Early Performance of ‘Fuji’ Apple Trees on Several Size-Controlling Rootstocks in the 2014 NC-140 Rootstock Trial
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71318/apom.2021.75.4.203Keywords:
trunk cross-sectional area, rootstock suckers, cumulative yield, cumulative yield efficiency, fruit weight, tree height, tree width, tree survival, tree mortalityAbstract
In 2014 a coordinated multi-year apple ( Malus domestica(Borkh)) orchard experiment on 14 rootstock genotypes trained to a tall spindle orchard system was established at eight locations in Canada and the United States using ‘Aztec Fuji®’ as the scion cultivar. The rootstocks tested were: Budagovsky10 (B.10), the Cornell-Geneva rootstocks G.11, G.202, G.214, G.30, G.41, G.935, and G.969, and the Vineland rootstocks V.1, V.5, V.6, and V.7. The industry standard Malling rootstocks M.26 EMLA and M.9-T337 were included for comparison. Tree morality, trunk cross-sectional area, tree canopy size, amount of rootstock suckering, yield, and number of fruits were measured annually. All measured responses were influenced by location and rootstock and the interaction of these two factors. After five years and averaged over all locations, G.214 and B.10 were 10% and 5% smaller than M.9-T337, respectively. G.935, G.11, and G.41 were 1%, 2% and 3% larger than M.9- T337, respectively, while G.969 was 3% larger than M.26 EMLA, respectively. V.1 and G.30 were 25% and 32% larger than M.26 EMLA, respectively, while V.7, V.5, and V.6 were the largest in the trial, ranging from 49-66% larger than M.26 EMLA. Cumulative yield increased with tree vigor. Remarkably, all rootstocks out-yielded M.9-T337 and M.26 EMLA. Averaged over all locations, cumulative yield efficiency was greatest for G.935 and G.214. Overall, tree mortality and suckering were low, but were affected by planting location. These results will allow apple producers to make more informed decisions concerning rootstock selection for the tall spindle or similar orchard training systems and planting locations.
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.