Factors Affecting Frost Tolerance of Raspberry Canes

Pacholak, E.

doi:10.17660/actahortic.1978.81.11

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…);16 Oct.,30 Oct.,15 Nov.),8 Jan.),13 Mar.,31 Mar.,16 Apr.). Such patterns of relative hardiness throughout the year have been reported for raspberry (Pacholak, 1978;Warmund and George, 1990) apple (Emmert and Howlett, 1953) and filbert (Hummer et al, 1986).…”

Section: Controlled Freezing Testssupporting

confidence: 62%

“…It is not surprising that the relative hardiness of the genotypes during the spring and the fall was best correlated with field observations, because the onset and rate of fall acclimation and spring deacclimation are more crucial in the determination of the winter survival of raspberries than their maximum hardiness level attained in midwinter (Brierley and Landon, 1946;Jennings et al, 1972;Pacholak, 1978). Emmert and Howlett (1953) also found that the relative hardiness of 55 apple cultivars was best determined in the fall.…”

Section: Controlled Freezing Testsmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing Cold Hardiness of Red Raspberry Genotypes in the Laboratory and Field

Zatylny¹,

Proctor²,

Sullivan³

1996

jashs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tissue survival assessments of red raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.), including cane dieback, bud death, time of cane leaf drop, and growth cessation, were compared to freezing tests of stem portions and buds. Four named cultivars and six Guelph (designated Gu) selections were assessed in the field at two locations in each of two winters and in concurrent controlled freezing tests at one location for one winter. The time of cane leaf drop and of cessation of cane extension growth in the fall were not correlated with field survival. Cane dieback as a percentage of cane length was a better estimate of winter survival than was bud number. Controlled freezing tests of stem portions and buds, and calculation of T40s and T50s indicate that genotypes differed in their relative hardiness throughout the winter. The different methods of field assessment of cold hardiness were well correlated, but not well correlated with controlled freezing tests (4.2% significant correlations). Exclusion of the genotype, Gu 75, which behaved differently in the field than in freezing tests, increased the number of significant correlations to 16.7%.

show abstract

Section: Controlled Freezing Testssupporting

confidence: 62%

Section: Controlled Freezing Testsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Assessing Cold Hardiness of Red Raspberry Genotypes in the Laboratory and Field

Zatylny¹,

Proctor²,

Sullivan³

1996

jashs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although raspberries in a dormant stage can resist low temperatures down to -30 • C or colder, warm spells will lead to loss of freezing tolerance, and when it gets cold again freezing tolerance will not increase to the previous level, and for each mild spell there will be a new loss of freezing tolerance [3][4][5][6]. Injury could be reduced by choosing a suitable cultivar and site, or protection method to prevent injuries from exposure to low winter temperatures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Method to reduce low temperature stress (LTS) in red raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.)

Nestby

Takeda

2015

JBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. BACKGROUND:In Nordic regions the floricane of red raspberries often suffer 20-30% injury from exposures to low temperatures. OBJECTIVE: Implemented methods to improve winter survival of red raspberry. METHODS:We studied from 2011 to 2014 the bending and covering effect of red raspberry floricanes of 'Glen Ample', 'Stiora' and selection KV91-39-7 on winter injury and yield. Canes were trained to a rotating cross-arm (RCA) trellis system and covered with two layers of polyethylene (Agricover) sheets, and supplemental heat was provided at critical temperatures. RESULTS: Bending plus heating reduced freezing injury of buds for all cultivars, and tended to increase yield for 'Stiora' and KV91-39-7, but not for 'Glen Ample'. Plots lifted directly to vertical after winter covering yielded more than plots where canes were left horizontal till anthesis and then lifted to vertical. CONCLUSIONS:The experiments show that bending raspberry canes to avoid freezing injury, was possible without much visible cane injury if bending was undertaken carefully using a RCA trellis. However, standard trellising with erect canes improved fruit yield. It was found that a few more cane buds were torn off because of trellising reducing the amount of buds compared to canes in erect position. Additional studies should be undertaken to look at reasons why better cane survival resulted in lower yields.

show abstract

“…During ecodormancy mild temperatures may cause dehardening resulting in injury if followed by cold weather. Cultivar differences in dehardening susceptibility and rate occur (Bailey, 1948;Pacholak, 1978;Palonen and Lindén, 1999). Exposing plants to a temperature of 4ЊC for two to four hours daily during two days caused dehardening of red raspberry 'Latham' (Brierley et al,1952).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%