Susceptibility of Pecan to Black Pecan Aphids

Zabadal, Thomas J.; Dittmer, Thomas W.

doi:10.21273/horttech.9.1.128a

Cited by 4 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A number of studies have been carried out which demonstrate that a significant reduction in botrytis bunch rot infection can be achieved by physically or chemically modifying bunch compactness. Treatments have included the application of gibberellic acid at flowering (Weaver et al 1962, Hopping 1975, Ari et al 1996, hand thinning (Barbetti 1980) and specific vine management systems (Zabadal andDittmer 1998, Smithyman et al 1998). However, in many of these treatments, bunch compactness was reduced through decreases in fruit set.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the susceptibility of different grape cultivars to Botrytis bunch rot, caused by Botrytis cinerea, is closely correlated with bunch architecture. Cultivars with tight (compact) bunches develop severe rot whereas those with loose (open) bunches are less susceptible (Weaver et al 1962, Marois et al 1986, Ferreira and Marais 1987, Vail and Marois 1991, Percival et al 1993, Smithyman et al 1998, Vail et al 1998, Zabadal and Dittmer 1998. This heightened susceptibility in tight bunches is most likely due to the combined effects of increased water retention and prolonged drying after rain events (Vail and Marois 1991).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inflorescence and bunch architecture development in Vitis vinifera L.

Shavrukov

Dry

Thomas

2004

Aust J Grape Wine Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inflorescence development from budburst to harvest was analysed in four cultivars of grapevine. Two cultivars with tight or compact bunches (Riesling, Chardonnay) and two with loose or open bunches (Exotic and Sultana) were selected to define differences in bunch development for future genetic analysis. A range of phenotypic characters for both inflorescence and shoot architecture were measured. Differences in the rate of rachis elongation rates were observed between tight and loose bunch cultivars commencing at the earliest stages of inflorescence development after budburst. At anthesis, five phenotypic characters showed significant differences between tight and loose cultivars: (1) total inflorescence length, (2) node number per inflorescence rachis, (3) combined length of two consecutive internodes of the rachis and (4) shoot node position at which the inflorescence was present and (5) mature tendril length. A quantitative estimate of bunch compactness was calculated at bunch maturity. Exotic and Sultana had significantly more open space than did compact bunch cultivars Riesling and Chardonnay. Comparison of flower number at anthesis and berry number at maturity indicated that the proportion of berries set was similar in all cultivars studied and, therefore, did not contribute to variability in bunch openness between cultivars. Internode length of the inflorescence rachis was the major trait responsible for inflorescence openness. Cellular studies using SEM, fluorescence microscopy and DNA content demonstrated that differences in rachis internode lengths were mostly associated with cell expansion.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inflorescence and bunch architecture development in Vitis vinifera L.

Shavrukov

Dry

Thomas

2004

Aust J Grape Wine Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consequently, numerous treatments have been tested to reduce bunch compactness in both wine and table cultivars, including the use of gibberellins (Vartholomaiou et al 2008, Evers et al 2010, Hed et al 2011, Molitor et al 2012a), prohexadione-calcium (Lo Giudice et al 2004, Vartholomaiou et al 2008, Schildberger et al 2011-N'-phenyl-Urea (CPPU)] (Zabadal and Bukovac 2006) and other innovative products (Abd-Allah et al 2013, Hanni et al 2013, as well as cultural practices, such as leaf removal (Evers et al 2010, Sabbatini and Howell 2010, Kotseridis et al 2012, Palliotti et al 2012, Tardáguila et al 2012, Intrigliolo et al 2014, bunch thinning (Tardáguila et al 2012) and alternative vine management systems (Zabadal and Dittmer 1998, Archer and van Schalkwyk 2007, Molitor et al 2012b). Many of these strategies also affect the final number of berries in the bunch, producing a reduction of crop yield.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multicultivar and multivariate study of the natural variation for grapevine bunch compactness

