Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
ABSTRACT
ethanol were compared with only ethrel spray in terms of the response
of berry weight in both seasons.
Changes in berry diameter in response to the application of
various treatments during the two consecutive seasons were reported
in Table 1 and Figure 3. It was evident that such diameter was not
affected by the applications of Ethrel alone at either 200 or 400 ppm
as compared with the control except with Ethrel at 200 ppm in the first
season. Even when Ethrel was combined with either ZnEDTA or
ethanol, no further change was obtained in berry diameter. In short, all
treatments and the control had not significant difference in berry
diameter among them in both seasons thus; there was no added
advantage in berry diameter when Ethrel treatment was combined with
other enhancers relative to its sole application in both seasons.
Length of "Crimson Seedless" berry at harvest was
determined at harvest and the data was reported in Table 1 and Figure
4. It was obvious that both Ethrel concentrations did not cause a
significant change in berry length as compared with the control in both
seasons. Similarly, ethanol at 5% did not alter such diameter at
harvest. Moreover, ZnEDTA caused only a significant change in
diameter during the second season relative to the control. On the other
hand, the combination treatments of various formulations did not
result in a significant alteration in berry length whether Ethrel was
combined with ZnEDTA or ethanol. However, combining Ethrel at
400 ppm plus ZnEDTA in first season resulted in a considerable
increase in berry length as compared with the control.
Data of juice volume in "Crimson Seedless" grape berries
as influenced by various treatments was reported in Table 1 and
Figure 5. The data indicated that Ethrel alone whether at 200 or 400
ppm did not result in a consistent trend in increasing juice volume
when the two seasons were compared. In a similar manner, ethanol at
5% (v/v) was not effective in altering the juice volume in considerable
way. In addition, ZnEDTA treatment did not cause any significant
change in that volume in both seasons. The addition of chemical
adjuvant such as ZnEDTA to Ethrel at either used concentrations did
not make a significant difference in terms of juice volume. However,
the combination of Ethrel at 400 ppm plus ethanol resulted in a
22
Table 1: Physical characteristics of "Crimson Seedless" grape berries as influenced by various applied treatments during the two seasons 2009
and 2010.
Treatments Berry size Juice volume Berry weight Diameter berry Berry length Pink berries Red berries Green berries
(cm3) (cm3) (gm) (cm) (cm) (%) (%) (%)
2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010
Control 2.875 3.163 2.300 2.506 3.674 3.608 1.589 1.614 2.128 2.211 61.350 24.540 5.511 6.475 33.077 50.985
c* d d b d cd a a b bc e d f e a a
Ethrel 200 ppm 3.363 3.194 2.619 2.525 3.520 3.538 1.529 1.590 2.170 2.221 71.419 52.035 16.440 21.465 12.141 21.500
ab cd ab b b d b a b bc cd a c d e a
Ethrel 400 ppm 3.581 3.225 2.731 2.606 3.843 3.638 1.545 1.598 2.199 2.191 76.745 51.954 13.657 35.132 9.597 12.919
a cd a ab a bcd ab a b c b ab d c f de
Ethanol 5 % 2.875 3.163 2.519 2.525 3.074 3.608 1.589 1.606 2.398 2.211 73.282 46.635 8.897 18.669 17.820 34.696
c d bc b d cd a a a bc c bcd e d c a
ZnEDTA 1% 3.288 3.544 2.300 2.594 3.452 3.977 1.538 1.591 2.113 2.295 60.822 44.474 16.957 23.501 22.221 32.025
ab a d ab bc a ab a b a e cd c d b b
Ethrel 200 ppm 3.200 3.364 2.519 2.600 3.293 3.740 1.536 1.579 2.174 2.236 77.550 74.811 7.929 32.234 14.521 19.954
+ ZnEDTA 1% bc abc bc ab bcd bc ab a b abc ab bcd e c d c
Ethrel 200 ppm 3.075 3.294 2.394 2.606 3.237 3.644 1.538 1.604 2.139 2.240 80.113 51.176 7.306 31.572 12.581 17.252
+ ethanol 5% bc bcd cd ab cd bcd ab a b abc a abc e c de cd
Ethrel 400 ppm 3.313 3.344 2.564 2.625 3.393 3.592 1.593 1.593 2.343 2.194 69.523 54.780 25.292 44.307 5.185 9.913
+ ZnEDTA 1% Ab bcd abc ab bc cd ab a a c d Bcd b b g ef
Ethrel 400ppm + 3.306 3.450 2.736 2.713 3.357 3.778 1.538 1.570 2.134 2.260 58.543 30.733 39.605 64.287 1.852 4.980
ethanol 5% ab ab a a bc b ab a b ab e e a a h f
* Values, within a column, of similar letters are not significantly different according to the least significant difference (LSD) at 0.05 levels.
