Yield and quality performance of apple under varied summer pruning intensities in the North-Western Himalayan region

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the influence of varied intensities of summer pruning on five predominant apple cultivars in ultra-high-density planting systems on yield and quality performance at harvest. The experiment was carried out during 2021-22 and 2022-23 growing seasons under the Kulgam district of J&K (UT) in the NorthWestern Himalayan region of India. Experimental plants were evaluated at harvest for yield and quality performance. The economic value of various treatments was calculated by estimating total costs (Rs/tree), gross income (Rs/tree), and Net income (Rs/tree) by framing questionnaires and collecting requisite information. Results revealed that summer pruning showed varied results in terms of various observations due to different genetic makeup, growing habits, bearing patterns, market price, and fruit quality. Significantly at par highest average yields/tree was obtained in Red Fuji (49.741kg) and Jeromine (49.268 kg) while the lowest value was obtained in Red Chief (27.919kg). However, Redlum Gala excelled over other cultivars in terms of Fancy (4.148kg), A-grade (27.517kg), and B-grade (4.158kg) although its yield was 42.313kg/tree which was lower as compared to Red Fuji and Jeromine. Maximum C-grade apples were obtained in the case of Red Fuji (23.998 kg/tree) and minimum in Red Chief cultivar (2.267 kg/tree). Mild summer pruning resulted in significantly the highest yield (47.076kg/tree) as compared to other summer pruning intensities. Summer pruning significantly affected the quantity of various apple grades. The maximum quantity of Fancy-grade apples (3.451kg/tree) was obtained in medium summer pruning whereas, mild summer pruning resulted in the highest A-grade (25.465kg/tree). Results revealed that the highest average yield was obtained in the mediumly pruned Red Fuji cultivar (57.53kg/tree) which was significantly at par with mildly pruned Jeromine (56.48 kg/tree). Better results in terms of Fancy-grade apples were obtained in mediumly pruned Redlum Gala (5.69 kg/tree) as compared to other treatment combinations. Similarly, mildly pruned Jeromine excelled in other treatment combinations in terms of A-grade apple yield (36.78 kg/tree). Similarly, various treatment combinations varied in terms of B-grade and C-grade apple yield. A negative correlation was observed between the crop yield (t/ha) and pruning severity in almost all cultivars excluding Red Fuji. A strong linear negative correlation (-0.99) between summer pruning and crop yield was observed in the Red Chief variety. A slight positive correlation was observed in the case of Red Fuji. The economic viability of various treatment combinations varied and was found better in terms of BC ratio in mediumly pruned and severely pruned Jeromine cultivar (3.67) followed by mediumly pruned Red Chief cultivar (3.57) and the lowest in unpruned Red Fuji (0.80).

Full text

International Journal of Environment, Agriculture and Biotechnology
Vol-9, Issue-4; Jul-Aug, 2024
Peer-Reviewed International Journal
Journal Home Page Available: https://ijeab.com/
Journal DOI: 10.22161/ijeab
ISSN: 2456-1878 (Int. J. Environ. Agric. Biotech.)
