Submitted:
28 June 2024
Posted:
01 July 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Orchard
2.2. Experimental Design
2.3. Maturation Indices and Nutraceutical Parameters
2.4. Fruit Biometric Measures
2.5. Flesh Firmness
2.6. Soluble Solids Content
2.7. Titratable Acidity
2.8. Dry Matter Content
2.8. Total Polyphenol Content (TPC) and Total Antioxidant Capacity (TAC)
2.9. Flesh Color
2.10. Leaf Drop
2.11. Vegetative Measurements
2.12. Gas Exchange
2.13. Shoot Hydraulic Conductance
2.14. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Musacci, S.; Serra, S. Apple fruit quality: Overview on pre-harvest factors. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 234, 409–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jimenes, I.M.; Mayer, N.A.; Dias, C.TdS.; Filho, J.A.S.; Rodrigues da Silva, S.R. Influence of clonal rootstocks on leaf nutrient content, vigor and productivity of young ‘Sunraycer’ nectarine trees. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 235, 279-285.
- Milošević, T.; Milošević, N.; Mladenović, J. Combining fruit quality and main antioxidant attributes in the sour cherry: The role of new clonal rootstock. Sci. Hortic., 2020, 264, 109236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Minas, I.S.; Tanou, G.; Molassiotis, A. Environmental and orchard bases of peach fruit quality. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 235, 307–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Snowball, A.M. Seasonal cycle of shoot development in selected Actinidia species. New Zeal. J. Crop Hortic. Sci. 1997a, 25, 221–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brundell, DJ. 1975. Flower development in the Chinese gooseberry (Actinidia chinensis Planch). I. Development of the flowering shoot. New Zeal. J. Bot. 1975, 13, 473–483. [Google Scholar]
- Snowball, A.M. Axillary shoot bud development in selected Actinidia species. New Zeal. J. Crop Hortic. Sci. 1997b, 25, 233–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foster, T.M.; Seleznyova, A.N.; Barnett, A.M. Independent control of organogenesis and shoot tip abortion are key factors to developmental plasticity in Kiwifruit (Actinidia). Ann. Bot. 2007, 100(3), 471–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Richardson, A.; Eyre, V.; Kashuba, P.; Ellingham, D.; Jenkins, H.; Nardozza, S. Early shoot development affects carbohydrate supply and fruit quality of red-fleshed Actinidia chinensis var. chinensis ‘Zes008’. Agron. 2020, 11(1), 66.
- Richardson, A., Boldingh, H., Kashuba, P., Knight, G., Ellingham, D., 2019. Flowering time determines the weight and composition of Actinidia chinensis var. chinensis ‘Zesy002’ kiwifruit. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 246, 741-748.
- Greer, D.H.; Jeffares, D. Temperature-dependence of carbon acquisition and demand in relation to shoot growth of kiwifruit (Actinidia deliciosa) vines grown in controlled environments. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 1998, 25, 843–850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seleznyova, A.; Halligan, L. Modelling effect of temperature on area expansion at the leaf the shoot and the whole plant level. Acta Hortic. 2006, 707, 167–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piller, G.J., Meekings, J.S. The acquisition and utilization of carbon in early spring by kiwifruit shoots. Ann. Bot. 1997, 79, 573–581. [CrossRef]