25
4 4.5
3.5 4
3.5
berry size (cm3)
Z n TA
Et hre +Et nE A
0+ Zn 5%
%
no A
n A
el 20 E %
TA
TA
4 pm
no m
hr 0 ol
Zn %
l
pm
pm
%
Et 0 0 +Z ET
ha T
h r l 4 h a DT
ro
l5
hr el Zn l 5
E
Et el 2 ntr
ha pp
Et ED
l5
l5
ED
ED
5
nt
40 0+ ol
hr l 20 E D
el 0p
0p
0p
2 0 D
l
Et 0 0
Co
no
h r Co
no
no
Zn
20
40
ha
ha
ha
0+
el
el
+
Et
Et
Et
0
hr
hr
40
el 0
0+
0+
Et
Et
el
e
Et
20
40
hr
hr
Et hr
el
el
Et
Et
Et
hr
Et
Et
Fig 1: Effect of treatments at harvest on berry size Fig 2: Effect of treatments at harvest on berry weight
during the two growing seasons 2009 and during the two growing seasons 2009 and
2010. 2010
1.64 2.45
2.4
Berry diameter (cm)
1.62
Berry length (cm)
2.35
1.6 2.3
1.58 2009 2.25 2009
1.56 2.2 2010
2010
2.15
1.54
2.1
1.52 2.05
1.5 2
1.48 1.95
nE A
ha TA
an A
5%
%
40 m
ha pm
Zn A
%
TA
TA
20 l
Zn %
ol
ET
pm
pm
el ntro
5%
5%
T
0+ ET
l5
p
tr
Et 0+ E ED
l5
D
0p
Et 0p
D
l5
ol
20 E D
0p
0p
0+ n E
no
on
D
nE
ol
ol
o
no
no
E
20
40
C
an
an
Z
Zn
Z
Z
ha
th
0+
th
th
0+
Et
el
0+
el
Et
E
hr
hr
20
hr
hr
h r 40
40
0+
0+
Et
Et
Et
Et
Et rel
20
40
l
el
20
40
e
el
hr
hr
h
hr
el
el
el
el
Et
Et
Et
hr
hr
hr
Et
Et
Et
Fig 3: Effect of treatments at harvest on berry diameter Fig 4: Effect of treatments at harvest on berry length
during the two growing seasons 2009 and 2010. during the two growing seasons 2009 and
2010.
2.8 90
2.7 80
Juice volume (cm3)
70
A
Et 0+E nE A
TA
TA
an TA
Et hre th a DTA
Zn %
%
ol
Et l 2 ro l
ET
pm
pm
40 m
ha pm
20 +Z ET
5%
5%
40 + Z %
5%
hr on tr
el pp
ED
D
l5
el 0 0 o l 5
E nED
l5
t
D
0p
0p
D
Et 0 p
hr on
nE
ol
ol
ol
E
no
hr 00
no
hr l 2 nE
n
20
40
C
an
an
C
Z
Z
ha
Z
0+
th
th
el
el
0+
th
Et
e
00
E
hr
20
40
0+
0+
0+
Et
Et
hr l 4
el
Et
el
20
40
Et hre
hr
hr
el
el
Et
Et
el
Et
hr
hr
Et
Et
Fig 5: Effect of treatments at harvest on juice Fig 6: Effect of treatments at harvest on pink berries
volume during the two growing seasons percentage during the two growing seasons
2009 and 2010. 2009 and 2010.
70 60
60 50
Green berries (%)
50
40
Red berries (%)
40
30
30 2009
20 20 2010
10 10
0
0
TA
A
A
%
ol
pm
40 + Z %
5%
th DT
th DT
E
tr
Et 0 pp
l5
l5
D
hr 00 p
hr on
nE
Et 0+E nE
ol
no
hr l 2 nE
hr l 40 no
40
C
an
2
20 +Z
a
ha
Z
el
el
00
E
0+
Et
Et
Et hre
e
hr
el
el
Et
Et
Fig 7: Effect of treatments at harvest on red berries Fig 8: Effect of treatments at harvest on green
percentage during the two growing seasons berries percentage during the two growing
2009 and 2010. seasons 2009 and 2010.
27
2. Chemical Characteristics:
Regarding the influence of various applied treatments in
"Crimson Seedless" grapes on the contents of chlorophylls a and b at
harvest were reported in Table 2 and Figures 9 & 10. The data
revealed that both Ethrel concentrations were considerably effective in
reducing the contents of chlorophylls a and b at harvest relative to the
control. Meanwhile, ethanol treatment proved to be significantly
effective on reducing the contents of chlorophylls a and b at harvest as
compared with the control. ZnEDTA led to the reduction of the
contents of chlorophylls a and b at harvest relative to the control.
Also, the formulation of Ethrel at 200 ppm or 400 ppm plus either
ZnEDTA or ethanol added an advantage with regard to reducing the
contents of chlorophylls a and b at harvest relative to the control. The
above findings whether for chlorophyll a or b agreed with the reported
results of Hartman, 1992 and Lopez et al., 2000. Who reported that
Ethrel enhanced ethylene production and stimulated progressive loss of
chlorophyll.
Carotene content data in the fruit skin of Crimson Seedless
cultivar at harvest as influenced by various applied treatments were
reported in Table 2 and Figure 11. The data indicated that carotenes were
drastically increased by Ethrel, ZnEDTA, ethanol, and Ethrel plus ethanol
or ZnEDTA as compared with the control in both seasons. By increasing
Ethrel concentration to 400 ppm, the increases in carotenes were
obtained. Also, ethanol or ZnEDTA application led to enhancing the
formation of carotene content in the fruit skin of Crimson Seedless
cultivar at harvest in the two seasons. The highest increase in carotene
content was obtained with spraying Ethrel 400 ppm in a formulation
with ethanol followed by the adjuvant ZnEDTA to the same Ethrel
concentration. Similarly, the addition of either ZnEDTA or ethanol to
Ethrel at 200 ppm had the same response between the two seasons in
terms of carotene content in the fruit skin that were still greater than that
found in the control clusters. The reported results of this study were in
line with others such as Farag, 2006. The increase in the conversion of
chloroplasts to chromoplasts was also reported as a result of the increase of
ethylene content in fruits. The increase in carotenes by ZnEDTA treatment
28
were still greater than that found in control. However, the highest
increase in the percentage of total sugar was obtained with spraying
ethrel at 400 ppm in formulation with ethanol followed by adjuvant
ZnEDTA to the same Ethrel concentration in both seasons. The above
mentioned results were in agreement with Hartman, 1992; El-
Kereamy et al., 2003; Han et al., 1996; Nikolaou et al., 2003 and
Delgado et al., 2004.
Regarding the influence of various applied treatments on
"Crimson Seedless" grapes on the percentage of reducing sugars at
harvest was reported in Table 2 and Figure 14. The data revealed that
both Ethrel at 200 ppm and ethanol 5% had a similar effect on
significant increase in percentage of reducing sugars compared with
control in both seasons. in addition to application of Ethrel at 400 ppm
and the addition of either ZnEDTA or ethanol to Ethrel at 200 ppm
had a similar significant increase in percentage of reducing sugars
compared with control in both seasons. Spraying ZnEDTA alone did
not effect on increasing the percentage of reducing sugar compared
with control in both seasons. But the highest increase in percentage of
reducing sugar was obtained with spraying ethrel 400 ppm in a
formulation with ethanol followed by adjuvant ZnEDTA to the same
ethrel concentration.
Response of "Crimson Seedless" clusters to various applied
treatments at harvest indicated that Ethrel at 200 ppm, ethanol at 5%
and ZnEDTA at 1% had no significant effect reducing the percentage
of non-reducing sugars as compared with the control Table 2 and
Figure 15. The data revealed that the formulation of Ethrel at 200 ppm
plus either ZnEDTA or ethanol and formulation of Ethrel at 400 ppm
plus either ZnEDTA or ethanol significantly reduced when compared
with just using Ethrel alone at both concentrations and control.
With regard to the percentage of T.S.S in treated clusters, the
data in Table 2 and Figure 16 revealed that there was a significant
increase in such percentage caused by both Ethrel concentrations in
both seasons. Moreover, the application of ethanol alone at 5% and
ZnEDTA trended to increase T.S.S percentage in both seasons as
compared with the control. Meanwhile, the addition of ethanol to
Ethrel at 200 ppm resulted in an enhanced percentage of T.S.S, as
30
Table 2: Chemical characteristics of "Crimson Seedless" grape berries as influenced by various applied treatments during the two seasons 2009
and 2010.
Non-reducing Vitamin C
Chlorophyll a Chlorophyll b Carotene Anthocyanin Total sugars Reducing sugars T.S.S Acidity T.S.S/Acidity
Treatments sugars (mg/ 100 ml
(mg/ l) (mg/ l) (mg/ l) (mg/ 100 g) (%) (%) (%) (%) (ratio)
(%) juice)
2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010
Control 1.018 1.143 0.504 0.598 1.258 .995 21.086 19.667 8.732 8.634 4.882 4.695 3.850 3.608 14.050 13.563 .845 .964 17.460 14.281 2.786 2.000
a* a a a g g g h d d f e a a g e a a e g g c
Ethrel 200 ppm 0.911 1.043 0.449 0.466 1.615 1.394 27.790 28.431 9.398 8.988 5.668 5.543 3.730 3.614 14.988 14.863 .780 .920 19.731 16.273 3.143 2.464
b c b bc e e e d bc cd d d a b f d cd bc c e f b
Ethrel 400 ppm 0.809 0.915 0.322 0.407 2.433 2.188 29.445 29.607 9.335 9.113 6.915 6.728 2.420 1.919 15.506 15.350 .781 .881 20.309 17.597 3.607 2.893
c d de d c c d c bc bc c c b c cd c cd de c c cd a
Ethanol 5 % .832 1.033 0.405 0.457 1.529 1.217 27.518 23.412 9.529 9.056 5.804 5.554 3.724 2.933 15.106 14.763 .822 .929 18.716 16.067 3.251 2.321
c c c c ef f e g bc bc d d a b ef d ab b d ef ef b
ZnEDTA 1% 0.928 1.080 0.426 0.517 1.392 1.146 27.582 24.818 9.110 8.888 5.193 4.755 3.918 3.918 15.338 14.819 .830 .963 18.639 15.724 3.286 2.321
b b bc b fg fg c f cd cd e e a a de d ab a d f ef b
Ethrel 200 ppm 0.840 0.921 0.388 0.377 1.887 1.778 30.440 26.253 9.401 9.116 6.842 6.467 2.559 2.127 15.731 14.900 .813 .908 20.192 16.564 3.464 2.500
+ZnEDTA 1% c d c de d d cd e bc bc c c b c c d b bcd c de de b
Ethrel 200 ppm + 0.801 0.873 0.350 0.346 2.345 2.266 31.351 28.276 9.332 8.984 7.102 6.852 2.230 1.929 15.325 15.000 .803 .893 19.632 16.906 3.857 2.571
ethanol 5% c e d ef c c bc d bc cd c c b c de cd bc cd c d c b
Ethrel 400 ppm 0.746 0.828 0.305 0.314 2.667 2.497 32.189 31.096 9.745 9.397 7.458 7.583 2.287 1.861 16.138 15.788 .772 .861 21.484 18.596 4.286 3.036
+ZnEDTA 1% d f e fg b b b b b b b b b c b b d ef b b b a
Ethrel 400 ppm + 0.700 .791 .292 .296 2.888 2.792 35.957 33.321 10.480 10.258 8.385 8.395 2.085 1.980 16.375 16.563 .741 .843 22.590 19.929 4.571 3.107
ethanol 5% d g e g a a a a a a a a b c a a e f a a a a
* Values, within a column, of similar letters are not significantly different according to the least significant difference (LSD) at 0.05 levels.
