’7 .

,

 

. ,‘, . .4. a 4n‘a32j‘kg-4 31.; L.“

,4 x 1..)

4m .

'Q".\‘:".:‘v

 

-a
~L .

my .
a; ' ram-1
011;“: a

..- .1
v”! ELL.”
”’1: H Nk‘a :
I. nw'l M

a. ‘u‘g‘

N" K
hf“; 1/.“12 w.
33“}!
. .- " '(I'r
‘ . 7‘3! ‘ . g 1‘ ..I§;‘cu “fight‘g'b
~‘H mam“ "m
r‘ifi v'»~2«;‘7¥i:’-*‘“~: a.

‘ ‘1 "$2”. 617% ~

{A
..

;, ‘1
Q1?! |’
‘ ll
.‘3.
{#5:

5 ‘
#{3\; WA :1 l
in: €521”

4 $3.”; 1
I

4x 37‘2’514‘5‘9
#11::55'111’33" W
r . "I

1 .. ‘1.,‘. A- L
‘ '0
um
‘ ,. “11%;:
1',
4 $1753“
I

IV“$rvl

4 w ‘

,., 3,11":

9295'. m
‘

WI“ ‘5'?

 

; T r
A m.
ulf t

 

 

w
;.l ‘L:
13:11:55“
lwrr'fiq‘a.
5 Vfifinmattha‘ll
‘ HG. mi.“ 1.5;: rt' '
¢$fifgx$1§xa¢gqu§fff
. .‘ , ‘ ‘

3,1. ‘ u
é‘Lfintn‘i .
‘ ‘
”‘11...“ x

mm

1“” '1 v-
tat-‘11” ,

'1

~ , mm;- ‘5723‘11 W
a 4“.“ .J. 6¢""" 3414135151 :w, )ta‘
~z V219. my. fix‘ufil‘x.‘ ...~ w
"'%“¥”&4%5Er éfifiegf‘wv
«*1 “r .4. Wu»).
#9,. . ,.

L571

“"1:~

55
T:

1:
"I
:(

fr‘
.. 4‘

.,
.r
4.6.

x)"
, 72115:.
‘ “3;“-
1;.

J'HESIS

.This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

Rootstock and Variety Influences in the Apple on
Leaf Composition, Fruit Composition and
Storage Quality of the Fruit

presented by

Marcel Michel Awad

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

_Eh_D___ degree in ere

 

Major professor

Date March 17, 1961

0-169

 

 

LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

 

 

 

 
 

ROOTSTOCK AND VARIETY INFLUENCES IN THE APPLE ON LEAF
COMPOSITION. FRUIT COMPOSITIOA' AND STORAGE QUALITY

OF THE FRUIT

By

Ma reel Michel Awud

Afi ABSTRACT OF A TIIESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Depa rtment of Horticulture

196]

ABSTRACT
ROOTSTOCK AND VARIETY INFLUENCES IN THE APPLE ON LEAF

COMPOSITION. FRUIT COMPOSITION AND STORAGE QUALITY
OF THE FRUIT .

by Marcel Michel Awad

A study was conducted to evaluate the influence of selected East Malling
rootstocks, varieties and other related variables on the leaf and fruit com-
position of apple trees. The influence of rootstocks and storage treatments
on the storage quality of the fruit was evaluated also.

The rootstocks studied were EM I, II, V, VII, XIII and XVI. The
varieties grown on these rootstocks were Northern Spy, Red Delicious,
Jonathan and McIntosh. Leaf samples were ta. ken five times at two—week in-
tervals in 1959, and once (mid—July) in 1960. Fruit samples were taken at
harvest in 1959 and placed in regular and CA storage.

The elements determined in the leaves and fruit were nitrogen, potas-
sium, phosphorus, calcium, magnesium, manganese, iron, copper, boron,
zinc, molybdenum and aluminum. Pre-storage observations made on the
fruit were soluble solids and flesh firmness in all varieties and ground color
in Jonathan and McIntosh only. Fruit of the Northern Spy variety were not
available for nutrient composition and storage studies.

At the end of the storage period, flesh firmness and soluble solids

determinations were made on all varieties. Storage scald, brown core and

 

Marcel Michel Awad - 2

internal breakdown were determined on Red Delicious fruit. Ground color,
soft scald, Jonathan spot and russeting were determined on Jonathan fruit.
Ground color, storage scald, brown core and mealy breakdown were deter—
mined on McIntosl' fruit.

Results obtained were as follows:

1. The influence of EM rootstoclzs on leaf composition was evalu-
ated first in this study. Significant differences between rootstocks in affect-
ing leaf composition were obtained for every element determined with the
exception of nitrogen. The significant differences, Lowever, were not large
enough to require a change in standard leaf composition values, as used for
diagnostic purposes, to account for rootstoci. differences.

2. The influence of EM rootstocks on fruit composition was evalu-
ated next in this study. Where significant differences between rootstocks
were obtained, they were relatively small, with the exception of fruit boron
and zinc, whicl. showed a wider composition range as related to rootstocrcs.
In general, the rootstoc's whicl. induced the high and He low lea‘ composi-
tion levels also induced the high and the low fruit composition levels.

3. The influence of varieties on leaf composition was determined.
Varieties were found to affect, significantly, leaf composition values for all
the elements considered. Differences between varieties were particularly

wide for leaf potassium. If leaf composition for all elements is considered,

 

Marcel Michel Awad — 3
Red Delicious would be a variety with a relatively high nutrient level,
Northern Spy and Jonathan would be intermediate and McIntosh would be
intermediate to low in this respect.

It is not known whether characteristic high or low levels are related
to differences in nutrient requirements or a result of luxury consumption
in the case of high levels. The differences obtained between varieties in
affecting leaf composition were not large enough to indicate a need for a
change in standard leaf composition values as used for diagnostic purposes.

4. The influence of variety on fruit composition was studied. Dif-
ferences between varieties were significant in this relation for all elements
with the exception of molybdenum. The actual differences were small with
the exception of jonathan fruit, which was particularly high in iron, Red
Delicious fruit, which was high in boron and McIntosh fruit, which was high
in zinc and aluminum. There was a frequent parallelism between high and
low nutrient levels in the leaves and in the fruit.

5. The seasonal variation of nutrient elements in leaves was de-
termined. Leaf nitrogen, potassium, phosphorus and boron showed a decline
and leaf calcium and aluminum showed an increase from the first to the last
sampling date. Leaf magnesium and manganese showed little variation.

The other leaf elements considered showed no definite seasonal trends. These
seasonal trends were similar to those reported for leaves from trees on seed-

ling rootstocks.

Marcel Michel Awad - 4

6. The influence of EM rootstocl's on storage quality was assessed.
Fruit from Red Delicious on EM V showed the lowest incidence of storage
scald. Fruit from Jonathan on the vigorous EM XIII and XVI rootstocks
showed the lowest incidence of fruit russeting. Rootstoclts had little or no
influence on the incidence of the other disorders considered.

7. The influence of storage treatments on storage quality was
evaluated. Fruit from trees on clonal root stocks responded to storage treat-
ments in a similar manner to fruit from trees on seedling rootstocks.

8. Highly significant correlations between measurements made on
leaves and fruit were determined. Some of the relations obtained were simi-
lar to those reported previously for trees on seedling rootstocks. Other cor-

relations are reported here for the first time.

    

ROOTSTOCK AND VARIETY INFLUENCES IN THE APPLE ON LEAF
COMPOSITION, FRUIT COMPOSITION AND STORAGE QUALITY

OF THE F RUIT

By

Marcel Michel Awad

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Horticulture

I961

 

{7 03,3 .:
// /"//-.-$

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to express his sincere gratitude to Dr.
A. L. KenWorthy for his encouragement and assistance through-
out the duration of the study, to Dr. D. H. Dewey and Mr. W.
Toenjes for their personal assistance in particular phases of this
study; andto Drs. H. C. Beeskow. E. J. Benne, R. F. Carlson,
R. L. Carolus, D. R. Dilley, A. E. Ericl'son. and H. B. Tukey
for reviewing the manuscript.

Special acknowledgment is made to Miss Zaira C. Rocha
for her encouragement and affection during the last part of this

study.

ii

 

 

C ONTE NTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
CONTENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
MATERIALS AND METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
RESULTS. . . . . . .
Influence of rootstocks on leaf composition . . . . . . . 28
Influence of root stocks on fruit composition . . . . . . . 33
Influence of rootstoeks on storage measurements . . . . . 35
Influence of varieties on leaf composition . . . ...... 35
Influence of varieties on fruit composition . . . . . . . . 42
Influence of seasonal variation on leaf composition . . . . 42
I Influence of locations on leaf composition, fruit composi—
tion and storage measurements . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Influence of years on leaf composition . . . . . . . . . . 46
Miscellaneous interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Effect of storage treatments on storage measurements on
thefruit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Correlation studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
DISCUSSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
SUMMARY.........................108
LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

iii

 

 

I. ."l R1 )l‘nit "I‘ll ).,'

T' v increased :se of \'--tu.-tatiyel\' propagated rootstocfxs in the
apple ind ;str\. has t reated m'i: ' I‘L'V. and \‘tll‘lL’Ll problems for the research
worker as "nell as for if e erotica "1' e literature s? ows numerous reports
on the many ispet'ts azzd lll‘ul'I'. n.s of stot '-'—sc1on relations. One of ti e
areas, I'I v.1 icl. relatzyel'. te'w st nhes have been c0"ductcd. is that of the
.“1 :trition oi the apple tr-. e as :ii'h-t t-Id b. rootstocf- s, scion \arieties and
other related yariarles. It is ‘.‘.1Il‘.Il‘.I~ idea In mind that the present inves-
tigation ".as i'-I'I(l tcted.

.\mo::e t1 t‘ yt. .‘t'léllth'l‘ limo-malted apple rootstocl s a re tl e East
Malling series (12M) "ill 'trt- among t't lit-st Snow: and the most widely
used at H e present time. I" e ziresent stuth was based or. six different
rqus'IUt‘k's of [lie I1,\,1 series. ()Ii cruel Ill. Ilie SIX rootstocks \l't'l‘t‘ li‘l'tll‘lcd
t] e four varieties w hich are most widely grown in Michigan.

Since leaf and fruit \ omposition have Leer] one of the most important
and useful tools in study iug nutrient relations in apple trees, tl m: were used
extensively In this st-zda. Finally, the influence of rootstoc'.s on tl e stor-
age behavior of the apple fruit was studied as anotl er aspect in the evalua-

tion of the EM rootstocks selected for this investigation.

 

REVIEW OF LI'I'IiRATURE

Influence of rootstocss on leaf composition.

 

As early as 19.24. llatton aud Grubb (1924) reported that leaves
from Bra mley'sjeedling and \-\orcester Pearmain apple trees on EM V
showed twice as m-ich scoi'cl. rt-s ilting from potassium deficiency as those
from trees on EM 1. and that those on 15M X sl-owed still less scorci: than
those on l'IM I. 'I‘ey classified tl"e I‘IM stoc's witl respect to scorcl' s'is-
ceptibility as follows' EM IX. X, XIII and XVI showing little or no leaf
scorch, EM 1 yet". little leaf storch, liM Il some leaf scorclz, EM V”
considerable leaf scorch. and le \’ III'IL‘I‘ leaf scorcl‘. This ma :es EM V
extremely susteptible. and EM II and VII distinctly susceptible to potas—
sium tlc_-li~.'ie:n”_,'.

lilallace (l‘lil) also found that leaves from lAorcester Permain
scions on liM V were affected more seriousl). b‘. scorch than those on
EM 1. il(- found that the potassium content in the spur leaves of trees on
E M V was about 61) percent of comparable leaves on EM 1.

Warm; and Wallace (1035) determined the leaf composition of Wor-
cester Pearin'iin and Lane's Prince Albert trees grown on various EM root-
SIO(‘i s and ”(W reported the following levels based on a percent of He fresh

weight:

 

 

 

 

 

 

"If 1"": f3 LEVER] LU I 'f . E2“; LELIHLL;\£’E L
Nit-"Lire". \' I 11 VII VII ‘V 'II
Potassium. I ll '\' \'ll 1 '\ll 11 -V
P‘r-splor's I'\' \'II II \ VII I II

(alti'ni‘ V 3 ll VII II VII V I

.\l:i."'.t-si.::. II'\' I VII II \' ! VII

'I' e'_. .ilso It'llHE'I' d t‘ .it sl-not-- i-l \.:i'ietit s o:: I'.\l II and V. whicl

I

often I‘!‘«.'I' score .t‘tl Illildl't‘. .- I'Ii' low lil')('I-1‘<~I.'|11 eyen under conditions of

fuxl-i'zil-ie poms ~: .ii. s :::!h'..

Ifu'l'lt-‘ (l'-""l) I'L'IIHI'It'tI t‘ .it in es o'i ILM IX lad shown less scorch than
those -i:: I‘.\I I and V .\is«- (o\"s ()i'niige leaves scorched less on EM IX
t5 an on ILM XII. i’IL'-H'l\.'I'1“'tI tl-at l'.\l IX was t" c least susceptible of the
four rootstot l - to st on 1. 12M XII was iiitei‘nn-tliate. and EM I and V were
most s':stt-;itil:le.

Vaiil' :lll‘l1-'I 'l.issilieil the leaf coiiipositiou of trees grown on EM
I‘UHISIUL'L'S .t - IHIIH'.‘.‘~‘

}_l_i gh Mediiiii Low

Potassium. VII _/ II 'V IX

P' osploi‘us: II. V, VII, IX

(,‘aIc‘Iiini, IX II, V VII

Mairiiesi'iiii' II, V, VII, IX

 

 

Hoblyn (1040-41) pointed out that Bramlev's Seedling trees on EM V
suffered more from potassium deficiency tl‘an tlzose on EM 1, but “III!
Cox's Orange Pippin and Beaatv of I;ath trees the relationship “as reversed.
He also reported II at trees on 15M I and VII were particularlv susceptible
to magnesium deficiencx. \‘.I‘.et‘eas trees on EM i1 and V were less subject
to it.

Road: and Bolas (104;) found that leaves of trees on the vigorous
rootstock Ii.\l XII contained less talci'im, more magnesium, and probablv
more potassium t"an thost on tl.e duari‘ing rootstock EM IX.

Roach (194 f) reported that elements contained in leaves of Cox's
Orange Pipj)iit on three liM rootstoc's can be arranged in a descending

order as follov. s:

(Mg), I3, Fe, XII 7 V IX
(Ca), (Sr), IX 'V 'XII
/ (K). XII 'IX V
Mn, IX V, but XII variable.
P, Variable

For the above elements sboxt n in brackets, the results were less
variable. The aboVe results were ren'iarkablv consistent \\Illi hardly an
aberrant one.

Bould et al, (I 930) found that trees on ISM XII were most seriously

affected bi." copper det'icienc' . L'otttparable trees on IiXI I and II 's'ere
fo and to be less' affected.

The East Malling report for [”30 (Anon. 196:0) indicated that root-
smcks had an effect on mineral c'omposition of apple leaves. Rootstocks
significantlv affected the composnioii of apple leaves, tl (High by no means
similarlv for Itiit‘tiw'ti, p‘ospl.or'.-s. potassium, calcium. and magniesium,
which 'xx ere the elements" determined in the investigation.

Kcmmrtl'v (Noll) fo ind t! at rootstoclzs affected significantli. tl e
leaf composition of I l -' ear—old McIntosl and Cortland trees. Examination
of t1 e data sl (iv. s ti at root stoc= s can be arranged in descendingr order with
l-(tllH‘.‘.\

'9. . .
I\i(’.. LII

:e.-:;‘,L,'t to leaf , (unfit.

\‘lt‘lzitosl' Cortland

II /V VII. XII ..'XIII

.Jitrouen: (I)
Potassium. XII XIII VII ‘IV V '11 XII -XIII ‘VII 'II 'V
I’lospl.<.ir'is (I) XIII.'V 'VII II XII
C‘alcilim. XII XIII 'II VII V 'IV XII -'XIII' II VII V

Mairi'A-siiiii' XII 'XIII II VII IV V XII XIII II -V 'VII

Manganese (I) (I)

Iron: II' XII ' XIII " VII'” IV ' V II " XIII “V XII ’VII
(.‘opper: XII XIII VII iv xv .- II XIII V'XII v "VII" tt
Boron: (I) II 'XIII "V 7'VII "XII
Zinc: (I) XII 7VII7 V ',?XIII '7 II

(I) No significant differences between rootstocks.

 

 

 

Influence of rootstocks oz: fr'iit composition.

 

Brown (1931) was He first \'.t)i"'.et' to report the effect of some of the
EXI root stocks on the c‘Ul‘ltDUSlllH". o1 ll‘.e apple fr-iit. He found that, on a
e.1,;l.t lusts. fr ::t t t the Lane's Prince Albert \ariet}: grown
on various ILXI rootstocl's \U'lld lw- classified in a decreasing order of nutri-

ent content as follows"

 

 

.{itt‘oflc'ir I_I__I__I_.\ X
Potassium. II _._\'___I_ IX
P‘osp'orns ll Xu_l_ IX
('11ch up" I X IX -II_
Mitchesi .'ll| I_I_'_I_ i.\_
Iro::: IX II _I

III e difir-re'ices itr'i‘.‘.ee't the rootstocL s Iindt-t‘scorml b\
t! e same line .‘.('?t' not found to be significant).

Wallace (I‘IIU) reported s'iiz'nificant effects on H e chemical composi-
tion of apples due to tl e i'ifl tence of rootstocks. He studied fruit of He
Worcester Pearmain and brainlex's Seedling varieties on IBM I, II, V. IX
and XII rootstoc-s.

Archbold and \lt'itldov.s()n (1032) examined H e cl entical composition
of Bramlev's Seedling and \torcester Pearmain apples on four E'VI rootstocks
and they found marked differences in the fruit from the two varietig‘“ 0." EM V

as compared with HM IV, VI and X.

“ante and Wallace (19%;) studied t' e composition of fruit from
Worcester Pearmaizi and Lane's Prince Albert trees on several EM root-
stocks. 'I‘l'e‘ arranged t‘ root stoc ks in decreasine order of magnitude of

fruit cttiiiptisititm, it.’1di)e'l'ct"‘.l Ii'es" \‘t'liiil basis. as follows"

 

 

“ '3 :9: : 31-1"; 1211::- L: 1 11L" .1 13211242295:
:lfr‘t)'."t_"‘i \_'i_t____ X'_H_l___II .-I_ \' VII XIII -v I -II
Potassi in. XI_II_ _I__\1l__ll____\ I II' XIII VII / V
P'osi)"t-t‘l-t \'__i it Hi xut XL‘L‘X i___ii__-VII

 

 

("I“e dii'tein Ilk es l-e-t'vw-n t! e rootstocks inderscored by the

same Ii'ie en "Hi to :nd to 'e significant).

Influence of i'ootsto, .'- s o': stoi‘.i_e_-_- q I.’llll'..

 

Wallace (I‘Hit) cavc exattmles oi siiijnificatit differences in storage
quality the to rootstoc s 'H'LI! r \ erttiin wraironmental co'tditions. Worcester
Pearmain apples from ire-t s HI: I-.\l IX s' owed niucI- more internal breakdown
tl‘a:. t‘ e fruit from trees I).‘ l-IM I. II. V and XII. In the «ase of Bramley's
SL:¢‘(III.'H’,‘, the truit from trees o.i I:.'.\I I t‘X"llilI(.‘(l much more brown core and
internal breakdown tl an the Ir iit from trees on EM V.

Kidd and \‘lest (I‘lIl-l) reported tiiar'-'ed differences in tl‘e case of low
temperat ire breaf-doxti: III lirainlr-x's Seedling and on fungal rotting following

/

senescence iii the ease of Lane's Prince Albert as a result of rootstock

effect s .

Iloitlvn as-d Bane (I‘I'H) found that the fruit from trees on EM I aitd
IX was better ,olored tl-a: H e fr at from trees on E.\l II. V, and XVI.

Home (1034) reported II at I‘-I'ilnilt,‘_\'>' Seedling trees on EM IV and
VI prod-iced apples more resistant to storage rots tl an trees on EM V and X.

Van Hiele (I‘Ho) indicated that. on tl e w? ole, I is preliminary im-
pression was that EM I. II and XIII lad a favorable effect on the I-eeping
quality of fruit and EM IV ' ad a le~~s favorable effect.

lireviglieri liq-i») noted that apples kept best from trees worked on
seedlings. next best from those on a 'ocal vartetx, and not as well from
trees on E.\l II.

Canadian storage trials (Anon. I‘FI) of fruit from .\IcItttosl trees
grown on E\I I. II. IX and .\’II showed that Il'ose trees grown on EIVI [were
verV SIISCCIHIIIIL‘. and if use on IzM II vere moderatel‘, susceptible to brown
core. Fruit from trees on EM IX and XII were more liable to fungal rots
and Ir iit from trees on 12M XII were ver_\ susceptible to senile breakdown.

Investigations 1!: Sv.it/t.-t'lati(l (Anon. 1030) indicated that, under
their conditions. truit and storage qualitv was unaffected bv the rootstock

w itl‘ the exception of EM IX, wI ich affected storage qualitv adversely.

Influence of variet‘. on leaf composition.

 

There is considerable evidence indicating that varieties do not have

identical nutrient requirements. Differences have been observed in numerous

 

 

occasions among varieties with respect to leaf composition.

Batjer and Magness (1938) reported that leaves from Delicious trees
had a higher potassium content than leaves from Jonathan trees.

Collison (1940) found that Delicious leaves had a higher calcium
content than McIntosh haves, and the latter were, in turn. higher than
Northern Spy leaves.

Beattie and Ellenwood (1950) showed that Delicious leaves had a
higher nitrogen, potassium, magnesium and manganese content than
Stayman leaves. The opposite was true for calcium and iron.

Kenworth} (1930) reported leaf content values showing Jonathan to
be higher than McIntosh for nitrogen, potassium, calcium, magnesium,
and manganese. Tl'e opposite was the case for phosphorus, iron, copper and
boron. However, the only significant differences occurred in the case of
phosphorus, iron and copper.

Thompson e_t 3.1. (193.2) found significant differences between leaf
composition values among six varieties of apples of nitrogen, potassium,
phosphorus, calcium and magnesium.

Thomas St. a_l. (1953) indicated that Delicious leaves were higher in
nitrogen, phosphorus and calcium than Stayman and Rome leaves, whereas
Rome leaves were higher in potassium and magnesium than leaves from the

other two va rieties.

 

 

Emmert (1954b) reported that Delicious leaves were higher in nitro-

gen, phosphorus, potassium and magnesium than McIntosh and Cortland
leaves. In the case of calcium there was but little difference between the
three varieties already mentioned.

Near (1959) reported that Delicious leaves bad a higher nitrogen,
_ phosphorus. potassium and magnesium content than Ionathan leaves. The

opposite was true for calcium. boron. and iron.

Influence of sampling dates on leaf composition.

 

Wallace (Nab) stated that the knowledge of the seasonal cycles of
the various nutrients in the leaves is an essential point in the development
of leaf analysis techniques for diagnostic purposes.

As early as 1911), Ritclier (1910) found that the potassium content of
apple leaves on a percentage basis decreased as the season advanced.

