AJEV AJEV Best Papers - Free Access
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 20:4:237-250 (1969)
Copyright © 1969 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 May, P.
Right arrow Articles by Antcliff, A. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by May, P.
Right arrow Articles by Antcliff, A. J.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by May, P.
Right arrow Articles by Antcliff, A. J.

The Effect of Controlled Defoliation in the Sultana Vine

P. May 1, N. J. Shaulis 2, and A. J. Antcliff 3

1 CSIRO Division of Horticultural Research, Glen Osmond, South Australia, 5064
2 New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Geneva, N. Y. and Fulbright Research Scholar Australian-American Educational Foundation, Canberra, A.C.T.
3 CSIRO Division of Horticultural Research, Merbein, Victoria, Australia, 3505.

About four weeks after anthesis, one of six defoliation treatments was given: control; removal of all nonfruiting shoots; removal of two-thirds of the remaining leaves; and removal of one-third of the remaining leaves taken from single whole shoots, from all shoots from whole canes, or from the basal nodes of all shoots.

Berry development (expressed as soluble solids per berry) was reduced in the season of treatment by 10% (for the least severe defoliation) to 35% (for the most severe defoliation). It also reduced bud fertility (number of bunches per node) in the following season, the effect becoming greater with increasing levels of defoliation. This reduced yield by as much as 80% not only from fewer bunches per node but also fewer berries per bunch.

In the season of defoliation, fruit development on both foliated and defoliated shoots was reduced in the presence of defoliated shoots, especially where both types of shoots were on the same cane. The effect of defoliation on bud fertility was localized within individual shoots.

The incidence of heat injury was not increased by the greater exposure to full sunlight of berries on defoliated plants.

Accepted on December 5, 1969




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Enol. Vitic.Home page
S. Poni, L. Casalini, F. Bernizzoni, S. Civardi, and C. Intrieri
Effects of Early Defoliation on Shoot Photosynthesis, Yield Components, and Grape Composition
Am. J. Enol. Vitic., December 1, 2006; 57(4): 397 - 407.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Enol. Vitic.Home page
A. G. Reynolds, J. N. Roller, A. Forgione, and C. De Savigny
Gibberellic Acid and Basal Leaf Removal: Implications for Fruit Maturity, Vestigial Seed Development, and Sensory Attributes of Sovereign Coronation Table Grapes
Am. J. Enol. Vitic., March 1, 2006; 57(1): 41 - 53.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Enol. Vitic.Home page
J. Bennett, P. Jarvis, G. L. Creasy, and M. C.T. Trought
Influence of Defoliation on Overwintering Carbohydrate Reserves, Return Bloom, and Yield of Mature Chardonnay Grapevines
Am. J. Enol. Vitic., December 1, 2005; 56(4): 386 - 393.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1969 by the American Society for Enology and Viticulture.