Studies On The Performance Productivity And Fruit Characteristics Of Some Loquat Trees:

Lotfy Abd El-latef Farag El-kholey

The present study was conducted at the .Horticultur- al Experiment Station at Barrage, Kaliobiae ;norate-during two successive seasons 1983 and 1984, to studythe performance, productivity and fruit characteristicsof seven seedling loquat trees as well as threegrafted loquat trees on quince rootstock of 27-yearold:The obtained results could be summarized asfollows :-1- Tree growthAll the studied loquat trees varied greatly in treegrowth parameters.a. Concerning shoot length, tree No. (2-2) gave thelongest shoots, followed by those of grafted treesas well as trJ.ee No. (3-4). The shor.test shoots wereproduced b, ~~~e No. (3-11). Moreover, trees No.(3-2), (2-1), (2-4) and (2-3) gave shoots medium intheir lengths.b. As for number of nodes per shoot, tree No. (3-4)surpassed all other trees, followed by tree No. (2-2)and grafted trees. The least number of nodes werenoticed with shoots of trees No. (2-1) and (2-4).Other trees came in between in comparison with thehighest and lowest limits.c. Referring to leaf length, tree No. (2-1) and graftedtrees gave the longest leaves. Moreover, leaflength of trees No. (3-2), (3-3), (2-2) and (4-4)were similar and took the average of the population.Th~ shortest leaves were produced by tree No. (3-4)and (3-11).d. Considering leaf width, the widest leaves were remarkedon grafted trees, whereas the values of trees No. (3-2) and (3-11) were the least. Other treeswere in between in this respect.e. With respect to leaf index, trees No. (3-2) and (2-1)gave the highest values of leaf index, whereas treesNo. (3-4) had the lowest value. No differences werenoticed between the other trees in this respect.f. As leaf area was concerned, the largest leaf surfacearea was produced by tree No. (2-1) and grafted trees.Meanwhile, the least leaf surface area was remarkedon tree No. (3-11). Other trees lie within the populationin this respect.g. As for the relationship of leaf area and its lengthand width it was found that Leaf area (cm2) of seedling trees =0.73 X leaf length (em.) X leaf width (em.).Leaf area (em ) of grafted trees =0.68 X leaf length (em.) X Leaf width (em.)h. With respect to leaf petiole length, leaves oftree No. (2-2) have the longest petiole. On thecontrary, trees No. (3-3) and (2-1) have the shortestleaf petiole. Moreover, values of leaf petiolelength of other trees lie in between.2- Tree floweringThe flowering aspects of the different studiedloquat trees varied greatly as follow :-a. In regard to blooming period and blooming duration,grafted trees as well as both trees No. (2-1)and (3-4) bloomed earlier than all other studiedtrees (September, 20th. 1983 and October, 10.:.!;1h9.84)_Meanwhile, tree No. (2-2),(2-4), (3-2), (3-3) and (3-U) started to bloom later(October, 1st.) 1983 and October, 20th. 1984}.On the other hand, all studied trees ended bloomingperiod in 1983 season in November, 2”Oth. whereas,in the second season, grafted trees and trees No.(2-1) and (3-4) terminated their blooming (Dece!niJer, 5th.)P2 earlier than other trees (ended blooming December,Consequently blooming duration for graftedtrees as well as trees No. (2-1) and (3-4) lasted60 and 56 days in the first and second seasons respectively,whereas, it was 50 and 51 days in 1983and 1984 seasons respectively for other trees.b. Regarding number of flowers per branch, it variedgreatly from season to another in most studied trees.However, branches of tree No. (2-2) had the highestnumber of flowers.and had moderatecomparison.,Other trees were nearly similarnumber of flowers per branch in II- Pollen grain1. Pollen grain morphologya. General appearanceThe fresh pollen grains, in mass looked light yellow dust to the naked eye and appeared brownishunder the microscope.b. Polarity and symmetryPollen grains were radiosymmetric, isopolar andaperturate. In equatorial view, they looked ellipticalto oblong with single or two furrows.c. General furrows and germsporesThe pollen grains were tricolpate with spherical germ pores located at the center of each calpi.d. Pollen grain sizePollen grains were always of medium size, withthe exception of trees No. (3-11), (3-2) and (3-3)as they had very few number of small pollense. Pollen grain shapePollen grain shape was prolate for grafted treesand tree No. (3-3), and ranged between prolate andsub prolate for trees No. (3-4), (2-2) and (3-11).