Chandler (1936) reported that in 2-year-old Stayman Winesap trees
the nitrogen content of leaves, on a percent dry weight basis, decreased
throughout the season. The potassium content decreaSed to a low in mid-
]une, increased to a high at the end of june, then decreased to a low at the
end of July, and then increased thereafter.

Vaidya (1938) found that, on the basis of the percent of the residual
dry matter, the calcium content in leaves showed a decrease in july, after

which it increased steadily during the following months. The potassium

II

contentof leaves increased during the period of rapid growth, reached a
peak in September and then decreased rapidly. Leaf phosphorus was very
high in new leaves and decreased to a minimum at the time of leaf fall.
Magnesium, iron, manganese and aluminum showed no definite seasonal
cycles.

Reuther and Boynton (1939) found a seasonal decrease in leaf potas-
sium from July to October.

Boynton it a1 (194-1) reported that as the season advanced from July
to October leaf calcium increased, leaf potassium decreased, and leaf phos-
phorus decreased in June, then showed little variation.

Beynton and Compton (1945) found that on a dry weight basis, leaf
potassium and leaf nitrogen decreased and leaf magnesium increased slightly
as the season advanced.

Cain and Boynton (1948) reported marked decreases in leaf potas
sium and phosphorus and an increase in calcium, magnesium and total
bases (Ca+Mg+ K) as the growing season advanced.

Regers et i_1__ (1933) found that as the season advanced, there was a
decrease in leaf nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus and an increase in
leaf calcium and no pronounced trend in leaf magnesium.

Thomas c_t t_i_1_. (1953) took four leaf samples from Delicious and

Rome trees from mid-June to mid-August and they found a decrease in leaf

 

 

nitrogen. an increase in leaf calcium. and little variation in leaf potas-
sium, phosphorus and magnesium during the sampling period.

Emmert (1954a) also found that there was a decrease in leaf phos-
phorus and potassium and an increase in leaf calcium as the season ad-
vanced.

Mason's rep-tr: (1‘55) indicated that leaves from the middle of the
current season's growth of EM \"II growing in the stoolbed, leaf nitrogen
and leaf phosphorus decreased as the season advanced. Leaf calcium and
leaf iron increased steadily from May to November. Leaf potassium in-
creased to a high in mid July. decreased to a low at the end of August.
increased again to .i high in October, and then decreased steadily. Leaf
magnesium increased until mid August then decreased steadily. Leaf man-
ganese increased slightly until mid August then s'how'ed little variation.
Mason remarked that until mid August. which was the time of cessation
of growth, there was a relatively orderly change in the concentration of
elements, but after mid August the ageing effect on leaf composition was
not orderly in nature.

Mason and Whitfield (1960) studied the seasonal changes of elements

in the leaVes of the clone EM IX used as a scion grown on the clones EM IX
and XVI used as rootstocks . They found that in the EM IX/XVI combina—
tion, leaf nitrogen decreased as the season advanced, leaf phosphorus de

creased until May, then showed little variation, leaf potassium decreased

 

—
2.:

until June then increased until September. then decreased rapidly. Leaf
magnesium increased .intil .\la}.. showed little change until August and then
decreased. Leaf . alc: im s': owed .2 .oniinuous lllc rease throughout the
season. When the Ii\l ."X IX .ombination was studied. leaf calcium showed
the same ‘.'.£“I.‘ill()'l I).'1llt'l"- o: the previous combination, but leaf potassium
decreased until June. inc reasi d in J ll‘.. decreased in August. increased in

Septeirbet‘ and flax”. de-. l'.'-!\t d iliro .itl'o'ii the remainder of the season.

I Signifit uitt clll'l'1'tlliitl‘.~ bet” et-n '. ll io'is determinations made on apple

leaves and tr ill.

 

Warue .i'td Vlufla. e (I‘HW') were among the first to report a negative
correlation l)el‘.‘.t"'3: .eal pot issi un and leaf t alci mi. The varieties under
study ..-re \‘m:'ct_-ster l’earziiain Ind Lane's Prince Albert grown on various
EM rootsto. i:s. Vaid‘ci (1‘1“) rep irted similar findings.

Isoynton :iud t ompion (1‘1-13) reported that in McIntosh there was an
inverse reunion bet tin-n ieai potassium and leaf magnesium and a positive
relation between eat nitrogen and leaf magnesium.

('ain (I‘Hia) studied the effett of nitrogen lt‘l'l1l17t.‘l‘H()l’i foliage com
position and found that nitrogen lt'l'lll17et‘s caused an increase in leaf nitro-
gen, calcium attd magnesium and a decrease in leaf potassium and phos-
phorus, regardless of potassium lt.‘l‘llll}’.t.'1' levels. Also. potassium ferti

lizers resulted in a decrease in leaf magnesium.

Hill (1033) reported that increased concentrations of foliage nitrogen
were accompanied hi. dei reased concentrations of pl ospl'orus and potassium,
and increased concentrations of iiiagnesi'nn.

Eaves and Keisal (Nil) di-tt-i'iiiined H e cl emical composition of
Cortland leaves and the} found the following correlations in untreated plots:
a) Positive correlations lit-tween P and Ca. .~.' and K, .J and Mg.

l1) .x'eeative correlations lietween l\' and My”. I\' and l’, P and Mg,

Ca and Mt:

“llI HIM'l‘i (l‘l:'i) I'L'Dht‘li il :1 litislllve t‘t'lalltin litttvset'n fruit potassium]
and magr‘esiam.

Kenwortl ;. and Harris: (Who) determined the cl emical composition of
Mc'lntosl': and Red l‘ielicioas fruit and found the following highly significant
Correlatains hetv een elements

1) When Micligaz apples v ere considered there were positive
correlations l'etween .4 and K, 1’ and Mg. l’ and Mn, Mg
and Mn.

.2) When Mcliitosh apples from four states were considered there
were positiVe correlations between P and Ca, Ca and Mg,
Mg and Mn.

55) Wl.eii Red Delicious apples from four states were considered,
there were positive correlations hetw'een l’ and Mg, P and B,

Ca and Mn, Mg and Mn, and negative correlations between

P and (‘u. Mg and ("‘I. Mn and Cu.
4) When hotl varieties from four states were considered, there
were positive correlations lietw'een P and C a, P and Mg, P
and B. L'a and Mg. L a and Mn, Ca and Fe, Mg and Mn, and
, negative correlations hetween .\' and [3. Mn and Cu.

Smocf- and Boynton (IO—H) conducted a two-year studv of four McIntosh

orchards and a one-i. ear st'Ith in a fifth orchard. and the» pointed out the
followingr trends.

a) Increased applications of nitrogen fertilizer decreased the
firmness of tl e fruit at harvest time. hut did not seem to
stun ilate i'icreased rates of softening during storage.

li) Increased applications of nitrogen fertilizer seemed to result
in tl.e retardation of the normal development of yellow ground
ttiltir.

c) 'l" ere was not alwaxs a direct correlation between the amount
of nitrogen applied and the effect on firmness or ground

color, but there was almost alwavs an inverse correlation

lietween leaf nitrogen and fruit firmness and ground Color.
d) There was no ma rked effect of differential nitrogen treat-

ments on soluhle solids in the fruit, but where there were

significant differences, soluhle solids were reduced by the

higher nitrogen levels.

e) T: ere v as :i'i indication that the amount of lirow'n core found
after storage increased in some orcl'ards wit?" l'igl er leaf
nit rogen levels. li it there was not alw'rvs a direct correla-
tion ‘.'.itl' the :imo'int of fertilizer applied to the tree.

t.) In lU‘ll' of the five orchards there was no effect of differential
nitrogen treatments on the incidence of storage scald, hut
in the 'ifth orc lia rd tl‘ere v as a strong suggestion that the
l.tt‘.1-.'t‘ nitrogen applications reduced It e incidence of scald.

Overle}. and Hvei” olser (I‘M!) reported an experiment in whicl the
fruit coming from pluts receiving potassium fertilizer alone, had tl e high-
est average tles' firri'.i':ess aud produt ed if e smallest and the most l‘igl lv
colored fr iit. 'l'hev also reported that the fruit having a low average flesh
firmness came from trees on plots receiving nitrogen alone or in combina-
tion with other t lenie'us and tti'odut ed t' e largest and the lowest colored
apples.

l-lill t_-_t a_l_. (19%”) and Hill and lleeuev (1‘52) studied the relation of
foliage nitrogen, potassium. p‘ osp‘; orus and magnesium to the keeping qual-
ity of the apples in Ill) Mcltitosl‘ ort hai'ds during three consecutive years.
They found that quality of \lclntosl apples was reduced if the nitrogen level
exceeded .2. 1 percent of the drv matter of the leaves in mid-July. A highly

significant negative correlation existed between foliage nitrogen and fruit

quality. Potassium was found to have a definite lint lesser effect tl an nitro-
gen on storage q'ialitf and the}; considered that if the potassium levels in
the foliage in mid-j'ilv fall l‘clow l. T pert ei.t of the drv weight, tl e storage
quality wo-ild lie unpaired. .\ smaller positive correlation lietween foliage
potassium and trait q 'L'tllt‘. was determined. The investigators also found
no relation hetvage': lUllLlL'L' phosp' or :s and storage (1"alitv.

Wee- s :1 a1. tl‘HJ) o'z-s‘et'M-Li tl-at increases: in leaf :iitrog =n iii McIntosh.
trees were associated with depressed fruit color, w'l'ereas increases in leaf
potassium ere assoi iated it‘- increased fr-zit color. 'I ' ev also reported
that high nitrogen trees prod'u ed the softest fruit and low nitrogen trees the
hardest fruit. l-‘i'iali' t‘a‘ noted tl .it as leaf nitrogen increased, leaf potas-
sium de. reased a'id " igl ino r,-ai.ic nitrogen treatments caused an increase
in lea" nitroge'i, iiiagiiesi 'll‘. a'id . alci'im. and a decrease in leaf potassium
and phosp' or-is.

('ollzns (l‘ln'i') :‘eiioited t‘ at as ("e nitrogen levels in II c tree were
increased, the color and l'eeping qualitv of the fruit decreased. Firmness
also decreased as the 'iit rogen level inc reased.

B'l'iiiem Hin (l‘HH) made numerous leaf and fruit composition deter-
minations on [onat' an trees and found the following l iglilv significant corre-
lations.

l) A positiVe correlation lietweeii leaf and fruit composition for

.J, K, P and Mn.

3) Positive .orrelations lietxxeen fruit firmness at harvest, after
regular storaiii and after CA (controlled atmosphere) stor-
(lgt'.

1) Fr tit firmness at l.a rx est was negatively correlated \\itli leaf
'!ll‘."|z'_t'il and tr-nt ritroix‘en. potassium and magnesium.

4) l‘! :it firmness atter rcii'uia r storaw: ‘\\ as negatively correlated
v. itl leaf 'llll'tli‘t"! and tr in nitrogen and magnesium.

;) F: at :irniriess «tftct‘ ('.-\. storage \‘.£l's‘ neitativelv correlated
it' ieat niti'ocen. potassium and magnesium and fruit nitro-

l

i" I‘. Illil. l)‘)l£l“l .ll‘i.

") Positive \ orri i.it:o'is Etctv ecn itt'oui‘d iolor scores at larvest,

:iilu-i' t‘«--.' 'lztt' stiii'.1i;i- and alter ('A .s'IUI‘ilLre.

'f) 'l" e sol il=le solid< t ontent of il-e fruit \"tts positively correlated
it}. ti i- sol :ltle solids content after regular and CA storage
(1"(l 'ii-inativi-l“ torri..-lated it. it! fruit nitrogen and potassium.
HHI'tlifi'.’ (lute) .oted tl at stil'llilt' s'olids were consistentlx lower iti
apples affected 'x'.ll'} soft scald than in those not affected by tl-e disorder.

Smitl- (W42) reported tl-.it tl=ere was a l‘l}{'l 1'. significant negative

correlation ltUl‘.‘.(_'f_'.l vellov. iirouud color and the alisence of brown core.

 

.'\l.\'l liRl-\LS .\. {1.7 .\lli'l‘ElOl_')S

General.

A i‘ootstoi k—variet'. orchard located at t‘ e Gral'am Experiment Station,

Grand Rapids. Mic-"ieau '.=.as "s‘ed in this .st .d'.. T' e o.chard lavoiit is pre-

sented in Fig ti'c I. "l" e trt es ere pia".ted l'] I'H.’ and v ere grown under sod

c.tlt'.:re.' l'i eac! of t' e t'.-.o locatio'ts. t1 i. re were t‘o'ti‘ ttees of each \ariety-

TUUISIHCV \ UH‘il'i'TLlIlh' . '.I "e ".a Huh-W '-('Dl'L'.\("‘.ll. 'l “('11. {nrtl‘crn SPM RL‘d

Delicio :s. Ionatl an and \‘i- liito- 'I" c liast Malling rootstoc' s represented

)

were EM 1. ll. \' \'li'. .\lli i'id XVI. ' 'I ' ere v.ei'e, tl erefore, L)“ trees in each

of the t‘-.-.'o Focatious'.

Leaf sattutles .t"'i_- to: m ted ti'oni tl-e peripher}. of the tree. Leaves

'-.'.':'ici- .-.--i'e alto .t iziiit'.- .l' itt'lt' i~ :i the l-as'e of the c. rrent vear's s‘l oot and the

terminal leaf and tree of i'isect or disease daiiiaae it ere selected. The leaf

samples were kUllk'k ted ever' t-‘o wee:- s d Il'lllL’ iane, Julx and August, as shown

in Table l. i‘t- weat‘ i't' was fair to partl'. cloud" at all six sampling dates,

and the s'amplizie as done ll(_'l‘."'('t'l‘i Ill-(II) a. m., and Sill) p. m.

The apple leaf samples were washed in a detergent solution then rinsed

eonsec itively in tap ‘.‘-..’II¢.'I and distilled water. The w‘-ole operation required

less than. one min ite pet .ample. 'l'iie leaVes \H't‘e then dried in a forced d raft

oven at too I" for one weel' a:.d tl en ground on a Wilev mill with a 20-mesl-

— TI 0 soil was: a Miami loam. pll values ranged 5. (I to 'i'. 4.

Soil potassium
ranged from l'n'ts' to 431'» pounds per acre on the basis of the reserve test of
Spurwac and Lawton (I949), The trees received nitrogen last in 1956.

2/

EM II, V and VII are semi-dwarfing rootstocl-'s, EM I and XIII are vigorous,
and EM XVI is a Very vigorous rootstock.

l‘)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure I.

I x x X X
x x i x x
L x x i x x
l
O
C x x Lx x
A x _: .. . x _
x . X
T .
I x x 1 x x
O t __-__-___- __
N x x - x x
1 x x x x
; .- —_
I x x X x
X X x X
X x ' X X
x x l x x
L _ ____
X X X x
K K X X
_ -p.-_.. __ _
L x x x x
O
C x x l x x
A i -
T X K i x X
I X X l x x
o a _- _ _______ _
N x x l x x
2 x x l x x
x X X X
X. K x x
X X X X
K x x x
t it .
Northern Spy Red Delicious

 

Rootstock -variety orchard located at the Graham Experiment

.-.’n—— —---—

- +———- “W..- ”—- -
I
I

.le

x x l x
l
x x I x
x x x
X X X
x x x
x x x
x x x
X X K
x X x
x x x
x x x
X x l X
x x ' x
x x x
X X X
x x I x
— —— i
X X i K
I
l
x x ‘ x
X X X
X X X
X X X
x x x
X X X
x x X
_ y -. .
jonatltaii McIntosh

 

Station in (irand Rapids, Michigan.

 

'l‘rees planted in l952.

X

X

——-—J_ __.__.

 

 

.._ ____._..T...

l£.\I XV

li.\l XII

-— .—_———_—-—.

li.\l VI]

1‘: .\'l V

li.\l ll

li.\ll

l{.\l XV

HM Xl

li.\l Vl.

liM V

liM ll

litVll

Table 1. Dates and locations of leaf sampling of the variety—rootstock

orchard located at the tiralzam Experiment Station.

 

 

Sampling Date Location
A _I-ine 3t), 1959 1
B _]'.il\.' 14, 1959 l and 2
C juli. JR, 1939 1
D August 11, 1939 l
E August 25, 19§9 1
F juli .22, 19M) 1 and 2

 

screen. The ground samples were anaIyZed b: the Plant Analvsis Labora-

torv, Department of ilortic 1lI'1I‘t' .{itrogen was determined by the Kjeldahl-
Gunning method and potassium hi. flame pl otometrv. Phosphorus. calcium,
magnesium, iron, manganese, copper, boron, zinc, molybdenum and aluminum
were analyzed witl. a "Quantograpli" which is a direct -reading photoelectric
spectrometew manufactured hi,- the Applied Research Laboratories of Glendale,
California.

Mature fruit samples were collected from trees of the Red Delicious,
Jonathan and McIntosh varieties. Northern Spv trees were not sampled be-
cause of a very liglt crop.

One bushel and 2t) apples were harvested at random from each tree.
The 20 apples were used for pro-storage determinations. One Lalf-basI-iel
was placed in regular refrigerated storage rooms at 32° F. and the other half—
bushel was placed under controlled atmosphere (CA) conditions. he fruit

was placed in the storage rooms on the day of harvest. Red Delicious and

Iv
Iv

Jonathan fr-tit placed in CA storaee was kept at 42' I" and atmospheres of 2. 5
percent ('02 and 5% percent ()1. .\1c1ntosh 1'1 CA storage was kept at M" F and
atmosp? ei‘es' of 3 percent (‘t)_)_ and 4 percent f.)_,_. Table .2 slows the harvest

dates. the date of t‘rtiioHJl ot t'.e fruit from storage. and the total duration of

tie storage period.

Table .3. Harvest tlLlIt'--. dates of '--nto\al of ft":it from storage and total

I

:1-‘atto oit e -'oi'a u- period to" t' e fruit used i'i [1 l:- studv.

 

 

———__ _——_—_ —_..-__—— . --_——-_-—-- __ _ __-_—_—.___- -—

 

 

' _ llili"~'t."-l l-JiIIL til l‘l'llHH'dl [Ins in 5101'—
\arw[.\ daft-(1‘1“!) from sttii'ti;:'c-(l‘lt'w(1) UHF
R'I'n' 'l'dl' CA Regula r CA
Red Delicio .s 11) ()x‘Itii'ul' 1 -\pril 1-1 .\1a', .1 19'" 213
jonatl'an Septeni': er .39 .\1)1'1l 1.’ .\'l-‘.1‘.' '1 19'.” 217
Mclritosl SL’DIL'IIIlit'I' .’-’. .\1ai't ‘ 411 April 4 191 195

 

 

 

(l) A la r-.'e part of t' e \ rop 't.‘ as 'r':oc ed down in." a ver_v strong wind the
da. of harvest In the , use of Red l'telicio is on liM XIII and XVI onlv
fr :it tot t‘ e c' emit al aual'. ses' was tollected.

'l ‘.e toilo‘uu :t' tests were r in on the lot of 2.1) apples larvested from
eVerf; tree.
a) 'l'lt' ‘;'1()t:1tl iolor oftlie s‘-in was determined on both the Mc
litlosl and t‘.e Jonatl an fruit wit‘ the aid of He (‘ornell color
cl'art (SlilUL f- and Mar1 wai dt, 195;) iii w1.ic1 color variation

between green and yellow are numbered from 3 to 1.. Com-

pletely red fruit was given a rating of 1). The number of

fr iits in each color category was recorded and the average
color value of the sample was computed.
b) The flesh firmness of the fruit was determined with a Magness-
Taylor pressure tester (Magness and Taylor, 19.25) using a
l-’"l.'|L.‘l‘ diameter pl-inger which was applied to both the
green cltee'- and the diatiiett‘ically opposite red clteek of each
fruit. An average val :e was obtained and recorded for each
sample.

c) Tl-e sol.ib1e solids .ontent of the composite sample of juice
obtained from the use of the pressure tester was measured
wit! a Zeiss ()pton land refractometer.

d) A wedge w as removed from the center slice of each apple and
all t"e wedges from the same sample were composited and
used for chemical analysis. Each sample was placed in a
i_'i.eeset lotl' bag and dried for one month at 161)" F. The dried
fruit samples were tl en ground in a Wiley mill with a 20-mesli
screen. The ground samples were then analyzed for the same
12 elements determined in the leaf samples. The same
methods of analysis were followed.

At the end of the storage period the following tests were run on each
ha] f‘lMIShCl sample from both regular and CA storage:

a) Red Delicious: The average flesh firmness and do soluble

 

 

solids content of the fr iit were determined on 21) fruits. All
If e fr :it was examined for the presence of storage scald,
brown core. and internal breakdown and the percentage of
affected fruit was determined.

b) _1o:iath;i-i: All the fruit w as examined for the presence of soft
scald. jouathan spot, and r- sseting. after which 20 fruits
were selected at random and the average flesh firmness, the
avera_.'_e gi'trtnd color, the soluble solids content and the per-

L eutage of H e 311 fruits affected b‘. core browning and internal
1:i'i_-a:~dow:i was determined. The remaining fruit was held in
a room at "'1" for scven dans, after which the fruit was
again examined for the presence of core browning and internal
brealdown and the percentage of affected fruit was determined.

c) McIntosh: All the fruit from both.- regular and CA storage was
examined for the presence of storage scald and the percentage
of affected fruit was determined. Twenty fruits were then
selected at random and used to determine the average ground
color, the average flesh firmness, the soluble solids content
of the sample, and the percentage of the 21) fruits affected by
brown core and mealv brealdown. The remaining fruit was
held in a room at 7.3”1?‘ for seven days after which the fruit was

again examined for the presence of storage scald, brown core

and meal: brea: dov n and the perci.-'itage of affected fruit

was determined.

Statistical analysis of data.

 

All statistical analyses were done with the aid of the Michigan State
University electronic digital computer (Mystic). For the purpose of the statis-
tical analysis the data for eat h measurement for each tree was analyzed separ-
ately as described in the six different problems. as follows:

Probleflt_l_:_ The data obtained from the results of the leaf analysis
from location 1 in 19:9 were anal'. Zed statistically. The values obtained
from each sample representing a tree were entered separately. The
anal‘.sis of variance of t1 ree main effects. varieties, rootstocks, and
sampling dates, and t‘ eir interactions were determined. The data
from four varieties, .six rootstocL s. and four sampling dates were
thus analyzed. '1! e fiftl sampling date was omitted from the analysis
due to the capacity limitation of the computer. A typical analysis of
variance table is given in Table II.

Differences between treatments were determined by using a mini-
mum required difference (MRD), (Lewis, 196(1). 'I'l-e MR1) value is
obtained by multiplying the standard deviation of the treatment mean
by the value in the studentized table (Duncan, 1955) corresponding to

degrees of freedom of the error term and the number of averages being

.20

Table 3. Analysis of variance of leaf phosphorus data (Problem 1).