- Clearwater, M.J.; Seleznyova, A.N.; Thorp, T.G.; Blattmann, P.; Barnett, A.M.; et al. Vigor-controlling rootstocks affect early shoot growth and leaf area development of kiwifruit. Tree Physiol. 2006, 26, 505–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Seleznyova, A.N.; Thorp, T.G.; Barnett, A.M.; Costes, E. Quantitative analysis of shoot development and branching patterns in Actinidia. Ann. Bot. 2002, 89, 471–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Famiani, F.; Antognozzi, E.; Boco, M.; Tombesi, A.; Battistelli, A.; Moscatello, S.; Spaccino, L. Effects of altered source-sink relationships on fruit development and quality in actinidia deliciosa. Acta Hortic. 1997, 444, 355–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Snelgar, W.P.; Thorp, T.G. Leaf area, final fruit weight and productivity in kiwifruit. Sci. Hortic. 1988, 36, 241–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lai, R.; Wooley, D.J.; Lawes, G.S. Effect of leaf to fruit ratio on fruit growth of kiwifruit (Actinidia deliciosa). Sci. Hortic. 1989, 39, 247255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Minchin, P.E.H.; Snelgar, W.P.; Blattmann, P.; Hall, A.J. Competition between fruit and vegetative growth in Hayward kiwifruit. New Zeal. J. Crop Hortic. Sci. 2010, 38(2), 101–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Slinkard, K.; Singleton, V.L. Total phenol analysis: Automation and comparison with manual methods. Am. J. Enol. Viticult. 1997, 28, 49–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pellegrini, N.; Re, R.; Yang, M.; Rice-Evans, C. Screening of dietary carotenoids and carotenoid-rich fruit extracts for anti-oxidant activities applying 2,2_-azino-bis-(3-ethylenebenzothiazoline-6-sulphonic acid) radical cation decolourisation assay. Method Enzymol. 1999, 299, 379–89. [Google Scholar]
- Re, R., Pellegrini, N., Proteggente, A., Pannala, A., Yang, M., RiceEvans, C., 1999. Antioxidant activity applying an improved ABTS radical cation decolourisation assay. Free Radic Bio Med. 1999, 26,1231-37.
- Scalzo, J.; Politi, A.; Pellegrini, N.; Mezzetti, B.; Battino, M. 2005. Plant genotype affects total antioxidant capacity and phenolic contents in fruit. Nutr. 2005, 21(2), 207–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bogeat-Triboulot, M.B.; Martin, R.; Chatelet, D.; Cochard, H. Hydraulic conductance of root and shoot measured with the transient and dynamic modes of the high-pressure flowmeter. Ann. For. Sci. 2010, 59, 389–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grossman, Y.L.; DeJong, T.M. PEACH: A simulation model of reproductive and vegetative growth in peach trees. Tree Physiol. 1994, 329345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lacointe, A.; Minchin, P.E.H. Modelling phloem and xylem transport within a complex architecture. Funct. Plant Biol. 2008, 35, 772780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Piller, G.J.; Greaves, A.J.; Meekings, J.S. Sensitivity of floral shoot growth, fruit set and early fruit size in Actinidia deliciosa to local carbon supply. Ann. Bot. 1998, 81, 723–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greer, D.H.; Cirillo, C.; Norling, C.L. Temperature-dependence of carbon acquisition and demand in relation to shoot and fruitgrowth of fruiting kiwifruit (Actinidia deliciosa) vines grown in controlled environments. Func. Plant Biol. 2003, 30, 927–937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Piller, G.J.; Meekings, J.S. The acquisitionand utilization of carbon in early spring by kiwi fruit shoots. Ann. Bot. 1997, 79, 573–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ho, L.C.; Grange, R.I.; Picken, A.J. An analysis of the accumulation of water and dry matter in tomato fruit. Plant, Cell Environ. 1987, 10, 157–162, ISSN 0304-4238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lang, A. Xylem, phloem and transpiration flows in developing apple fruits. J. Exp. Bot., 1990, 41, 645–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greenspan, M.D.; Shackel, K.A.; Matthews, M.A. 1994. Developmental-changes in the diurnal water-budget of the grape berry exposed to water deficits. Plant, Cell Environ. 1994, 17, 811–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]