33
0.7
1.4
0.6
1.2
0.5 1
Chlorophyll a (mg/l)
Chlorophyll b (mg/l)
0.4 0.8
2009
2009
2010
0.3 2010 0.6
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.1
0
0
TA
TA
A
%
l
5%
5%
o
T
E
tr
pp
pp
A
D
D
l5
D
TA
TA
%
on
l
ET
m
5%
5%
nE
nE
ol
ol
00
00
o
E
no
tr
pp
pp
an
an
D
D
l5
Zn
l2
l4
D
Z
Z
ha
on
nE
nE
ol
ol
00
00
0+
th
th
no
0+
C
Et
an
an
hr
hr
Zn
l2
l4
E
Z
Z
20
ha
40
0+
0+
0+
th
th
Et
Et
e
+
Et
el
hr
hr
el
E
20
40
20
40
hr
0+
0+
hr
Et
Et
el
el
el
Et
el
20
40
Et
hr
hr
hr
hr
el
el
Et
Et
Et
Et
hr
hr
Et
Et
Fig 9: Effect of treatments at harvest on Fig 10: Effect of treatments at harvest on chlorophyll
chlorophyll b during the two growing a during the two growing seasons 2009 and
seasons 2009 and 2010.. 2010.
40
35
30
Anthocyanin (mg/ 100 gm)
25
2009
20
2010
15
10
0
A
TA
TA
%
l
ET
m
5%
5%
o
tr
pp
pp
D
D
l5
D
on
nE
nE
ol
ol
00
00
E
no
C
an
an
Zn
l2
l4
Z
Z
ha
0+
th
th
e
+
Et
hr
hr
0
E
E
20
40
0+
0+
Et
Et
el
el
20
40
hr
hr
el
el
Et
Et
hr
hr
Et
Et
Fig 11: Effect of treatments at harvest on carotene Fig 12: Effect of treatments at harvest on
during the two growing seasons 2009 and anthocyanin during the two growing seasons
2010. 2009 and 2010.
34
12 9
8
10
7
8 6
Total sugar (%)
4 3
2
2
1
0 0
A
TA
TA
%
l
ET
m
5%
5%
o
tr
pp
pp
ED
D
l5
D
on
nE
ol
ol
00
00
E
no
n
C
an
an
Zn
l2
l4
Z
Z
ha
0+
th
th
e
0+
Et
hr
hr
E
20
40
0+
0+
Et
Et
el
el
20
40
hr
hr
el
el
Et
Et
hr
hr
Et
Et
Fig 13: Effect of treatments at harvest on total sugars Fig 14: Effect of treatments at harvest on reducing
percentage during the two growing seasons sugar percentage during the two growing
2009 and 2010. seasons 2009 and 2010.
4.5 18
16
4
14
3.5
Non-reducing sugar (%)
12
3
2009 10
2.5
(%)
TSS
2010 8
2
6
1.5
4
1
2
0.5
0
0
ol
A
%
A
m
pm
A
5%
%
ET
ntr
DT
DT
p
l5
l5
0p
0p
Co
ol
ED
no
no
nE
nE
20
40
an
ha
ha
Zn
Z
Z
th
el
el
0+
Et
Et
0+
E
hr
hr
0+
0+
20
Et l 40
Et
Et
20
40
el
e
hr
hr
el
el
Et
hr
hr
Et
Et
Fig 15: Effect of treatments at harvest on non- Fig 16: Effect of treatments at harvest on T.S.S
reducing sugars during the two growing percentage during the two growing
seasons 2009 and 2010. seasons 2009 and 2010.
1.2 25
1 20
0.8
TSS/ Acidity (ratio)
15
Acidity %
2009
0.6
2010 10
0.4
5
0.2
0 0
ha TA
ha TA
%
pm
ha pm
20 + Zn A
%
l
ro
ET
l5
l5
0+ n ED
ED
l5
nt
0p
0p
no
no
ED
Co
no
20
40
Z
Zn
+
Et
Et
el
el
00
Et
0
hr
hr
0+
2
4
Et
Et
40
el
el
hr
hr
el
el
Et
Et
hr
hr
Et
Et
Fig 17: Effect of treatments at harvest on acidity Fig 18: Effect of treatments at harvest on T.S.S/
percentage during the two growing Acidity ratio during the two growing
seasons 2009 and 2010. seasons 2009 and 2010.