 

 

Degrees of Mean F value
Source Freedom Square (2)
Varieties .S .03h7l
Rootstochs 3 . 0.2416
Sampling dates '4- . 01570
VxR(l) IS .00300
VXSDH) U .0021?
R X SD 15 . 00096
V x R x SD 45 . 00091
Error Zhfi .00080

 

(l) Interactions tombined to test main effects.
(2) ' Significant 1 "level.
Significant S .' level.
compared. The advantage of this value is that all the means under the
same treatment can be tompared with the aid of a single value.
Proble_i_i_t_2_:_ T} e i'2fl ience of variety. rootstock, location and their
interactions on leaf composition was statistically analyzed in this
problem. The leaf composition val'ies from both locations 1 and 2 for
the julv 14, 193‘) sampling were used. This sampling date (julv 14,
1959) was He one used in the area when collecting leaves for diagnosing
purposes.
_P__I‘-()mi:i_(-_1i‘i__3_f The influence of variety, rootstock, years and their
interactions on leaf composition was determined statistically. This

time the values for the two locations were pooled together because the

values for the two locations were significantly different iii 1959 only

 

 

for potassium, magnesium and molybdenum and the actual differences
were i‘CltlIiVel‘. small. Only the leaf composition data from the July H.
19:9 sampling and the one sampling of l‘lht) were used.

_P_i;o_‘_t_l__cn_i_~l_ T' e infl :ence of \ariety, rootstock, location and their
interactio'is on fr :it -.'oniposition was analyzed statistically. Only the

1050 data were used.

Problem :2 The i'ul-ience of rootstock and location on pre-storage

 

and post storage inuisaremc-nts and their interactions within eacn of
t"e three varzeties studied was determined statistically.

Erotic-11L: 'Ie'i correlation problems involving 3, 421 correlations
were analv7ed statisticall'.. Correlation coefficients were determined
for each variety o:: all root stocl's (three problems), eac": rootstock
on all varieties (six problems), and all observations (one problem).

”i he torrelation coefficients were calculated and their significance

determined. (ml. the I‘H‘) data were used.

 

 

 

R liSL' L'I'S

Influence of rootstoc: s on leaf composition.

—. __—__ ___-
——

 

ln Tat-les 4, S and o. the relative influence of the various EM root-
stocks on leaf composition is presented. In Table 4, the leaf composition
values obtained at each oi fo-ir sampling dates are considered together. In
Ta'nle 3. leaf \UETTP‘)>lliUl‘ values obtained at the main sampling date are eval-
uated. Flit;tll‘.. :: 'lai 2e t. t‘ e leaf temposition values obtained at the main
samplini- dates. of l'lW and [Unit are t onsidered.

.L'i_t_r«_iLe_-;; Rtmtsltt- '-s did -:ot lave a significant influence on leaf
nitrogen.

l_’p_ta_.-si_.u_i_i_:_ Rootstm s significantly influenced leaf potassium values,
as seen in 'l'al-le~- 4. S and e. iii-ether tour sampling dates, the main sampling
date of two years were taken into \ o'isideration, trees on EM 1 had the highest
leaf potassi .m \al'ies and trees on liM V lad the lowest values.

Phosp‘ o:'-. 'l l-ere were significant differences between rootstocks

——.-_. — .

"f

in affecting leat p' osp' or.:s when four sampling dates or two years were taken
into consideration ('I ables 4. o). Leaf phosphorus was highest on trees on
153/1 V and lowest on 15M XVI. However, wl-en onlv the main sampling date was
S"Idied. no significant different e was fo ind Letwccn root stocl's (Table 5).
951.5311”: There were significant differences between rootstocks when

t!’ .l . . - . -
”Q leaf com )osition data from four samilin r dates, one sannlin r date or two
l 1» is

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

" I '- ' ' . ' -- ' ' ( ‘ I _I ‘I ‘ I' l . ‘ " u. - s. — - r- , ;. -
I. 1. -6 ’. --:- I. I -. , ...L n I. -l | ' '. J —I\ ‘u .1 .I I .J . V—L'J-l‘.
-
' . - O .- - - . ' I I | g" _ r ' I '1 ' Y .
_ . '_ . . .. .. " .. - .- L‘ . .. ”'1- '3’ .....- .JLV‘I- U
i ‘ ‘ V I
. I .-. - - . o _ ,-. J ‘ 3 . u __ v. _) V' —. ' (‘ . - p . r -
L t -1 .I . - ..._ - '-- - I - .I .1 9' Ir. ... I. I'L (- ".¢ I. _ r-L . J-‘d I‘;1Tv
. - - . 1 '
n . . u I ' ‘ I ‘ - to O y _\ . p,
'I‘ .- I. .m' . . . u : I C- T.‘ I . '- - I..a A I- ‘ V I - \? ll-e .- lrie .
_ — I——- -——-*I _--~* _'-I_--* —I-—*— —- - -‘ —--——-—-l -- — .Ifl
. liar: ..
.. - .- .' . . x . I
VIVI' II I o 0
' -' I I - d
" " 9 _
~ - I I. o u -. .- C-U L.
".21. 1 . - . - .. e / l .
UL I. A I 0 . . a I .- - 'I ~ ~ — O /, - v
._.4p._.- -.._ _— . .— . _..- — - -__ .— __..--—-— - —- .- -_ ————- ——-..-.-— — ——-— — >———— .— —-— -—- —_
\ -- -. ‘ u - 'I I - I w
l 1‘ .. I‘ I. -' I
-‘ a . u- .—L- ‘ - & l
. _ _ | 5 .‘VI a;
1 .1 _ .5. I _ . u _ _ . . _ _ I
- ' .- - r ' ‘ ’ '
. u I 0 I . |I . - I O .n .
- - -I —- —-- * ----.—- .— --m—-
_-- ....._— - - . - . — ..— - —__._.—_—_.
. . l . . -
- o d I- I g .. ' . — u . I
i . - “U _, ‘| —\ . I
l I - I . ._ .. . o . 0 .I O .. L J. O '9 LC
n—--— ‘* u-I—vo—g— -—.-—.— _ .- —— .n..m-.— — — ——u u .- —-—I-—I I-.
- - —-- —*-m
| - ' ' ' .
._ T. d . o _. ,l. l . I .. .— a .
l
I -
l - I 1.. i u
I O . p . o . - i I I _ O - 0 ch _
Io-I- —-h—- -—— Ian—I I.-
l v I —
i _ , .
'a- l ._ -_ - l .. . _ l I . . .
l
j _ . I l _ I . .. . - I -- I I - L; .- O - In I,
-—-- -- - .--— --—. -— .. .— ..- -—.—.—— _—
D I I I U
-'-.I. ‘ I" .u l ‘ _ _' . h . I I _
- '\ I' \I ‘
- I
.0 o -O ‘ ‘ ' a -0 H 0' ‘.o" ‘10- *ruod
...h......--... _ .. -...—_.-—-—... ._ .—
I I 1-
. A ., -‘ g I I u _ a
' I a r fil 2‘
1 l . O --- O - . — I- I . i l , I— /
I - I . ~ .
'- '
- ' - A - I .- 1. A I“ l - n-
l I - — I I
: I o I I ' a . § . I". l\l_ l‘ I.
.. __ _ .- — .. _ . _ .. . .. ._.. ._... -_ _ .__ -—— -— —— .... _-_.._——
.( '
h I h - ' ' 'l h I- I I ' I - I
- . .' . . . - - - L 2 c; ya
- I I a . I - . o _ o . . - o . 1 o I, /' 0 V
' .- - — - - u - _ -.- — —— —— — n- no .u ._ —-
, ‘ . .
’- 0 4 . __ . I . '

q; .' Us, I I. ‘ I 9-! I. O- - .I- I—“I I l‘k -\‘k-I

————-. — _ —-- - q— -_ ..—.-—— --. —--- —--I--- ———-——— - _--——- _-—'-_—u

l' ‘ v- . l
.y. _a I V .4 I . I
- I "_ - A. A-" ‘ II . . - ' - I- a. I - I — ‘ A. A.

D
\I
‘-

J
'\
I .
\J

, .
1'.!.I--. "'9 o "'o -- "'IL— or 0‘; O

_-—-. --_. —. - "—..—- . —-——.—--——.. nu..- _— .-

-- —---- .—-—————l—

 

 

‘ . .u . . . o ' 1. I a - ¥ . —
. . I ‘ ‘ 7 1 -.. ' . . C-
‘r — . A ' . .’.] . .. . . _ up I-O . l I J l__ |._ | ‘ LV;' L‘K.‘
7* ‘\_-. _._.. .-_... _ _. .. _..... -.._ .. .-..-. - . . .. -. _ __ .. .__ __ --. _ . _ ._.__ . _..L

 

 

' a II- ‘ : ‘n- ‘ i. -' r. . ' .- .. I - I nr- u l a .
J" -' 4-.9’: sr. J11 Jr. i'C': 3"! ".- .-'- '1‘51... '9 ‘..i. “‘9. lc:.-. A H C--tnl.-TJI1§’2‘
‘ . . u. __ .....J~-

I".
‘ .‘Il

 

P“ ‘ '-

-ao.e "-.

 

 

 

L"
‘ ‘ -" '- - ‘ \ - -‘_ I
i 11 cv...‘ -’:A U; rokl O h. LIA. :: VI
‘- 0 ' I . ‘ I ' I - " | "I | I I
-etacen - . ,\,-; udierscuzea ix n Same line.
' q r! ‘ ,, ‘
““~.-I u.‘ \t l .‘ ~.\;' I v v I K.‘
" -. - ' .-
'ru' ""‘31 I U
DJSlS niggnvc. '0w9CL. 3%
E .n — n- —- — I -— w—-—- -- ——— —— -g
1‘ L I 11K, 1“,: .. - ' . I I .. .. .
cl -— I I q. n. q , r1 "i‘
,' I-O A .. .— I A -’ I_o A. L- o L '- L.o".ik.. L—OL" 1‘0
.- - C T‘ T r 1 1 up
:UL'IUU.‘ J. I - I I-.. - .l- 4.1.! I lJ- I
1 _ _ I ' l f}
k L. \ ‘o'_\ 4.0~_- ‘0‘- Lot'\ lot, ob"
‘D In ." n1. . . -r ' ' ' T I :1
finv~rnlv-\ a.- -_ V 1‘ I.-- -Ih I. I. v u.-
.: l: .' ‘1‘ _ g i \_
o -’ I _ .. ’ on --b- o — I. l ’ O l .’/ .\I...
' ' ‘ "" '1' T 1
Un—l-L not. I.- l I .— ' -|-L*I --L
5 ' ‘- .. ‘ ‘ ... ' . I l L '1
,' J.IL‘-I coir. ”I .. Jo 4" .of/ v.31 0L
‘ _ . l I
i'. '1 J I ‘ a:-- luJ ‘ 'n I .- 4‘ .- .. L .- - V - ‘ ' -
‘l- .I -\ I ‘ . r7,- -
. I _, -'\.. O - . ’ 0:.3'511 o-- J 0"— 0L,' ‘J 0".)
'I - v v
.I.“.‘ J I ' 4 ‘l ‘ h g. ‘- - - .I- I ~ I.l L 1
h l A i l ,' I 7 ‘I
i—'.£l'at.0 I _9_ 'Lo— I've; “'1‘. ' L+.'o.1 kj'o
:. ' a u .p - g V I
~‘IV..‘ g. C I -4 .h I I"! — .- AI- 7 -
I l v I- r. a . .' . a. _: Z -‘ -‘
r”: H _ , ,- -t- I. . :2“ it:
'I -— . , - - — .
1' l I. l I ' l
V'Jrr- l .. -..LL 1 .4. IL .‘. I I.
' I U, ‘ - '_ - ‘ I - I I v I h
£10.10.... .0 LLOh L40? 1L.“ .1.‘ I," l‘gol l‘v
.4 ( ' v I ' ‘ 1 ll:
‘JLIltvn v .-i L \lLJ. .'_.L A's-
7' r r ' ” IL "I X A'. l . 1. 7
kOr'ozho A/g,’ / '01 ’A02 j/oC /'L0\J ‘—\j0’+ )0
1y I . . ' , I. y I nI .- '7 1 '-
‘ULISL'LH .l I- l A]- V .\.11 L1.
7 ‘ ' a I' r . v u I (
50:10.5. "0/ "0/ 40‘ l’o‘xx I “.1 Ply
:1 z : - ..' ., _ .,
~ .4 "--LL'I.-1'I I. [-1. .- . LL U I. l I. II JJ.
' Iv 'v- a I , a , .\ )C .4. I I L
1’ 0 .4 Out. L, / L IL L.L./‘ L _ (_C.\/' Li. l‘b
. . I
\

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

p———.— -—— ———————— ———

 

a; com'osition.
"n: order of

”l D
“are not signifisxnt
t e

 

but: i!

10.

5....

‘-

c-

-L—

C”

'_J

 

 

Kl J Mean
Gate

<3 I’ Zinc

 

f) E t- 1'
If "3 "i 1'
‘1 L1". t1

vaiue: represent
x c lUC'A'Li-JIIS X 1
was not it'luded

98° 4

I..- O

x 4 trees.

0 analytical difficulties.

varietieu x

l sampiig5_

31

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I ' _- V‘ . . .q I '\ ' I I I C I
JI_:ML‘-o 'V. I‘LIL - Ar AL— . .I- ~. - v». - - I. \ -I I . d- ' I i ... .- . I...
"‘ f I I I I .| ‘ I "I I " I. II 0‘
-‘lJu '- . .' . , ' I. H. E.I .I. .5: I. Lu. .LCA .
I L O. ' ' " ' ‘ ; ° ' ' I ‘ ‘ ‘ ..p ' .V ‘ 5.4 'II I I I t-
4. u - .. J I- A... l— A. - A. . - . ‘ O ‘ I A _ ' -I . I II 4 ' ‘I‘
I“ 1- ." I‘- .. . ‘ ’I g- . -- 1 . . I . o -. _ ' ‘ .' ‘ y I -
I'.-ilon.l A A - All . F. l - . . ‘.‘l.. \’ A . I. : - £' .A'f
5' " ‘- V -.
I‘ z... .- _h- a.- .:.I I
——-..-- .I——— --- —-—- ._-. - —— —— c... —— - - -- -— - — .- - y .— . - - . — -—_ .—
~ ‘ ‘
“Ldgl‘ua‘ _ I- _ . _ ' ;
I -_ -- . g - ‘ 'I .
.. " I“ '2‘ L
- U o 1“
' C ' ‘ 2 I .' | :- " -~
bdyLSO ... ..C’. .I \I~"...I ..
.---- — -———-—_ -.— - .————_———-—-- - . -_ _——— —— _-—-— I- .— _-
u .- r. .. -. .
— I
.‘ .Ll-. .r -:._-‘ .. . I I _ .. .’ I .. l‘. - . -
n H ‘ f I
r I I I I
h I s L I - . - O - I I _. I - _ I I ‘I '
- - . * *— l‘. **_ — -
.- . I. . o —
b—- - l
4. .1 J. in -. - .. - .. - _ - - - - . - -
I ‘ —I - —
'J I . ' ' L \
I. l - — O h 9 J O I ' L I O _ v
_.—.-. _-———I—— —- -——_—_._— ..
_-___—-‘—— _——— _ _._.—— -—-__.
p... - . , - - -.
I-III' ‘ I -' -¢ ' I
L -0'4 .u- a I I4 - I. I 3 . I . g. — - .- .Il ' I.
v A a _ " ‘I ‘ ‘ ‘
- Q -_ _ I __ O \- I o —. _ I -_ 0 . I L - O
—_- --—I-— ——.— - -- -—-I - - --_ __.-
I -. I — .
I
J ‘1 -1 . 5 J .- q . .., . .- . I . '
‘ ‘. l - ' ‘
.1 g l I I
.L I - I 5 I o- n . I '_. I .‘ ..' I H I J L- O
h I_‘— -— —_— ---—-—- h--——--._——-—u — --—— —-——— ——
. .‘ .
. I 0 " I
O'l‘tul -' I ' I. I - l - ‘ - .I _ I I a. — .—
- .. I. A, 1 ' 1‘ l r .' . y
I I A I I l" . O I- - l 0 v — 5' O
.3...——--..__...__’ “—.....m—m- _.—......._.....
_————_———_—
- v . . .
~ I
L- -I I ' . ' I- - g - Al I
l ' 'I -- - I -o ‘
l o I Q .I. o L C I .' i - l‘ - A _ I. : l‘L A‘
‘ ‘ ‘— —— —- —- — — u - — -—--—-—-— — --———-———_ ———-_
I r I I ~
I- -II .4 I l I
Jb ‘ I ~- ’ - - l .- Ih I o a - 4- I -
I II I _ I I ‘ '1 ‘ Q I . 1 a .J ‘-
("0: II-II .. I. ...0 AL I,- -- I. -l I . 1. I'. I .' I
' —-———*
__,-—— - _ - - . .—. .I— .. .—
I; . u - - II I '-
I I. H I I
LII/.— .I.‘ I - a- I .. IL - - _ I I L
I I'- I I ' I I ' I l‘ 1 I
I. 0‘. IL". 2 I ' ' ( IL. I J |—- I . L 'I , .Ik. .1
‘ -'-—-—I-—-— - - .—J— In.“ — — — ——- ——~—-—
- '- I - I I u -- w I I
' "' . I l
""J 5.: -~ A. n.- ‘ . .I n l l l A .. A A. 'L - . I
I ' I I
, . l ‘ .
I" O I I . o H I / H o '_ ' a ’3 '° I _ I L H 0 v II .!
. J— -——“_
.T ’ ' I II ' Y
I I
I I
lthv -'l —I‘ J . . ~ I- ‘ I h m I -. I I V L n
I I _N
I , I. "I .. I ‘5'. ‘ I, ‘ '(. I. I!
1’ O: I A I o I . _ I k. I , L 0/ -- _ _ _ It. .
_ —~ . '-——-——*fi‘~- —— — --_ - —— —
,

(1.) fine-JP; V

date ya
I ' r '
\d) Aime W-
L..ant5rm<:se_: vms no

fUJg;ic

l.‘l
I‘ll

ice

iii 1‘3

I 'y‘:' {I X.

1?
CT
*1
\D

5

y Lfiprurnnt

'\

9
_ Lax:wtl.3n:; x L” ychrsz.\ H
1- I I 1 '
.ll l._"‘ ll-Je L

lIl'J

\r
LII—I

111'

C"

containin; Cm;

L Sampiin

#7 -
b;'(:€'b

irriculties.
tila:

.30 1 3

uk-
\Jl

-—.————-—-— ——-— --I_.

1
I -.-‘

years were taken into consideration (Tables 4, S and 6). Trees on EM land
XVI had tilt: highest leaf calcium values, whereas trees on EM II, V and XIII
had the lowest values.

Magnesi im. Rootstoc‘s significantly affected leaf magnesium values

 

when either four sampling dates, one sampling date or two years were consider—
ed. In everv case, trees on EM XVI were the highest in leaf magnesium and
trees on EM I were the lowest (Tables 4, S and (i).

Manganese: 'I" ere w e re significant differences between rootstocks in

 

regard to leaf ttttht;,fut.e<c wlen tl-e data from four sampling dates or one sampling
date were analet-d (Tables 4. 3). In every case trees on EM XIII had the highest
values, and trees on EM ll lad tl-e low est values. The data from the second

year could not he used if] t‘ is studi. liecarise a manganese containing fungicide

was applied prior to leaf sampling.

Lr_o_n_:_ Rootstot '~ s affected. leaf composition values for iron when the
data from four sampliug dates ('l‘ahle 4) and one sampling date (Table 5) were
analyzed. However, when the data from two vears were considered, no signi-
ficant difference was found lit-tween rootstocks (Table 6). Also, different root-
stocks were not consistent in their influence on leaf iron.

s,

9.1??? Rootstocks significantlv affected leaf copper values only
when the data from two yea rs were taken into consideration (Table 6). In every
case, trees on HM Vll showed the highest leaf copper values.

Boron: There were significant differences between root stocks with

 

33

respect to leaf boron w “.en four sampling dates and when only one sampling
date were considered (I ables 4. 3). This was not the case when the values
from two years were taken into account (Table h). In everv case trees on EM V
showed the l‘.ig"est leaf boron values.

E91”: .10 sigmifieant difference in leaf zinc values was found between
the rootstocss wl‘en the data from four sampling dates was analyzed (Table 4).
The data for zinc were not included in Tables 5 and h because of analytical
difficulties.

Moh:bden-1m. There were significant differences in leaf molybdenum

 

for the different rootstocks when four sampling dates were taken into account
(Table 4). However, l.'1 ti'e other two studies, no significant difference was
found.

gliniin'jni; Root stoc‘- s did not affect significantly leaf aluminum values

in any of He problems considered ('I'al-les 4. S and (i).

Influence of rootstocl's on fruit composition-

 

Rootstoc' s did ‘-ave a significant influence on tlte potassium, copper,
boron, zinc and aluminum composition of the fruit (Table 7). Rootstocks, how-
ever, did not have a significant effect on the amounts of nitrogen, phosphorus,

calcium, magnesium, manganese, iron and molybdenum, in the fruit.

Table 7.

~
.‘q.

\ \

fruit

be

LHQ.-..L_I ‘LI
Ery weight

33815

' T-fl‘fi! 7 ‘
-‘J..h .‘v.’ --‘
U
'V ' '
- ‘ bk M-J. l
(I
" V. v
.. H - D‘ ..
-LAVM- L .4. .0
- ‘Ir1-

" __ ._ 1 T'
‘I--1d:‘ h"_- L U
1

.0 :‘L‘ J ‘Aa‘ - .U‘

n' . v'
k.r.nld.

v 1 VI.
1. 0; out.

£10: 0|.er

ALL! I“ i11Uin
p.p.m.

* 4

(1) mean values represent d4 trees: 5
date x : locations

h‘l'
U" u

 

5.3

V‘ I
lbb-L - ‘l-?—Lu I.)

JOQCECOCflb are
'
,—
\J

an r00 5-

34

‘
. _ ‘ - o ‘ ‘ —.
9’1 A ID. 1 IJ" d.’ 0" K:

\J

c on fruit combosition.

ea in aecreasing order of
Eifferences were not significant

andeescored by the same line.

 

.. Lowest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘4 '3’.-
-vv r -.y 1 v w -. _' .-
.lL l .. I I - A. A .1. 05.. .L .L
.,r_‘ .‘ .
. ‘. 1 I '7 .
O — ; i O 5—- I O h- L? O‘— L: O L l I O [—1 j
- I I' v - v -r '
I
o. ' L - up. A I h .- I ‘ .L
a a: l;. - r1 1. r. I .‘
o o o o ._. ’ 1' o __ o ,' Ix.
. I - --
.A. - - I _ . ~ 4-. u .. L J.
‘ ‘ __ ‘ I -‘| '5
O . o h -" o A. a - '4’ o J.’ ’- o 1 h'
I - E I " l
' o I - - ‘— - -- I u. -
\“H 1. 1:: ‘1' . -
O i : o 4.. '. o A'. ”I; o J. J 0 1!: L 0 l ‘3
- ." I r | u w I T
a'h ‘ _ || L - A“. L as A I L J. a.
r". l ‘ C L: :!C:
O J J" 0 v / 0 v ‘KJ 0 w 31/ . I‘Jj/ O K) _"
——-——o————o-—— ~——. —
' ' ' ' I I, ' ’ l"
-- - .5. A - J I J- .g I .- V ‘
~ . - a ‘ I: E A 1 IJ -\
.LL.‘ —o/’ iuo/ 1.-.,1 1.4.0, Llot
'v v r .' ~v r " 1
4' o— J — V -s .h ‘5 I L - ' .I.
. . f C 1 r - C-
u ‘ ' "' N
I I J A O 5— 4 v'. ._ V' . ‘2) I“; . d 2-} O )
l
u T 'Y‘ CV - Ir '7' -
v - ; ' ‘ I ‘ 0'. i .- L L L I
- l -- ' r F?
Lbo— l-r.—J kit:— 0 0': {0—
"Y r r .,q
v .Li L ;;i -L Avi
f'l_ r r L L ll " '1
,l‘ or“ 'L- or '/10 J L". o I L? Jol+ 1* .L OK:
- w v I - '
I- r" L 1' a L i o, Ia.

