AOBPreview published online on March 28, 2003
Annals of Botany, doi:10.1093/aob/mcg072
© 2003 by Annals of Botany Company
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Submitted on October 2, 2002
Affiliation of the authors:
1 The Horticulture and Food Research Institute of New Zealand Ltd, Palmerston North Research Centre, Private Bag 11030, Palmerston North, New Zealand;
2 The Horticulture and Food Research Institute of New Zealand Ltd, Mt Albert Research Centre, Private Bag 92169, Auckland, New Zealand;
3 The Horticulture and Food Research Institute of New Zealand Ltd, Hawke's Bay Research Centre, Private Bag 1401, Havelock North, New Zealand;
4 UMR BDPPC, Architecture et Fonctionnement des Espèces Fruitères, INRA, 2, place Viala, 34060 Montpellier Cedex 1, France
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: aseleznyova{at} hortresearch.co.nz.
Architectural analysis was applied to study branch development of ‘Royal Gala' apple trees grafted with dwarfing and non-dwarfing rootstock/interstock combinations, which had been chosen to produce trees with a wide range of vigour. Using AMAPmod methodology, the structure of 3-year-old branches was described at four levels of representation: branch; annual shoot; growth unit; and node. Three types of growth units were distinguished: extension growth unit (vegetative unit with internode extension); vegetative spur with minimal internode extension; and fruiting spur or bourse. The aim of the analysis was to describe exactly how the rootstock/interstock combinations affected the structure building process. The number of extension growth units, vegetative spurs and fruiting spurs per annual shoot changed over the years, but this was not affected by rootstock/interstock combination. Compared with MM.106 rootstock, M.9 rootstock reduced the number of nodes per extension growth unit. In most cases, rootstock/interstock combination had no effect on the linear relationship between extension growth unit length and node number (R2 = 0·88). Average internode length depended on unit node number, with internodes being shorter for units with fewer nodes. Thus the difference in apple branch size induced by the rootstock/interstock combinations was mainly due to a reduction in the length and number of neoformed nodes produced on extension growth units. As percentage budbreak of axillary buds on extension growth units was not affected by rootstock/interstock combination, differences in numbers of axillary annual shoots per branch were entirely due to differences in the total numbers of nodes extended during the previous year.
Revised on December 5, 2001
Accepted on February 3, 2003
Application of Architectural Analysis and AMAPmod Methodology to Study Dwarfing Phenomenon: the Branch Structure of ‘Royal Gala' Apple Grafted on Dwarfing and Non-dwarfing Rootstock/Interstock Combinations
A. N. SELEZNYOVA1*,
Key words: Malus domestica Borkh, plant architecture, modelling, growth unit, rootstock, dwarfing, internode length, node number, neoformation.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A. N. Seleznyova, D. S. Tustin, and T. G. Thorp Apple Dwarfing Rootstocks and Interstocks Affect the Type of Growth Units Produced during the Annual Growth Cycle: Precocious Transition to Flowering Affects the Composition and Vigour of Annual Shoots Ann. Bot., April 1, 2008; 101(5): 679 - 687. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R.L. R. Pilcher, J-M. Celton, S.E. Gardiner, and D.S. Tustin Genetic Markers Linked to the Dwarfing Trait of Apple Rootstock 'Malling 9' J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci., January 1, 2008; 133(1): 100 - 106. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P.-e. Lauri, K. Maguylo, and C. Trottier Architecture and size relations: an essay on the apple (Malus x domestica, Rosaceae) tree Am. J. Botany, March 1, 2006; 93(3): 357 - 368. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. COSTES, E. GARCIA-VILLANUEVA, C. JOURDAN, J. L. REGNARD, and Y. GUEDON Co-ordinated Growth between Aerial and Root Systems in Young Apple Plants Issued from in vitro Culture Ann. Bot., January 1, 2006; 97(1): 85 - 96. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|