Influence of altered irradiance on fruits and leaves of mature pear trees

Garriz, Patricia I.; Alvarez, H.L.; Álvarez, Ángel Carracedo

doi:10.1023/a:1000344920479

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The content of soluble solids has often been considered to be highly correlated with the radiation level, since higher light exposure leads to an increase in carbohydrate assimilation and partitioning. This was found to be the case in plums,43 kiwifruit44 and some cultivars of French hybrid wine grapes,45 as well as in berries of Red Dutch in our study, but it was not the case in pear fruit46, 47 and the other two currant cultivars investigated in this paper. The biosynthetic pathways of these components during fruit development need to be investigated in individual currant cultivars for a thorough understanding of the impact of different growth conditions.…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 51%

Effects of latitude and weather conditions on sugars, fruit acids and ascorbic acid in currant (Ribes sp.) cultivars

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 51%

Effects of latitude and weather conditions on sugars, fruit acids and ascorbic acid in currant (Ribes sp.) cultivars

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Apple trees develop thinner leaves underneath dark hail nets (Solomakhin and Blanke, 2010). A similar effect was recorded for pear trees under shade netting in Argentina (Garriz et al, 1997). Interestingly, we observed some thinner leaves and an increased SLA for AV pear trees (Fig.…”

Section: Av Alters Pear Leaf Morphology But Not Photosynthesissupporting

confidence: 85%

“…Under uniform shade netting, Peavey et al (2022) showed a mixed response of pears at 30 % shading in Australia, with modified appearance but similar firmness and overall yield. Garriz et al (1997) reported a decrease in pear fruit number but increase in firmness under shade netting in Argentina. Kappel and Neilsen (1994) related fruit number and quality to the % of sky coverage.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Pear (Pyrus communisL. cv. Conference) has shade-tolerant features allowing for consistent agrivoltaic crop yield

Reher,

Willockx,

Schenk

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transitioning to a fossil fuel free society requires an increase in solar energy production. However, expanding solar power to farmland competes with food production. Additionally, climate change threatens food security and leads increasingly to yield losses. Agrivoltaics (AV) systems produce solar energy and food on the same field, while sheltering crops. In AV systems, crops grow in a modified environment with reduced solar irradiance, a tempered microclimate and a potential physical cover protecting against hail damage. This research describes pear production under an AV pilot with 24% light reduction for 3 consecutive seasons. AV pear trees yielded 14% less than the reference. Flowering and fruit set was unchanged while AV reduced leaf flavonoid levels. The leaf photosynthetic light response was identical, yet a delayed leaf senescence under AV suggests an adaptation to the modified environment. AV impacted fruit shape, as there was an increase in the number of bottle shaped pears and a reduction in caliber. Other fruit quality traits were broadly unaffected, yet postharvest ethylene production was higher for AV fruit in 2022 than for the control. This study demonstrates that AV systems hold potential for pear production under temperate climates and highlights plant adaptations that make this possible.

show abstract

“…A hypothesis for this result is that fruits of trees at the closer spacing were more shaded, slowing down fruit ripening. Garriz et al (1997) reported higher firmness of shaded 'Bartlett' fruit. However, Plooy & Huyssteen (2000) did not find differences on fruit firmness and soluble solids of 'Forelle' pear as affected by planting density.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 93%