35
following the first one in both seasons. This trend was supported by
the increase in total soluble solids (T.S.S) in the berries of the second
harvest over that of the first one while juice acidity in the second
picking was dramatically reduced in the second picking as compared
with the first one in a consistent way. Thus, it was logic to find a
significant increase in T.S.S to acidity in the second picking, which
reached to the commercially approved range between 22.4 and 18.5 in
the two seasons respectively. Furthermore, there was a considerable
increase in vitamin C content in the juice of "Crimson Seedless"
berries in the second picking as compared with the first one in both
seasons. Thus, all desired fruit traits that improve berries quality and
enhance their grade were obtained in the second harvest in a consistent
manner.
The research outcome of this study provided experimental
evidences that the lack of Ethrel efficacy on grapes could be due to the
lack of enhancing its partitioning and diffusion through the grape
cuticle as shown from the results of using ethanol in the used
formation, which was supported by the finding of Farag et al., 1987c.
Meanwhile, recent studies indicated to the role of ethanol on
activating some genes leading to more anthocyanin biosynthesis
(Chervin et al., 2002). On other hand, using ZnEDTA as an adjuvant
to Ethrel effectiveness could be ascribed to stimulating more ethylene
production by the chelating agent EDTA as reported by Cooper et al.,
1968. Moreover, ZnEDTA was found to stimulate the breakdown of
chlorophylls in "Thompson Seedless" berry skins (Farag, 2006).
Another important conclusion was to apply such formations on grape
vine while draining hot or warm air between vine rows to avoid the
inhibition of PAL activity and increasing the difference between day
and night temperatures in vine orchards.
40
REFERENCES
الملخص العربي
تأثير تركيبات اإليثريل المحورة وتجنب تراكم الهواء الساخن على تلوين
حبات العنب صنف الكريمسون الالبذري وصفات جودتها.
أ .تأثير تجنب تراكم الهواء الساخن وعدد مرات الحصاد على خصائص
الحبات.
كريم دمحم فرج ،عمرو دمحم هيكل ،ويفيه دمحم وبيه واجى ،رائد سليمان شحاته سليمان0
قسم البساتين ،كلية الزراعة ،جامعه دمنهور.
أجرٌت هذه الدراسة خالل موسمً 9002و 9000باستخدام شجٌرات عنب الكرٌمسون
النامٌة فً منطقة مركز بددر بماافةدة الباٌدرج بجميورٌدة ملدر ال ربٌدة 0وقدد تدم را الشدجٌرات
باستخدام رشاشة ٌدوٌة اتى نقطة الجرٌان السطاً .واشتملت الم امالت على الكنترول (را ماء)
والزنددا المخلددوب بمركددب EDTAبتركٌددز ( %1وزن /اجددم ) وثٌيرٌددل بتركٌددز 200جددزء فددً
الملٌون وثٌيانول ( %5اجم/اجم) وثٌيرٌل بتركٌز 200جزء فً الملٌون مخلوط مع زنا مخلوب
مع ( % 1 EDTAوزن/اجم) وثٌيرٌل بتركٌدز 000جدزء فدً الملٌدون مخلدوط مدع ثٌيدانول %5