 

V l

L19.’+

All; II
C)“ o r/ C’L" o ‘J

————._——.—-._. _— - —————--—.——_ ——-—

 

' Yr-r

al.1

 

 

.__——-———.——————-—~——

hh JG
‘ k \
l‘k/ ‘L'

1D.l Ifi.“

ll.U

 

— - —_ -—-. _.- .—-..

x 4 trees.

varieties

Saar-1.2125.

J‘J
Jl

Influence of rootstoc '- s o-1 storage measurements.

 

 

Red Delicious. RU(')I>I(DL"- s influenced significantly the soluble solids

 

content of the fr iit and the incidence of storage scald on the fruit (Table 8).
However. rootstoci s did not affect significantly the flesh firmness of the fruit.
.‘\'0 brown core or internal breakdown was found at any time.

j_o_nath_an:_ Rootstoc' s had a significant influence on the flesh firmness
of the fr :it and on tl.e percentage of russ'eted fruit (Table 0). However, root-
stocls's did not affect significantly soluble solids. ground color of the fruit, and
the incidence of jonatl‘an spot or soft scald on tl'e fruit. I~.'o core browning or
internal l-reai—.down was fouud at an}. time in the fruit.

Nehnosl: Rootstocl's 'nad no significant influence on any of the

measurements tonsidered (Table III).

Influence of varieties on leaf composition.

——_———

 

 

 

In ti-e case of almost every element, there were significant differences
between varieties with respect to leaf composition (Tables ll, 12, and 13).
This was true whether four sampling dates, one sampling date, or two vears
Were talen into consideration.

The onl‘. exceptions were for copper when the data for four sampling
dates were used and for phospl or-is, iron, copper and aluminum when the
data from two years were ta.':en into account. There was very little or no

difference in relative composition between varieties whether the data from

36

‘fi.- ."'.I
-34; -‘A,.....

-

uit.

‘\
J.

.l.

o- u
h
s

_-' I.'.'
v A‘- — ‘. ‘

b

.A.‘

(fir

\l

:1 O

P y r.
A eL'enveS

f

naerscored

u -

b'l

u

703KB

.—
v \‘S

L

7'
.‘n‘

b.1111;

Ir

aw!

5|.

1‘15.)

{uh

“—..——

 

h-—_—--

 

 

—.._ ..——— -—-————._.—- m

 

 

 

 

-'
I
‘—

 

 

 

 

 

o
b
o
I
+.. .0.-
U
o
.II..
”s 1.
.L
. . o
a . LO
.. . 1-.
g
o
I .H
_.. 5
W.»
as...
.v.
u a...
q. .14
.v. n.—
. a
a.»
C...

t

.4‘

e r—

.J .
and
“L .L
C .3
*v 3
S S

 

L'.’

A

“De

)

\1

13.

cg

IIUI‘VC‘

9.
L;

.x.‘

\

"_(‘
- .At...

1'

I
I
A

r7511.

.i
:I G

V L

x

-(..uc

d

'(

date

'-
- )

amplin
14ft-c

._i

1
Oil

.101;

I
L.
)\)‘,c

"l

.4
.x‘.‘

I
u
I

V
A.

r
J
It-

1.. '4‘.

H
.L

‘I

. '1.
,‘J;~

130;?

(J
U

ati

I
‘1‘"- U

V.
II

'3

\

I||IIII1| I..-

Iable a. izr;.ense :. ;- rectitoen:
st.r.;e Leasizeaents or do
are agrangea 'n leareac;ng
measure :.ei.t -:or;..i.;e:-e-1 . L'i
significant between *ootst
same line.

 

 

nathan

on ire-storage
fruit.

oraer of

haotstocks

values for tne

were
one unde‘scored by the

non

 

 

1%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. I '7 . --- :1 - I '. ‘
IDA-Io-‘tJL; 11 AL“ ADA. ‘ :‘INI \. .L D - -- J QLLJ
“1*Lest. newest
.1
. A‘.. ‘ '7 ' . " T 1" '." I ""
‘/ E'JLut+e -..L .‘.lAL L v V .; JLI L
F- :«c 5' ' ‘ ‘ a :- h‘ ‘ a. r‘ f" I) r‘ -‘ l, "I
S- -‘ ‘V - ' -: I I' A, 0-; .L . C (I l;./ J—llo" LP.)
Q '- " r- '~ . ~ 7 ~ T T 1' "'T
'1’ch 1...: l L. bu.- J"‘-A-- I. I 11‘ .-
~1 c -. _ ~ : * 2 c 2 ‘ '. -
ILe-Zn -,o a'o: -_o) l_.o+ L‘s .a,)o:l
‘ I r-
LlrmnCSE "“*”*““
in los. l;
:roand '.._ L c . .ZLL- li
a 1 - s a f-
I: r. ‘— 01‘ .L C L L . L 1.. v . j C "I. . '2
' I _
secretl)
0: r "'73 1 * ' , ‘ ‘ r a - u I
/ - .a-A u. I -. I 4-I . A. - Ju-L‘LA.
.~ '.- ..: ‘ ‘r; r l." , '- .--
$1-25.:G: 'Jy" _’ oi LI. L L} o I L201 1\ 0L 130v
Don; u'-:'1rb
SPAS :
- o" ' v . ... 'f
I. V; :r\AlL 1.- 4-- V [I V - I ‘ Vin-L
p I l' I L 1 1 '1 (
dries—336:1 b‘ ‘0 do/ (—0 ' 10C) *0 l.)
/ / é
soft 52 ld(d
v A, I 7" Y 17 v'r .[ v'rq
/' rU3~eted L— fins .- I I‘LL- 1‘ I L
A r ‘ A'- i .J I t b
frAlt‘_¢—J.) -_~_ 06.] l '0 / J.)- l' 1.40:-- "o_,’ 'l.‘

 

 

NS

¥—-
‘
0

NS

11.5

 

 

(1) mean value: reprny_
locations x A trees
regular stLra

(c) bean varies r
locations x h

V

and after 3A

x 5
after CA
eirerent 1
trees a
I

‘4 samples:

s;tor-'.i.';e l .
6 samples:
c observations (sf

1 Sampling date
observations (at

harvest,

1 sampling date

x
af

X

ter regular

h-

1‘

ter

torage

38

Table 10. Influence of AL rootstocks on pre-storage and
post-storage measurements on ucIntosh frui .
zootstocds are 4*r.ngec in decreasing order of
values for the measurements considered. Differences
were not significant setween rootstocks underscored
ov tn sate line.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MEASUHEMLNT uctf.folib mfiD
signeSt Lowest. 5% %

% soluble 1-- iii: :1 T AVI I

solids ill I ." l_.o 1:.7 l¢.; 1a.; 1;.c h; NS

Average miii Til -i I KY. 1

flesh 11.6 11.; 11.; 1111 11.1 11.; up Ab

firmness

Ground. he- - 1' 11 «ii All:

C010: LO": (—05 gov -—O.¢ L—IOLII 1.06 dd» ht)

score ll)

% of fruit i 11 A111 XVi V V11

affected by as.b e4.e cj.b 4;.5 43.1 sl.3 Nb as

storage

scald (a)

% of friit i U 11 XVI Jil £111

affeCted 03 45.7 Lj.4 13.3 19.7 17.c 15.4 Nb as

Drown c reis,

% of fruit .-1 11 171 ilil I V

affected by 11.9 3.5 7.1 5.¢ 0:1 7;§ db as

mealy

breakdownidi

 

 

(1) mean values represent 54 samples: 1 sampling date x a
locations x 4 trees x j observations (At harvest, after
regular storage and after Ca storage).

(d) mean values represent 58 samples: 1 sampling date x d
locations x 4 trees x 4 observations (After regular and
3A storage plus 7 days at 759 P after both regular and
CA storage).

“—..—Cw,

39

Table 11. lineral comgosition of apple leaves as affected by
varieties grown on six 5K rootstocks. Varieties are
arranged in decreasing order of leaf combosition(ll.
Differer3es were not significant between varieties
underscored by LL; sane line.

5.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..'. I _ .. (TaT‘T _ T'.
Ham—unuufla'. u A]... a. ‘LL. “4“:
' . _' ..‘ a- .- . .- 5 . _ 1 .- .. r'(, 0.
Dr“: ‘NeLbllb .—‘-:I_:n‘:?\ V - H r- ‘4 J I 3,4 l/'v
5 -
0:15.18 0
"T I H. .' l..u ‘ -- ‘r -"
7'. _. 0 .IL': Lo; J Co\z'_. L ‘70 0 J6 oU‘j
' I} ~ - a, I ~ . --
EV it“sK'ULLll. \. . l L, .. H :I... '.,"_-¢‘
. . ', - r", _ . I 1
:'~ LoCL .Lo.'C 1.4L LO‘1‘+ .09 03.5
LEL'L; I1'-'..'.L-~ .1 .2 : L52.-. L'J.‘
up. ,. I t;'\ I 1 ‘I I . I" n ‘ I ,'
o ---— : ot—LL oLvi OLDL- 0\Jl( OJLC—
fl -v- ~ —Q a ‘ w -— 0’-
v '1... __ -I \J A. n I... '— l
1 ,' I '1 ' ‘l ‘ ~ -1 :-
soL‘j loui' .LO\.‘.L I It— .JbL 0L)
. .. - ‘ .. .
Llsot": . ‘ .— U ‘l. v I u u H 'J I“ J ‘ II \— L 1 2
_ q . '1 -. \ \ '
V o - 09L’\j opsd 09L}. obit.) o JC—Il

 

 

 

 

 

' I
.I..'X.|J.". ‘L-Al; I - -A—LJ k..- I L'L‘

f - v' :1 nu L. - I) l . A. In— ( l - . .- { I}; '4“; T C I:

t o 3' o .-o - o - 1 1 o - -.J o _ _ o , 0 _. --. O
I i

w ‘ I ‘ 1 ‘

-n‘. -‘ .1 -‘ II.QU LILJl-l J! I

, ,. .. , "7 J . '7 K

:o‘. oLuo _r ' L- I-/ (.le I—-.l.[ '+ 15
"I | - .- 1 " ‘
VIJI L —L .4 -' —".4 LJ 6‘ 1 I'll“-

1 ; .. L _
L '1'. no I'I'ojl o). 2.0-- U0 IL 13L:

 

Dbrpn L ” ecu UEY ”c
L.L.L. ’m.” fi‘.‘ _;.b £315 5-4 4-6

 

 

 

y13~ : - .17 -41 .'
1 My 0 J1‘ L... '. AJJJAJ an-

' r. v ‘1' I f ‘ Iit. IL. ‘ ‘1 ’

lack/curl. Ljo_/ 8001. L/'OEJ t__/\- .' Lot 504
I,.-.I‘ IIII. I. u «\i ._"'
ubUlJiLuJJa—Li-lt. '... .V I... bub-L 1..: l

- ' x
Pol/o". “0‘. ['oh “‘2' j. /‘ .4 o6

 

' '

“LL '.'1. HULL -.' vi! .-:,‘ L. 'I' ‘1’ .L‘J'. 1.1
pOIJ‘ozno 11...). L351. d235 Lia} Ci]. C35

 

 

 

“

 

 

(l) Kean values reyreeent 96 trees: b rootstocks x fi_sampliE§
dates x 1 location x 2 year x 4 trees.

Table 14.

40

mineral comgosition of apple leaves as affected by
varieties grown on six 3: r-otstocks. Varieties are

arianpged iJ;
Differences
underscored

decreasing order of leaf composition(1).
were not significant between varieties
by tn same line.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

' . :' . l ‘ '7 - . -
nLEnEAIxa) vanlnflno MHU
. rin‘ I:: ‘f' . I' 1 '
Dry welt-Int; . .._.-C.’.‘C. LO‘..eit. 57 191.;
baSis.
hifnoaan “LL .-n sir n;
7C 6.1.44 c-o;2 Cow? —o.; olU 1LT
EbTALLiLh; ::I L-fl- no t a
l 1 \
70 1:0,. L:OVl 10.2.15 Loin .07 0-44
7“. - ---- ~--—- 1' a
rdLanURJD 4 ALL p- L 'lkl' I»
«I 05-42.; .‘—.h—: 0L]:- l) O L'JO Ode .(Jul
:1L:lblt '_ \.AI :|.: 1.12.14 '1
:2 :O'v 10v lotJ'lv .20 I CLO 0.1.1‘.
ital};.;-.;1§J£._ r.-- ...: -I'iclu 1'
L- a, A ’ 1' z ’ L4
/_H' 0].)“ 0/12/ D _‘. 0V1 ' I-‘ 4
ill—:11" s} -"‘l..V LL‘ ‘1'; L' . I: ‘— - I . E— '1' 1 ‘. L I
I. f “'1 L; I .- 5 I “F 'I 4 LL r y I.
.'..‘ on“. 'V0L_ I"/.h \IOL (.0 /o\. /./
:KL . -_u u”: Ln; - I
}.g.m. 51: a;. 521 affi 14 18
\ ' 7 I V
«L'i'ritfi o .1! L11.) uf a n...
r v.- ‘ . , 1
p'l'.l‘. lace: lio‘j 1.05) lboi ob or/
BOKUN #31:. L: .. II Aly: 1.5.! ‘1'
L'oZ'oHfio _z’:’.l'ok-.II :.§.{_ 910‘": 519.]. 901 “0C:
II«‘J.JZD.J.;J..3_'... - J.» J .1 \ - .121 1'
l’.£.;r:. O [-5.4 (+04 “0‘3 .5 .7
4bUnIKUR nbfi M? DEL biY
p.;.m. db? cgq dUU dbl EU 56
\ - __

 

 

 

A; bean v

(er)

a

iues reire:

rent as trees : 6 rootstocks x 1 sampling
date x a locations x 1 year x 4 trees.
Zinc was not included due to analytical difficulties.

Table 15.
by

varieties

41

grown on

Lineral comiosition of acple leaves as affected
rootstocks.

Varieties

 

are arzanéed in decreasing order of leaf compositio
Differences were not significant between varieties
unde scored by tne same line.

L'LLLJLL '1‘ ( 3. ) V AF. 1 if 11 I as 1.1111)

Dry weight
basis.

5%

 

F *1 -'~ rs
lillnbalu
(ll,
[\-

PUTALSILK
%
PHOSPhanE
C,
JALJIUR
?
LAG-.4 lat. I U m.
o.
/-
lubh
t.p.m.
Jbllnh
1].; .Ir‘.‘
obnbfi
P o P o 3'; o
nbLYbbnfiUn
1).}..Hl.

ALULJJdL.
lloldomo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hignest. Low ‘t.
LLL JcK a; Sly
(105 L045 idol? (—010
b} ‘1' -ILL i. ‘ U if.“
lobj‘ lobj 104K.) 1059
.u;l. {3'1 iLC Jkgk
.d}? .ccc .de .1““
Job mC oil. L11
lei/”j obli‘ (.2.ij (Jovfi
DAL blY JLA MC
.524 .501 .d C .575
Jun DJL SlY m3
27C £45 :49 ddd
J- L 1“ 11.21; 1..: by Y
13.1 5.6 12.4 ld.2
DE]; iuC JUL :51 Y
3'00: 1101+ jg'oL: diver]
JDN m3 SlY bfib
4.] 4.6 4.1 4.1
JD 1‘. LN {21' Y DEL
fi29 5&2 55d d3;

 

 

 

.1t

NS

.7

NS

 

 

 

__.

(l) lean values represent 96 trees: 6 rootstocks x l sampling

date per year x c locations x_£ years x 4 trees.

not included due to analytical difficulties.
a result of the use of a

(a) Zinc “as
manganese

was

not included
fungicide containing the element in 1960.

a S

 

 

 

 

four sampling, dates. one sampli :11 date. or two tears were considered.

Influence of varieties on fruit composition.

 

 

For L‘\'L'l"_. element. \i it: tl‘e exception of molybdenum, tbere were
significant differences betueen \Lil'lL‘TIL's uit! respect to fruit composition
(Table 14). ..'o data for Ix'orti'erz: pr ‘J-L'l'L' available because of inadequate

fr‘iit inu.

Influence of ~t'Lisfif..ll variation on leaf composition.

- _ .__ _ —-—_._ ——-—~—.—— ._———--.__ —. ._—..— _

 

 

There anus .l .rn'zt1:i'io"s decrease in t‘ e leaf content of nitrogen. potas-
sium. pl'ospi or :~ .i'id ENH'H" tron. t‘ e 'n'--t to t‘w- last samnling date (Table 13).
There uas a co'itin lo 's 1 'creaso- in .alct 'm and aluminum from t! e first to We
last samplir-e date. \lai-jnesi nu. {ll£l?.£‘llilc‘.\('. iron, copper. zinc and molybdenum

5.1.de an ”TM. -1;,,- pattern ()1 \ariation from t' e first to the last sampling date.

M111911_L~::11nir_-
”’ D..- L ‘_"‘ll?‘_?lli.'l‘3’_z" Wit-:1 t5 e tuo locations were taken into consider-
ation. it was found tl=at t‘=ere \tere significant differences between
locations for potassium, magnesium and molybdenum (Table 1(3).
’l"-ere \ket‘t' no si,{"uf1cant differences for the other elements studied.
(.2) Eflfltfll’ll.)ffiili_‘il£ There were significant differences between

locations uitli respect to tbe fruit content of nitrogen, calcium, mag-

nesium, copper, boron, zinc and molybdenum (Table in).

Table l‘l‘. nine 4;

43

-\

-- .I A -;r- .y- --'
I- In; -JLk. thL L'J-L/ll 0‘

 

 

affected by
in decreasing
bifrerences were

red by

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I 55‘ - \ ‘r- '|'i +: < l 7‘ 'V| I,
V‘i-‘u ‘e v nfi M O ‘ 1‘. ‘— b‘ek. 1* I I in.
. 1 \
V\_ Y\ ‘ ‘ \ ‘ r \ vqu n V1 ’- -\
O$\L" L. a 44.5 v' u:-UD.LU1—vz ‘1. ’0
V IN" r_~ 1 ~ 5 , I. “It " V' V I
‘ a; u . .5 A ' 1., ¢-. L‘VJUII’COAL -1; 18E]
‘ .
+v‘ "- r ' ‘
; LILAe h.-11- ¢A--':' O
l
l
l -- - - v-
~~H‘";n‘ A I -“ A'" -a A ‘I ‘I‘.o
_-IY\ -- ‘- --'r ‘F
iiy weld“-
. r a ' = ID \- I' . \U - W'-
Stl~ .AJ.‘..‘AP-.'.ao LOVJ‘Jtto
‘—-
1". - -u N .w
.“-z’f‘vd“s‘ U .‘ -'-— l-chO‘J
I -., I ' D.
I. I -'/ 0L__L— o~—...'s.
___._._
. ‘l -: - . . ,
Ah .1 4.. huh-» h c .l .. ._ '_ \_ 1‘ .1.-
4 H ‘ "'
W I o I? w Ocs‘. '
p *‘I -' - -.v — ‘ -
LAQUKJ‘ olv--- ‘ n—lh - ' - .\
. 1 r" t['
VI ' _ - Fl
.' o .va o L‘ .1 o .L ,'
" - ‘ “TI 1 I “ ‘
a -L4JJ ‘. .l ' |‘ _ H01 ' J
_ 1 ...
, . , A
a 0 ‘I‘: 0 LL- ° 0 A.-- _/
‘ —-v
M4..".J.I~.u,..'. 4.. . _, -. n L-J—uL.‘
v. [5- ,- 1
I o .‘.. o'- .. o .. -_/C
‘ I . . - II ~
I... x-‘ 1.;1‘4—4‘.‘-‘ ‘ I L—LIL’
'1
V f f ' a
rel-roll. a 0.. -LOL‘ L_.C.-
LX1'J.° .I - .. ‘3..._'
. r ' - o' a -- E 'l,‘ .
riot/0.... J. ,‘o/ .J‘ 0., L.»
"l ' '
' L— f I '
JIJ! A o— p. | OJ“ '- \Il‘
l r v w J ‘ F) .l r- l)
l r o 1' o h. o , o L I o / o
Didi-1|- .I 1.: ' _I.l IV..'
l ' ‘l I .
7 hr I. . e
‘ y. O-AO O _ ‘1. 0 v Ht..\-’
- L 4 A
' I ‘ .‘I
L- L ‘ ,. p'l .. .J' L‘ LA—o-
r '7' i I '- In-
L 0 I4 0.... L n . o _ .f. c
VL. ...M" u -
I'aJ—Jfi La La “L! I .I. L '. L‘ a. .J L. Ail-.-
- ‘- -' 1 1
L'OL'o-rrao 4.. o"+ .4 o
. T
ALUieitUL-z T "- I --
‘ Al J'Ad I.l
r ' I” . l . 1C; --
tJo Pom. ‘ 0 ' . o J jgk)
*- —-———.--—-. ———*—

 

 

(l) bean value. r

locations x u

present he trees
trffeSo

b

 

i-IJ‘L‘LI;
Cu:
2"-
I z /
. t_l‘_.‘_-
2C)!
0 "J/ _/
l -7

 

root

\3

\n

 

 

44

 

 

E if‘lsectefzu 0:7,
ranged in

‘ \ ‘ ' '\ W

h' 111I9I9n

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

T‘Ih ‘ ‘ ._ ‘ . \ ‘ I u o. ‘ O. i -~ I
iaole i7. mlnurjl :.m.c—.citn d. ...le leaves a
. . b
32.1th in; dates . ”amt lizn. d fies are 81'
I .. ‘ ”4 . ‘ \ ‘\ v I o a
decreasing cider a: lezi con:031tion(
were :.ot 5:1 n11 icart :etw Jen samp Llllf'f
‘ - ' r I If 1‘ ‘ v . _ r 1
dnJrl‘l C: 1 .3; 30" tlle E) 1 e .lene .
.Lan&;\l' biu-hl -..i.,c
. V? c - I; _ "'
lrJ heljho
338150 Jl"-€$1o LOW'ET.
---— -——-_ - -. _--——— — — — a-“
T“: , I“ H y I h‘ 1
l‘J-J-zb J—‘A‘ '1 5 - .'
L' '1 "1 ‘ 1 1 .I- 1 "‘
’ L— . l I I-- O .. -L J- . I I, L I I,
‘R .rr ' _ “' " ' .4 ‘
ro-n.CI-J_uu. ‘- I; . -
" " '"l "I C . ‘ l-
o - L o f C .- 0 I , o /.
:‘11. '-.I }l:-'u ‘tl. ~ I‘— I: L
- ‘l r, l), ‘
--J- .’ 0 ~11 I 0L— 4: ,1;
1 - .
an -u f
a. o ' l o l. : l o v 1 .. 0-)
. A .4 ' _-.
“A v a.
s 1 .' "I -' I -
.. O 73$ Li 0 fl; I I _’ . l
: ‘ I
5““. 5 J. 1'1
' V 'r u—d r, C, i ' \ l1 ‘4'. . t
1"F'd‘. o, {—0 {/Lo{ ,OV
:« .
6. - b
I ’ I. . ’I ‘
it... 0 IA. (-641. I—ju l-L'J .—iI’_
l‘r- - I, H Ia /" ‘-
‘. 51.. f .; h x _. ‘|_
I ‘ | l f 4 I ' ‘_\
t.L.m. lu.w d.c L.4 .j
‘I - C “ 'r\
Dbrczi : F o r
‘ ' ' , - 1 -' / \ < r1 1
I, 0 :I C In. :"-3 O L l _} O 9 L:?_. 0 C; L / . (_.
ZIN‘\ A bl. \.‘ r5
IJ . L; . I'Tl . ’ (—- . 1. -‘_ . 1 Cu .4 I “ Ct.
' ."--I I . I I ‘
L'-‘J n—l ‘ A- *1 “Al '6 1" I: M. 5' A
I r I .
lJCEvI. .0 1+0( 49/ 1+.) :).Ll
I I g 1" .
114' a -I"J;l -' . fl ..
i .J. o J. L:(,-,/ Cut. L140 ‘.L’t.'

