AJEV
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 22:4:215-222 (1971)
Copyright © 1971 by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shaulis, N. J.
Right arrow Articles by May, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Shaulis, N. J.
Right arrow Articles by May, P.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Shaulis, N. J.
Right arrow Articles by May, P.

Response of 'Sultana' Vines to Training on a Divided Canopy and to Shoot Crowding

N. J. Shaulis 1 and P. May 2

1 New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Geneva, N. Y.
2 CSIRO Division of Horticultural Research, Glen Osmond, South Australia.

'Sultana' (syn. 'Sultanina', 'Thompson Seedless', Vitis vinifera L.) vines of mature age planted in rows 11 ft apart were trained to form canopies 6, 9, or 18 ft in length when spaced 9 ft in the row; vines spaced 18 ft in the row had 36-ft canopies. Canopy length greater than vine spacing was obtained by dividing the canopy into two parallel curtains, 4 ft apart. In the 9-ft canopies there were three systems of arranging the shoots to modify their exposure. In the 18-ft canopies there were four systems of arranging the shoots. All vines were pruned alike, in winter of 1967, 1968, and 1969, by adjusting the number of nodes retained to the weight of the canes, which averaged about 4 lb. per vine; then, vines with canopies 6, 9, 18, and 36 ft in length had 22, 14, 7, and 3 nodes per foot of canopy, respectively.

At harvest in 1968, treatment means did not differ in yield or fruit maturity. In 1969, pruning weights, and thus node numbers per vine and per foot of canopy were similar to those in 1968. At 1969 harvest, however, the treatments did affect the yields of fresh fruit per vine; they were 7.9 kg for 6-ft canopy, 16.8 kg for 9-ft, 20.8 kg for 18-ft without foliage wire, 25.5 kg for 18-ft with foliage wire and 28.4 kg for 36-ft canopy length. This was not accompanied by reduction in fruit maturity, resulting in respective total yields of soluble solids per vine of 1.8, 3.4, 4.2, 5.0, and 5.8 kg. In 1970, differences between treatments followed the same trends but were smaller.

The differences in yield were due to differences in fruitful shoots/node, clusters/node and crop weight/node.

It is concluded that, in 'Sultana', shoot crowding reduced yield and that yield increases were obtained from the vine training which reduced shoot crowding.

Accepted on June 24, 1971




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Enol. Vitic.Home page
L. A. Sanchez and N. K. Dokoozlian
Bud Microclimate and Fruitfulness in Vitis vinifera L.
Am. J. Enol. Vitic., December 1, 2005; 56(4): 319 - 329.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Enol. Vitic.Home page
W. M. Kliewer and N. K. Dokoozlian
Leaf Area/Crop Weight Ratios of Grapevines: Influence on Fruit Composition and Wine Quality
Am. J. Enol. Vitic., June 1, 2005; 56(2): 170 - 181.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1971 by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture.