Home >Current Issue

Volume: 6, Issue: 5, Sep-Oct, 2018
DOI: 10.7324/JABB.2018.60507

Research Article

Methods of pruning and thinning in a flooded camu-camu plot

Jaime Durand-Valencia1, Mario Herman Pinedo-Panduro2, Elvis Paredes-Davila2, Carlos Zumba Lopez1, Luis Romero-Villacrez1, Ricardo Bardales-Lozano2, Dennis Del Castillo-Torres2, Carlos Abanto Rodriguez2, Edvan Alves Chagas3, Valdinar Ferreira Melo4

  Author Affiliations


Abstract

A 20-year-old camu-camu plot was studied to determine pruning production and stand-thinning techniques with the objective of recovering its productive capacity in a floodable area. The evaluated treatments were as follows: T1 “control” (without pruning and without stand-thinning), T2 (without pruning and with stand-thinning per line), T3 (with pruning and stand-thinning per line), and T4 (with pruning and selective stand-thinning). The distribution of plants in the field was not balanced, and the INFOSTAT program was applied for the non-parametric analysis of Kruskal and Wallis with 8 replicates. The response variables were as follows: “Number of flowers/plant” (NFL), “number of fruits in phase 3” (NFRF3), “number of fruits in phase 5” (NFRF5), “percentage of fallen fruits in phase 3” (% FRCF3), “percentage of fallen fruits in phase 5” (% FRCF5), “average fruit weight” (PPFR), and “fruit yield” (RFR). Significant differences were found between treatments for NFL, NFRF3, NFRF5, % FRCF3, and RFR with values: P = 0.0002, P = 0.0022, P = 0.0009, P = 0.0010, and P = 0.0010, respectively. The percentage of fruits fallen in % FRCF5 and PPFR were not statistically influenced by the treatments. T2 reached higher values in all these variables. In the 10 months of the trial, T2 induced a significantly higher RFR, evidencing the disadvantage of pruning and the efficiency of linear thinning in the short term. It is necessary to continue evaluating the next harvests to observe the RFR trends.

Keywords:

Fruit abscission, Plantation design, Varzea.



Citation: Durand-Valencia J, Pinedo-Panduro MH, Paredes-Davila E, Lopez CZ, Romero-Villacrez L, Bardales-Lozano R, Castillo-Torres DD, Rodriguez CA, Chagas EA, Melo VF. Methods of pruning and standthinning in a floodable camu-camu plot. J App Biol Biotech. 2018;6(05):42-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.7324/JABB.2018.60507


Copyright: Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License, which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

References

1. Pinedo P M, Riva R R, Rengifo S E, Delgado V C, Villacr\éz V J, Gonzales C A, Inga S E, L\ópez U A, Farro-ay P R, Vega V R, Linares B C. Sistema de Producci\ón de camu-camu en Restinga. Instituto de Investigaciones de la Amazonia Peruana. Ed. IIAP. Iquitos, Per\ú; 2001.

2. Imán C S. Cultivo de Camu-camu Myrciaria dubia H.B.K. en la Regi\ón Loreto. Lima-Per\ú; 2000.

3. Yuyama K, Kiyoko L, Yuyama O, Valente P J, Colleto A, L\ópez A J, Chávez F W, Bacelar L G, Lima M, Rojas G S, Koshikene D. Camu-camu Myrciaria dubia (Kunth) Mc Vaugh. 1ra Ed. CVR Curitiva-Brasil; 2011.

4. Pic\ón B C. y Acosta V A. Cultivo de camu-camu Myrciaria dubia H.B.K Mc Vaugh en la Selva baja del Per\ú. Manual T\écnico. MINAG-PNCC, Iquitos-Per\ú; 2000.

5. Inga H, Pinedo M, Delgado C, Linares C, Mejía K. Fenología reproductiva de Myrciaria dubia McVaugh H.B.K. (camu-camu). IIAP. FOLIA AMAZÓNICA. 2001. 12 (1-2): 99-106. https://doi.org/10.24841/fa.v12i1-2.127

6. Pinedo P M, Delgado V C, Farro-ay, P R, Del Castillo T D, Iman C S, Villacres V J, Fachin M L, Oliva C C, Abanto R C, Bardales L R, Vega V R. Camu-camu (Myrciaria dubia. Myrtaceae); Aportes Para su Aprovechamiento sostenible en la Amazonia Peruana. 1ra Ed. Lima; 2010.