 

 

(l) bean values

1 locati
bampling

'l
H

o n
A
B

l"
J

D

l'elir‘L‘I'OI’lt
X 4 trees.
made on

H H
H H

inE_;‘uSt

9b trees: 4
30,
14,
26,
11,

1959.
1959.
195a.
1959.

dune
July
July

inf; J

C:

h—- .. —_—._.___ __ _

 

 

varieties x 6

rOOCStO

J g

" — n---—_-.--_

l 7 1,.
. ' J' obt—
’—
.‘IQ‘
- '(i
-‘k— -‘L-

 

CKS X

Table 16.

45

mineral cosposition of apgle leaves and apple fruit
as affected oy locations. Differences were not
significant between locations underscored by the
same line .

 

dLnLdNT (1
dry wei ht
basis

—- u--

 

) Alibi LsAiififal AIYLE FMUIT(5)
nigh. Low. High. Low.

 

"T'n!‘.,'\fi ~p-
l‘i linoaan
%

POTASSiUk
7,
EHLbEhonUb
3 :li lJ J IU EL
%
MAGHES -L‘ 1..
%
MANGANESE

p.p.m.

MOLYBDEHUJ
P .p . If. 0

11
POL/0m.

 

2 1 2 1
_.15 c.1Q .c5l .515

 

 

a l d l
l.ei l.cc .375 .552
l L. C. l

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

d d 1
34.7 sj.f 15.5 11.7
c l _ 1
db? - h—ul j506' (JO-U
_ l d l
ll.J lo.§ b.v 7.7
i K 2 l
pizw 51A 55... 47.9

 

1 a l 2

[+06 40L 1.4 101
d a l

c’ti" ddz 340d ei.t)

 

 

 

 

 

(1) Leaf zinc was not included due to analytical difficulties.

(2) mean values retresent 96 trees : 4 varieties x 6 rootstocks
X 4 trees.

(3) mean values retresent 7? trees : 3 varieties x 6 rootetocks
x 4 trees.

4o

(3) Storage measurements: The only significant difference between

 

locations occurred for flesh firmness in Red Delicious (Table 17).

Influence of years on leaf \ omposition.

 

There were signifit ant differences between years for leaf nitrOgen,
potassium. copper. boron and aluminum (Table 18). No significant differences

were fo'ind for the other elements considered.

Miscellaneous interactions.

 

Rootstocl x \‘arieti. interaction for leaf composition: When the data

 

 

 

from four sampling dates- were considered. this interaction was significant for
all 12 elements under st'ltl‘.. When the main sampling date was considered, the
rootstocl' x varietv interactitm was significant for nitrogen, calcium, magnesium,
manganese. boron, molybdenum and aluminum, but was not significant for potas-
sium, phosphorus, iron and copper. When the data from two years was taken
into consideration, the interaction was significant for nitrogen, potassium, cal-
cium, magnesium and molybdenum, but was not significant for phosphorus, iron,
copper, boron and aluminum.

Rootstock x Variety interaction for fruit composition: The rootstock x

 

variety interaction was significant for nitrogen, phosphorus, magnesium, man-
ganese, iron, copper, boron, zinc and aluminum, but was not significant for

potassium, calcium and mol'. bdenum. I ~..

Table 17. influence of locations on pre-storage and post-
storage measurements on ned Delicious, .onathan

i7

and mclntash fruit.

 

Differences were not significant
between locations underscored by the same line.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MflAbUfifinimf asp LnLICIUSS JUNAFHAL LCINTobn
High. Low. High. Low. nigh. Low.

% soluble l L l a l a

solids (1) 15.9 15.9 15 b 13.6 18.6 l2.§

Average flesh l a l s a

firmness in ls.c 15.0 15.6 15.4 11.4 11.2

lbs. (1)

Ground color 2 l l 2

score (1) l 0.9 &.l 5.0

% of fruit 1 c l d

affected by 3;.C s6.1 25.2 44.5

storage scaldtzj

% of fruit 1 3

affected by 11 6” 1619

Jonathan

Spot(5)

% of fruit d

affecced by r.5 4.1

sof scaldt4)

% russeted l a

fruit(4) l6.§ l4.§

% of fruit 4 1

affected by 51,6 15.5

brown core (a)

% of fruit 2 1

affected by 10.0 5.6

mealy
breakdown(¢i

 

 

 

 

 

(1) Lean values
samples for

(a) nean values
samples for
(5) Mean values
(4) Mean values

 

 

 

represent 48 samples for Red Delicious and 72
Jonathan and McIntosh.
for dad Delicious and 96

represent 3; samples

helntosh.

represent 48 samples.
represent 72 samples.

48

Table 15. mineral composition of apple leavea as affected by
years. Differences were not significant between
years underscored by the same line (1).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

dLEhfithZ) YEAR
Dry weight
basis High. Low.
NITROGEN 1960 1959
‘70 (10¢? £015
POTASSIUE 1959 1960
it.“ Aobd 1043
rfioslnoats 1960 1959
7 .61? .dl5
3A CILm 175$ 1966
% 1.Uj .9?
Ariana-E IJ 1959 1 EU
0/" od‘j‘j .2967
IRoN 1959 1960
poi. om. 2(12 d2}
CUEIER 196; 1959
L-L-m- 14.3 10.5
BOAON 1160 1959
p.p.m. 54.5 d9.6
mOLYBDshUh 1959 1966
p.p.m. 4.5 4.4
ALLmluUm 1966 195%
p.p.m. 567 :46

 

 

 

 

(1) Mean values represent 193 trees: 4 varieties x 6 rootstocks
x 6 trees.

(2) Zinc was not inclided due to analytical difficulties.
manganese was not included as a result of the use of a
fungicide containing the element in 1960.

49

Root stock it Sampling dates: This interaction was significant for leaf

 

calcium, iron, copper, boron, zinc, molybdenum and aluminum.

Rootstocks x Locations. This interaction was significant for leaf

 

nitrogen, phosphorus, calcium. magnesium, manganese, copper, boron and
molybdenum, and for fruit iron, boron zinc and molybdenum.

Rootstocks x Years: This interaction was significant for leaf phos-

 

phorus, calcium. magnesium, iron, boron and molybdenum.

Varieties x Sampling dates: This interaction was significant for leaf

 

phosphorus, calcium, magnesium, iron, copper, boron, zinc and aluminum.

Varieties x Locations: This interaction was significant for leaf phos-

 

phorus and calcium and for fruit boron.

Varieties x Years: This interaction was significant for leaf nitrogen,

 

phosphorus, calcium, magnesium, iron, boron, molybdenum and aluminum.

Effect of storage treatments on storage measurements on the fruit.

 

Red Delicious: (Table 19)

 

(l) Soluble solids- There was a significant increase in the percent

 

soluble solids of the fruit during both regular and CA storage.
No significant differences between regular and CA storage were
found.

(2) Flesh firmness: The flesh firmness of the fruit was highest at

 

harvest, then declined during storage. The decline was more

pronounced in CA storage than in regular storage.

50

Table 19. Influence of the time of obserVation on pre-storaae
and post-storage measurements on sea Delicious an
Jonathan fruit. Differences were not significant
between observations underscored oy the same line.

L -—

MEAbUmsurjui‘ OBEJnn‘t’.'ti‘Ic-L.ii( l) ititl.‘
Highest. Lowest. 5% 1%

 

 

asp usulflLUSKZ)

 

 

 

 

.. _ ._-..._ .7... _-.___-_.._..._--_..._...

 

a solucle la s‘a AH

SOlidS 114.; 1"0'1' ldod .LL .5
Average flesh an AR ASA

firmness in 16.4 15.; 14.6 .4 .5
lbs.

7(- 0 f fr'u i t :‘11'. :1
affeCted by 54.4 45.6 N6 N6
storage scald

 

 

 

 

JONATHAN (5)

 

 

 

 

 

% soluble an «a A34

solids 15.9 15.6 15.6 .4 .5
Average flesh Ad ASA As

firmness in 16.7 14.4 11.5 .5 .4
los.

Ground color an ASA nR

score 1.6 .7 .5 .2 .5
% of fruit A: ASA

affected by 57.5 .7 4.6 6.5
Jonathan spot

% of fruit An ASA

affected by 4.6 1.6 1.1 1.5
soft scald

% russeted AL“ AM

fruit 19.1 15.2 as NS

 

 

 

(1) AH: Measurement made at harvest.
Ad: Measurement made after regular storage.
A3 : measurement made after JA storage.
(4) Mean values represent 54 samples: 4 rootstocks x 4 locations
x 4 trees.
(5) mean values represent 46 samples: 6 rootstocks x 4 locations
x 4 trees.

(3) goflflld There was no significant differences between

regular and (‘A storage in preventing storage scald.
32191113.”: (Table {9)

(l) SoLulililolLds: There was a significant decrease in the per-
cent soluble solids content of the fruit during both regular
and CA storage. .Jo differences were found, however, between
regular and (TA storage in their effects on the soluhle solids
content of the fruit.

(.2) Flesh firmness.- There was a significant decrease in flesh

 

firmness during storage. The decrease was more pronounced
\\llll regular storage than with CA storage.

(5) (il‘fflllltl (3:11 'I here was a siimificaut decrease in the ground
color score of the fruit during storage. The decrease was
greater with regular storage than with CA storage. (A decrease
in ground color score indicates an increase in the yellow ground
color of the fruit).

(4) jonathan spot: There was a very significant decrease in the

 

percent of the fruit affected by this disorder in CA storage as
compared to regular storage.

(3) SlofLiiald There was a significant decrease in the percent of
the fruit affected by soft scald in CA storage as compared to
regular storage.

(6) F_r_uit_russetingz- There were no differences between regular and

52

‘ CA storage in the percent of russeted fruit. (Fruit russet-
i ing is not a storage disorder).
McIntosh: (Table 20)

(l) Soluble solids: There was a: significant increase in the soluble

 

solids content of the fruit during storage. There was no dif-
ference between regular and CA storage in this respect.

(2) Flesh firmness: There was a significant decrease in flesh

 

firmness during both regular and CA storage. There was,
ho-.'.ever, no difference between regular and CA storage in
this respect.

(3) Ground color: There were no significant changes in ground

 

color during the storage period.

(4) Storage scald: At the end of the storage period, there were

 

no significant differences between the fruit from regular and
CA storage with respect to the incidence of storage scald.
However, after seven days at 7S‘F, the fruit from regular
storage was significantly higher in storage scald than fruit
from CA storage.

(5) Brown core: The fruit from CA storage was significantly

 

lower in brown core both at the end of the storage period
and after seven dats at 75‘ F.

(6) Mealy breakdown: There was no significant differences between

 

the fruit from regular and CA storage with respect to the incidence

Table 40.

53

Influence of the time of observation on pre-storage

and post-storage measurements on Mclntosh fruit.
were net signifiCint between observations
underscored by the same line.

Differences

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

we

 

 

 

5 “"'“"'r””"'“”’
MEASUREMENT JBSEnVAFlcNStl) MRD
High st. Lowest. 3%. 1%

% soluble aja Ah AH
solids 14.7 _14.6 14.5 .1 .4
Average flesh An ”Is As
firmness 14.4 9.9 9.7 .6 .9
in lbs.
Ground color ijl A} An
score _51g_____3.3_____}39 n8 NS
% of fruit Aa7 AJAE A: i-A
affected by 58.9 15.4 11.5 0.9 4.4 5.7
storage
scald
% Of fruit as? An «:5/ A34
affected by 65.5 14.6 1.6 .1 6.5 8.7
brown core
'72) Of frUit 51:17 :3. -1.( AR 3.3")
affected by 54.1 4.9 .1 .1 4.9 6.5
mealy
breakdown
(1) Mean values represent 45 samples: 4 rootstocks x 4 locations

x 4 trees.

AH: measurement made at harvest.
AH: Measurement made after regular storage.
A37: Measurement made after regular storage plus 7 days
at 752 r.
ASA: measurement made after 1A storage.
ACA7: heasurenent mide after 1A storafie plus 7 days at

of mealy breakdown at the end of the storage period. However,
after seven days at 75" F. the fruit from CA storage was signi-
ficantly lower in mealy breakdown than the fruit from regular

s'lU I‘Ll cc.

Correlation studies.

 

Tables .21. 22. and 35 present higl'l_\ significant correlations between
measurements made on tact. variet‘ grown on various EM rootstoc’:s. Corre-
lations which oct urred in two of (“fee varieties were considered in the follow-
ing paragraphs.

Howt Yet. when oi.st.-i'v.ttions w ere made on only one or two varieties,
the occirrt-ntt- in one \arit-tj. vas t onsidered to be sufficient. The following
presentation of torrelations is based on these assumptions.

Leaf nitrogen sl owed a negative correlation with leaf aluminum and a
positive correlation 'titl‘. fr lll nitrogen for both Red Delicious and McIntosh
trees. Leaf nitrogen was torrelated negatiVely with fruit firmness before and
after storage in all three varieties. Leaf nitrogen was related negatively with
the percent of storage scald when Mclntosl‘. fruit from regular storage was held
seven days at 75 I". However, the cot'rt.-lation was positive when McIntosh
fruit from (.A storage was held seven days at 73' F.

Leaf phosphorus showed a positive correlation with fruit phosphorus
and with fruit firmness before and after storage of jonathan and McIntosh fruit.

Leaf calcium and leaf molybdenum were correlated positively in Red

55

Identification key for measurements shown on the opposite page.

 

l-neaf nitrogen.

4- " pOtassium.
5— ” phosphorus.
4- " calcium.

5- ” magnesiim.
6- " manganese.
7— ” iron.

6- " c0pper.

9- “ boron.
16— ” molybdenum.
11- ” aluminum.

l4-Fruit nitrogen.

15- " potassium.
14- " phOSpLC‘US.
15— ” calcium.
l6- ” magnesium.
17- “ manganese.
ld— “ iron.

19- " sniper.

43- " boron.

41- “ molybdenum.
.44- ” 'Jlunitaun.

45-lercent soluble solids at harvest.
4 I» I! H '.. _ 3.9:; I‘EF‘NLilar Storage.

C u up n H

3- - ' CA S orage.

46-rlesh firmness in lbs. at harvest.

47- ” “ ” ” after regular Storage.
40— ” " " ” “ :A storage.

49-Percent of fruit affected by storage scald after regular
storage.
U-lercent of fruit affected by Storage scald after 3A storage.

 

 

 

 

56

Table 21. Highly significant correlations between measurements

made

on Red Delicious trees on four Eh rootstocks.

The measurements in column A are correlated with the
measurements in column B as indicated (1). The Key
to the numbers is the same for both columns and is
presented on the opposite page.

 

 

COLUMN A COLUMN B
1 -11, +12, -26, —28.
2 +19.

5

4 +10.

5 — 7, - 9, +24, +25.
6 +19, -28.

7 - 5, +11.

6

9 - 5, +20, -24, -25.
10 + 4, +50.

11 - 1., + 7+ '23-

12 + 1, -26, -26.

15

14

15 +17, +21.

16 ‘db, +500

17 +15, +18.

18 +17.

19 + 2, + 6.

20 + 9, -16, —30.
21 +15.
22
23 -11, +24.
24 + 5, — 9, +25, +25.
25 + 5, - 9, +24.
26 — 1, ~12, +26.
27 +26.
28 - l, — 6, -12, +26, +27.
29 +50.

30 +10, +16, —20, +29.

 

 

(l)Correlation

 

coefficients significant (50 df)
(+) positive at % level.
(-) negative at 1% level.

57

Identification key for measurements shown on the opposite page.-

 

l-Leaf nitrogen.

2- " potassium.
5- " phOSphorus.
4- ” calcium.

5- " magnesium.
6- ” manganese.
7- " iron.

8- " copper.

9- " boron.
10- " molybdenum.
ll- " aluminum.

12-Fruit nitrogen.

15- " potassium.
l4- " phosphorus.
15- ” calcium.
16- " magnesium.
17- " manganese.
lb- ” iron.

19- ” coyper.

20- " boron.

21- ” molybdenum.
22- " aluminum.

25-Percent soluble solids at harvest.

24- ” ” " after regular storage.
25- " " " after 3A storage.
ab-Elesh firmness in lbs. at harvest.

27- " ” ” " after regular storage.
2b- " ” ” " " CA storage.
29-Ground color score at harvest.

50— ” ” " after regular storage.

51- " " " ” CA storage.

52-Percent of fruit affected by sonathan spot after regular

storage.

55-Percent of fruit affected by Jonathan Spot after 3A Storage.'
54-Percent of fruit affected by Soft scald after regular storage
H H H H

3E3_ H H II

56-Percent of fruit affected by russeting found after regular

storage.

CA storage.

57-Percent of fruit affected by russeting found after CA

storage.

!

 

 

58

Table 22. highly significant correlatisns between measurements
made on Jonathan trees on SlX as rootStocks.
measurements in column A are correlated with

measurements in column B as indicated (1).

to the numbers is the same for both columns anu is

presented on the "posite page.

I
A

 

 

 

 

COLUMN A JcLUmh B

l -26, —¢9o

2 — 5, +;7.

5 + ', +'4, +2&, +27.

4

5 - _, — 9, -24, — . -57-

6 ’15, -19.

7 +11.

5 +Lc_o

9 + j, ‘ 99 +179 ‘129 +359 -¢7°
1C

11 + 7.

1 +13, +16, -21, +5L.

15 +1 , +14, +16.

14 + 9, + 9, +15, +10, +19, +26.
5 - b9 ‘ 7, +179 *Cl°

lb +LL, '12.

17 +15, +10, +21.

10 +14, +17, -20.

19 — b, + 5, +14, +19, +22, ~29.
db . !, +.~.
2 -12, +1‘, +L7, +56.
2.: + c’. + 19.
49' 5;”, +(_'(;, +¢-€.., '51, +270
an _ f, +", +¢5, +26, +27, +2b, +56.
2i +;§, + iv, +nt, +25.
26 - 1, + 5, +25, +24, +25, +27.
27 - 1, + L, + 5, +24, 26, +57.
dd ~16, +24, +25.
29 - 9, -1'.

50 +12, +51.

5 -(__j, +511, +54.

5; +5b.

55

54 +51.

55

is - 5. +dl. +d4. +39. +57.

57 - 5, +d5. +27, +94°

 

(1) Correlation :oefficients significant (46 df)
{+1 positive at 7 level.
(-) negative at 19 level.

Identification key for measurements shown on the Opposite page.

59

 

l-Leaf nitrogen.

8- " potassium.
5- ” phOSphorus.
4- " calcium.

5- " magnesium.
6- " manganese.
7- " iron.

8- ” COpper.

9- " boron.

lu- " molybdenum.
ll- ” aluminum.
12-Fruit nitrogen.
15- " potassium.
14- ” phosphorus.
15- " calcium.
l6— " magnesium.
17- " manganese.
18- ” iron.

19- ” COpper.
20- ” boron.
21- " molybdenum.
22- ” aluminum.

25-Eercent soluble solids
84.— H II tl
25— I! H H
26-Flesh firmness in lbs.
27- [I I! H H
d8- I! H H H

 

 

 

at harvest.

after regular storage.
" CA storage.

at harvest.

after regular storage.
" CA storage.

29-Ground color score at harvest.

50‘- II I! H
51- H H I! H

52-Percent of fruit affected by storage scald after

storage.

55-Percent of fruit affected by storage scald after

storage plus 7 days at
54-Percent of fruit affec

55_ u n n it
plus 7 days at 759 F.

ted by storage scald after
II I! II If

after regular storage.

CA storage.
regular

regular

759E.
CA storage.

56-Percent of fruit affected by brown core after regular storage
H II I! H H

57- H H II II
plus 7 days at 759 F;

5d-Percent of fruit affected by brown core after CA storage

plus 7 days at 759 F.

 

 

66

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 25. highly significant correlations between 1 asurements
made on .cinzosh trees on six an rootstocks. The
measurements in column a are correlated with the
measurements in column b as indicated (1). The key
to tne numbers is tne same for both columns and is
presented in the Opposite page.

CULUNB A Jcltmh B

1 - 5, -11, +12, -26, -fi‘. +55.

2 — 7, +15.

5 - 1, +11, +14, +24, +23, +ub, +2C.

4 + 5, +1;, -a-, -2;, -27, -2c, +51, +5h, +57.

5 1 M.

6

7 - 2, + a, + 9, +11, +2L, -25.

c + 7, + 9, +16, +16.

9 + 7, + , +lu, +2c, +21, -25.

10 + 1+, + (5, + j.

11 - L, + 5, + ”.

lc.’ + -, +1€ , +1”, +1{:, -:."+, -25, -:.l_, -22, —‘}5, +50.
15 + 2, +14, +19, +1'.

14 + 5, +15, +1L, +19, +26.

15 +17, +21.

16 +1., +13, +14, +1t, +19.

17 +1., +15.

16 + c, +12, +1?, +19, +22.

19 +12, +15, +14, +16, +16.
2 + /, + 7, +14, —2i, +5c.
21 + 9, -.7-
22 +19.
25 — 7, — 9, +24, +25, +2L, +-C, -5b.
24 + 5, - 4, -12, 2,, +29, +26, +27, +26, -50, —51.
25 -— 4, -12', +2), +24, +26), +27, +20, -56.
26 - 1, + 5, -12, —2L, +25, +24, +25, +2C, -5U, -56, -57
gr —- 1+, +._‘:‘, +211, +215, -f)’\,‘.
28 + 5, - 4, —12, +25, +24, +25, +26, +27, -5b, -51, —56,
29 +51 -57.
50 -24, —26, -27, -2o.

51- -2’4 , -LC$, -+ "‘1‘.

52 +55.

55 - l, -l;, +5c.

54 +55.

55 + 1, +54.

56 + 4, +12, +26, -25, -2:, —26, +'7.

37 + [1, -¢..(5, -r.'t'5, +£5h..

5a

(1) Correlation coefficients significant (46 df)

(+1 positive at 1% level.

(-1 negative at 1%

level.

(ii

Delicious and McIntosh trees. in McIntosh trees, leaf calcium was correlated
positively with the ground color score of the fruit after CA storage, and with the
percent brown core in the fruit after regular storage.

Leaf magnesium stewed a negative correlation with leaf boron in both
Red Delicious and jmiathar. trees. Leaf magnesium was correlated positively
with the soluhle solids content of the fruit after storage in Red Delicious. How-
ever. a negative correlation in. as determined between leaf magnesium and the
percent soluhle so.ids of H t- fruit in Jonathan. Finally, a negative correlation
between leaf llldiillt‘~l'!llt and fruit russeting was found in Jonathan after storage.

Leaf iiia-igauese '.\.:is correlated positively witi fruit copper in Red
Delicious. hut negatlvv'lj.‘ orrelatt-d with fruit copper in jonathan.

Leaf iron uas torrelatt-d positively with leaf aluminum in all three
varieties.

Leaf horon slowed a positive correlation with fruit boron in all three
varieties. Leaf horon was correlated negativelv with the percent soluhle solids
of the fruit in Red Delicious and \lchitosh. Finally, leaf heron was correlated
negatively v ith the ground color scores of jonathan fruit.

Leaf molybdenum was correlated positively with the percent storage
scald found after (TA storage in Red Delicious.

Fruit nitrogen was correlated positively with fruit magnesium in both
Jonathan and McIntosh. Fruit nitrogen was correlated negatively with the firm-

ness of the fruit at harvest and after storage in Red Delicious and McIntosh.

 

Finally, there was a positive correlation between fruit nitrogen and the ground
color score of Jonathan fruit, a negative correlation between fruit nitrogen and
the percent of storage scald in McIntosh in fruit held for seven days at 75°F
after regular storage, and a positive correlation between fruit nitrogen and
the percent of McIntosh fruit affected by brown core after regular storage.

Fruit potassium showed a positive correlation with fruit phosphorus
and magnesium in both Jonathan and McIntosh.

Fruit phosphorus was correlated positively with fruit copper and boron
in both Jonathan and McIntosh.

Fruit calcium showed a positive correlation with fruit manganese and
molybdenum in all three varieties.

Fruit magnesium was correlated positively with the percent of storage
scald found after CA storage in Red Delicious.

Fruit manganese showed a positive correlation with fruit iron in both
Red Delicious and Jonathan.

Fruit boron and the percent of McIntosh fruit affected by brown core
after regular storage were correlated positively.

Fruit copper was correlated negatively with the ground color scores
of Jonathan fruit at harvest.

Fruit molybdenum showed a positive correlation with fruit russeting
found after regular storage in Jonathan.

The percent of soluble solids of the fruit at harvest showed a positive

 

 

()3

correlation with the soluble solids content of the fruit after storage in all three
varieties. The soluble solids content of the fruit also showed a positive corre-
lation with the firmness of the fruit at harvest and after storage in both Jonathan
and McIntosh. Finally, there was a negative correlation between the soluble
solids content and the ground color scores of CA-storcd Jonathan fruit, a posi-
tive correlatio.. Leta-Wt... 11.; soluble solids content of the {wit and the percent
russeted fruit in CA-stored Jonathan fruit, and a negative correlation between
the soluble solids content of the fruit and the percent of brown core in regular
stored McIntosh fruit.

The percent soluble solids content of the fruit after regular storage
was correlated positiVely with the following measurements: (1) the percent
soluble solids of the fruit after CA storage in all three varieties; (Z) the flesh
firmness of the fruit at harvest and after storage in jonathan and McIntosh:

(3) the percent russeted fruit after regular storage in jonathan. The percent
soluble solids content of McIntosh fruit was correlated negatively with the
ground color scores of the fruit.

The percent soluble solids of the fruit after CA storage was correlated
positively with the flesh firmness of the fruit at harvest and after storage in
jonathan and McIntosh. A negative correlation was found between the soluble
solids content of the fruit and the percent brown core in McIntosh.

The flesh firmness of the fruit at harvest was correlated positively

with the flesh firmness of time fruit after storage in all three varieties, and

 

64

correlated negatively with the ground color score of the fruit after regular
storage and with the percent brown core in McIntosh fruit after regular stor-
age.

The flesh firmness of the fruit after regular storage showed a posi-
tive correlation with the flesh firmness of the fruit after CA storage in Deli-
cious and McIntosh. a positive correlation with the percent russeted fruit in
Jonathan after CA storage, and a negative correlation with the ground color
score of McIntosh fruit after regular storage.

The flesh firmness of the fruit after CA storage showed a negative
correlation with the ground color scores of McIntosh fruit after storage and
with the incidence of brown core in McIntosh fruit after storage.

The percent of fruit affected by storage scald after regular storage
was correlated positively with the percent of fruit affected by the same disorder
after CA storage in Red Delicious.

In Jonathan fruit there were positive correlations between: (I) the
ground color score of the fruit after regular storage and the ground color
score of the fruit after CA storage: (2) the ground color scores of the fruit
after CA storage and the percent of the fruit affected by soft scald after regu-
lar storage; (3) the percent of the fruit affected by jonathan spot and the per-
cent of the fruit affected by russeting after regular storage and the percent of
the fruit affected by the same disorder after CA storage.

In McIntosh fruit there were positive correlations between: (I) the

_.-.-._-.- _—_

 

ground color scores of the fruit at harvest and the ground color scores of
the fruit after CA storage; (.2) the percent of the fruit affected by storage
scald after regular storage and the percent of the fruit affected by the same
disorder after seven days at 75‘ F; (3) the percent of the fruit affected by
storage scald after CA storage and the percent of the fruit affected by the
same disorder after seven days at 75' F; (4) the percent of the fruit affected
by brown core after regular storage and the percent of the fruit affected by
the same disorder after seven days at 75° F.

Tables 24, 25, 26, .27, 28 and 29 present all highly significant
correlations between determinations made on each of the six EM rootstocks
on which the three varieties were grown. The only correlations presented
in the following paragraphs were those which occurred in three or more
rootstocks out of the possible six rootstocks considered.

Leaf potassium was correlated positively with: (1) leaf potassium
in BM I, II, XIII and XVI: (.2) leaf boron in EM I, II, V and X111: (3) fruit
phosphorus in EM II, XIII and XVI. Leaf potassium was correlated negatively
with: (1) leaf aluminum in EM II, VII and XVI: (2) fruit magnesium in EM 1,
11. VII, XIII and XVI; (3) fruit iron in EM V, VII, XIII and XVI.

Leaf phosphorus was correlated positively with fruit phosphorus in
BM II, XIII and XVI, and correlated negatively with fruit magnesium in EM 1,

[1. VII and XVI.

 

66

 

Identification key for measurements shown on the opposite page.

 

l—Leaf nitrogen.

2- ” potassium.
5- " phOSphorus.
4- " calcium.

5- ” magnesium.
b- " manganese.
7- ” iron.

5— ” copper.

9- ” boron.

lU- ” molybdenum.
ll- " aluminum.

lZ-Fruit nitrogen.

15- “ potassium.
l4— " phosphorus.
15— " calcium.
16- " magnesium.
l7— " manganese.
lb— ” iron.

19- " COpper.

20- ” boron.

21— ” molybdenum.

22- ” aluminum.

 

 

Table :4.

67

highly significant correlations between measurements
made on med delicious , tonatnan and scintosn trees
on :m l rOOtatockifhe measurements in column a are
correlated with tue seasurerents in column b as
indicated t1). The sey to the numbers is the same

for Late columns and is presented on the Opposite

}J_€‘

 

 

-—— .— -

 

COLUmN A

COLUmN B

 

#‘\x R rd

\1 (“\ri

O

\1\

1c

1

11
12

2
J

14

C.‘
/

lb

1
.L

1t:
19
ék)
cil
Cd

K

+
\1
¢
4
+
\.
O
I
H
r"
+
r
t

+ ', -11, -Lt—/O

+ L., + h, + :, _l“_ , +L.'\..o

+ 2, + j, + 9, +15, +14, —16,

 

(l-) Sorrelation coefficient: significant (22 dfl

(+3 positive at 1x 1eVe1.

{-l ne ative at 1% level.

 

68

Identification key for measurements shown on the oppositelwgm

 

l-Leaf nitrogen.

2- ” potassium.
5- " phosphorus.
4- ” calcium.

5- ” magnesium.
6- ” manganese.
7- " iron.

8— ” copper.

9- ” boron.

10- ” molybdenum.
11- ” aluminum.

lZ-Fruit nitrogen.

15— " potassium.
14- " phosphorus.
15- ” calcium.
16- " magnesium.
17- " manganese.
15— ” iron.

19- " copper.

20— ” boron.

21- " molybdenum.

22- “ aluminum.

 

 

 

69

highly significant correlations between 5 asurements

e
ce on heiicicus, donutnan and hclntosn trees

The
the measureiente in

1180

rootstocks. mea;ure;en 2 in

(J
D m
LI
}—1
*-

column B as

to the nuabers is the same

and is presented or. me oiposite

\- 1 'M"
VOLJ-Aln‘s

 

COLUMN A

COLURN B

 

 

r \x n ta

(IQO‘w

ll
14
15
la
13
16
17
1c;
133
:30
é;l

\

+dv.

‘ ‘7" +159

+ l, + 4, +1“, +cc.

+ 1*.

— ‘59 " ()9 ‘ I 9 ’1”, ”’lk'
+ l, + 3‘».

+ _, .1“,

"Ca ’ja +79
+15.

+ 7, + b.

+¢_'C'.

+ 1, +6), + j.
+1“.

+l(‘jo

 

 

(1)

Correlation coefficients significant (dd

df)

(+) positive at 19 level.

(-) negative at 1% level.

70

Identification key for measurements shown on the opposite pagm

 

l-Leaf nitrogen.

2— ” potassium.
5- " phOSphorus.
4— ” calcium.

5- ” magnesium.
6- " manganese.
7— ” iron.

8- ” copper.

9— “ boron.

lO- ” molybdenum.
ll— ” aluminum.

12—Fruit nitrogen.

 

15- " potassium.
l4- ” phosphorus.
15- ” calcium.
16— " magnesium.
l7- " manganese.
ld— " iron.

19- " copper.

20- ” boron.

21— " molybdenum.

2:— " aluminum.

 

 

 

Table [5b.

, . . . ..

highly significant correlztions between measarements
1

made D!) .186; -9

on nu
corre
incic

ic-ous. tonntnan an mCiHCOSh trees
N". FOOL“

tocxs. rue measurements in column A are
thed “it

n the measuretents in column B as

ated(l). Tne Key to the numbers is tne same

for acts :olumns and is presented on the opposite

£23.38 0

 

COLUMN A

COLUMN B

 

('WO"‘JO‘\JI+‘\\-I\H

15
16
1'?
1'6
1‘3
CKJ
<1.
<18

 

..', +1.._-o

- ;, +::o
+ _. ’1’“, 4-."J-
+16.

+ 4, +11, +l¢. +17, +13, +19, +d2.
+14, +15, +16, +lC, +19.
- d, - 5, + 7, — 9, +12. elc, +l7, +lv.

+ld, +lt, +17, +lb.

_.~______
(1.) Correlation coefficients significant (22 df)

{+3 positive at 1% level.
(-) negative at 1% level.

 

 

 

 

 

72

   

Identification key for measurements shown on the opposite pagm

 

l-Leaf nitrogen.

2— " potassium.
5- " phOSphorus.
4- ” calcium.

5— " magnesium.
6- " manganese.
7- ” iron.

5- " copper.

9- " boron.

10- ” molybdenum.
ll- " aluminum.

l2—Fruit nitrogen.

15- ” potassium.
14- " phosphorus.
15- ” calcium.
lb— " magnesium.
l7— " manganese.
lo- " iron.

l9- ” copper.

20- ” boron.

21- ” molybdenum.

22— " aluminum.

 

Table 27.

highly significant correlations between measurements
made on Red Delicious, Jonathan and McIntosh trees
She measurements in column A

on EM VII rootstocks.

are correlated with the measurements in column B as
indicated kl). The key to the numbers is the same
for both columns and is presented on the ogposite

page.

 

CU LUuJ‘i A

 

19
at
<1
22

 

-100

_11, —1e, -15.

.9.
\jl
w.

+
H \v
0
+
R
\l
I
\
a.
l

+17,

- ‘71

+2t.
+17,
+16,

+2;.
+16.

‘17.

+15,

I
P—' \J‘ K' \n \N
o
I
\.
o

,-—:_’,—S,—b,
-l , +15, +14.

+

I
\2'
.0

p:

I
\n
O

- 5, +16).

 

 

(1-3 Correlation coeffiCients significant (22 df)

 

(+) positive at 1% level.
(-) negative at 1% level.

74

  

Identification key for measurements shown on the opposite page.

 

l-Leaf nitrogen.

2- ” potassium.
5- ” phOSphorus.
4- " calcium.

5- ” magnesium.
6- " manganese.
7- " iron.

8- ” copper.

9- ” boron.

10- " molybdenum.
ll- " aluminum.

l2-Fruit nitrogen.

15— " potassium.
l4— " phosphorus.
15- " calcium.
16- " magnesium.
l7— " manganese.
lo— " iron.

19- " cepper.

20— ” boron.

21- " molybdenum.

   

22- aluminum.

   

 

 

  

 

Table 2b. Highly significant correlations between measurements
made on ned Delicious, Jonathan and McIntosh trees
on as XIII rootstocks. The measurements in column A
are correlated witn the measurements in column B as
indicated (l). “he key to the numbers is the same
for both columns and is presented on the opposite

 

 

page.
COLUMN A COLUMN B
1 +10.
6 + 3. - “. + 3, -10, +14, -lb, -l7, -16.
5 + a, + ,, +14, +2U.
4 - -. - 7. +1b, +Ls, +17, +18.
5
6 +2;.
7
O
9 + 2, + 9, - 4, +15, +14, -16, —l7, -1&, +20.
10 — u, + a, +16, +16.
ll -21.
12
15 + 7. +1“.
14 + L, + j, + 7, +19, +5“.
15 +17, +13.
16 I - 2, + 4, — 9, +10, +17, +16.
17 — 2, + 4, - 9, +15, +1b, +19.
18 + 1, - 2, + 4, — 9, +10, +16.
19 +15, +1', +22.
20 4 5, + 9, +14.
:1 -11.
52 + 6, +19.

 

 

 

(1-) Correlation coefficients significant (22 df)
(+) positive at % level.
(-) negative at 1% level.

 

 

 

Identification key for measurements shown on the opposite page.

76

  

 

l-Leaf nitrogen.

10-
11-

l2—Fruit nitrogen.

15-
14-
15-
16—
17-
16—
19-
20-
21-
22—

potassium.
phOSphorus.
calcium.
magnesium.
manganese.
iron.
copper.
boron.
molybdenum.

aluminum.

potassium.
phosphorus.
calcium.
magnesium.
manganese.
iron.
copper.
boron.
molybdenum.

aluminum.

 

 

77

.r:-.easurements

correlations between measurements
tonathan and thntosn trees

in column A

measurements in column B as

the key to the numbers is the same

 

umns and is presented on the opposite

 

 

Table 29 3 significant
on men De icious,
XVI root tocks. The
orre ated.”Htu. tne
ated {1).
cth col
COLUMN A COLUMN B
1 + :, + t, +1U, -17, -16,
2 + 9, - 7, - 1, +14, -1t,
5 + 2, +14, -16.
4 +16, +15.
5 + 1, + 6.
6 + 1, + E, + 9, -15, -19.
7 - 2, +11.
8
9 + 6, +41.
1;; + 1, + 1+.
11 - 2, + 7.
12 +16.
15 +14.
14 + 2, + j, +15.
15 - l, — 6, +17.
16 - 1, ~ 2, - 5, +12, +17,
17 - l, - 2, +15, +16, +16.
15 — 2, + 4, +16, +17.
19 — 6, +16.
CL)
21 + 9.
22 +16.

 

 

-17 0
~17 .

-160

+10, +19, +22.

 

 

(1.) Sorrelation coefficients significant (22 df)

k4-

) positive at 1% level.

-) negative at 1% level.

Leaf calcium showed a positive correlation with leaf molybdenum in

 

EM II, XIII and XVI.

Leaf iron was correlated positively with leaf aluminum in EM I, II,
VII and XVI, and with fruit iron in BM I. II and V.

Leaf boron showed a negative correlation with fruit magnesium in
EM I, VII and XIII, and a positive correlation with fruit boron in EM 1, II,
V and XIII.

Fruit potassium and fruit phosphorus were correlated positively in
all six rootstocks considered.

Fruit calcium and fruit manganese were correlated positively in
EM II, V, VII, XIII and XVI.

Fruit magnesium was correlated positively with fruit manganese
in EM V, VII, XIII and XVI, with fruit iron in BM V, XIII and XVI, and
with fruit aluminum in EM V, VII and XVI.

Fruit manganese and fruit iron showed a positive correlation in
EM I, V, VII and XVI.

In summary, Table 30 presents all highly significant correlations
between determinations made on all three varieties grown on all six root-

stocks.

 

 

 

79

 

 

Identification key for measurements shown on the opposite page.“

 

l-Leaf nitrogen.

2- " potassium.
5- " phOSphorus.
4- ” calcium.

5- ” magnesium.
6- " manganese.
7- " iron.

d- ” copper.

9- “ boron.

10- " molybdenum.
ll- " aluminum.
l2-Fruit nitrogen.
15- ” potassium.
14- ” phOSphorus.
15- ” calcium.
16- " magnesium.
17- " manganese.
lb- ” iron.

19- " cepper.
20- ” boron.
21- " molybdenum.
22- ” aluminum.

80

Table 5o. digs y signifi
made on Fed De

U
I

on ma i, 11. R. Vii, X211 ani .-; rootstocks.
3? "913tfii

measurements in column B as indicated (1).
to the numbers is the same for both columns and is

measurements in column A arr

presented on the opposite page.

'13: correlations between measurements
‘icious, Jonathan and McIntosh trees
The
with the

The key

 

- -Cfl- —

COLUMN A T. HLN r

 

 

 

1 r «-

l + 2. + s, + a, -11, +12, -lc, -22.

2 + i, + a, - 7, + r, -1c, -11, +1}, +14, -16. -l7, -i;
5 + , + , -12, +le, -1*, 17, +23, -22. /-C&
L.

5 — . —1:., _,.}‘ -1:1, -22.

L -1:, -2c.

7 - 2, - f, + 1, +11, +1), +13.

d + ‘, + 7, + 3, +15.

9 + 1, + 2, + f, + c, +14, -1c, -17, +20, +21, -22.

1b '" 2, +11 .

11 — 1, - 2, - 1, + .I, +1! , +17, +15.

12 + l, - ', +lr, +17, +1', +-*.

lfi + 2, +l-'—, — .

1‘+ + ., + , + , +15, +1‘, +25.

15 - :, +i/, +1 , +17, +21. u 1
15 - l, — _, - 9, - 7, +15, +11, +12, +17, +10, +13, -2q
17 i - 2, - j, - D, + 7, — W, +11, +12, +15, +16, +11, -1;
1” i — 2, - b, + 7, + a, +11, +12, +1 , +16, +17. /+2L
19 f +12, +l4, +i9, +16, +17, +22.
cflu 1 + j, — F” -+'j, +lfi, -16.
21 + 2, +15, +17.
22 - 1, - 2, - 5, - fl, - 9, —15, +16, +19.

 

 

 

 

 

 

(l) Torrelution coefficients significant (I42 dfl
(+) positive at 1% level.

\—1 negative at 1% 16V81.

DISCUSSION

Influence of rootstocks on leaf composition.

 

Nitrogen: In this study there were no significant differences between
rootstocks in mfIUencing leaf composition. ‘.'arne and llace (1935) and the
East Malling report for 1959 (Anon. 1960) reported differences between root-
stocks in affecting the nitrogen composition of the leaf. However, they did
not indicate if their differences “.ere significant. Kenwortby “960) obtained
significant differences between rootstocks in affecting leaf composition in
Cortland trees. but not in McIntosl' trees.

The reports on the influence of rootstoc' s on leaf nitrogen do not show
a consistent arrangement of rootstocks with respect to their influence on leaf
nitrogen. Also, this arrangement does not sho“. a relation unit the influence
of rootstocks on the vigor of the tree. The results of the present study indi-
cate that if rootstoc's did have an influence on the nitrogen economy of the
tree, their influence could not be detected by leaf analysis.

Thomas (1927) has shown that inorganic nitrogen is changed into amino
acids in the roots of the apple tree. Bea} bane (1953) reported that dwarfing
rootstocks had a highly parenchymatous phloem and xylem and, therefore.
contained more living tissue per unit volume of the roots than vigwous root-
stocks. If these two factors have an influence on the nitrogen nutrition of
the trees which is affected by rootstocrs, leaf analysis failed to show it. How-

ever, this may be the result of the fact that the differences in vigor between

81

82

the rootstocks under study was very slight and differences in nutrition could
be masked by environmental variations. A carefully controlled experiment
could show statistical differences between rootstocks in the nitrogen nutrition
of the tree.

Potassium: Rootstocks influenced significantly the potassium com-

 

position of the scion leaves. The influence of rootstocks on potassium defi-
ciency has been the most frequently reported rootstock-nutrient relation in
clonal rootstocks. The results of this study are in general agreement with
those obtained by Hatton and Grubb (19.24), \\allace (1931), Warne and Wallace
(I935), Bane (1939), Vaidva (1938), lloblyn (1940-41), Roach (I947), and
Kenworthy (1960).

Invariably, trees on EM V and II were reported to be the most sus-
ceptible to leaf scorch resulting from potassium deficiency, and at the same
time the leaves on those trees had the lowest potassium content values.
Rootstocks EM I, XIII and XVI were reported to have little or no susceptibi-
lity to leaf scorch.

In this study, trees on liM V and II had consistently the lowest leaf
potassium values, trees on EM VII, XIII and XVI had intermediate values,
and trees on EM I had the highest values. These differences were obtained
in spite of the fact that the potassium available in the soil was relatively high
(188 to 436 pounds per acre) and was about twice the optimum required for

Michigan crops (McCall, 1960). In a situation where soil potassium values

 

83

would be a limiting factor, differences between rootstocks could become
more acute with respect to the development of potassium deficiency.

The range in leaf potassium values between trees on various root-
stocks is relatively narrow in spite of the statistical differences obtained.
This'is an indication that in situations where soil potassium is relatively
abundant, differences due to rootstocks would not have to be taken into con-
sideration when using leaf composition values for diagnostic purposes.

Phosphorus: The results obtained with this element were in general

 

agreement with those obtained by Warne and Wallace (1935), Vaidya (1938),
Roach (1947) and Kenworthy (1960), with respect to the fact that there were
differences between rootstocks in influencing the leaf content of this ele-
ment. The results of this study agree with other worlers in the fact

that trees on the EM V and VII are usually reported as being high in leaf
phosphorus.

The range in leaf composition values between trees high in phosphorus
and trees low in phosphorus could be of importance if phosphorus nutrition
was a problem in apple trees. However, tree responses to phosphorus appli-
cations have been very rare and this tends to minimize the importance of
any leaf composition differences that could be attributed to rootstock influence.

Calcium: The fact that there were significant differences between
rootstocks in affecting leaf calcium was in agreement with the findings of

Warne and Wallace (1935), Vaidya (1938), Roach (1947) and Kenworthy (1960).

##

 

84

There is, however, considerable disagreement among research workers in
arranging rootstocks with respect to their influence on leaf calcium.

This is probably the result of the influence of various environmental
factors, such as soil type, which modify rootstock effects. The range in
composition between the high and the low calcium values does not seem wide
enough to justify the consideration of rootstock differences in using standard
leaf composition values for diagnosing purposes.

Magnesium: Rootstocks had a significant influence on the magnesium

 

content of the scion leaves. Trees on EM XVI were always the highest in
leaf magnesium, and those on EM 1 were always the lowest. The range in
magnesium composition between the high and the low values was very wide
and trees on EM XVI were particularly high in this element.

\Varne and ‘.’allace (1935), Vaidya (1938), Hoblyn (1940-41), Roach
(1947) and Kenworthy (196(1) have also reported differences between root-
stocks in affecting leaf magnesium. Again, there is some variation in the
relative influence of individual rootstocks.

This study showed that trees on EM I and VII' were those having the
lowest leaf magnesium content and was in close agreement with Hoblyn's
findings which indicated that trees on EM 1 and VH were highly susceptible
to magnesium deficiency.

The relatively wide range in leaf magnesium found in this study in-

dicates a possible need for further assessment of the influence of rootstocks

 

on magnesium nutrition. If a consistent influence of rootstocks is estab-
lished, this factor would have to be taken into consideration, conceivably
a higher level of soil magnesium would be necessary for certain rootstocks
to attain the desired level of magnesium nutrition as reflected by leaf
analysis.

Manganese: This study showed that rootstocks had a significant

 

effect upon influencing leaf manganese. Roach (1947) reported differences
between rootstocks in this respect without reference as to their statistical
significance.

In this work, trees on EM XIII had a much higher leaf manganese
content than trees on all the other rootstocks. Trees on EM II were the
lowest in leaf manganese. Again, the range in leaf composition for this
element was relatively large and further study would be required in order
to determine with more certainty the influence of rootstocks on leaf man-
ganese.

Iron: Rootstocks affected, significantly, leaf iron only in 1959.

 

Differences did not exist when the data for two years were considered.
Roach (1947) and Kenworthy (1960) have reported previously similar find-
ings.

In this study, trees on EM 1 and XVI were at the high and low ends
or the composition range, respectively. The pH values of the soil ranged

between 5. 3 and 7. 4 (McCall, 196(1) and it is improbable that iron availa—

so

bility problems existed in that soil. Under conditions less favorable for
iron availability in the soil, differences between rootstocks as related to
iron nutrition could become more important.

As a result of a relatively wide variation in the leaf iron values between
trees, the significance of the differences found in this study may not have a
practical application at the present time.

Copper: Significant differences between rootstocks in affecting leaf
copper were found only when the data from two years were considered.
Bould it a_l. (193(1) reported differ inces in susceptibility to copper deficiency
that be attributed to rootstock influences. The absence of acute problems
in copper nutrition together with the fact that the differences found in this
work were very small do not allow any conclusions of practical value.

Boron: Rootstocks affected significantly leaf boron values only in
1959. When the data from two years were considered, the differences were
non-existent. Kenworthy (196(1) is the only worker who has determined dif-
ferences between rootstocks in this respect. In this study, trees on EM V
showed the highest leaf boron values. The fact that problems in boron
nutrition are relatively rate in Michigan orchards would tend to limit the
practical interest of these findings. However, the development of an acute
problem along this line would warrant further research on the subject.

Zinc, molybdenum and aluminum: There were no significant differ-

 

ences between rootstocks in affecting the leaf content of these elements ex-

 

 

87

cept in the case where four sampling dates were considered, and in that
case the actual differences were not considered to be of great importance.
Kenworthy (1960) is the only worker who has determined differences in leaf
zinc that could be attributed to the influence of rootstocks. No reports are
known on the effect of rootstocks on leaf molybdenum and aluminum. In
areas where the nutrition of one of these elements is a problem, further
research into the possible influence of rootstocks on the nutrition of these
elements would be required.

General discussion: Rogers and Beakbane (1957) pointed out that the

 

effect of a root system on the top of the tree could be accounted for by three
postulated mechanisms: (1) differences in nutrient absorption and metabol-
ism; (2) differences in transport: and (3) differences in auxin metabolism.

In this study, the influence of rootstocks on leaf composition was
evaluated and was found to be in general agreement with the findings of other
research workers. The causes of the rootstock effect was not a part of this
study. Therefore, the influence of the mechanisms mentioned was not de-
termined. he respective role played by each of these mechanisms in influ-
encing leaf analysis could be the subject of further research studies.

It also is possible that, under less favorable nutrient conditions than
those found in this study, the differences between rootstocks as affecting the
nutrition of the tree could be greater.

The influence of rootstocks on leaf composition had little or no relation

 

88

to the relative vigor of the rootstocks studied. It should be remembered
that the differences in vigor between the rootstocks considered were very
slight and only very gradual variations in leaf composition would be expected.

On the basis of the present study, it is difficult to see an immediate
need for any modification of the standard composition values, as used for
diagnostic purposes, to account for rootstock differences.

In some instances, the knowledge of the presence of a rootstock
particularly susceptible to inducing relatively high or low nutrient levels,
could lead to the application of appropriate corrective measures. However,
leaf analysis should reflect the need for the corrective measures although
soil tests or analysis might indicate an adequate supply of the element in

question.

Influences of rootstock on fruit composition.

 

In this study there were significant differences between rootstocks in
affecting the potassium, copper, boron, zinc and aluminum composition of
the fruit. These results were in general agreement with the findings of other
workers in that differences in fruit composition could be attributed to root-
stock influences. However, where some differences existed, they were either
non-significant or too small to be of practical value. In the case of boron
and zinc, however, the range in composition between the high and the low

values is relatively wide.

 

89

 

Another observation made in this study was that, in the case of
several elements, the rootstock which induced the highest and the lowest
leaf composition valuus also induced the highest and the lowest fruit com—
position values, respectively. This is an indication that the general

nutrient level of the tree was particularly high or low in such cases.

Influence of rootstock on storage quality.

 

Red Delicious: The influenCe of rootstocks on the soluble solids con-
tent of the fruit, although significant, was too small to be of practical im-
portance.

Rootstocks also had a significant effect on the percent of the fruit
affected by storage scald. Fruit from trees on EM V were the lowest and
fruit from trees on EM 1 and 11 were the highest in storage scald.

Savag* (1941) and Smock and Boynton (1944) reported reduced scald
incidence in McIntosh with nitrog-n applications. Kidd and West (1938) found
that apples growing in potassium deficient soil were less susceptible to stor-
age scald. Batjer and l-Ialler (1942) reported that the addition of Borax to a
soil not particularly low in boron reduced scald in Red Delicious apples.

The effects of potassium and boron were attributed to advanced maturity of
the fruit at picking time.

During the 1959 season, trees on EM V were the highest in leaf nitro—
8eh and boron and the lowest in leaf potassium. Fruit from trees on EM V
showed relatively high nitrogen and very high boron content and relatively low

POtassium content.

 

90

The reduction in storage scald may be attributed to one or a combina-
tion of these nutrient factors as affected by the EM V rootstock. The most
important factor seems to be, however, the high boron level in the leaves
and particularly in the fruit. This effect may be a direct one or an indirect
one through advanced maturity of the fruit. Further investigation of these
influences may help in clarifying the effect of EM V on storage scald.

jonathan: Rootstocks had a significant but small influence on the
flesh firmness of the fruit. Rootstoc'.s also had an appreciable influence on
the incidence of fruit russeting. Trees on EM XIII and XVI had relatively
low percentages of russeted fruit.

Mitchell (196(1) found that there was an inverse relation between the
vigor of the tree and the percent of the fruit affected by russeting. His find-
ings are in close agreement with the results of this study, since the fruit
from trees on the most vigorous rootstocks, EM XIII and XVI, showed the
lowest russeting incidence.

The negative correlation found between leaf magnesium and fruit russet-
ing may have a close relation with the previous findings. Boynton (1954) in-
dicated that trees showing magnesium deficiency were very sensitive to spray
injury. In this study, trees on EM XIII and XVI had the highest leaf magnes-
jUm values and the lowest incidence of fruit russeting.

McIntosh: Rootstocks had no significant influence on any of the stor-

age measurements considered. It is to be noted that the rootstock effect on

91

 

storage scald observed in Red Delicious was not evident for McIntosh.
General discussion: Under various conditions, root stocks have been
reported to influence the susceptibility of the fruit to several storage dis-
orders. However, in the present study, differences in leaf and fruit composi-
tion as affected by rootstock, had little influence on the storage quality of the
fruit, except for the few cases already mentioned. The incidence of storage
disorders, with the exception of storage scald, was not particularly high
during the 1959-1960 storage season. In a season in which the incidence of
such disorders would be very high, rootstock effects could be of wider signi-

ficance. This possibility, however, would require further investigation.

Influence of varieties on leaf composition.

 

The fact that varieties had a significant influence on leaf composition
is in general agreement with the results obtained by other workers. There
was, however, some variation as to the relative position of some varieties in
the leaf composition rang> for certain elements. This probably resulted
from differences in environmental factors and the fact that this study was
conducted exclusively on clonal rootstocks. Whereas, almost all other re—
ports on the subject were based on varieties growing on seedling rootstocks.

The differences between varieties with respect to leaf nitrogen, al-
though significant, were not large enough to be of diagnostic concern.

When leaf potassium was considered, the differences between varie-

l'ies became quite important. In every case, Red Delicious and Northern Spy

 

 

92

 

leaves were much higher in potassium than leaves from Jonathan and McIntosh
trees. Since the soil had an abundant supply of potassium, the ability of Red
Delicious and Northern Spy trees to accumulate more potassium in the leaves,
does not necessarily alter standard values for diagnosing purposes, but may
be the result of luxury consumption. Possibly, the soil supply of potassium
need not be as high for varieties such as Red Delicious and Northern Spy as
for varieties such as McIntosh and jonathan.

In the case of phosphorus, Delicious and Northern Spy leaves wore
again the highest in phosphorus content. Due to the fact that pl'osplorus has
rarely been a problem in apple tree nutrition, the practical significance of
these differences cannot be evaluated at the present time.

The differences between the leaf calcium content of the different varie—
ties, althougb significant, were relatively small. In this study, jonathan and
McIntosh leaves had the highest calcium content. In the case of magnesium,
Delicious had the highest leaf content of this element. The differences in
leaf magnesium among the different varieties were not large enough to be
of immediate concern.

Among the five major elements just mentioned, Red Delicious and
Northern Spy leaves very frequently showed the highest leaf composition
Values. When the seven minor elements were considered, Delicious and
Jonathan dominated the higher nutrient values. McIntosh leaves were, in

general, medium to low in nutrient eletnent composition as compared with

 

the other three varieties. Therefore, Red Delicious can be considered to

be a variety with a relatively high nutritional level, Northern Spy and

Jonathan would be intermediate, and McIntosh would be intermediate to low

in nutrient element composition.

Further investigation is needed to ascertain whether the characteris-
tic high or low levels for various elements in a variety are indicative of a
nutrient requirement, or are only the result of luxury com sumption without

significance as regards quality and siZe of the crop.

Influence of varieties on fruit composition.

 

There were significant but small differences between varieties with
respect to fruit composition for all elements with the exception of molybdenum.

Jonathan fruit was relatively high in nutrient content for severa. ele-
ments. This may have been due, in part, to the relatively small size of the
fruit harvested in 1959. jonathan fruit was particularly high in iron content.
This was probably due to the relatively high iron nutrition level of the trees
Which was also reflected in the high. iron content of Jonathan leaves.

Delicious fruit was relatively high in boron and was parallel with the
high boron level of Delicious leaves. Finally, McIntosh fruit was relatively
high in zinc and aluminum. McIntosh leaves were high in aluminum, but not
in zinc. Another point to be noted is that on a percent dry weight basis, the
fruit was higher in boron content than the leaves. For phosphorus, copper and

Zinc, both leaves and fruit had comparable values.

 

 

94

The previous examples indicate that varieties showing a high level
of a given nutrient in the leaves, also showed a parallel high level in the
fruit for the same element. The frequent occurrence of this parallelism
between leaves and fruit indicates that high and low nutritional levels in

the tree are frequently reflected in both the leaves and the fruit.

Influence of sampling dates on leaf composition.

 

The results of this study are in general agreement with the findings
reported by other research workers. The leaf content of nitrogen, potas-
sium, phosphorus and boron, decreased from the first to the last sampling
date in an orderly manner. Leaf calcium and aluminum increased as the
season progressed. Leaf magnesium and manganese showed little variation.

This is probably one of the rare times in which the seasonal varia-
tion in leaf copper, boron, zinc and molybdenum has been reported for
apples. Askew e_t al. (1936) reported a downward trend in fruit boron as
the season advanced.

This study shows that the sampling of tree leaves for nutrient diag-
nosis can be done at the same time period used for trees growing on seed-
ling root stocks and for trees growing on clonal rootstocks. Clonal root—
stocks did not appear to exert any particular influence on the seasonal trend,

of the elements considered, that was different from seedling rootstocks.

Influence of storage treatments on storage observations on the fruit.

 

Red Delicious:

 

(l) Soluble solids: The increase in the soluble solids content of

 

the fruit during storage was due to the hydrolysis of starch
and other fruit constituents to sugars.

(.2) Flesh firmness: The decrease in flesh firmness during stor-

 

age was also expected. The fact that the decrease in flesh
firmness in CA storage was greater than in regular storage
is difficult to explain. The difference between regular and
CA storage was, however, relatively small and should be
of little concern.

(3) Storage scald: The control of this disorder in Red Delicious

 

by CA stoiage has not been very successful. The findings of
this study are similar to those reported by Smock (1958).
MEET}.
(l) Sol__.f_le_s£li_dsz_ T' ere was a significant decrease in soluble
solids duringr storage. The decline was relatively small and
was probably the result of a net loss of sugars as a result of

respiratory activity in the fruit.

(2) Flesh firmness: Flesh firmness decreased during storage as

 

was expected. The decrease was greater in regular storage

and was probably the result of higher respiration and trans-

96

 

piration rates in this type of storage. Similar results were
reported by Dewey gt a_l. (1958) and Biinemann e_ta_l. (1959).

(3) Ground color: The ground color of the fruit became more
yellow during storage. Fruit from regular storage showed
a greater Changx in that direction than fruit from CA storage.
This was expected in view of the faster ripening occurring
in regular storags. Bunemann e_t z_1_l_. (1959) reported compar-
able results.

(4) Jonathan spot: CA storage resulted in almost absolute control
of this disorder. This result was in agreement with the find-
ings of Plagge H942), Ballinger (1955), Dewey e_t :& (1957),
and Blinemann (it a_l_ (1959).

(5) Soft scald: There was a small difference between the incidence
of this disorder in regular and CA storage. The fact that this
is a low temperature disorder and that regular storage was
maintained at 32‘ F indicate that the low soft scald incidence
may be the result of a low occurrence of the disorder in the
1959 season. Dewey L_ta_l. (1957) found that CA storage in-
hibited soft scald in Jonathan apples.

McIntosh:
(1) mile solids: The small increase in soluble solids during

storage indicates a slight ripening activity of the fruit.

 

 

97

 

(2) Flesh firmness: There was, as expected, a considerable de—
crease in the flesh firmness in both types of storage. No
advantag: of CA over regular storage was noted in this respect.

(3) Ground color: The change in ground color from green to yellow
was very slight in both regular and CA storage and reflected a
slight ripening of the fruit.

(4) Storage scald: The incidence of this disorder was low when the
fruit was removed from both regular and CA storage. How-
ever, when the fruit was exposed to 7S'F for seven days, there
was no further increase in scald in the fruit from CA storage,
whereas the fruit from regular storage was seriously affected.
Smock (1958) has shown that scald was reduced greatly and
sometimes prevented by CA storage. Also the extended life
of apples from CA storage has been reported by Kidd and West
(1936), Allen and Smock (1938) and Smocl: (1958).

(5) Brown core: This disorder was completely prevented by CA
storage at 38‘ F. CA storage also resulted in an extended
shelf life of the fruit when placed at 75°F for seven days. Smock
(1958) reported similar results.

(6) Mealy breakdowr_i_: The incidence of this disorder was prevented
by both regular and CA storage. Moreover, CA storage re-

‘ sulted in an extended shelf life of the fruit when placed at 75" F

 

  

98

  

for seven days. Comparable findings have been reported by

 

Blanpied (1959).
General discussion: From the previous discussion, it can be
concluded that so far as the results of this study can show, fruit from trees
on clonal rootstocks will respond to storage treatments in a similar way as

fruit from trees on seedling rootstocks.

Correlation studies.

Leaf nitrogen was correlated negatively with leaf aluminum in two
out of three varieties, but only in two out of six rootstocks. This is probably
the first time that such relation has been presented and the significance of

this finding cannot be evaluated at the present time.

Leaf nitrogen was correlated positively with fruit nitrogen in two out
of three varieties, and in two out of six rootstocks. A similar finding was
reported by Blinemann (1958). This result shows that nitrog>n levels in the
tree are often reflected in both leaves and fruit.

A positive correlation occurred between fruit nitrogen and fruit mag-
nesium in two out of three varieties. This relation has not been reported be-
fore and no explanation can be offered for its occurrence.

The negative correlation found between leaf nitrogen and the flesh
firmness of the fruit at harvest and after storage in all three varieties was
in agreement with the results of Smocl: and Boynton (1944), Weeks t al. (1952),

Collins (1957), and Biinemann (1958).

99

Along a similar line is the negative relation between fruit nitrogen
and the flesh firmness of the fruit before and after storage in two out of three
varieties. Biinemann (1958) reported a similar finding.

Leaf and fruit nitrogen were correlated negatively with the incidence
of storage scald in McIntosh fruit from regular storage kept for seven days
at 75° F. Smock and Boynton (1944) indicated that large nitrogen applications
may reduce the incidence of storage scald. However, as a result of the
generally accepted negative relationship hprxvpp" high r-itmgen -evels and
general storage quality, the practical use of the previous finding appears
to be limited in scope.

The positive correlation between leaf nitrogen and the incidence of
scald in McIntosh fruit from CA storage kept for seven days at 75°F, although
in the opposite direction of the previously reported relation, is not very
meaningful in view of the very low scald incidence in the fruit subjected to
that treatment.

The positive relation between fruit nitrOgen and the ground color score
of Jonathan fruit was probably due to the slight delay in maturity resulting
from a higher nitrogen level in the tree.

The positive relation between fruit nitrogen and the incidence of brown
core after regular storage was closely related to a similar relation between
brown core and the soluble solids content and the flesh firmness of the fruit.

This relation will be discussed later in the text.

  

l 00

  

Other correlations between leaf or fruit nitrogen and other observa-
tions reported by various research workers did not occur consistently in
this study.

Leaf potassium was correlated positively with leaf phosphorus in four
out of six rootstocks and with fruit phosphorus in three out of six root stocks.
This relation has rarely been reported and its occurrence may be the result
of a rootstock effect, since the relation occurred only when individual root—
stocks were considered and did not occur when individual varieties were
studied.

The positive relation between leaf and fruit potassium had been re-
ported before by Bunemann (1958) and was evident in this study in two out of
three varieties and in all six rootstocks. This relation revealed the close
parallelism existing between leaf a:.d fruit in reflecting the potassium levels
in the tree.

Leaf potassium was correlated positively with leaf boron in four of
the six rootstocks. This relation apparently has not been reported before
and may be the result of a rootstock effect. A similar idea can apply to the
negative relation between leaf potassium and leaf aluminum which occurred
in three out of six rootstocks.

The negative relation between leaf potassium and fruit magnesium in
four out of six rootstocks is closely linked with the findings of other workers.

Boynton and Compton (1945), Cain (1953a), and Eaves and Kelsal (1954) have

 

  

101

  

reported a negative relation between leaf potassium and magnesium. The
positive relation between fruit potassium and magnesium was not in line with
the previous findings. ‘.'ilkinson (1958) reported a similar relation and sug-
gested that high potassium fruits may draw magnesium from the leaves.

The negative correlation between leaf potassium and fruit iron has
not been reported before and cannot be explained on the basis of this study.

A positive relation between leaf and fruit phosphorus was found in
two out of three varieties and in three out of six rootstocks. This relation
revealed the interdependence of leaves and fruit with the nutritional level of
the tree. Similar results were reported by B'Linemann (1958).

The negative relation between leaf phosphorus and fruit magnesium
occurred in four out of six rootstocks and may be due to a rootstock effect.
Previous reports on the occurrence of this relation could not be found.

Fruit phosphorus was correlated positively with leaf copper and boron
in two out of three varieties. Kenworthy and Harris (1960) reported a simi-
lar relation between phosphorus and boron, but a negative relation between
phosphorus and copper.

The positive correlation between leaf phosphorus and the flesh firm-
ness of the fruit at harvest and after storage has not been reported before
and its implications are not apparent at this time.

A positive correlation between leaf calcium and leaf molybdenum

occurred in two of the three varieties and in three out of six rootstocks.

 

  

    

There was also a similar relation between fruit calcium and molybdenum in
all three varieties. These relations apparently have not been reported be-
fore. A reason for this interaction may be found in the soil where increased
molybdenum availability occurs at higher pH values.

The positive relation found between fruit calcium and manganese in
all three varieties and in five out of six rootstocks, has been reported pre—
viously by Kenworthy and Harris (1960).

The positive correlations which existed in McIntosh between leaf cal-
cium and the ground color scores and the incidence of brown core cannot be
explained at the present time.

A positive correlation between fruit magnesium and manganese was
found in four out of six rootstocks. The same relation has been reported
before by Kenworthy and Harris (1960). A similar relation occurred between
fruit magnesium and iron and between fruit mar nesium and aluminum in three
out of six rootstocks. Comparable relationships have not been reported else-
where.

A positive correlation between leaf magnesium and the percent soluble
solids occurred in Red Delicious, but the relation was reversed in Jonathan.
Fruit magnesium was correlated positively with the percent of scald found in
Red Delicious after CA storage. No explanation can be offered for these
findings.

The positive relation between leaf manganese and fruit copper in Red

 

103

Delicious was reversed in Jonathan. Here again, these results cannot be
explained.

Leaf iron was correlated positively with leaf aluminum in all three
varieties and in four out of six root stocks. This is probably the first time
such relation is reported. The close relation between iron and aluminum
may be explained on the basis of simultaneous soil availability, a related up-
take and translocation ora combination of these factors.