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijeab.94.39 336
Yield and quality performance of apples under varied
summer pruning intensities in the North-Western
Himalayan region
Haseeb Ur Rehman*, Manzoor Ahmad Ganai, Tasneem Mubarak, Ab Shakoor Khanday
and Shahid A Shergojry
Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Kulgam
*Corresponding author: haseebpom@gmail.com
Received: 16 Jul 2024; Received in revised form: 18 Aug 2024; Accepted: 25 Aug 2024; Available online: 31 Aug 2024
©2024 The Author(s). Published by Infogain Publication. This is an open-access article under the CC BY license
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Abstract— This study aimed to evaluate the influence of varied intensities of summer pruning on five
predominant apple cultivars in ultra-high-density planting systems on yield and quality performance at
harvest. The experiment was carried out during 2021-22 and 2022-23 growing seasons under the Kulgam
district of J&K (UT) in the North-Western Himalayan region of India. Experimental plants were evaluated
at harvest for yield and quality performance. The economic value of various treatments was calculated by
estimating total costs (Rs/tree), gross income (Rs/tree), and Net income (Rs/tree) by framing questionnaires
and collecting requisite information. Results revealed that summer pruning showed varied results in terms
of various observations due to different genetic makeup, growing habits, bearing patterns, market price, and
fruit quality. Significantly at par highest average yields/tree was obtained in Red Fuji (49.741kg) and
Jeromine (49.268 kg) while the lowest value was obtained in Red Chief (27.919kg). However, Redlum Gala
excelled over other cultivars in terms of Fancy (4.148kg), A-grade (27.517kg), and B-grade (4.158kg)
although its yield was 42.313kg/tree which was lower as compared to Red Fuji and Jeromine. Maximum C-
grade apples were obtained in the case of Red Fuji (23.998 kg/tree) and minimum in Red Chief cultivar
(2.267 kg/tree). Mild summer pruning resulted in significantly the highest yield (47.076kg/tree) as compared
to other summer pruning intensities. Summer pruning significantly affected the quantity of various apple
grades. The maximum quantity of Fancy-grade apples (3.451kg/tree) was obtained in medium summer
pruning whereas, mild summer pruning resulted in the highest A-grade (25.465kg/tree). Results revealed
that the highest average yield was obtained in the mediumly pruned Red Fuji cultivar (57.53kg/tree) which
was significantly at par with mildly pruned Jeromine (56.48 kg/tree). Better results in terms of Fancy-grade
apples were obtained in mediumly pruned Redlum Gala (5.69 kg/tree) as compared to other treatment
combinations. Similarly, mildly pruned Jeromine excelled in other treatment combinations in terms of A-
grade apple yield (36.78 kg/tree). Similarly, various treatment combinations varied in terms of B-grade and
C-grade apple yield. A negative correlation was observed between the crop yield (t/ha) and pruning severity
in almost all cultivars excluding Red Fuji. A strong linear negative correlation (-0.99) between summer
pruning and crop yield was observed in the Red Chief variety. A slight positive correlation was observed in
the case of Red Fuji. The economic viability of various treatment combinations varied and was found better
in terms of BC ratio in mediumly pruned and severely pruned Jeromine cultivar (3.67) followed by mediumly
pruned Red Chief cultivar (3.57) and the lowest in unpruned Red Fuji (0.80).
Keywords— Summer pruning, cultivar, yield, quality.

Rehman - Yield and quality performance of apples under varied summer pruning intensities in the North-Western
Himalayan region
ISSN: 2456-1878 (Int. J. Environ. Agric. Biotech.)
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijeab.94.39 337
I. INTRODUCTION
Apple (Malus X domestica Borkh.) is the most
important temperate fruit worldwide with a total
production of almost 90 mT (FOA, 2023). India occupies
5th rank globally in terms of production after China, USA,
Poland, and Turkey, with Jammu & Kashmir accounting
for more than 75% of the country’s production (Rehman
and Mubarak, 2023). Although Red Delicious strains
occupy a major area under apple cultivation, recently Gala
strains, Fuji, and other delicious clones/selections have
also covered a good percentage of acreage (Rehman et al,
2023). These cultivars have gained popularity only after
the adoption of some intensive planting systems like ultra-
high density, semi-high density, and medium density
orcharding. Under these systems, it has been found
essential to strike a balance between vegetative and
reproductive growth to maximize the production and
quality traits and summer pruning is one of the techniques
to do so. Summer pruning under intensive systems of
planting contains growth, maintains a balance between
vegetative and reproductive growth, improves fruit size
and fruit production to obtain high yield and quality fruit
(Hussein Moatamed, 2012). This technique is also used for
breaking apical dominance and increasing twigs and spurs
formation of apples (George et al, 2002), increasing fruit
set (Fathi and Mokhtar, 1998), and increased the
percentage of retained fruit to perfect flowers (Ebied,
2005). Summer pruning can also effectively reduce the
measured plant growth during the current year (Dejong et
al, 2004). Time of summer pruning is also an effective
factor for improving the quality of the apple and increase
in resistance to bruising and storage decay (Ibrahim et al,
2007). This technique is required to obtain good fruit
colour for tree types such as slender spindle trees whose
canopy has gaps that become filled with shoot growth soon
after full bloom (Robinson et al, 1991).
