Plant Architecture to Boost Quality Production in Fruit crops

1. Plant Architecture to Boost Quality Production
in Fruit crops

2. CONTENTS
1. Plant architecture- Importance, definition and classification
2. Canopy architecture management :
 Principles
 Steps
 Course of action
 Techniques
3. Case studies
4. Future prospects
5. Conclusion
2

3. 3
2. Dense, over-
crowded and
bearing is confined
to upper periphery
of shoots.
1. Unproductive
orchards in vast
stretch in fruit
belts.
5. Difficulty in
intercultural
operations.
4. Reduced
Productivity and
poor quality of
the produce.
3. Development of micro-
climate inside the canopy.
WHY PLANT ARCHITECTURE MANAGEMENT?

4. 4
6. Plant architecture management holds an important meaning in newly planted
orchards as well .
It has become an integral part of high density planting because HDP won’t be
successful without the use of the principles of plant architecture management .

5. 5
 Fruit production involves the capturing and conversion of sunlight into the
production of fruit biomass.
 The main controlling factors: amount of incoming radiation, the percentage of
radiation intercepted.
 The overall productivity of fruit crops depends on several factors, out of which poor
plant architecture management is one of the most important factors.
Sharma et al., 2019

6. PLANT ARCHITECTURE
Plant architecture is defined as the three-dimensional organization of the plant body.
It includes the branching pattern, size, shape, position of leaves, flower organs,
root structure and length, etc. (Reinhardt and Kuhlemeier, 2002). 6

7. SALIENT FEATURES:
1) It is species specific.
2) Influenced by light, temperature, humidity, nutrients, etc.
3) Influences the suitability of a plant for its cultivation, yield and the
efficiency with which it can be harvested.
4) It has long been the only criteria for systematic and taxonomic
classification and even today, it is the best means of identifying a plant
species.
7

8. 8
SHOOT SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE
MAIN STEM
Architecture of a plant is divided
into two parts:
1. Shoot System Architecture: It
includes the architecture of above
ground portion of the plant.
 Determined by organization and
activities of different meristems
like apical, axillary, intercalary
meristems, etc. (Wang et al., 2018).
Secondary
scaffolds
Primary
scaffolds
Tertiary
scaffolds

9. 2. Root System Architecture: Root system architecture refers to the spatial
configuration of the root system (Lynch, 1995).
It includes structural features of root like root length, spread, number,
length of lateral roots, depth and distribution, etc. 9
ROOT SYSTEM
ARCHITECTURE
Source: www.aplustree.com

10. 10
Since much of the research on root traits has thus far been focussed on most
common cereal crops, model plants, there is scanty information available on
the fruit crops and its importance is so vast in the present era which makes it
a researchable issue in fruit crops.
IMPORTANCE OF ROOT SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE IN FRUIT CROPS

11. CANOPY ARCHITECTURE MANAGEMENT
A series of operations on the above ground portion of the tree, aiming towards
maximized production of quality fruits per unit canopy area. It affects various quality
parameters of fruits like fruit colour, fruit weight, T.S.S., acidity, etc.
11
Canopy/Crown
Trunk
Branches Leaves

12. • Enough space for air
circulation inside canopy.
12
• Sufficient fruiting
branches.
• Optimum crotch angle
in scaffolds.
• Healthy, strong and
well distributed
framework of secondary
and tertiary branches
• Healthy foliage with
high photosynthetic
efficiency to maximize
the solar radiation use
efficiency.
• Optimum root/shoot
ratio.
FEATURES OF AN IDEAL CANOPY

13. PRINCIPLES
1. Maximum penetration and utilization of light.
2. Facilitating aeration inside the canopy.
3. Avoidance of built-up microclimate.
4. Controlled plant stature.
5. To facilitate the cultural practices.
6. To increase input use efficiency
7. Maximizing productivity with quality fruit production.
8. Economy in obtaining the required canopy architecture.
13

14. STEPS
14
6. Pruning of the shoots and excessive growth.
4. Centre opening of full grown trees.
5. Allow the canopy to grow horizontally.
3. Training the plants with appropriate training system.
2. Initial frame development.
1. Selecting an appropriate planting system.

15. HOW TO DECIDE CORRECT COURSE OF ACTION?
Analysis of architectural aspects in plant like:
 Angling of branches
 Pattern of branching
 Understanding the processes like:
 Bearing habit
 Action of growth hormones
 Understanding the level of influence of environment on architecture at a point
of time/location.
 Objective for which canopy management is done.
15

16. TECHNIQUES – CANOPY ARCHITECTURE MANAGEMENT
1. Training
2. Pruning
3. Use of dwarfing rootstocks, interstocks and dwarf cultivars
4. Use of growth retardants
16

17. 1. TRAINING
The judicious removal of a plant part to develop a proper shape of plant to make it
capable of bearing heavy crop load. For this purpose plant can be tied, pruned,
fastened or staked.
Objectives:
1) To develop a strong framework.
2) To control vegetative vigour.
3) To increase light exposure for fruits/foliage
4) To remove water sprouts.
5) To have better crotch angle between
scaffold branches of the tree.
6) To facilitate pruning, harvesting and promote mechanization.
17

18. Methods of training are broadly classified into 3 categories:
1. Old conventional methods: For low density plantings include Central Leader
system, Open Centre system and Modified Central Leader system.
2. Somewhat more recently established for high density planting system of
dwarf and semi-dwarf apple trees: Espalier and cordon, etc.
3. Recently established systems for Ultra high density planting of apple:
Slender Spindle, Vertical Axis, etc.
18

19. 1. CONVENTIONAL METHODS
Apples, Pears, Pecans, Plums
19

20. Peach, Nectarines
20

21. Pistachios, Walnuts, Chestnuts 21

22. 2. FOR HIGH DENSITY PLANTING
22
Espalier system Cordon system

23. Slender spindle Vertical axis
3. FOR ULTRA HIGH DENSITY PLANTING
23

24. 24
TRAINING SYSTEM IN VINES
Head system Bower system

25. 25

26.  Proper and judicious removal of plant parts to obtain better and quantitative yield.
 Types: Winter pruning and Summer pruning
Objectives:
1) To control flowering and fruiting of a tree.
2) To obtain regular bearing.
3) To maintain balance between reproductive
and vegetative phase of a plant.
4) To remove diseased, damaged, insect infested
and weak shoots.
2. PRUNING
26

27. 5) To increase longevity of the tree.
6)To get maximum returns from the
orchard.
7) To thin out flowers and fruits.
8)To ensure access to sunlight to bearing
shoots.
27

28. Before pruning, we should know about the bearing habit of the trees.
• Terminal or axillary bearer.
• Bears on old season growth or on current season growth.
28
S.no. Fruit crop Pruning period
1. Apple, Pear, Peach, Plum February - March
2 Phalsa and Grape mid – December to mid - January
3. Ber May - June
4. Mango July – August
5. Guava April – first week of May (For crop regulation)

29. 1. Heading back
2. Thinning out
3. Ringing/ Girdling
4. Notching
5. Nicking
6. Root pruning
7. Leaf pruning
METHODS OF PRUNING
29

30. 30
Heading back

31. 31
Thinning out

32. 32
Girdling

33. 33
Notching Nicking

34. Root pruning
34

35. 3. DWARFING ROOTSTOCKS/INTERSTOCKS/DWARF CULTIVARS
A fruit tree rootstock is the stump of a related
species which already has an established, healthy
root system, and to which a separate budwood is
joined by grafting or budding (Thomas and
Morgan, 2003). The resulting fruit tree will be
stronger, quicker to establish and will take on the
desirable features of the rootstock itself.
 Two types: seedling and clonal rootstocks.
35

36.  Interstems or interstocks are inserted
between rootstock and scion to form “three
piece” trees to overcome the incompatibility
barriers between stock and scion and also it
reduces the high vigour of desirable
rootstocks (Nimbolkar et al., 2016).
 This technique aims to reduce the vigor of
plants, increase yield efficiency and improve
fruit quality.
36

