Light interception in apple trees influenced by canopy architecture manipulation

Improvement of light penetration within tree canopies has been a constant objective of fruit tree architecture manipulation through the setting up of training systems. Recently, centrifugal training, i.e. the removal of fruiting shoots in the tree centre and on the underside of branches, has been proposed to improve fruit size and colour as well as return-bloom as compared to conventional solaxe-trained trees with equivalent crop loads. The present study was conducted to quantify the benefits of centrifugal training on light interception by the fruiting shoots via computer-assisted three-dimensional representations of foliage geometry. Data were collected on six 5-year-old apple trees cv.Galaxy, trained either with solaxe or centrifugal training systems, using an electromagnetic 3D digitiser. The 3D distribution of the foliage in the tree canopy was recreated by combining both the spatial locations of shoots (as measured from 3D digitising) and foliage reconstruction. Light interception efficiency properties of the trees were characterised by silhouette to total area ratio (STAR) values computed from images of the 3D mock-ups. Compared to the solaxe system, centrifugal training significantly improved the STAR of the whole tree by 20%. It also increased both leaf area and STAR of the fruiting shoots by approximately 15%, regardless of their position in the canopy. In this paper, we discuss the role of this enhanced light interception by the canopy in increasing the autonomy of the fruiting shoot, i.e. improved fruit size and colour, and return-bloom.

[1]  H. Sinoquet,et al.  Measurement and visualization of the architecture of an adult tree based on a three-dimensional digitising device , 1997, Trees.

[2]  I. J. Warrington,et al.  Influence of Orientation and Position of Fruiting Laterals on Canopy Light Penetration, Yield, and Fruit Quality of ‘Granny Smith’ Apple , 1988, Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science.

[3]  J. D. Dulk.  The interpretation of remote sensing : a feasibility study , 1989 .

[4]  D. Tustin,et al.  The influence of orchard row canopy discontinuity on irradiance and leaf area distribution iii apple trees , 1998 .

[5]  J. D. Quinlan,et al.  The Influence of Shoot Competition on Fruit Retention and Cropping of Apple Trees , 1971 .

[6]  H. Sinoquet,et al.  Assessment of the three-dimensional architecture of walnut trees using digitising , 1997 .

[7]  F. Baret,et al.  Spatial and Temporal Variation of Light inside Peach Trees , 1994 .

[8]  P. Lauri,et al.  Apple tree training in France: current concepts and practical implications , 1999 .

[9]  J. Palmer.  COMPUTED EFFECTS OF SPACING ON LIGHT INTERCEPTION AND DISTRIBUTION WITHIN HEDGEROW TREES IN RELATION TO PRODUCTIVITY , 1981 .

[10]  A. Lakso.  ASPECTS OF CANOPY PHOTOSYNTHESIS AND PRODUCTIVITY IN THE APPLE TREE , 1981 .

[11]  Hervé Sinoquet,et al.  Modeling radiative transfer in mixed and row intercropping systems , 1992 .

[12]  D. L. Abbott.  THE BOURSE SHOOT AS A FACTOR IN THE GROWTH OF APPLE FRUITS , 1960 .

[13]  F. Baret,et al.  A 3D peach canopy model used to evaluate the effect of tree architecture and density on photosynthesis at a range of scales , 2000 .

[14]  L. C. Grappadelli,et al.  Early Season Patterns of Carbohydrate Partitioning in Exposed and Shaded Apple Branches , 1994 .

[15]  H. Sinoquet,et al.  Characterization of the Light Environment in Canopies Using 3D Digitising and Image Processing , 1998 .

[16]  B. Barritt,et al.  Light Level Influences Spur Quality and Canopy Development and Light Interception Influence Fruit Production in Apple , 1991 .

[17]  P. Lauri,et al.  THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CULTIVAR FRUITING-TYPE AND FRUITING BRANCH CHARACTERISTICS IN APPLE TREES , 1993 .

[18]  L. C. Grappadelli,et al.  Measurement and Modeling of Carbon Balance of the Apple Tree , 1997 .

[19]  Pierre-Eric Lauri,et al.  Relationship between the early development of apple fruiting branches and the regularity of bearing—An approach to the strategies of various cultivars , 1997 .

[20]  L. C. Grappadelli,et al.  IMPLICATIONS OF PRUNING AND TRAINING PRACTICES TO CARBON PARTITIONING AND FRUIT DEVELOPMENT IN APPLE , 1992 .

[21]  E. W. Hewett,et al.  Wood age and leaf area influence fruit size and mineral composition of apple fruit , 1994 .

[22]  Terence L. Robinson,et al.  The Bases of Productivity in Apple Production Systems: The Role of Light Interception by Different Shoot Types , 1996 .

[23]  Alan N. Lakso,et al.  The Relationship Between Leaf Area and Light Interception by Spur and Extension Shoot Leaves and Apple Orchard Productivity , 2000 .

[24]  N. Keutgen,et al.  Photosynthetic acclimation of apple spur leaves to summer-pruning , 2002 .

[25]  S. Sansavini,et al.  CANOPY EFFICIENCY OF APPLE AS AFFECTED BY MICROCLIMATIC FACTORS AND TREE STRUCTURE , 1992 .

[26]  Pauline Stenberg,et al.  Simulations of the effects of shoot structure and orientation on vertical gradients in intercepted light by conifer canopies. , 1996, Tree physiology.

[27]  A. Takenaka,et al.  Effects of leaf blade narrowness and petiole length on the light capture efficiency of a shoot , 1994, Ecological Research.

[28]  Pierre-Eric Lauri,et al.  THE CONCEPT OF CENTRIFUGAL TRAINING IN APPLE AIMED AT OPTIMIZING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GROWTH AND FRUITING , 2004 .

[29]  Hervé Sinoquet,et al.  RATP: a model for simulating the spatial distribution of radiation absorption, transpiration and photosynthesis within canopies: application to an isolated tree crown , 2001 .

[30]  Pierre-Eric Lauri,et al.  Shoot type demography and dry matter partitioning: a morphometric approach in apple (Malus ×domestica) , 2001 .

[31]  J. M. Lespinasse,et al.  REGULATION OF FRUITING IN APPLE ROLE OF THE BOURSE AND CROWNED BRINDLES , 1993 .

[32]  J. M. Lespinasse,et al.  APPLE TREE MANAGEMENT IN VERTICAL AXIS: APPRAISAL AFTER TEN YEARS OF EXPERIMENTS , 1986 .