Articles
FIELD PERFORMANCE OF MICROPROPAGATED AND CONVENTIONALLY PROPAGATED RED RASPBERRY
Article number
336_23
Pages
185 – 192
Language
Abstract
Field performance of micropropagated (MP) and conventionally propagated (CP) red raspberry (Rubus idaeus L. cv.
Comet and Festival) was examined under hedgerow and stool management systems for 3 seasons (1989 to 1991). All MP plants but only 58% of CP plants survived field transplantation.
MP plants were more vigorous than CP plants during the first two but not the third growing seasons with comparatively more primocanes and taller, heavier canes.
MP ‘Festival’ in 1990 yielded 2.2 t/ha, almost half the amount of established commercial plantings in Quebec, while yields from CP ‘Festival’ and MP and CP ‘Comet’ were negligible.
However, in their third growing season (1991) MP and CP plants had the same yields and ‘Festival’ slightly outyielded ‘Comet’. Winter hardiness and photosynthetic capacity of primocanes and floricanes were unaffected by propagation method, cultivar and field management systems.
Cane management systems had no effect on field performance of MP or CP plants in this relatively young plantation.
MP plants, produced in our laboratory or purchased from a commercial micropropagator, were superior to CP bare-rooted canes obtained from a certified grower; their establishment was clearly better and they maintained an advantage for two growing seasons.
Comet and Festival) was examined under hedgerow and stool management systems for 3 seasons (1989 to 1991). All MP plants but only 58% of CP plants survived field transplantation.
MP plants were more vigorous than CP plants during the first two but not the third growing seasons with comparatively more primocanes and taller, heavier canes.
MP ‘Festival’ in 1990 yielded 2.2 t/ha, almost half the amount of established commercial plantings in Quebec, while yields from CP ‘Festival’ and MP and CP ‘Comet’ were negligible.
However, in their third growing season (1991) MP and CP plants had the same yields and ‘Festival’ slightly outyielded ‘Comet’. Winter hardiness and photosynthetic capacity of primocanes and floricanes were unaffected by propagation method, cultivar and field management systems.
Cane management systems had no effect on field performance of MP or CP plants in this relatively young plantation.
MP plants, produced in our laboratory or purchased from a commercial micropropagator, were superior to CP bare-rooted canes obtained from a certified grower; their establishment was clearly better and they maintained an advantage for two growing seasons.
Authors
R. Deng, D. J. Donnelly, D. J. Buszard
Keywords
Field establishment, floricane, photosynthesis, plant vigor, primocane, Rubus idaeus L., tissue culture
Online Articles (52)