Upload
kathlyn-grant
View
221
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
High-density olive orchards in Israel
Dag, A., Avidan B. and Lavee, S.ARO, The Volcani Center, Israel
Birger, R, Israeli Olive Board, Israel
Objective
To facilitate the use of ‘overhead’
mechanical harvesters
↓Reduces costs relative to hand harvesting
and brings orchards into production within
a few years.
Tools
• Growth regulators
• Selection of cultivars
• Tree-training design
• Mechanical pruning
• Economic calculation
Using growth regulators to reducevegetative growth
Gibberellin inhibitors reduce branch elongation
ControlUniconazole
Effect of gibberellin inhibitors on branch elongation, cv. Barnea
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Bra
nch
elon
gati
on (
cm /
2 m
onth
)
A
BC
D
AB
D
A
A
A
CD
Effect of Uniconazole on tree height and yield of cv Barnea
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
2002 2003 2004 2005Year
Fru
it y
ield
/ t
ree
(k
g)
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
Tre
e h
eig
ht
be
fore
win
ter
pru
nin
g (
cm
)
Control0.1 g/tree Uniconazol / soil applicationגובה ביקורתגובה טיפול
Height
Yield
Using growth regulators to reducevegetative growth – side effects
Loosely hanging Branches
Promotion of lateral-bud development
ControlUniconazole
Using growth regulators to reducevegetative growth – conclusions
• Growth regulators can reduce tree growth.
• Growth inhibition may be followed by increased fruit set.
• 0.1 g/tree Uniconazole in soil application gave the best results in terms of growth inhibition and fruit set.
Performance of different varieties in ‘High-density’ orchards, Golan Heights, 2005/6.
CultivarCultivarFruit yield Fruit yield
(kg/ha.)(kg/ha.)
% of oil% of oilOil yieldOil yield
(kg/ha.)(kg/ha.)
Leccino6,76015.31,034
Arbequina11,58018.92,195
Barnea5,69019.61,110
Maalot1,98022.2442
Askal10,60026.42,800
Souri1,96417.3340
Picholine7,27318.91,371
Korneiki9,81123.12,269
CultivarCultivarFruit yield Fruit yield
(kg/ha.)(kg/ha.)
% of oil% of oilOil yieldOil yield
(kg/ha.)(kg/ha.)
Leccino10,48020.32,139
Arbequina17,64020.23,560
Barnea12,03022.52,700
Maalot6,41027.51,762
Askal
Souri7,10720.81,480
Picholine9,14019.21,756
Korneiki16,52022.12,421
Performance of different varieties in ‘High-density’ orchards, Golan Heights, 2006/7.
Tree-shaping design
Central leader:‘Y-form’:Cordon:
Effect of different training systems on tree Effect of different training systems on tree growth in a high-density orchard-Magal, 2005growth in a high-density orchard-Magal, 2005..
CultivarCultivarTrainingTraining system systemLeaf area indexLeaf area index
33rdrd year year 44thth year year
BarneaCentral leader4.9 a6.1 bc
BarneaY- trellis4.3 b6.3 bc
BarneaCordon3.3 c5.8 cd
ArbequinaCentral leader4.8 a7.1 a
ArbequinaY- trellis4.3 b5.6 cd
ArbequinaCordon3.4 c5.5 cd
MaalotCentral leader5.0 a6.0 ab
MaalotY- trellis4.0 b5.9 c
MaalotCordon2.7 d7.7 d
Effect of different training systems on tree Effect of different training systems on tree growth in a high-density orchard-Magal, 2005growth in a high-density orchard-Magal, 2005..
CultivarCultivarTraining systemTraining systemYield Yield
Fruit (kg/tree) Fruit (kg/tree) Oil (kg/ha)Oil (kg/ha)
BarneaCentral leader8.72,522
BarneaY- trellis6.01,739
BarneaCordon1.3362
ArbequinaCentral leader7.71,990
ArbequinaY- trellis5.41,420
ArbequinaCordon1.1285
MaalotCentral leader3.81,043
MaalotY- trellis0.6173
MaalotCordon0.254
Effect of different training systems in a high density orchard – conclusions
• The heavy pruning required to achieve a ‘Cordon’ tree shape delays tree development and reduces yield the first year.
• This delayed development is disappearing in the second year.
• Cultivar-yield ranking was:
‘Barnea’ > ‘Arbequina’ > ‘Maalot’.
• Highest leftover fruit at harvest: ‘Arbequina’ (ca. 15%)
• A small number of trees were uprooted during harvesting, mainly in the ‘Y’-form pruning system.