(اجم/اجددم) وأخٌددرا ث ثٌيرٌددل بتركٌددز 000جددزء فددً الملٌددون مخلوط دا ث مددع زنددا مخلددوب بمركددب
% 1 EDTAمع استخدام المادج الناشرج توٌن 00-بتركٌز ( %1اجم/اجم) لكل الم امالت .وقدد
تم را الشجٌرات مرج واادج عند تلوٌن % 20- 15مع استخدام نةدام دعدم (جٌبدل) 0وتدم تطبٌد
هذه الم امالت تات نوعٌن من الةروف البٌئٌة وذلا من خالل تفتٌح المسافات البٌنٌة بدٌن لدفوف
الشددجٌرات أو عدددم تفتايددا ممددا ٌتددٌح لددرف اليددواء السدداخن أو عدددم لددرف علددى الترتٌددب وقددد
استيدف الباث تاسٌن عملٌة التلوٌن ليمار الكرٌمسون سٌدلٌس وجودتيا وذلا عن طرٌد اسدتخدام
تركٌبات اإلٌيرٌل الماورج من خالل نةام ٌؤير علدى المنداا الددقٌ عدن طرٌد الدتاكم فدً لدرف
اليددواء السدداخن ومنددع تراكم د بددٌن لددفوف الشددجٌرات وٌمكددن تلخددٌال أهددم النتددائ فددً ا تجاهددات
التالٌة:
لقد أدت الم املة بالزنا المخلوب بواسطة EDTAثلى زٌادج اجم ووزن وطول الابات
وخفددن نسددبة الابددات الخ ددراء و أٌ دا ث أدت ثلددى زٌددادج نسددبة T.S.S/Acidوكددذلا الكدداروتٌن
واألنيوسٌانٌن وذلا بالمقارنة بالكنترول
أما الم املة باإلٌيانول فقد أدت أٌ ا ث ثلى زٌادج الكاروتٌن واألنيوسٌانٌن بٌنما لم تؤير هذه
الم املة على اجم وكمٌة ال لٌر ووزن وقطر الابات ومن نااٌدة أخدرف فدان الم املدة باإلٌيرٌدل
47
سواء بتركٌز 200جزء فً الملٌدون أو بتركٌدز 000جدزء فدً الملٌدون أدت ثلدى زٌدادج الكداروتٌن
واألنيوسٌانٌن ونسبة الابات الوردٌة والامراء وقلة نسبة الابدات الخ دراء وقدد أيبتدت الدراسدة أن
الم املددة باإلٌيرٌددل بتركٌددز 200جددزء فددً الملٌددون فددً تركٌبددات سددواء كددان مخلوط دا ث مددع الزنددا
المخلددوب بمركددب EDTAأو اإلٌيددانول أدت ثلددى زٌددادج الكدداروتٌن وزٌددادج نسددبة الابددات الوردٌددة
والامراء وقلة نسبة الابات الخ دراء وزٌدادج نسدبة األنيوسدٌانٌن بٌنمدا لدم تدؤير هدذه الم املدة علدى
اجددم وكمٌددة ال ل د ٌر ووزن وقطددر وطددول اليمددار وذلددا بالمقارنددة بددالكنترول وقددد أدت الم املددة
بتركٌبددة اإلٌيرٌددل بددالتركٌز األعلددى ( 000جددزء فددً الملٌددون ) سددواء فددً وجددود الزنددا المخلددوب
بواسطة EDTAأو ا ٌيانول ثلى نتائ أكير فاعلٌ فً تاسٌن التلدوٌن بالمقارندة بتركٌبدة اإلٌيرٌدل
بتركٌدز 200جدزء فددً الملٌدون وأو ددات النتدائ التدايٌرات اإلٌجابٌددة علدى لددون اليمدار وجودتيددا
ومٌ اد ن جيا عند لرف اليواء الساخن بتفتدٌح المسدافات بدٌن لدفوف الشدجٌرات بٌنمدا وجدد أند
ٌجب قطف ال ناقٌد أكير من مره ب د الم امالت اٌث كاندت نتدائ جدودج الابدات مدع القطدف اليدانً
لل ناقٌد و الذي أجري ب د خمسدة عشدر ٌدوم مدن الم املدة الاقلٌدة أف دل مدن نتدائ لدفات الجدودج
للقطف األول الذي أجرف ب د عشرج أٌام من ثجراء الم املة الاقلٌة
وتولى نتائ تلا الدراسة بزٌادج فاعلٌة الرا بمركب اإلٌيرٌدل بتركٌدز 000جدزء فدً
الملٌون عن طرٌ تاوٌر التركٌبدة المسدتخدمة باسدتخدام مركدب ZnEDTAأو اإلٌيدانول كمركدب
آمن .وكذلا تولً نتائ الدراسدة باسدتخدام النةدام المفتدو لشدجٌرات ال ندب لتجندب تدراكم اليدواء
الساخن بٌن لفوف تلا الشجٌرات.