Similarly, a positive correlation between summer
pruning and colour development has been reported by
Belter and Thomas (1980); Ogata et al1(986); Ystass
(1992). Ogata et al, 1986 and Platon and Zagrai, 1997
reported that in apple summer pruning significantly
improved the yield during the current and succeeding
years. Several hypotheses mainly related to endogenous
growth control, hormone regulation, and shoot-to-root
ratio (Ferree et al, 1984; Saure, 1992) have been proposed
to partially or fully interpret the effects of summer pruning.
Given the above, the present experiment was conducted to
not only evaluate the performance of cultivars but also to
understand their response to summer pruning under high-
density planting system.
II. MATERIAL AND METHODS
Red chief (V1), Redlum Gala (V2), Red Velox
(V3), Red Fuji (V4), and Jeromine (V5) on M.9 rootstock
in Tall Spindle System after 4th and 5th year of planting
were evaluated along with the impact of summer pruning.
Plants were trained to the central leader system with
uniform cultural practices as per the package of practices
of SKUAST-Kashmir. Summer pruning treatments varied
in terms of severity as S1 (no pruning), S2 (10% removed),
S3 (20% removed), and S4 (30 % removed). Summer
pruning was confined during the 1st week of August in both
the years (2022 & 2023) across cultivars without keeping
growth habit in consideration. It was a two-year study
replicated at 3 different locations on 5 plants of each
cultivar. The design of the experiment was two factorial
Randomised Block Design (RBD). Data in terms of yield
was estimated by taking the yield of all treated plants of
individual cultivars, dividing it by the number of plants
under the same treatment, and finally converted to yield/
ha. Grades were assigned manually as per the standard
procedure keeping size, colour, shape, blemish, scar, and
disease or pest symptom on fruit in consideration. After
assigning grades as Fancy, A, B, and C-grade, fruits under
different grades were weighed using digital balance. The
average grade was estimated by adding individual grades
under a particular treatment and dividing it by the total
number of plants under the same treatment and finally
converted to tonnes per hectare. Economics was calculated
based on prevailing market rates of the inputs and produce.
The data were subjected to statistical analysis of variance
using Web Agri Stat Package, an online software
developed by Central Coastal Agricultural Research
Institute of Indian Council of Agricultural Science (ICAR)
and means of treatments were compared based on the
critical difference (C.D) test at p <0.05.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Crop yield:
Table 1 shows a lot of variability in crop yield
among different varieties and pruning intensities. Among
the varieties, Jeromine and Red Fuji being at par registered
significantly higher yields than the rest, with a numerically
high value (49.74 t/ ha) recorded in Red Fuji. The
performance of varieties is a function of genetic makeup
and environment. Since the performance of varieties varies
depending on the location, these two varieties under
discussion seem to be better suited to the microclimate and
other factors of the study location. The results are
consistent with the findings of Kumar et al (2013) and
Kumar (2020). The variation could also be the result of
phenotypic characteristics of the varieties, management

Rehman - Yield and quality performance of apples under varied summer pruning intensities in the North-Western
Himalayan region
ISSN: 2456-1878 (Int. J. Environ. Agric. Biotech.)
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijeab.94.39 338
practices, and the site of the plantation as reported by Bhat
et al, 2006 and Hampson et al, 2009.
Summer pruning also impacted crop yield and it
could be observed from the data that severe pruning at 30%
removal of growth (S4) reduced yield drastically. A
significantly higher yield was recorded in 10% removal
(47.07 t/ha) followed by 20% removal of growth. These
figures indicate that optimizing pruning has a severity that
substantially impacts yield, and severe and no summer
pruning causes yield penalty. From the interaction (Table
2 & Fig1) it is clear that severe summer pruning had a
negative impact on crop yield in all varieties. A negative
correlation was observed between the two (Fig 3-7) in
almost all cultivars excluding Red Fuji (Fig 6). A strong
linear negative correlation (-0.99) between summer
pruning and crop yield was observed in the Red Chief
variety (V1). With the increase in pruning severity, there
was a corresponding decrease in yield in this variety. A
slight positive correlation was observed in case of Red Fuji
(Fig 6). Data in Table 2 shows that the maximum yield
(57.53 t ha-1) was obtained in case of Red Fuji (V4) with
10% summer pruning. From Fig 1, it can be observed that
various apple cultivars responded differently to different
levels of summer pruning as far as yield is concerned.