7. IIAP- Instituto de Investigaciones de la Amazonia Peruana. Guía Práctica Nº 2 Instalaci\ón de plantaciones de camu-camu en áreas inundables. 2009.

8. Pinedo M, Linares C, Mendoza H, Anguiz R. Plan De Mejoramiento Gen\ético de camu-camu. . Instituto de Investigaciones de la Amazonia Peruana. Ed. IIAP. Iquitos, Per\ú; 2004.

9. Imán C S, Melchor A M. Tecnología para la Producci\ón del camu-camu Myrciaria dubia (H.B.K.) Mc Vaugh. 1ra Edici\ón Iquitos-Per\ú; 2007.

10. Vásquez M A. El camu-camu, cultivo, manejo e investigaciones. Editora Gráfica e Imprenta Universal S.R.L. Iquitos-Per\ú; 2000.

11. Pinedo P M, Delgado V C, Vega V R, Sotero S V, Farro-ay P R. Cultivo de camu-camu en áreas inundables. Manual T\écnico. Ocho fascículos para el productor. Instituto de Investigaciones de la Amazonia Peruana. PROBOSQUES. Iquitos-Per\ú; 2012.

12. Vázquez V V, P\érez B M, Osuna G J. La poda del mango. INIFAP, CIRPAC. Libro T\écnico N\úm. 2, Santiago Ixcuintla, Nayarit, M\éxico; 2010.

13. Shiva A, Tanka P K. Effect of time and level of pruning on vegetative growth, flowering, yield, and quality of guava. International Journal of Fruit Science. 2015; 290 a 301, DOI: 10.1080/15538362.2015.1015762. https://doi.org/10.1080/15538362.2015.1015762

14. Abanto R C, Pinedo P M, Bardales L R, Alves Ch E. Efecto de la poda de fructificaci\ón y defoliaci\ón en el proceso productivo de camu-camu en la regi\ón Ucayali-Per\ú. Folia Amaz\ónica. 2014; 23: 17-24. https://doi.org/10.24841/fa.v23i1.4

15. Farro R S, Pinedo P M. Posibles factores que producen la caída de fruto de Myrciaria dubia (HBK) Mc Vaugh, "camu-camu" durante la fenología reproductiva de la colecci\ón "cinco cuencas" en el centro experimental San Miguel – IIAP. Tesis Biología UNAP, Loreto, Per\ú; 2010.

16. Paredes D E. Comparativo de 37 Clones de camu-camu arbustivo Myrciaria dubia (H.B.K.) Mc Vaugh. En el sexto a-o de su instalaci\ón. Tesis. Iquitos- Per\ú; 2013.

17. Servicio Nacional de Meteorologia e Hidrologia. Direccion Zonal 8. Loreto. Boletin Mensual. Iquitos. Per\ú. 2017.

18. Di Rienzo J.A., Casanoves F., Balzarini M.G., Gonzalez L., Tablada M., Robledo C.W. (2008). InfoStat, versi\ón 2008, Grupo InfoStat, FCA, Universidad Nacional de C\órdoba, Argentina.

19. Marini R P. Physiology of pruning fruit trees. Virginia Cooperative Extension. 2003. [Consulta: Febrero 2017]: http://pubs.ext.vt.edu/422/422-025/422-025

20. Espinosa B M, Garcia S J, Valeria E O. Efecto de intensidades diferentes de raleo en el crecimiento de un rodal de Pinus radiata.Bosque Valdivia 1994; 15, (1):55-65. https://doi.org/10.4206/bosque.1994.v15n1-07

21. Ferrere P, Lupi A M, Boca T. Crecimiento del Pinus radiata sometido a diferentes tratamientos de raleo y poda en el sudeste de la provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina. Bosque (Valdivia). 2015; 36 (3). https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-92002015000300009

22. Martiarena R, Crechi E, Pinazo M, Von W A, Marquina J, Monteoliva S. Efecto del raleo sobre el crecimiento y la densidad de la madera de Pinus taeda implantado en misiones, Argentina. Revista: Ciencia Forestal. 2014; 24 (3).

Article Metrics

Similar Articles