There was a positive correlation between leaf and fruit iron. This
result shows again that both. the leaf and the fruit can reflect variations in
nutrient conditions in the tree for certain elements.

Fruit iron and manganese were correlated positively in two out of
three varieties and in four out of six rootstocks. This result shows that
although these two elements have been found to be antagonistic by Sommers
and Shive (1942), a positive relation can still occur in certain parts of the
plant.

The positive relation between leaf and fruit boron occurred with all
three varieties, and with four out of six root stoel s. This, once more, re-
flects the close relation between the nutrient content of both leaves and fruit.

Leaf boron was correlated negatively with leaf magnesium in two out
of three varieties, and with fruit magnesium in three out of six rootstocks.
Negative relationships between boron and calcium have been reported, but

apparently none so far between boron and magnesium in apples. Merrill et al.

  

  

(1957) corrected toxic symptoms resulting from high boron in tung leaves
by increasing the magnesium level in the leaves.

The negative relation between leaf boron and the soluble solids content
of the fruit at harvest in two out of three varieties may be explained by a
delay in maturity resulting from lower boron levels. Batjer and Haller (1942)
reported that borax applications advanced the maturity of the fruit. The op-
posite influence of low boron levels may also be valid in explaining the pre-
vious relation.

The negative relation between leaf boron and the ground color score
of Jonathan fruit indicates that the higher boron levels were associated with
increased yello: ing of the ground color of the fruit. Haller and Batjer (1946)
noted that the change from green to yellow ground color was hastened on
trees receiving heavy boron applications. This relation may be linked close-
1y to that mentioned in the previous paragraph.

A positive correlation between fruit boron and the incidence of brown
core after regular storage was determined but could not be related to the
findings of other workers. The influence of the boron level on fruit maturity
may have a relation to the incidence of brown core, but this possibility re-
quires further study.

Further study would also be required to elucidate the reasons for the
occurrence of a negative relation between fruit copper and the ground color
score of the fruit, the positive relation between leaf molybdenum and the in-

cidence of scald in Red Delicious after CA storage and the positive relation

 

105

between fruit molybdenum and the incidence of fruit russeting found after
regular storage.

The positive correlations between the percent soluble solids at har-
vest and after storage and the flesh firmness at harvest and after storage
were in agreement with the findings of Bu'nemann (1958) among other workers.
These relationships show that variation in the soluble solids content and the
flesh firmness of the fruit after storage can be predicted at harvest. The
relation between soluble solids and the flesh firmness points out the inter-
dependence of both factors in their contribution to the storage quality of the
fruit.

The negative relation found between the soluble solids content and the
ground color of Jonathan and McIntosh fruit is an indication that fruit with a
more yellow ground color is, in general, at a more advanced stage of matur-
ity and shows a higher soluble solids content.

A negative relation between the flesh firmness and the ground color
score of the fruit was determined in McIntosh and showed that increased
yellowing of the ground color was associated with increased fruit firmness
."hen these determinations were made after storage. The fact that this rela-
tion occurred only in McIntosh showed that the relation between soluhle solids
and flesh firmness is more direct and important than the relation between
ground color and either soluble solids or flesh firmness.

The positive correlation between the ground color scores of the fruit

at harvest and after storage was reported also by Bunemann (1958) and others

and indicates the close relation between the harvest and post—storage condi-
tion of the fruit.

In Jonathan, there was a positive correlation between the incidence of
fruit russeting and the soluble solids and the flesh firmness of the fruit.
These relations have not been reported elsewhere and nothing is known as to
the reasons for their occurrence.

The positive relation between the incidence of brown core after regu-
lar storage and fruit nitrogen and the negative relations between brown core

after regular storage and the soluble solids content and the flesh firmness

 

of the fruit at harvest and after storage indicate that a lower incidence of
brown core may be associated with a more advanced degree of maturity of
the fruit at harvest. The opposite, however, could also be possible.

The positive relation between the incidence of storage scald in Red
Delicious after regular and after CA storage also shows a predisposition of
the fruit to this disorder when the fruit was placed in storage.

In McIntosh, the positive relation between the incidence of storage
scald after regular and CA storage and the incidence of the same disorder
after the fruit from both types of storage was held for seven days at 75°F in-
dicates that that fruit susceptible to the disorder showed their susceptibility
in almost every treatment. The same idea applies when we note the positive
correlation between the incidence of brown core after regular and CA storage.

In Jonathan, the positive correlation between the incidence of soft

scald after regular storage and the ground color score of the fruit after CA

 

 

 

  

storage cannot be explained.

Finally, the positive correlation between the incidence of Jonathan
spot and the incidence of fruit russeting indicate that common factors may
or may not be related in affecting the susceptibility of the fruit to both
disorders.

General discussion: The occurrence of the previous correlations
shows that many of the relations found in trees growing on seedling root-
stocks are also valid for trees growing on clonal rootstocks. Among the
new relations reported, some may be the result of local environmental
conditions. The discovery of other relations was made possible by the
use of faster and more complete methods of element analysis and by the
use of faster tools for statistical analysis. Finally, the particular use of
clonal rootstocks is probably responsible for the occurrence of some of

the relations not previously reported elsewhere.

 

 

SUMMARY

The influence of East Malling rootstocks, varieties and other re-

    
    
 
  
  
  
 
 
  
  
  
   
  
   
  
 
   

lated variables on the leaf and fruit composition of apple trees were evalu-
ated in this study. The influence of rootstocks and storage treatments on
the storage quality of the fruit was another aspect of the evaluation of the
EM rootstocks represented in this study.

The rootstocks studied were EM 1, II, V, VII, XIII and XVI. The
varieties grown on these rootstocks were Northern Spy, Red Delicious,
Jonathan and McIntosh. Leaf samples were taken five times at two—week
intervals in 1959, and once (mid—July) in 1960. Fruit samples were taken
at harvest in 1959 and placed in regular and CA storage.

The elements determined in the leaves and fruit were nitrogen,
potassium, phosphorus, calcium, magnesium, manganese, iron, copper,
boron, zinc, molybdenum and aluminum. Pre-storage observations made
on the fruit were soluble solids and flesh firmness in all varieties and
ground color in Jonathan and McIntosh only. Fruit of the Northern Spy
variety were not available for nutrient composition and storage studies.

At the end of the storage period, flesh firmness and soluble solids
determinations were made on all varieties. Storage scald, brown core
and internal breakdown were determined on Red Delicious fruit. Ground
color, soft scald, Jonathan spot and russeting were determined on Jonathan
fruit. Ground color, storage scald, browu core and mealy breakdown were
determined on McIntosh fruit.

108

   
  
  
  
   
 
  
  
  
    
 
 
  
  
  
   
   

Results obtained were as follows:

1. The influence of EM rootstocks on leaf composition was
evaluated first in this study. Significant differences between rootstocks in
affecting leaf composition were obtained for every element determined with
the exception of nitrogen. The significant differences, ho Never, were not
large enough to require a change in standard leaf composition values, as
used for diagnostic purposes. to account for rootstock differences.

2. The influence of EM root stocks on fruit composition was
evaluated nex.’ in this study. Where significant differences between root-
stocks were obtained. they were rela‘ively small, with the exception of
fruit boron and zinc, which showed a wider composition range as related
to rootstocks. In general, the rootstocks which induced the hig'. and the
low leaf composition levels also induced the high and the low fruit com-
position levels.

3. The influence of varieties on leaf composition was deter-
mined. Varieties were found to affect, significantly, leaf composition
values for all the elements considered. Differences between varieties
were particularly wide for leaf potassium. If leaf composition for all
elements is considered, Red Delicious would he a variety "wit‘r a relatively
high nutrient level, Northern Spy and jonathan would be intermediate and

McIntosh would be intermediate to low in this respect.

   
 
   
   
 
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
  
    
 
   
 
 
    

It is not known whether characteristic high or low levels are related
to differences in nutrient requirements or a result of luxury consumption
in the case of high levels. The differences obtained between varieties in
affecting leaf composition were not large enough to indicate a need for a
change in standard leaf composition values as used for diagnostic purposes.

4. The influence of variety on fruit composition was studied.
Differences between varieties Were significant in this relation for all ele-
ments with the exception of molybdenum. The actual differences were
small with the exception of Jonathan fruit, which was particularly high in
iron, Red Delicious fruit, which was high in boron and McIntosh fruit,
which was high in zinc and aluminum. There was a frequent parallelism
between high and low nutrient levels in the leaves and in the fruit.

5. The seasonal variation of nutrient elements in leaves was
determined. Leaf nitrogen, potassium, phosphorus and boron showed a
decline and leaf calcium and aluminum showed an increase from the first
to the last sampling date. Leaf magnesium and manganese showed little
variation. The other leaf elements considered showed no definite seasonal
trends. These seasonal trends were similar to those reported for leaves
from trees on seedling rootstocks.

6. The influence of EM rootstocks on storage quality was
assessed. Fruit from Red Delicious on EM V showed the lowest incidence

of storage scald. Fruit from Jonathan on the vigorous EM XIII and XVI

 

lll

    
      
     

rootstocks showed the lowest incidence of fruit russeting. Rootstocks had
little or no influence on the incidence of the other disorders considered.

7. The influence of storage treatments on storage quality was
evaluated. Fruit from trees on clonal rootstocks responded to storage
treatments in a similar manner to fruit from trees on seedling rootstocks.

8. Highly significant correlations between measurements made
on leaves and fruit were determined. Some of the relations obtained were
similar to those reported previously for trees on seedling rootstocks. Other

correlations are reported here for the first time.

 

LITERATURE CITED

     
    
   
  
 

Allen, F. W., and R. M. Smock. 1938. Carbon dioxide storage of apples,
pears, plums and peaches. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 35: 193-
199.

Anonymous. 1951. Canada Department of Agriculture Fruit and Veg. Prod.
Res. Committee. 1950.

1950. Lausanne. Stations fédérales d'essais viticoles, arbori-
coles et de chimie agricole, a Lausanne et a Fully. Rapport d'activite’
1949. (Annual report of the Lausanne Horticultural Research Station
for 1949). Landw. Jb. Schweiz. 64: 729-861.

1960. VI. Plant Analysis. Report East Malling Res. Sta. for
1959., 21.

Archbold, H. K., and E. M. Widdowson. 1932. Chemical Work on Fruit.
Rept. Food Inv. Board, 1931, 260. (Gt. Brit.)

Askew, H. 0., E. Chittenden, and R. H. K. Thomson. I936. The use of
Borax in the control of "internal cork" of apples. Part I. The influ-
ence of borax top-dressing on the boron status of soil, fruit, and
leaves. New Zealand Jour. Sci. and Tech. 18: 365-375.

Ballinger, W. E. 1955. Storage of Jonathan apples in controlled atmospheres
and film crate liners. M. S. Thesis, Michigan State University
(Unpublished).

Bane, W. A. 1939. Manurial experiments with apples and pears at East
Malling, 1919-38. Report East Malling Res. Sta. for 1938: 205—208.

Batjer, L. P., and M. H. Haller. 1942. Fruit maturity and growth of
apple trees as affected by boron content (Preliminary report). Proc.
Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 40: 29-30.

, and]. R. Magness. 1938. Potassium content in leaves from
commercial apple orchards. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 36: 197-

201.

Beakbane, A. B. 1953. Report 13th Intern. Hort. Congress, London, 1952,
152-158.

112

 

113

Beattie, J. M., and C. W. Ellenwood. 1950. A survey of the nutrient status
of Ohio apple trees. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 55: 47-50.

Blanpied, G. D. 1959. Some aspects of the physiological behavior of
McIntosh apple fruits following controlled atmosphere storage.
Ph. D. Thesis, Michigan State University (Unpublished).

Bould, C., D. J. D. Nicholas, J. A. H. Tolhurst, T. Wallace, and J. M. S.
Potter. 1950. Copper deficiency of fruit trees in Britain. Nature
165: 920—921.

Boynton, D., J. C. Cain, and O. C. Compton. 1944. Soil and seasonal
influences on the chemical composition of McIntosh apple leaves in
New York. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 44: 15-23.

, and O. C. Compton. 1945. Leaf analysis in estimating the
potassium, magnesium and nitrogen needs of fruit trees. Soil
Science 59: 339-351.

1954. Fruit Nutrition. Norman F. Childers, editor, Horti-
cultural Publications, pp. 1-78.

Breviglierei, N. 1948. lndagini ed osservazioni sulla conservazione delle
mele in Palestina. (Apple storage investigations in Palestine). Riv.
Ortofrutt. 22: 159-161.

Brown, J. W. 1926. Chemical studies on the physiology of apples.
V. Methods of ash analysis and the effect of environment on the
mineral constitution of the apple. Ann. Bot. 40: 129-147.

Biinemann, G. 1958. The relation of the nutrient element content of the
leaves and fruits to the storage quality of Jonathan apples in regular
and controlled atmospheres. Ph. D. Thesis, Michigan State
University (Unpublished).

, D. H. Dewey and A. L. Kenworthy. 1959. The storage
quality of Jonathan apples in relation to the nutrient levels of the
leaves and fruits. Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Quart. Bul. 41: 820-823.

Cain, J. C. 1953a. The effect of nitrogen and potassium fertilizers on the
performance and mineral composition of apple trees. Proc. Amer.
Soc. Hort. Sci. 62: 46-52.

 

114

Cain, J. C. 1953b. The absorption and distribution of mineral nutrients
in apple trees as affected by nutrient supply. Proc. Amer. Soc.
Hort. Sci. 62: 53-66.

1955. The effect of potassium and magnesium on the absorp-
tion of nutrients by apple trees in sand culture. Proc. Amer. Soc.
Hort. Sci. 65: 25-31.

, and D. Boynton. 1948. Some effects of season, fruit crop
and nitrogen fertilization on the mineral composition of McIntosh
apple leaves. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 51: 13-22.

 

Chandler, R. F. 1936. Absorption, distribution and seasonal movement
of potassium in young apple trees and the effect of potassium ferti-
lizer on potassium and nitrogen content and growth of trees. Jour.
Agr. Res. 53: 19.

Chittenden, E., and R. H. K. Thomson. 1940. The effect of Borax on
the storage quality of Jonathan apples. New Zealand Jour. Sci.
and Tech. 21A: 352-356.

Collins. W. B. 1957. Influence of nutrition on apple storage quality.
Canada Dept. Agr. Fruit and Veg. Preserv. Res. Committee. 1956z2.

Collison, R. C. 1940. Experiments in orchard soil management: Fertilizers,
mulches and cover crops. New York State Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 691.

Dewey, D. H., W. E. Ballinger, and I. J. Pflug. 1957. Progress report on
the controlled atmosphere storage of Jonathan apples. Mich. Agr.
Exp. Sta. Quart. Bul. 39; 691-700.

Duncan, D. B. 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11: l.

Eaves, C. A., and A. Kelsal. 1954. Chemical composition of Cortland apple
leaves in relation to nutritional treatment. Jour. Hort. Sci. 29: 59-71.

Emmert, F. H. 1954a. The soluble and total phosphorus, potassium, cal-
cium and magnesium of apple leaves as affected by time and place

of sampling. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 64: 1-8.

1954b. The influence of variety, tree age and mulch on

 

 

the nutritional composition of apple leaves. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort.
Sci. 64: 9-14.

 

Haller, H. M., and L. P. Batjer. 1946. Storage quality of apples in rela-
tion to soil applications of boron. Jour. Agr. Res. 73: 243-253.

Harding, P. L. 1936. Distribution of total soluble solids and catalase in
different parts of Jonathan apples. Jour. Agr. Res. 53: 43-48.

Hatton, R. G., and N. H. Grubb. 1924. Field observations on the incidence
of leaf scorch upon the apple. Jour. Pom. and Hort. Sci. 4: 65-77.

Hill, H. 1953. Foliage analysis as a means of determining orchard ferti—
lizer requirements. Rep. 13th Intern. Hort. Congress, London, 1952:
199-214.

, and H. B. Heeney. 1952. Storage studies in relation to apple tree
nutrition. Canada Dept. Agr.,Fruit and Veg. Prod. Res. Committee
1951: 3.

, F. B. Johnston, H. B. Heeney, and R. W. Buckmaster. 1950. The
relation of foliage analysis to keeping quality of McIntosh and Spy
varieties of apples. Sci. Agr. 30: 518-534.

Hoblyn, T. N. 1940-41. Manurial trials with apple trees at East Malling,
1920-39. Jour. Pom. and Hort. Science 18: 325—343.

, and W. A. Bane. 1934. Apple manurial trials. Rep. East
Malling Res. Sta. for 1933- 59.

 

Horne, A. S. 1935. Biological work on fruit. Rep. Food Inv. Board, 1934:
165 (Great Britain).

Kenworthy, A. L. 1950. Nutrient element composition of leaves from fruit
trees. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 55: 41-46.

1960. Unpublished data. Michigan State University,
Department of Horticulture.

 

, and N. Harris. 1960. Composition of McIntosh, Red
Delicious and Golden Delicious as related to environment and season.
Department of Horticulture, Michigan State University in cooperation
with the National Apple Institute, Washington, D. C.

 

Kidd, F., and C. West. 1934. The effect of rootstock on the keeping quality
of Bramley's Seedling apples. Rep. Food Inv. Board, 1933 (Great Britain).

 

116

Kidd, F., and C. West. 1936. Recent advances in the work on refrigerated
gas-storage of fruit. Jour.. Hort. Sci. 14: 299-316.

1938. Rep. Food Inv. Board, 1937: 37 (Great Britain).

 

Lewis, L. N. 1960. Studies on the nutrition of Bartlett pear trees (Pyrus
communis L) and fire blight (Erwinia amylovora, Burr). Ph. D.
Thesis, Michigan State University (Unpublished).

 

Magness, J. R., and F. G. Taylor. 1925. An improved type of pressure
tester for the determination of fruit maturity. U. S. D. A. Cir. 350.

Mason, A. C. 1958. The concentrations of certain nutrient elements in
apple leaves taken from different positions on the shoot and at differ-
ent dates through the growing season. Jour. Hort. Sci. 33: 128-138.

, and A. B. Whitfield. 1960. Seasonal changes in the uptake
and distribution of mineral elements in apple trees. Jour. Hort. Sci.
35: 34—35.

 

 

McCall, W. W. 1960. Unpublished data. Michigan State University, Depart-
ment of Soil Science.

Merrill, S. Jr., G. F. Potter and R. T. Brown. 1957. Response of mature
tung trees on red bay soil to boron and magnesium. Proc. Amer. Soc.
Hort. Sci. 67: 160-164.

Mitchell, A. E. 1960. Unpublished data. Michigan State University, Depart-
ment of Horticulture.

Nour, M. 1959. Nutritional status of apple orchards in New Mexico. New
Mexico Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 443.

Overley, F. L., and E. L. Overholser. 1932. Some effects of fertilizer
upon storage response of Jonathan apples. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort.
Sci. 28: 572—577.

Plagge, H. H. 1942. Controlled atmosphere storage for Jonathan apples.
Refrig. Engineering 43: 215-220.

Reuther, W. , and D. Boynton. 1939. Variations in potassium content of
the foliage from certain New York orchards. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort.
Sci. 37: 32-38.

117

Ritcher, L. 1910. Mineral stoffgehalt der obstaublatter in verschiedenem
wachstumzeiten. Landw. Vers. Sta. 73: 457—478.

Roach, W. A. 1947. The role of mineral nutrition in the rootstock scion
effect. A progress report. Rep. East Malling Res. Sta., 1946: 88-
90.

. and B. D. Bolas. 1945. Section 11. IV. Biochemistry. Rep.
East Malling Res. Sta., 1944: 25.

 

Rogers, B. L., L. P. Batjer, and A. H. Thompson. 1953. Seasonal trend
of several nutrient elements in Delicious apple leaves expressed on
a percent and unit area basis. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 61: 1-5.

Rogers, W. S. 1927. Rootstock effect on colour and size of apples. Rep.
East Malling Res. Sta., 1925: (11 Supplement), 16.

, and A. B. Beakbane. 1957. Rootstock and scion relations.
Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 8: 217—236.

 

Savage, E. F. 1941. Some factors affecting the storage quality of the
Cortland apple. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 38: 282-288.

Smith, W. W. 1942. Development of the storage disorder brown core in
McIntosh apples. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 41: 99-103.

Smock, R. M. 1958. (Revised) Controlled atmosphere storage of apples.
Cornell Ext. Bul. 759: 1-36.

, and D. Boynton. 1944. The effect of differential nitrogen
treatments in the orchard on the keeping quality of McIntosh apples.
Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 45: 77—86.

 

, and E. D. Markwardt. 1955. Harvesting, handling and
packing apples. Cornell Ext. Bul. 750.

 

Sommers, I. I., and J. W. Shive. 1942. The iron-manganese relation in
plant metabolism. Plant Physiol. 17: 582-602.

Spurway, C. H., and K. Lawton. 1949. Soil testing, a practical system of
soil fertility diagnosis. 4th Rev. Ed., Michigan Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech.
Bul. 132. 39 pp.

118

Thomas, W. 1927. The seat of formation of amino acids in Pyrus malus L.
Science 66: 115-116.

 

, W. B. Mack and C. B. Smith. 1953. Leaf concentrations of
five elements in relation to optimum nutrition of a number of horti-
cultural crops. Pa. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 564.

 

Thompson, A. H., R. S. Marsh, and O. E. Schubert. 1952. A leaf analysis
survey of apple orchards in West Virginia. W. Va. Agr. Exp. Sta.
Bul. 356.

Vaidya, V. G. 1938. The seasonal cycles of ash, carbohydrate and nitro-
genous constituents in the terminal shoots of apple trees and the
effects of five vegetatively propagated rootstocks on them. 1. Total
ash and ash constituents. Jour. Pom. 16: 101-126.

Van Hiele, T. 1946. Over den invloed van den onder stam op de houdbaar
heid van fruit 1943-44. (The influence of the rootstock on the keep-
ing qualities of the fruit). Meded. Direct. Tuinb. 418-439.

Wallace, T. 1930. Factors influencing the storage qualities of fruit. Proc.
lst. lmper. Hort. Conf. London.

1931. Chemical investigations relating to potassium deficiency
of fruit trees. Jour. Pom. and Hort. Sci. 9: 111-121.

 

1956. The nutrition of fruit crops. A retrospect. Rep. East
Malling Res. Sta. 1955: 53-60.

 

Warne, L. G. G., and T. Wallace. 1935. The composition of the terminal
shoots and fruits of two varieties of apple in relation to rootstock
effects. Jour. Pom. 13: 1-31.

Weeks, W. D., F. W. Southwick, M. Drake and J. E. Steckel. 1952. The
effect of rates and sources of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium on
the mineral composition of McIntosh foliage and fruit color. Proc.
Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 60: 1.1-21.

Wilkinson, B. G. 1958. The effect of orchard factors on the chemical com-
position of apples. 11. The relationship between potassium and titrable
acidity, and between potassium and magnesium, in the fruit. Jour.
Hort. Sci. 33: 48-57.

 

 

 

 

ROOM use 0““

ROOM USE ONLY
an; 271.9% E
Jun-res-
.- fit. 4 -

W

.‘

 

   

“"‘illlliiiiiiiiillitiiiluiliiif