37. EFFECT OF ROOTSTOCK ON SCION
1. Tree size and vigour
2. Precocity in flowering and fruiting
3. Fruit set and yield
4. Fruit size and quality
5. Nutrient status of scion
6. Winter hardiness
7. Disease resistance
8. Ability to resist soil adverse
conditions
37
Jayswal and Lal, 2021

38. EXAMPLES OF DWARFING ROOTSTOCKS
Fruit trees Rootstocks
Citrus Trifoliate Orange, Flying Dragon, Soh Sarkar
Apple M27, M9, M26
Plum Pixi
Peach Prunus besseyi
Cherry Colt and Charger
Pear Quince C
Guava Psidium friederichsthalianum, Aneuploid - 82
Mango Rumani, Vellaikolamban
Singh et al., 2021
38

39. M27 M9 M26 MM106 MM111 M25
39

40. 40
Crop Commercially dwarf cultivars Desirable features
Mango Amrapali Precocious and bears regularly
Papaya Pusa Nanha, Red Lady 786 Dwarf and bears regularly
Banana Dwarf Cavendish, Pusa Dwarf High yielding with dwarf stature
Apple Red Chief, Oregan Dwarf, good quality fruits and
high yielding
Cherry Compact Lambert, Meteor and North
Star
High yielding and dwarf
Peach Red Heaven, Candor Dwarf and high yielding
Sapota PKM-1, PKM-3 Dwarf tree stature
Guava Pant Prabhat Less spreading, High yielder
EXAMPLES OF GENETICALLY DWARF SCION
Subedi et al., 2020

41. The group of the bioregulators that if used in appropriate concentration, modify a
plant in its growth and developmental behaviour without including phytotoxic or
malformative effects, including synthetic substances known as growth retardants.
(Wani et al., 2021).
They are of three types:
 Onium compounds such as Cycocel and Meliquat chloride.
 Pyrimidines such as Ancymidol and Flurprimidol.
 Triazoles such as Paclobutrazol and Uniconazole.
4. GROWTH RETARDANTS
41

42. They influence the plant architecture in a typical fashion, such as
1. Inhibition of shoot growth (plant height, internode elongation, leaf area)
with unchanged number of internodes and leaves and with intensified
green leaf pigmentation.
2. Maintained or slightly promoted root growth.
Wani et al ., 2021
42

43. Crop Chemical Reference
Litchi PBZ @ 2.5 g tree-1 Ahmad et al., 2000
Mango PBZ @ 3 g a.i. tree-1
as soil drench
Sarkar et al., 1998
Avocado PBZ @ 2 g tree-1
as soil drench
Kohne and Kohne, 1990
Guava Ethephon @ 1000 ppm, PBZ @
1000 ppm
Singh, 2005
43
RECOMMENDATIONS OF GROWTH RETARDANTS FOR SOME FRUIT
CROPS

44. 44

45. 45
Case Study:1
This experiment was conducted to standardize the canopy architecture of rejuvenated
mango plants of cv. Amrapali planted at closer spacing. For this, 24 years old mango trees
planted at 5m x 5m spacing were taken.

46. Effect of canopy management after rejuvenation pruning on plant growth
parameters and yield of mango cv. Amrapali
TREATMENTS ON CANOPY ARCHITECTURE HEIGHT (m) CANOPY SPREAD (m) YIELD (kg/tree)
RP 1 m + PS 60 cm + SS 60 cm 4.05 5.5 37.99
RP 1 m + PS 120 cm + SS 60 cm 4.32 5.1 9.35
RP 1 m + PS 60 cm + no control on secondary shoot 4.37 4.8 51.68
RP 1.5 m + PS 60 cm + SS 60 cm 4.60 5.15 51.44
RP 1.5 m + PS 120 cm + SS 60 cm 4.75 4.95 47.09
RP 1.5 m + PS 60 cm + no control on secondary shoot 4.33 5.13 57.44
RP 2 m + PS 60 cm + SS 60 cm 5.07 5.3 51.95
RP 2 m + PS 120 cm + SS 60 cm 4.9 4.9 43.02
Sem± 0.17 0.23 15.81
CD at 5% 0.48 NS 32.27
46
RP- Rejuvenation pruning, PS- Primary shoot, SS- Secondary shoot

