HARRY L. AN ORIS TABLE GRAPE HANDLING PRACTISES CARDINAL AND RIBIER - 1972 Frederik L. Jensen - Extension Viticulturlst, Kearney Field Station • George Leavitt - Staff Research Associate, Kearney Field Station Both Cardinals and Ribiers require extensive hand work in their culture. Some of these practises have not been fully evaluated in terms of time re¬ quired or the effects on the fruit quality. 1. Cardinals - Kearney Field Station These second-crop vines were in the high-level cordon, wide croparm vineyard. Eight treatments with 12 single vine replications were applied in a randomized complete block. Time for the first treatment was recorded as was the time required for the second treatment on June Ik, This second operation consisted of removing all leaves in the cluster area to expose the fruit. Fruit was harvested from only 3 treatments as shown in Table 1. The overall quality of all was poor with rather small, fairly straggly clusters containing medium-sized berries. There are no significant differences in . total time nor maturity. The yield of the "all basal leaves removed" is significantly below that where only two basal leaves were removed. Sample size for maturity was 50 berries per vine. 2. Ribiers - Kearney Field Station These are third or fourth crop vines in the mother block, trained fairly low, and are vigorous vines. Ten single vine replications of three treatments were applied in a randomized complete block. On May 3, the vines were suckered to two shoots per spur, and to the two distal clusters per shoot with the shoulders removed. The treatments are those shown in Table 2.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
HARRY L. ANORISTABLE GRAPE HANDLING PRACTISES
CARDINAL AND RIBIER - 1972
Frederik L. Jensen - Extension Viticulturlst, Kearney Field Station •
George Leavitt - Staff Research Associate, Kearney Field Station
Both Cardinals and Ribiers require extensive hand work in their culture.
Some of these practises have not been fully evaluated in terms of time re¬
quired or the effects on the fruit quality.
1. Cardinals - Kearney Field Station
These second-crop vines were in the high-level cordon, wide croparm
vineyard. Eight treatments with 12 single vine replications were applied
in a randomized complete block. Time for the first treatment was recorded
as was the time required for the second treatment on June Ik, This second
operation consisted of removing all leaves in the cluster area to expose
the fruit.
Fruit was harvested from only 3 treatments as shown in Table 1. The
overall quality of all was poor with rather small, fairly straggly clusters
containing medium-sized berries. There are no significant differences in .
total time nor maturity. The yield of the "all basal leaves removed" is
significantly below that where only two basal leaves were removed.
Sample size for maturity was 50 berries per vine.
2. Ribiers - Kearney Field Station
These are third or fourth crop vines in the mother block, trained
fairly low, and are vigorous vines. Ten single vine replications of three
treatments were applied in a randomized complete block.
On May 3, the vines were suckered to two shoots per spur, and to the
two distal clusters per shoot with the shoulders removed. The treatments
are those shown in Table 2.
On Jime 29-30, the leaves around the clusters were removed to expose
the clusters. There were significant differences in time required between
treatments in these strong-growing vines. The sideshoots were especially
difficult to remove in treatment 2 since they were large and had to be cut
off with clippers. Canes were also thrown over the crossarms but this
operation was not included in the time.
At harvest, there were differences in total yield but yields of
packable fruit were greater. Most of treatment 3 fruit was straggly with
numerous shot berries. There were no differences in maturity but the berry
weight was significantly smaller in treatment 3 where all the leaves had
been removed past the clusters in April.
Sample size for berry weight and maturity was 60 berries per vine.
3. Ribiers - Mark Zaninovich, Delano
The vines were about 15 years old, of medium vigor, trained to a con¬
ventional trellis. Six treatments of 10 single vine replications were
applied in a randomized complete block. Only 3 treatments were harvested.
The vines were handled, suckered and flower-cluster thinned in a manner
similar to the previous trial. The vines were size-girdled by the owner on
June 1 when the fruit measured about 10 mm in diameter. Leaves around the
clusters were removed shortly thereafter.
The results in Table 3 show no differences in time required for the.3
treatments, nor any difference in maturity. The berry weight was signifi¬
cantly less where all the leaves were removed past the last cluster than
where either no leaves or two basal leaves were removed.
Sample size was 100 berries per vine.
Suimnary
These preliminary trials indicate that no leaves should be removed from
the shoot pre-bloom. The effects of such removal may have the undesirable
effects of:
a) Decreasing yield of packable fruit due to a poor set -