- 86 -2 - Viability testa. ’Fresh pollen grains of different loquat trees showed100% viability with acetocarmin staining test.b. Pollen grain germinationThe lowest value of pollen grain germination wasrecorded by tree No. (3-4), while the highest valuewas noticed with trees No. (2-2) and (2-1). Othertrees were in between.c. Pollen tube elongation.”’:: ”’”’ o’l(”’19 <;. -1’The pollen tube was noticed withtree No. (3-4), while the optimum length was foundwith tree No. (2-2), followed by trees No. (3-3)and (2-1). Other trees gave satisfactory tubeelongation.111- Concerning early stages of flowering for differentstudied loquat trees, although most .flowerswere opened, other remained completely closed anddid not shed pollens. Nevertheless, shed pollengave no more than 50% pollen germination, whereasthey showed 100% viability in acetocarmin test.3- Tree fruitinga. The highest value of fruit set percentage wasnoticed with trees No. (3-11) and (2-4). No remarkabledifferences were noticed between other trees.b. Referring to fruiting percentage, no clear trendwas noticed in this respect, since tree No. (3-11)had the highest percentage of fruiting in the firstseason and noticeably low value in the second season.Other trees came in between in both seasons.c. Regarding yield as kg. per tree, the highestyield was noticed with tree, No. (2-2), followedby trees No. (2-4), (3-11), (2-1) and (3-2) indescending order. Moreover, tree No. (3-3) gave thelowest yield.d. As for number of fruits per tree, it followed nearlythe same pattern of yield as kg. per tree fordifferent trees.e. In respect to yield as kg. per cm2 of trunk. crosssectional area, grafted trees trees No. (2-2)and (3-4) showed the highest value in this respect.The least values in this concern were noticed w~thtrees No. (3-2) and (3-3).f. Concerning harvesting duration, trees No. (2-1),(2-4), (3-2) and (3-11) were similar. Meanwhile,fruits of grafted trees as well as those of treeNo. (3-4) took longer harvesting duration.4- Fruit quality1- Fruit physical propertiesa. Considering fruit weight, tree No. ,(2-4) gave thelightest fruits. Meanwhile, the heaviest fruitswere produced from tree No. (3-4). Other treesshowed more or less similar values.b. As for fruit length, tree No. (3-4) gave the tallestfruits. Nevertheless, tree No.(3-11) gaverelatively short fruits. No remarkable differenceswere noticed among other trees.c. Regardin9 fruit diameter, the widest fruits wereproduced from trees No. (2-2) and (2-4). On thecontrary, fruits of tree No. (3-4) showed relativelythe lowest value in this respect.d. Concerning fruit index (LID), tree No. (2-4) gavecomparatively the highest fruit index value. On thecontrary, tree No. (2-2) gave the least value in thisrespect. Other trees were in between.e. With respect to pUlp percentage, the highest valueof pulp perc.entage was observed with. tree No. (2-4),followed by the grafted trees and tree No. (3-11).On the other hand, the lowest value of pUlp percentagewas noticed with tree No. (2-2).f. In regard to pulp thickness, fruits of both treesNo. (3-3) and (2-4} had relatively the highest pUlp thickness, followed by those of grafted trees.Moreover, tree No. (3-11) showed comparatively theleast pulp thickness. Other trees lie within thepopulation in this respect.g. Referring to number of seeds per fruit, the greatestnumber of seeds per fruit was produced from treeNo. (3-3) followed by those of trees No. (2-1) and(2-2). Moreover, trees No. (2-4), (3-2), (3-4) andgrafted trees gave not only the lowest but also similarvalues in this respect.h. Considering seed weight, the least seed weight wasnoticed with tree No. (3-3). On the contrary, thehighest seed weight was obtained with grafted,trees.,Other trees were in general similar in their valuesin this respect.i. As for fruit colour, all studied trees varied in their fruit co.Iouz’ert.L,onFruits of tree No. (2-were yellow, whereas, fruits of trees No. (2-2),(2-1), (3-4), (3-2) and grafted trees were yelloworangein colour with different numbers of theColour Chart. Moreover, fruits of trees No. (3-11)and (3-3) were orange in colour.II- Fruit chemical propertiesa. The average of two seasons showed that the highestpercentage of T.S.S. existed in fruits of tree No.(3-3). On the contrary, the lowest percentages ofT.S.S. were obtained from fruits of trees No. (3-4)and (3-11). Other studied trees were in between inthis respect.b. Fruits of tree No. (3-3) were more acid in theirtaste. On the other hand, tree No. (3-11) developedfruits of the lowest value of acidity. Other treeswere in between in this respect.c.. T.S.S./acid ratio of fruits of studiedtrees indicated that the highest value was observedfor tree No. (3-11). In addition, tree No. (3-3)gave late maturing fruits. Other trees lie withinthe population average in this respect-d. Fruits of tree No. (3~11) contained the h~ghest amount of ascorbic acid, whereas the reverse wastrue when trees No. (2-2), (2-4), (3-2) and (3-3)were concerned.5- Evaluation of the loquat treesa. According to fruit quality (fruit weight, pUlp percentageand the reduction of seeds per fruit), it could be concluded that fruits of trees No. (2-4),grafted trees and (3-2) are the preferable ones forthe fresh consumption.b. Regarding evaluation of loquat trees through treeproductivity (i.e. yield kg./tree), the studiedtrees could be arranged in descending order accordingto their actual superiority in this respect asfollow :-Tree No. (2-2), (2-4), (3-11), (2-1), (3-2) and(3-4)