47. Pruning at 1.0 m height, 60 cm length of primary shoot and no control on the
length of secondary shoot were found to be the most appropriate treatment to attain
an adequate canopy architecture in unproductive mango plants of cv. Amrapali planted
at close spacing.
47

48. 48
Case Study:2
Treatment comprised of 3 apple varieties (Coe Red Fuji, Granny Smith and Spartan)
grafted on M9 rootstock and trained on two tree architecture (Vertical axis architecture
and Cordon tree architecture) at 0.75 m x 1.5 m spacing.

49. 49
Cultivar Annual
extension
growth(cm2)
Trunk girth
(cm)
TCA (cm2) Yield
(kg/tree)
Yield (t/ha) Yield
efficiency
(kg/cm2)
Fruit wt. (g)
CRF x
VATA
102.34 16.7 23.66 10.92 84.63 0.45 160.91
CRF x CTA 94.77 15.66 18.75 6.44 57.06 0.33 167.14
GS x VATA 76.08 14.07 16.48 4.05 36.01 0.23 116.82
GS x CTA 94.27 13.39 17.43 2.32 20.61 0.13 158.64
SP x VATA 95.68 12.20 1.87 2.93 26.24 0.24 153.49
SP x CTA 93.56 12.33 12.18 0.96 8.60 0.06 136.09
CD (P=
0.05)
6.43 N.S. N.S. 1.42 3.96 0.02 19.44
CRF= Coe Red Fuji, GS= Granny Smith, SP= Spartan, VATA= Vertical axis tree architecture,
CTA= Cordon tree architecture
The growth, productivity and quality were found superior in Coe Red Fuji on vertical
axis tree architecture under intensive orchard system in apple.

50. Case Study:3
50

51. Rootstock Plant height
(m)
Canopy
volume (m3)
Fruit wt.(g) Juice % TSS (°B) Acidity (%) Ascorbic acid
(mg/100 mL juice)
Rough Lemon 2.20 30.45 39.28 45.84 9.08 5.60 53.60
Attani-2 1.72 15.48 46.57 41.81 8.48 5.21 67.10
Jatti Khatti 1.73 11.96 43.60 39.23 8.85 5.55 64.98
Billikichli 1.89 16.14 41.55 36.77 8.83 5.87 69.10
Sour Orange 1.72 14.12 44.77 39.64 9.18 5.90 57.37
RLC-4 2.1 24.1 50.37 44.15 9.23 6.02 73.20
Karna
Khatta
1.74 16.30 46.43 41.14 8.93 6.02 43.41
Troyer
Citrange
2.01 12.03 42.85 38.10 8.62 6.14 72.90
LSD
(P<0.05)
0.32 4.40 2.61 5.43 0.37 0.41 2.8
When Kagzi Kalan lemon plants were budded on RLC-4 rootstock , superior quality
fruits were observed with highest fruit weight, TSS, acidity and ascorbic acid.
51

52. Case Study:4
52

53. Effect of square, rectangular system of planting on light interception (%) and quality
parameters of litchi
Treatments
Light
interception
(%) below
Canopy
Light
interception
(%)
upper
canopy
Fruit yield
(kg/plant)
Fruit yield
(t/ha)
Acidity (%) TSS (°B)
Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean
2m x 2m 47.8 84.52 3.65 8.26 0.91 18.15
3m x 3m 57.92 88.25 6.1 7.10 0.72 19.15
4m x 4m 72.97 90.05 14.05 8.56 0.73 19.00
5m x 5m 75.82 93.62 20.97 8.29 0.80 20.19
6m x 6m 74.97 94.02 40.12 10.13 0.81 20.73
8m x 8m 80.22 96.88 50.05 8.216 0.73 20.19
C.D at 5% 4.748 3.631 1 0.575 0.09 1.207
SE(m) ± 1.561 1.194 0.329 0.189 0.03 0.397
53