| Type of shoot |
FW (grams) |
Dmin/Dmax | H/D |
|---|---|---|---|
| TE | 166.655±3.35ab | 0.899±0.007ns | 1.418±0.008ns |
| NT | 164.833±3.26ab | 0.897±0.007 | 1.409±0.012 |
| SP | 154.856±3.88b | 0.901±0.013 | 1.382±0.009 |
| CNT | 172.603±2.99a | 0.903±0.008 | 1.413±0.009 |
| Year (A) | ns | ns | ns |
| Treatment (B) | * | ns | ns |
| Interaction (AxB) | ns | ns | ns |
| Type of shoot |
FF (kg cm-2) |
TSS (°BRIX) |
TA (%) |
TSS/TA |
DMC (%) |
Dry weight fruit-1 (grams) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TE | 7.135±0.33b | 14.288±0.30a | 2.488±0.12c | 5.742±0.13a | 18.170±0.12ab | 30.281±0.15b |
| NT | 8.930±0.23a | 12.620±0.29b | 3.09±0.01b | 4.084±0.01b | 18.468±0.10a | 30.441±0.11b |
| SP | 8.514±0.20a | 10.435±0.34c | 3.88±0.93a | 2.689±0.21d | 18.631±0.20a | 28.851±0.17c |
| CNT | 8.467±0.26a | 11.196±0.32c | 3.30±0.02b | 3.392±0.43c | 17.825±0.10b | 30.766±0.18a |
| Year (A) | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| Treatment (B) | * | *** | * | * | * | * |
| Interaction (AxB) | ns | * | ns | * | ns | ns |
| Type of shoot | L* (10°/D65) | a* (10°/D65) | b* (10°/D65) | Chroma (10°/D65) | °Hue |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TE | 67.66±0.56c | 0.40±0.03ns | 14.20±0.20ab | 14.203±0.19ab | 89.775±0.27bc |
| NT | 69.23±0.58bc | 0.34±0.03 | 13.96±0.25ab | 13.969±0.25ab | 91.124±0.19a |
| SP | 72.83±0.92a | 0.33±0.05 | 13.56±0.41b | 13.567±0.41b | 88.959±0.32c |
| CNT | 70.77±0.61ab | 0.28±0.03 | 14.89±0.27a | 14.892±0.26a | 90.559±0.17ab |
| Year (A) | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| Treatment (B) | * | ns | ** | * | * |
| Interaction (AxB) | ** | ns | ns | * | ns |
| Type of shoot |
CAT µmol trolox/gr FW |
TPC mg GA/gr FW |
|---|---|---|
| TE | 6.851±0.289b | 2.247±0.163a |
| NT | 4.923±0.790c | 1.739±0.109b |
| CNT | 9.336±0.485a | 2.114±0.050a |
| SP | 6.927±1.098b | 1.456±0.104b |
| Year (A) | ns | ns |
| Treatment (B) | ** | * |
| Interaction (AxB) | * | ns |
| Type of shoot |
Shoot length (cm) |
N° leaves |
Leaf area (cm2) |
N° fruits | N° leaves fruit-1 |
Leaf area fruit-1 (cm2) |
Phylloptosis |
Internode length (cm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TE | 66.16±30.36c | 14.41±3.94c | 177.15±7.31b | 8.50±1.15a | 1.69±0.83c | 300.37±15.79c | 59.60±2.67ns | 4.59±0.73b |
| NT | 404.33±164.20a | 60.00±22.32a | 250.00±6.58a | 6.80±1.17b | 8.82±0.70a | 2205.88±31.50a | 63.33±7.64 | 6.73±0.99a |
| SP | 16.273±5.14d | 6.90±2.6d | 136.36±8.31c | 2.50±0.83d | 2.76±0.11c | 376.85±2.70c | 50.00±3.67 | 2.35±0.93c |
| CNT | 153.529±31.72b | 24.41±4.0b | 175.00±4.73b | 3.05±0.91c | 3.05±0.94b | 534.00±12.48b | 56.50±2.79 | 6.28±0.78a |
| Year (A) | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| Treatment (B) | ** | * | ** | * | *** | * | * | ** |
| Interaction (AxB) | * | ns | ns | * | ns | * | ** | ns |
| Type of shoot |
An mol CO2 m–2 s–1 |
E mol H2O m-2 s-1 |
gs mol H2O m–2 s–1 |
HC Kg sec-1 MPa-1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TE | 19.542±1.33a | 3.575±0.33a | 0.376±0.05c | 15x10-6a |
| NT | 17.843±0.98b | 3.537±0.56a | 0.881±0.04a | 14x10-6a |
| SP | 17.235±0.32b | 1.908±0.38c | 0.247±0.01d | 18x10-6b |
| CNT | 16.114±0.70c | 2.209±0.15b | 0.653±0.07b | |
| Year (A) | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| Treatment (B) | ** | * | * | ** |
| Interaction (AxB) | * | ns | ns | ns |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