השפעת שיטת העיצוב על יבול 2006 בשלושה זנים, מגל
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Y זקוף קורדון
שיטת העיצוב
ד')ג/
ק")
שבחו
מרי
פל
בו י
ארבקינה
ברנע
Aמעלות
A
B
a
ab
b
א
אא
השפעת הזן ושיטת העיצוב על יבול שנתי ממוצע (2005-06)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
Y זקוף קורדון Y זקוף קורדון Y זקוף קורדון
ארבקינה ברנע מעלות
זן ושיטת עיצוב
ד')ג/
ק"ב (
שחו
מל
בוי
השפעת הזן ושיטת העיצוב על יבולי השמן מגל 2005 / 6
0.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
350.0
400.0
450.0
Y זקוף קורדון Y זקוף קורדון Y זקוף קורדון
ארבקינה ברנע מעלות
זן ושיטת עיצוב
ד')ג/
ק"ב (
שחו
ממן
של
בוי
2005
2006
ממוצע 2005-6
A
B
C
A
A
B
A
A
B
a
b
c
a
a
a
a
a
b
א
ב
א
א
אא
א
ב
אב
דרך השמןדרך השמן
עיצוב מטע לבוצרת- היקף גזע05באר חייל, דצמבר
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
ʣʧ ʯʥʣyʥ̫ʬʫʩʣʣʁ
ʮ
ʬʫr ʥ̫ʦʮ
ʥʣʯʥʣyʥ̫ʮ ʬʫʩʣʣʁ
Vʮ ʬʫ Yʮ ʬʫ ʮ ʬʫr ʥ̫ʦ
ʮʱ
ʲʦʢʤr
ʷʩʤ
ʤhʩʨy ʥ̫ʲ ʰʸ ʡc
abb
d
ab a
B
A
B
C
B
A
השפעת שיטת העיצוב על היקף הגזע -באר חייל - 6.8.06
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
קורדון חד צדדיכל 1.5מ'
זקוף כל 1.5מ' קורדון דו צדדיכל 3מ'
Vכל 3 מ' Yכל 3מ' זקוף כל 3 מ'
טיפול
מ)ס"
ע (גז
הף
קהי
ברנע
קורטינה
עיצוב מטע לבוצרת, קורטינה- שטף קרינה,
06באר חייל, מרץ
0.000
0.500
1.000
1.500
2.000
2.500
3.000
קורדון חד צדדי כל1.5 מ'
זקוף כל 1.5 מ' קורדון דו צדדי כל3 מ'
Vכל 3 מ' Yכל 3 מ' זקוף כל 3 מ'
טיפול
LA
I
עיצוב מטע לבוצרת, ברנע- שטף קרינה06באר חייל, מרץ
0.000
0.500
1.000
1.500
2.000
2.500
3.000
3.500
4.000
4.500
קורדון חד צדדי כל1.5 מ'
זקוף כל 1.5 מ' קורדון דו צדדי כל3 מ'
Vכל 3 מ' Yכל 3 מ' זקוף כל 3 מ'
טיפול
LA
I
השפעת שיטת העיצוב על LAI (מדידה באמצעות ספטומטר) רביבים 6.8.06
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
קורדון חד צדדיכל 1.5מ'
זקוף כל 1.5מ' קורדון דו צדדיכל 3מ'
Vכל 3 מ' Yכל 3מ' זקוף כל 3 מ'
טיפול
LAI
ברנעקורטינה
בניסוי שיטות עיצוב- באר 2006יבולי חייל
טיפוליבול (לשורה)
מ3ברנע, זקוף, ק"ג712
מ'1.5ברנע- זקוף, ק"ג759
מ'3קורטינה, זקוף, ק"ג120
מ'1.5קורטינה, זקוף, ק"ג209
17.1%, קורטינה: 12.5%אחוזי שמן (אבנקור)- ברנע:
Comparing productivity and harvesting costs: Comparing productivity and harvesting costs: high-density orchards vs. trunk-shaking high-density orchards vs. trunk-shaking
cultivation systemscultivation systems Traditional olive orchards –
ca. 10 x 10 m
Intensive olive orchards – ca. 4 x 7 - 7 x 7 m
High-density olive orchards – ca. 2-2.5 x 4 m ?
Comparing productivity and harvesting costs: Comparing productivity and harvesting costs: high-density orchard vs. trunk-shaking high-density orchard vs. trunk-shaking cultivation systemscultivation systems – harvesting costs– harvesting costs
• ‘Trunk shaker’- 1,650$ / ha.
• ‘Overhead harvester’- 533$/ ha.
Olive yield (kg/ha) in two adjacent ‘Arbequina’ plots: one plot pruned for ‘overhead’ harvester,
other plot pruned for ‘trunk-shaker’, Halutza 2003-6.
2003200420052006Average
Trunk-shaker7,03013,7205,54017,5009,365
Overhead
harvester (act.)
3,2008,3805,54010,6606,945
Overhead
harvester (cal.)*
5,60014,6609,70018,66412,156
* Calculated for 4 m between rows
Comparing productivity and harvesting Comparing productivity and harvesting costs: high-density orchard vs. trunk-costs: high-density orchard vs. trunk-
shaking cultivation systems- conclusionsshaking cultivation systems- conclusions
• Reduction in harvest costs
• Not much change in fruit yield
• Higher costs in orchards establishment
Mechanical pruning
Topping:Hedging:After thepruning:
Mechanical pruning – Results
• Four different regimes of topping and hedging with the high-vigor ‘Barnea’ cv.
• Yield ranged from 1.3 to 4.6 kg/tree for the different treatments
(differences not significant).
• Low yields seem to be the result of heavy pruning, which reduced the proportion of fruit-bearing shoots.
- Small proportion of leafs and branches- Small proportion of leafs and branches-Relatively low level of damage to the harvested fruit Relatively low level of damage to the harvested fruit
Jojoba HarvesterJojoba Harvester
AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements
• Kibutz Magal, Kibutz Gshur,Hulda, Halutza
• R & D Ramat Negev
• Chief Scientist – Ministry of Agriculture
• Technicians; Izak Zipory, Yair Meny, Yulia Sabutin, Moshe Aharon
• Ehud Hanoch; Yonis Morira
Thank You