54. Treatments
Light
interception
(%) below
Canopy
Light
interception
(%)
upper
canopy
Fruit Yield
(kg/plant)
Fruit yield
(t/ha)
Acidity (%) TSS (°B)
Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean
4m x 3m 59.8 85.02 16.51 12.88 0.79 19.56
5m x 3m 54.32 84.35 11.22 7.48 0.85 19.41
6m x 4m 59.40 87.82 33.38 15.87 0.77 20.46
8m x 4m 68.20 92.22 42.35 20.33 0.64 21.17
C.D at 5% 2.84 4.968 3.067 3.827 0.078 0.761
SE(m) ± 0.934 1.633 1.008 1.258 0.026 0.25
For high quality production from less land with efficient harnessing of natural
resources and appropriate planting geometry, planting of Shahi cv. of litchi at 8m x 4m
distance can be recommended to the farmers to obtain higher yield.
54

55. 55
Case Study:5

56. 56
Methods No. of
inflorescen
ce
developed
Avg. fruit
set/20
panicles
Total
fruit no.
per tree
Total fruit
weight per
tree (kg)
Avg. fruit
weight
(kg)
TSS
(°B)
Total
sugar (%)
Total non structural
carbohydrate
(mg/100g of DW)
Soil 165.25 6.53 253.17 95.77 0.371 14.77 12.9 176.25
Spray 128 5.95 177.75 68.35 0.378 14.26 12.1 165.0
SED 14.64 0.39 16.76 11.28 0.02 0.23 0.41 3.69
Rates
2.75g 131.8 6.28 183.7 66.12 0.362 14.42 12.72 168.2
5.5g 160 7.95 247.0 93.28 0.368 14.67 12.77 176.0
8.25g 188.5 6.44 299.3 121 0.398 15.63 12.93 189.0
Control 104.17 4.29 131.80 47.85 0.360 13.33 11.22 149.3
LSD
(P<0.05)
20.7 0.55 23.71 15.95 0.03 0.22 0.41 5.21
Paclobutrazol highly restricted vegetative growth, increased non structural carbohydrates
of the shoots, fruit weight, TSS and total sugars when applied through the soil @ 8.25 g
a.i./tree.

57. Case Study:6
57

58. Rainy season
(Average yield in
kg per tree)
Winter season
(Average yield in
kg per tree)
Average no. of
flower buds per
branch
Average no. of
fruit set per
branch
Cost of treatment
(Rs.)
Total return per
tree (Rs.)
T1 (NAA
600 ppm)
22.00 65.00 38.00 30.75 60.00 608.00
T2 (NAA
800 ppm)
6.00 84.00 42.00 32.25 70.00 696.00
T3 (Flower
bud
thinning)
0.00 76.00 30.00 24.5 60.00 608.00
One leaf
pair
pruning
4.65 88.00 43.00 36.00 40.00 722.00
Two leaf
pair
pruning
34.25 61.00 33.00 27.25 40.00 625.00
Control 105.50 4.50 3.5 2.77 - 425.00
CD at 5% 7.05 8.27 7.94 5.42
On the basis of yield and returns (Rs.) during both the seasons, they for regulating the cropping
pattern in guava and obtaining maximum winter season yield of superior quality fruits, one leaf pair
pruning should be done in the first week of May. 58

59. FUTURE PROSPECTS
2. Exploring the
possibilities of
farm
mechanization.
3. Precision
farming can also
be applied to plant
architecture.
1. Uniform trees- individual tree
effect will get over.
59

60. CONCLUSION
 Uniform produce.
 Higher yield of superior quality.
 Ease of various intercultural operations.
 Reduction in disease and pest infestation.
 Management becomes easier.
 Therefore, it needs greater attention in fruit crops.
60

61. Thank you
THANK YOU
61