48
Table 3: Physical characteristics of "Crimson" grape fruits as influenced by heat accumulation type during the two seasons 2009 and 2010.
Heat Berry volume Juice volume Berry weight Berry diameter Berry length Pink berries Red berries Green berries
accumulation (cm3) (cm3) (gm) (cm) (cm) (%) (%) (%)
types 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010
Non- heat 3.358 3.445 2.624 2.789 3.463 3.831 1.574 1.653 2.229 2.384 71.223 57.078 23.273 27.401 8.081 16.757
accumulation a* a a a a a a a a a a a a a b b
Heat 3.036 3.134 2.314 2.377 3.258 3.528 1.524 1.535 2.169 2.074 68.632 55.842 8.193 14.297 20.584 28.625
accumulation b b b b b b b b b b b a b b a a
* Values, within a column, of similar letters are not significantly different according to the least significant difference (LSD) at 0.05 levels.
Table 4: Chemical characteristics of "Crimson" grape fruits as influenced by heat accumulation type during the two seasons 2009 and 2010.
Heat Non-
Reducing Vitamin C
accumulation Chlorophyll b Chlorophyll Carotene Anthocyanin Total sugars reducing T.S.S Acidity T.S.S/Acidiy
sugars (mg/100 ml
types (mg/ l) a (mg/ l) (mg/ l) (mg/ 100 g) (%) sugars (%) (%) (ratio)
(%) juice)
(%)
2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010
Non- heat 0.374 0.325 0.801 0.806 2.210 2.183 31.083 29.368 9.793 9.384 7.012 6.778 2.781 2.606 15.896 15.328 .715 .866 22.503 17.864 4.182 2.905
accumulation b* b b b a a a a a a a a a a a a b b a a a a
Heat accumulation 0.490 0.519 0.884 1.111 1.793 1.434 26.997 25.050 9.109 8.934 5.935 5.793 3.175 2.569 14.894 14.807 .881 .948 17.220 15.900 2.984 2.254
a a a a b b b b b b b b a a b b a a b b b b
* Values, within a column, of similar letters are not significantly different according to the least significant difference (LSD) at 0.05 levels.
49
Table 5: Physical characteristics of "Crimson" grape fruits as influenced by picking time factor during the two seasons 2009 and 2010.
Time of Berry volume Juice volume Berry weight Berry Pink berries Red berries Green berries
Berry length
picking (cm3) (cm3) (gm) diameter (%) (%) (%)
(cm)
(cm)
2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010
The first 3.135 3.127 2.503 2.578 3.257 3.636 1.511 1.579 2.175 2.182 64.002 50.587 12.860 16.189 23.096 33.223
Picking b* b a a b b b b b b b b b b a a
The 3.282 3.293 2.445 2.600 3.463 3.724 1.587 1.579 2.224 2.283 65.852 58.333 28.605 35.509 5.570 6.158
second a a a a a a a a a a a a a a b b
Picking
* Values, within a column, of similar letters are not significantly different according to the least significant difference (LSD) at 0.05 levels.
52
Table 6: Chemical characteristics of "Crimson" grape fruits as influenced by picking time factor during the two seasons 2009 and 2010.
Non-
Reducing
Time of picking Chlorophyll a Chlorophyll b Carotene Anthocyanin Total sugars reducing T.S.S Acidity T.S.S/Acidity Vitamin C
sugars (mg/100 ml
(mg/ l) (mg/ l) (mg/ l) (mg/ 100 g) (%) sugars (%) (%) (ratio)
(%) juice)
(%)
2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010
The first 0.468 0.482 1.034 1.009 1.620 1.631 25.225 24.246 8.824 8.828 5.709 5.618 3.115 2.639 14.683 14.661 0.861 0.972 17.439 15.264 3.254 1.984
a* a a a b b b b b b b b a a b b a a b b b b
Picking
The second 0.296 0.362 0.652 0.908 2.383 1.985 32.855 30.172 10.078 9.450 6.237 6.954 2.841 3.536 16.107 15.474 0.735 0.841 22.439 18.500 3.913 3.174
b b b b a a a a a a a a b b a a b b a a a a
Picking
* Values, within a column, of similar letters are not significantly different according to the least significant difference (LSD) at 0.05 levels.
54
54