Yields improved upto moderate pruning but heavy summer
pruning had a negative effect on yield across the different
cultivars. However, the effect was more prominent in less
vigorous cultivars like Red Chief and Jeromine. This
varied response of different apple cultivars to different
severity levels of summer pruning may be attributed to the
different growth habits of studied cultivars (Cooley and
Autio, 2011).
Table 1: Average yield and yield of different grades of apple as influenced by variety and summer pruning.
Varieties
Average yield
(t/ha)
Fancy
A grade
B Grade
C grade
V1
27.92
2.24
19.31
4.13
2.27
V2
42.31
4.15
27.52
4.16
6.51
V3
39.83
2.60
26.45
4.44
6.11
V4
49.74
2.02
8.44
15.35
23.99
V5
49.27
2.55
33.27
5.14
8.45
CD(p≤0.5)
2.24
0.31
3.99
1.70
2.07
Pruning Severity
S1
41.93
1.77
21.01
7.09
12.30
S2
47.08
2.87
25.47
7.03
11.57
S3
43.70
3.45
24.79
6.91
8.41
S4
34.56
2.76
20.72
5.55
5.58
CD(p≤0.5)
2.00
0.28
3.56
NS
1.85
Table 2: Variety x pruning severity interaction effect on yield and different grades of apple.
Treatment
combination
Average
yield
Fancy
A grade
B grade
C grade
V1S1
34.57
1.14
22.11
6.93
4.32
V1S2
29.53
2.30
21.92
4.14
1.34
V1S3
25.48
3.29
18.17
2.86
1.11
V1S4
22.10
2.23
15.02
2.60
2.29
V2S1
43.48
2.07
25.77
5.72
10.06
V2S2
46.61
3.78
29.14
4.91
8.71
V2S3
44.48
5.69
30.07
3.66
4.29
V2S4
34.67
5.06
24.53
2.34
2.98

Rehman - Yield and quality performance of apples under varied summer pruning intensities in the North-Western
Himalayan region
ISSN: 2456-1878 (Int. J. Environ. Agric. Biotech.)
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijeab.94.39 339
V3S1
39.62
2.52
22.78
5.11
9.05
V3S2
48.67
3.57
31.66
4.99
7.86
V3S3
39.85
2.48
27.94
4.81
4.27
V3S4
31.19
1.84
23.42
2.83
3.24
V4S1
43.62
1.25
4.77
12.00
26.85
V4S2
54.09
1.17
7.82
16.09
29.15
V4S3
57.53
2.80
10.38
18.46
25.44
V4S4
43.72
2.87
10.84
14.85
14.54
V5S1
48.33
1.86
29.66
5.66
11.22
V5S2
56.48
3.55
36.78
5.01
10.77
V5S3
51.14
3.00
36.75
4.75
6.94
V5S4
41.12
1.81
29.87
5.14
4.84
SE
34.57
1.14
22.11
6.93
4.32
CD(p≤0.5)
4.48
0.62
NS
3.43
4.14
Fig 1: Effect of interaction between variety and summer pruning intensity on crop yield fruit quality.
Apple quality (grades): Apple fruit quality is instrumental
in improving the economic value of produce. In Kashmir
valley lack of quality apple has been considered a major
reason for lower returns. So, any technological intervention
impacting fruit quality may prove reasonably beneficial for
apple growers. Quality in terms of fruit grading based on
standard values was influenced both by the type of cultivar
and severity of summer pruning. ‘A’ grade apple dominated
the other grades with higher numerical values irrespective
of the cultivar and pruning severity, except for Red Fuji.
Since grading is based on size and colour of the fruit, Red
Fuji with a lack of round colour under Kulgam conditions
was the reason for low fancy and A-grade apple in this
variety.
