APS Journal July 2017

J ournal of the A merican P omological S ociety

154

est number of branches were on PiAu 9-90, and the smallest with the fewest branches were on B.71-7-22. Graft- union height at planting was likely af- fected by the distance between the graft union and lateral roots and the length of the rootstock shank, both of which were very small in a few cases. Most (77% of the rootstock treatments) trees were able to be planted at the recommended level with the graft union between 100 and 150mm above the soil. Trees on PiAu 9-90 were planted such that the average graft union height was 135 mm. Seven combinations (23%) were planted with union heights less than 100 mm, with the lowest for trees on G.41TC.  Site Effects on Tree Performance. Over the first 5 years, site (Table 4) and rootstock (Table 5) affected all aspects of tree performance. Table 4 includes data only from the ten sites with a com- plete set of rootstocks. Colorado was missing two and Iowa was missing one rootstock treatment at the initiation of the experiment, and tree death resulted in complete loss of one rootstock treat- ment in Chihuahua. Data from these three sites were excluded from the analyses presented in Tables 4 and 5. Results from Chihuahua, Colorado, and Iowa, however, are included in the tree performance data presented by location in Tables 6-11.  Among the 10 sites included in Table 4, the highest mortality occurred in Nova Scotia (13%, Table 4); however, among all sites greatest mortality was in Chihuahua, with only 77% of the trees surviving for the first 5 years (Table 6). Survival was 100% in British Colum- bia, Minnesota (Table 4), and Colorado (Table 6).  Site-related tree characteristics are presented in Table 4. After 5 years, the largest TCA was recorded for trees in New Jersey and the smallest for trees in British Columbia. Trees were also tall- Table 4. Site means for survival, trunk cross-sectional area, root suckers, tree height, canopy spread, yield per tree, yield efficiency, fruit size, and zonal chlorosis of Honeycrisp apple trees in the 2010 NC-140 Honeycrisp Apple Rootstock Trial. All values are least-squares means, adjusted for missing subclasses. z Site Survival (2014, %) Trunk cross- sectional area (2014, cm 2 ) Cumulativ e root suckers (2010-14, no./tree) Tree height (cm) Canopy spread (cm) Yield per tree (2014, kg) Cumulative yield per tree (2011- 14, kg) Yield efficiency (2014, kg/cm 2 TCA) Cumulative yield efficiency (2011-14, kg/cm 2 TCA) Fruit weight (2014, g) Average Fruit weight (2012- 14, g) Zonal chlorosis (%) 2012 2013 2014 BC 100 10.1 6.8 277 120 12.9 22.2 1.4 2.4 302 284 --- 57 --- MA 98 13.5 7.4 299 188 8.9 24.8 0.8 2.0 230 222 --- 54 41 MI 99 12.1 1.2 257 127 6.7 17.2 0.7 1.6 200 200 --- 31 69 MN 100 13.7 0.1 292 186 8.3 17.9 0.7 1.5 174 182 14 49 43 NJ 98 18.1 3.6 335 277 9.7 23.7 0.6 1.4 322 280 --- --- 16 NS 87 13.0 0.2 273 115 10.7 26.0 0.9 2.2 164 170 19 41 66 NY 99 15.3 5.5 321 170 8.0 33.0 0.6 2.5 259 239 22 20 25 OH 92 12.4 0.8 231 112 11.5 13.9 1.0 1.3 178 178 --- --- --- UT 95 11.9 1.3 208 129 13.2 15.8 1.2 1.4 --- 176 --- --- --- WI 99 12.6 2.9 282 176 8.1 30.8 0.7 2.7 173 230 25 24 15 Average HSD 8 3.5 2.9 27 21 4.8 7.2 0.3 0.4 31 21 11 15 12 z Mean separation in columns by Tukey's HSD ( P = 0.05). HSD was calculated based on the average number of observations per mean. z Mean separation in columns by Tukey's HSD (P = 0.05). HSD was calculated based on the average number of observations per mean. Ta l 4. ite means for sur ival, trunk cross-sectional area, root suckers, tree height, canopy spread, yield per tree, yi ld effic ency fruit size, and zonal chlorosis of Hon ycrisp apple trees in the 2010 NC-140 Honeycrisp Apple Rootstock Trial. All values are least-squares means, adjusted for missing subclasses. z 20