Most popular articles
Everything About Peaches. Clemson University Cooperative Extension Service Everything About Peaches Website: whether you are a professional or backyard peach...
Mission Statement. For the sake of mankind and the world as a whole a further increase of the sustainability...
Newsletter 9: July 2013 - Temperate Fruits in the Tropics and Subtropics. Download your copy of the Working Group Temperate...
USA Walnut varieties. The Walnut Germplasm Collection of the University of California, Davis (USA). A description of the Collection and a History...
China Walnut varieties.

Articles

EFFECTS OF CULTURAL PRACTICES ON THE PRODUCTIVITY OF CV DIMIAT VINES

Article number
526_28
Pages
269 – 276
Language
Abstract
With distance in the row of 1.25 m the following row widths were tested: 1.25, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0 and 3.5 m (semi-high training, 0.8 m trunk height); 2.5 and 3.5 m (modified Moser training, 1.2 m trunk height). The loading was from 4 to 12 buds per vine.

A positive correlation existed between the yield per vine and the row width (individual load). Highest yield per hectare was produced however with 2.0 m and 2.5 m – row width (semi-high training), followed by 3.5 m – row width variant (Moser training). The increase of row distance from 2.5 to 3.5 m resulted in a reduced sugar content; the elongation of the trunk had a similar effect.

Relations were found also between the leaf area per vine and the row width with semi-high training.
Largest leaf area per vine was at 3.0 m – row width on account of greater leaf size.
However, vine leaf productivity (yield per unit leaf area) was highest in case of 2.5 m – row width, which corresponded to the photosynthetic activity.
The commercial harvest depended not only on the amount of assimilates, but also on their distribution between reproductive and vegetative organs.

Publication
Authors
T. Slavtcheva
Keywords
grapevine (V.vinifera L.), row widths, trainings, yield, leaf area, photosynthesis, statistics
Full text
Online Articles (54)
E. Miklós | L. Szõke | P. Kozma | L. Erdei
C. Lovisolo | A. Schubert | E. Peterlunger | S. Ferraris
M. Gómez-del-Campo | C. Ruiz | V. Sotés | J. Lissarrague
K. A. Loulakakis | K. A. Roubelakis-Angelakis
V. Licina | M. Jakovljevic | S. Antic-Mladenovic
E. Miklós | Zs. Szegletes | L. Erdei
S.G. Veliksar | S.I. Toma | R.F. Syrcu | V.M. Busuioc | A.I. Zemshman
M. Moriondo | B. Gozzini | L. Fibbi | S. Orlandini | M. Bindi
A. K. Papadakis | A. Marco | C. I. Siminis | K. A. Roubelakis-Angelakis
N. Terrier | N. Issaly | F. Sauvage | A. Ageorges | C. Romieu
P. Diakou | A. Moing | N. Ollat | C. Rothan | J. Gaudillère
F. Battistutta | G. Colugnati | F. Bregant | G. Crespan | I. Tonetti | E. Celotti | R. Zironi
G. Colugnati | F. Battistutta | F. Bregant | G. Crespan | E. Celotti | R. Zironi
E. Kraeva | A. Renault | N. Terrier | C. Tesnière | C. Romieu | F. Sauvage | J. Bierne | A. Deloire
M. J. Striem | Bruce L. Reisch | Julie R. Kikkert
C. Fregoni | L. Bavaresco | E. Cantù | D. Petegolli | D. Vizzon | G. Chiusa | M. Trevisan