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
Yield (t ha-1)
Treatments
AVG YIELD
FANCY GRADE
A GRADE
B GRADE
C GRADE

Rehman - Yield and quality performance of apples under varied summer pruning intensities in the North-Western
Himalayan region
ISSN: 2456-1878 (Int. J. Environ. Agric. Biotech.)
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijeab.94.39 340
Fig 2: Percentage of different grades of apple as influenced by variety and summer pruning.
Fig 2 gives an idea about the percentage of different apple
grades influenced by variety. It is quite clear that high
percentage of ‘A’ grade was obtained from all varieties
excluding Red Fuji where high percentage of apple was of
C grade. Fancy grade is considered the top grade of apple
and Redlum Gala(V2) registered significantly higher values
for fancy grade apple (4.14 t /ha) in comparison to all other
cultivars. Jeromine recorded significantly higher yield of A
grade apple (33.27/ ha) in comparison to all varieties,
followed by Redlum gala (27.5/ha). Red Fuji registered
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 S1 S2 S3 S4
Percentage of different grades
Treatments
FANCY GRADE A GRADE B GRADE C GRADE
r =-0.70
y = -0.2856x + 46.594
R2= 0.4917
15
25
35
45
55
0 10 20 30
Crop yield (t/ha)
Pruning severity
Fig 4: Relation between crop yield
and summer pruning in Gala
Redlum
r= -0.99
y = -0.4146x + 34.139
R2= 0.992
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 10 20 30
Crop yield (t/ha)
Pruning severity
Fig 3: relation between crop yield
and summer pruning in Red chief.
r=-0.62
y = -0.3411x + 44.949
R2= 0.3806
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30
Crop yield (t/ha)
Pruning severity
Fig 5: Relation between crop yield
and summer pruning in Red Velox.
r= 0.06
y = 0.0374x + 49.179
R2= 0.0046
42
47
52
57
62
0 10 20 30
Crop yield (t/ha)
Pruning severity
Fig 6:Relation between crop yield
and summer pruning in Red fugi

Rehman - Yield and quality performance of apples under varied summer pruning intensities in the North-Western
Himalayan region
ISSN: 2456-1878 (Int. J. Environ. Agric. Biotech.)
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijeab.94.39 341
significantly higher yields of both ‘B’ and ‘C’ grade apple.
With regard to the pruning severity prominent impact on
‘A’ grade apple was recorded with 10% and 20% summer
pruning, both being statistically at par but significantly
superior than rest of the treatments. 20% summer pruning
however registered significantly higher yield of fancy-grade
apple compared to other treatments. In the interaction it is
evident from Table 2 and Fig that the fancy grade apples
yield was highest in case of Redlum gala (V2) with 10%
summer pruning. Whereas, the least fancy grade apple was
obtained in Red Fuji under no summer pruning treatment
(Control). Irrespective of cultivar summer pruning to the
extent of 10% and 20% recorded significant improvement
in fancy grade apple and both severe pruning and no pruning
had negative interaction effect on all varieties.
Varied responses in terms of fancy grade fruit of
various cultivars to different severity of summer pruning
may be attributed to various factors like genetic makeup of
cultivars (Kumar, 2020), prevailing climatic conditions
(Singh and Chauhan, 2002), growth pattern (Cooley and
Autio, 2011), fruit drop (Sharma et al, 2011) and light
interception (Wagenmakers and Callesen, 1989; Barritt et
al, 1991).
From Table 2 and Figure 2, it can be understood
that the highest average A-grade apple (36.78 t /ha) were
obtained in mild summer pruned (10% summer pruning)
Jeromine cultivar which was at par with moderately pruned
(20%) Jeromine cultivar. Red Fuji cultivar yielded more
quantity of A-grade apple under severe pruning (30%) as
compared to other pruning treatments which was in contrast
to results obtained on other studied cultivars at sameseverity
of summer pruning. Better results in terms of average A-
grade apples were obtained in light summer pruning (10%)
across cultivars except Red Fuji. This may be attributed to
the vigorous growing habit of Red Fuji as compared to other
studied cultivars (Lugaresi et al, 2022). Better light
penetration during the 1st week of August in highly vigorous
cultivars like Red Fuji by summer pruning may contribute
to more A-grade apples as reported by Ashraf and Ashraf,
2014; Lugaresi et al, 2022; Uselis et al, 2020 and Fenili et
al, 2019.
