Two trellises (single wire and 37 cm wide 'T') and four pruning methods were compared on irrigated Shiraz grapevines, Vitis vinifera at Griffith. The pruning treatments were 'spur', 'rod and spur', 'hare's ear' and 'cane' pruning. Similar trellises and 'spur' and 'cane' pruning were compared on the vigorous cultivar Semillon. Yields were generally increased as node numbers increased. Thus 'T' trellises outyielded single wire trellises for each cultivar. There was no evidence of bud fruitfulness or photosynthetic capacity being increased by the 'T' trellis. Cane pruning generally produced larger crops in the early years of the experiments, but over all years there was little difference between pruning systems on individual vine yields. Cane pruning simply offered a means of increasing the node numbers of young vines. It is concluded that spur pruning, as the cheapest, is the most desirable method although cane pruning may be necessary in the future for mechanical harvesting.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Three experiments were conducted to assess the effects of GA on Waltham Cross grapevines. In the first-at Coomealla-a bunch dipping experiment-larger berries were produced and bunch weight was increased from 426 g to 840 g by dipping in a 1 0 p.p.m. solution and to over 1000 g with 40 or 160 p.p.m. at full bloom. The percentage of seeded berries was reduced from 97 per cent to 29, 14, and 1 0 respectively by these treatments. Later treatments were less effective.The two other experiments-one at Griffith and one at Coomealla-involved spraying whole vines at 10 and 20 p.p.m. Effects were much less clear cut, bunch weight was sometimes reduced and at Griffith the "hen and chicken" condition was accentuated.In the year following whole vine treatment, serious crop losses were recorded as a result of failure of buds to burst. Bunch number per vine was reduced from 52 to as few as 11.4 where 20 p.p.m. had been applied at the shatter stage. Abnormal shoot development was also apparent.