Tello

Aguirrezábal

Hernáiz

et al. 2015

Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aims Grapevine bunch compactness is an important trait with impact on fruit quality, mainly affecting the susceptibility to bunch rot. Many and different variables have been reported to have a significant influence on the variation of bunch compactness in particular cultivars, but little is known about the role of such variables in a wider framework. The aim of this work was to identify and weight the features responsible for the natural variation in bunch compactness in a large and diverse grapevine collection. Methods and Results Different statistical tests were sequentially applied to select the determining variables most influencing bunch compactness. Significant and low correlation was obtained for most of the variables studied for three consecutive seasons, confirming the multifactorial nature of this trait. Multivariate analyses indicated that there are three groups of variables with a significant influence on bunch compactness. Two groups, represented by the total number of berries per bunch and by the length of the first ramification of the bunch, are major factors responsible for the trait variation, whereas berry dimensions have a secondary role. Conclusions Bunch compactness is defined by the difference between its morphological (apparent) volume and its actual (solid) volume. The results showed that the actual volume is mainly determined by the total number of berries, whereas the morphological volume also depends on its spatial arrangement, determined by the architecture of the rachis. Significance of the Study This is the first multiyear study of bunch compactness at a multicultivar level, and it has allowed the selection and weighting of the main variables affecting the trait. These variables are suitable targets to study the underlying genetics of the trait.

show abstract

“…Another visual scale proposes to classify bunches into four categories of growing value of compactness (El‐Banna and Weaver ), and other studies propose different five‐category ratings (Christodoulou et al , Hopping , Firoozabady and Olmo ). An extended six‐point scale considering berry mobility and bunch gaps has also been defined (Zabadal and Dittmer ).…”

Section: How Is Bunch Compactness Evaluated?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Inter‐berry spacing is another characteristic of the bunch that varies with compactness, with loose bunches having more space between berries than the compact ones. This attribute has also been used for the indirect evaluation of bunch compactness, by determining the distance existing between two randomly chosen berries through the insertion of wedges in the inter‐berry space (Zabadal and Dittmer , ). Vail and Marois () followed a similar approach, and proposed the use of a firmness tester to measure the force required to separate two contiguous berries by a distance of 2 mm, as another attempt to measure bunch compactness in a quantitative way.…”

Section: How Is Bunch Compactness Evaluated?mentioning

confidence: 99%

What do we know about grapevine bunch compactness? A state-of-the-art review

Tello

Ibáñez

2017

Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bunch compactness (or density) is a grapevine specific trait that affects the commercial quality and sanitary status of wine and tablegrapes. Compact bunches are more susceptible to diverse pests and diseases such as Botrytis bunch rot and their berries ripen more heterogeneously, causing important economic losses through a reduction in crop yield and grape and wine quality. Bunch compactness is determined by the fraction of the morphological volume of the bunch that is filled by berries, but this simple definition contrasts sharply with the difficulty to measure it. While there are several objective and quantitative methods available to measure bunch compactness, the lack of a consistent approach between researchers makes comparing measurements difficult. The complexity of bunch compactness initially arises from the several bunch and berry traits that influence it, and from the distinct effects that these traits may cause in different cultivars. In addition to this genetic effect, diverse environmental signals impact on bunch compactness by affecting those primary factors that contribute to the solid component of the bunch (berry number, berry size) or to its spatial arrangement (rachis architecture). Last, several viticultural approaches, including agronomic techniques and growth regulators, have also proven to affect bunch compactness in different ways. This review aims to discuss present knowledge about this relevant grapevine trait.

show abstract

Susceptibility of Pecan to Black Pecan Aphids

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Inflorescence and bunch architecture development in Vitis vinifera L.

Inflorescence and bunch architecture development in Vitis vinifera L.

Multicultivar and multivariate study of the natural variation for grapevine bunch compactness

What do we know about grapevine bunch compactness? A state-of-the-art review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About