As evident from table -1, Red Fuji yielded highest
quantity of B-grade apples in the current system of planting.
Severe summer pruning (S4) in highly vigorous Red Fuji
cultivar decreased average B-grade apple from 18.46 t/ha
under-recorded under moderate (20%) summer pruning to
14.8 t/ha (Table-2). However, in other cultivars, severe
summer pruning decreased B-grade apples more or less in a
similar pattern due to their similar growth pattern. The
lower yield of B-grade in Red Fuji apples under severe
pruning may be attributed to better light penetration.
In general, a higher percentage of C-grade apples
was recorded in Red Fuji among the cultivars and under no
summer pruning treatment (S1) among the pruning
treatments (Fig 2). C-grade apple was comparatively less in
all cultivars, excluding Red Fuji. This may be due to better
light penetration under the system of planting these varieties
and also due to their genetic ability to develop fruit colour
and size under optimum conditions (Uselis et al, 2020;
Fenili et al, 2019; Ashraf and Ashraf, 2014).
Economics
Ultimately it is the economics that defines the
feasibility of technology for the farming community.
Despite the high yields of certain cultivars, they don't need
to fetch good returns under specific situations. Red Fuji for
instance attained the highest yield in the present study but
failed to compete with other cultivars in terms of returns
because of high percentage of low-grade apples in this
variety. Data regarding the economic viability of various
treatment combinations is shown in Table 3. From the data
it can be inferred that various varieties responded differently
to the summer pruning. Red Chief (V1) for instance was
economically less feasible when intense pruning was done.
r= -0.54
y = -0.2697x + 53.313
R2= 0.2962
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
010 20 30
Crop yield (t/ha)
Pruning severity
Fig 7: Relation between crop yield
and summer pruning in Jeromine.

Rehman - Yield and quality performance of apples under varied summer pruning intensities in the North-Western
Himalayan region
ISSN: 2456-1878 (Int. J. Environ. Agric. Biotech.)
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijeab.94.39 342
Highest net returns (Rs.2136858/ha) in Redlum Gala (V2)
resulted in S3 (20%). However, Red Velox (V3) responded
better (Rs. 2123825/ha) under mild summer pruning(S2).
Summer pruning proved economically important for Red
Fuji which generated net returns of Rs. 1016356 /ha under
S3 (Medium pruning) as compared to just Rs.524693/ha in
case of no summer pruning (S1). Medium summer pruning
may have sufficiently open canopy for better penetration of
light in Red Fuji, therefore improving the quality and
income from this treatment. Mild summer pruning (S2)
proved most profitable practice (2937527 /ha) in Jeromine
variety and also in comaprison to all other treatment
combinations in the experiment. Variation in terms of
economic feasibility of varied summer pruning intensities
in different apple cultivars may be due to additional costs of
cultivation and market price of produce (Nicholas and
Anthony, 2003), consumer preference (Guanxin et al,
2015), Demand (Dong and Li, 2008), Supply (Xiang, 2015),
yield (Bhat et al, 2006), type of harvested grade (Uselis et
al, 2020) and storability/shelf life (Naqash et al, 2017).
IV. CONCLUSION
This study revealed that summer pruning is highly
beneficial for apple grown particularly under intensive
systems of planting. Vigorous growing apple cultivars
responded very well in terms of yield and quality
improvement and overall economic feasibility to more
severe levels of summer pruning when compared to less and
moderate growing types. To harness the real value of tall
spindle system of apple, needs summer pruning to be
followed by apple orchardists. Maintaining the right
balance between vegetative and reproductive growth in
high-density systems is a tedious job, particularly when the
scion cultivar is vigorous and the soils are more fertile.
Summer pruning curtailed the growth of more vigorous
apple cultivars effectively in tall spindle system thereby
increasing light interception and ultimately leading to
improved yield, quality, and income.
