trellis. Tree vigor, mortality, productivity, bloom, maturity date, yield and fruit size were monitored annually. After seven growing seasons, no significant difference in tree mortality, tree width or tree height was observed among cultivars. Despite winter minimum temperatures falling below -28°C in 2004 and 2005, which killed flower buds in two years out of seven, no substantive injury to the tree or scaffold branches was sustained. At the end of the study, ‘AC Harrow Dawn’ was the most vigorous while ‘Redhaven’ and ‘Virgil’ were the least vigorous. ‘Redhaven’, HW272, and V84061 were the most productive cultivars. The bloom dates for all cultivars ranged from 19 Apr to 13 May, a period in the region which is still at risk of spring frosts. Fruit from ‘Harrow Beauty’, V85384, HW273, and ‘Vivid’ trees had the largest overall fruit size. On average, harvest dates ranged over a six week period (23 Jul – 4 Sep). In general, the nectarine cultivars ‘Harflame’ and ‘Harblaze’ did poorly primarily because of their greater predisposition to foliar and fruit damage from Japanese beetles ( Popillia japonicaNewman). We conclude from this study that the establishment of peach orchards in the Norfolk region of southern Ontario is feasible. Vigorous, healthy tree growth was evident in most cultivars, however care is warranted to select cultivars that are productive, and that have the adequate fruit size for the desired market.
Downloads
Published
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The American Pomological Society and Editors cannot be held responsible for the views and opinions expressed by individual authors of articles published herein. This also applies to any supplemental materials residing on this website that are linked to these articles. The publication of advertisements does not constitute any endorsement of products by the American Pomological Society or Editors.