Table 3: Economics of apple crop as influenced by variety and summer pruning.
Treatments
Costs /ha
(Rs)
Gross returns Rs/ha
Net returns Rs/ha
BC ratio
V1S1
838550
2155784
1317234
1.57
V1S2
765950
2032296
1266347
1.65
V1S3
388200
1774711
1386511
3.57
V1S4
340450
1475185
1134736
3.33
V2S1
652200
2406981
1754782
2.69
V2S2
702200
2713673
2011473
2.86
V2S3
673250
2810107
2136858
3.17
V2S4
529100
2243608
1714509
3.24
V3S1
594350
2191169
1596820
2.69
V3S2
733000
2856825
2123825
2.90
V3S3
603800
2412036
1808237
2.99
V3S4
476850
1948749
1471900
3.09
V4S1
654300
1178993
524693
0.80
V4S2
814400
1608061
793661
0.97
V4S3
868900
1885255
1016356
1.17
V4S4
664850
1587841
922991
1.39
V5S1
724950
3115799
2390850
3.30
V5S2
850150
3787677
2937527
3.46
V5S3
773100
3606917
2833817
3.67
V5S4
625850
2919764
2293914
3.67

Rehman - Yield and quality performance of apples under varied summer pruning intensities in the North-Western
Himalayan region
ISSN: 2456-1878 (Int. J. Environ. Agric. Biotech.)
https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijeab.94.39 343
REFERENCES
[1] Ashraf N and Ashraf M (2014). Summer pruning in fruit trees.
African Journal of Agricultural Research. 9(2): 206-210.
[2] Barritt B H, Rom C R, Bonnie I, Konishi J and Dilley M A
(1991). Light level influences spur quality and canopy
development and light interception influence fruit production in
apple. Hortscience. 26(8): 993-999.
[3] Belter H and Thomas T M (1980). Preliminary experiences in
summer pruning of apples in Michigan. Compact Fruit Tree.
13:100-101.
[4] Bhat Z A, Wani M S and Wani W M (2006). Evaluation of newly
introduced apple cultivars for their vegetative characteristics.
Annals of Biology. 22: 47−48.
[5] Cooley D R and Autio W R (2011). Summer pruning of apple:
impacts on disease management. Advances in Horticultural
Science. 25 (3): 199-204.
[6] Dejong T M, Johnson R S, Doyle J F, Weibel A, Olari L, Maral
J, Baige B, Ramming D and Bryla D (2004). Growth, yield and
physiological behaviour of size-controlling peach rootstocks
developed in California. Acta Horticulturae. 658: 449-455.
[7] Dong X and Li Z (2008). An Empirical Analysis of the
Influencing Factors of Grape Price in my country based on the
Research of Provincial Panel Data. China Prices. 8:16-19.
[8] Ebied M S (2005). Comparative studies on the effect of some
treatments on flowering and fruiting in different bearing sites of
Canino apricot trees. PhD. thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, Cairo
University.
[9] Fathi M A and Mokhtar H (1998). Influence of summer pruning
on growth, fruit set and fruit quality of "Anna "apple trees. Egypt
Journal of Agricultural Research. 79 (2):640-647.
[10] Fenili C L, Petri J L, Steffens C A, Martin M S D, Amarante C
V T D and Heinzen A S (2019). Alternatives to increase the red
colour of the peel in ‘Daiane’ and ‘Venice’ apples. Revista
Brasileira de Fruticultura. 41(2): 1-11.
[11] Ferree D C, Myers S C, Rom C R and Taylor B H (1984).
Physiological aspects of summer pruning. Acta
Horticulturae.146:243-251.
[12] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
(2023). FAOSTAT Statistical Yearbook. Rome.
https://doi.org/10.4060/cc8166en.
[13] George A P, Brodely R M and Orew (2002). Effect of new rest
breaking chemicals on flowering shoot production and yield of
subtropical trees. Acta Horticulturae. 575:835-840.
[14] Guanxin Y, Qing G and Dongmei Z (2015). Research on the
Influencing Factors of Price Fluctuation of Fruits and Vegetables
Based on VAR-Taking Apple as an Example. China Collective
Economy. 6: 38-40.
[15] Hampson C R, McNew R, Cline J, Embree C, Candstra J and
Wilson K (2009). Regional differences in performance of
Canadian bred apple cultivars and implications for breeding.
Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 89: 81−91.
[16] Hussein Moatamed A M (2012). Effect of Summer Pruning on
Vegetative Growth, Yield and Fruit Quality of" Le-Conte" Pear
trees. Journal of American Science. 8(12): 640-647.
[17] Ibrahim I T, Eva J and Marie E (2007). improvement of quality
and storability of apple cv. Aroma by adjustment of some pre-
harvest conditions. Scientia Horticulture. 112: 164-171.
[18] Kumar (2020). Performance studies of new apple cultivars on
different rootstock under high-density plantation in cold dry
temperate region of Kinnaur, Himachal Pradesh. International
Journal of Bio-resource and Stress Management. 11(2):
148−152.
[19] Kumar D, Ahmed N, Verma M K and Dar T A (2013). Growth,
yield and leaf nutrient status as influenced by planting densities
and varieties of apricot. Indian Journal of Horticulture. 70(2):
126–130.
[20] Lugaresi A, Steffens C A, Souza M P, Amarante C V T, Brighenti
A F, Pasa M S, Martin M S (2022). Late summer pruning
improves the quality and increases the content of functional
compounds in Fuji apples. Crop production and management.
81: 1-10.
[21] Naqash F, Hamid N and Kapila D K (2017). A case study on
economic analysis of marketing and price spread of apple fruit in
Kashmir Valley of J&K state. International Research Journal of
Agricultural Economics and Statistics. 8(2): 440-447.
[22] Nicholas A and Anthony R (2003). Food price volatility and
macroeconomic factor volatility: heat waves or meteor showers.
Applied Economics Letters. 10(3):155-16.
[23] Ogata R, Kikuchi H, Hatayama T and Komatsu H (1986).
Growth and productivity of vigorous Fuji apple trees on M.26 as
affected by summer pruning. Acta Horticulturae. 160:157-165.
[24] Platon I and Zagrai L (1997). The influence of training system
and pruning time on growth and apple fruiting. Acta
Horticulturae. 451: 513-518.
[25] Rehman H U and Mubarak T (2023). Evaluation of performance
of rejuvenated apple orchard in North Western Himalayas.
Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research.
10(6): 770-776.
[26] Rehman H U, Mubarak T, Khanday A S, Shergojry S A, Ganai
M A and Dar E A (2023). Evaluation of different apple planting
systems in high, mid, and low altitudes of Kashmir Valley. 2023.
Theoretical Biology Forum. 12(2): 350-354.
[27] Robinson T L, Lasko A N and Ren Z (1991). Modifying apple
tree canopies for improved production efficiency. Hortscience.
26(8): 1005-1012.
[28] Saure M C (1992). Interference of pruning with endogenous
growth control. Acta Horticulturae.322: 241-247.
[29] Sharma J, Sharma S K, Panwar R D and Gupta R S (2011). Fruit
retention, yield and leaf nutrient content of Ber as influenced by
foliar application of nutrient and growth regulators. Environment
and Ecology. 29(1):627- 631.
[30] Singh D and Chauhan J S (2002). Studies on pruning and
nitrogen fertilization in peach. Indian Journal of Agricultural
Research. 36(2):128-132.
[31] Uselis N, Viskelis J, Lanauskas J, Liaudanskas M, Janulis V and
Kviklys D (2020). Effects of growth control on yield and fruit
quality of the apple cultivar ‘Rubin’. Agricultural and Food
Science. 29(3): 245- 252.
[32] Wagenmakers P S and Callesen O (1989). Influence of light
interception on apple yield and fruit quality related to
arrangement and tree height. Acta Horticulturae. 243:149-158.
[33] Xiang Y (2015). Research on the characteristics, laws and
influencing factors of fruit price fluctuations in my country.
Huazhong Agricultural University.
[34] Ystaas J (1992). Effects of summer pruning on yield, fruit size,
and fruit quality of the apple cultivar ‘Summer Red’. Acta
Horticulturae. 322:277-282.