CC BY
62AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
BIOLOGICAL AND AGRICULTURAL CHARACTERIZATION OF APRICOT (PRUNUS ARMENIACA L) CULTIVARS IN THE EASTERN PART OF GEORGIA
Maglakelidze E.,
PhD in Agricultural Sciences, LEPL Scientific-Research Center of Agricultur
Bobokasvili Z.,
Associate Professor, PhD in Agricultural Sciences, LEPL Scientific-Research Center of Agricultur
Kakashvili V. Master in Agricultural Sciences Division of Fruit-growing Research, LEPL Scientific-Research Center of Agricultur
Abstract
This article presents the results of study penological observation and biological features of 10 introduced foreign cultivars of apricot (Prunus armeniaca L). The research has been carried out, in collection orchard of the experimental station Jigaura (Eastern part of Georgia) of LEPL Scientific-Research Center of Agriculture (SRCA). The experiment was conducted during five growing season (2015 -2019).
The following agronomic and biological characteristics were studied according to the 10 cultivars: phenolog-ical phases of development, detailed pomological description of tree, flower, fruits and other part of cultivar. As well their biochemical analysis and pattern of yield and productivity. According to the study, the cultivars of Bergeron, Farbely, Fardao and Goldrich- Sungiant has the high quality of fruits and distinguished by acceptable commercial properties and has been recommended for planting in Sida Kartly (Eastern part of Georgia) region and as well as in the other regions with similar ecological conditions in Georgia.
Keywords: Variety, flower, fruits, vegetation, harvest.
Introduction
Apricot is one of the most cultivated stone fruits in the world indicates that "Apricot native of China that spread throughout Asia, Europa, North and South America [21, 23]. In European and Mediterranean countries production covers more than 75% of the world's supply". In China there are more than 2000 cul-tivars, many of which are purported to be widely adapted, large-fruited, and of excellent quality. The apricot is generally adapted to narrow climatic areas. As a result of narrow adaptation, favorable local varieties are not always produced economically in other regions. Apricot cultivars are generally sensitive to disease and to high or low temperatures [19, 22, 24, 25].
The apricot cultural well with stand frosts (-280) and the heat points is sufficient for the development and ripening of the fruits, in the most regions of Georgia [34,32,] However, the apricot cultural is characterized by a very short period of winter rest, which can be easily terminated with the temperature rise. Due to the early vegetation, the apricot culture is very damaging to the later spring frosts also the biggest damage comes from the Moilia iaxa Fhren, [1, 13].
Among the stone fruit cultures spread in Georgia, the apricot has less weight. Apricot cultural plantation account for 0.6 percent of the total area [7, 13] of fruit orchard in Georgia. Apricot culture is spread across a small scale in Eastern Georgia in the following places: in Kartli and in Kakheti. Industrial planting of apricot cultivar rarely occurs only in Gori and Tbilisi regions. An average apricot production in Georgia amounts around 6,000 t. [2, 3, 12, 18].
Apricot cultural are not grown in Western region of Georgia whose mild and humid climate contributes to the development of various fungus diseases. [17, 18, 36, 37]
Apricot flowers is very sensitive to later spring frosts and it is a big impact on the production. Also apricot production failure is often caused by spring rains, which are so common during flowering time. In addition, it promotes the development of fungal diseases, which finally reduce the harvest [6,10, 13]
The assortment of apricot cultivars in Georgia is poor. Assortment of apricot is mainly comprised of the two varieties Alipriala (60%)- local variety and Shalskhy (40%) - Armenian selection variety, also the most adaptable are small fruit apricot seedlings raised from the stones.
Several new cultivars of apricot of foreign origin have been introduced to Georgia during the last ten years [2, 13,14], but adaptability of these cultivars to the environmental conditions of Georgia has not been evaluated yet including agronomical and commercial peculiarities as well as suitability of their cultivation in various regions of Georgia.
The goal of our research was to study introduced cultivars of apricot in the fruit growing zone of Georgia - Shida Kartli and selection of the best cultivars from them, with hardy bloosom buds and resistant to deseases, with further recommendation for cultivation within this region.
Materials and metods
This study was carried out with 11 apricot cutivars (Ninfa, Pinkcot, Goldrich-Sungiant, Cafona, San Castrese, Carmen top, Pisana, Bergeron, Farbaly,
Fardao, Alipriala). These cultivars were collected in the plot of the Scientific Research Center of Agriculture, Georgia located in the village Jighaura of Saguramo (Mtskheta municipality) during in the years 2015-2019.
The collection orchard of village Jighaura is located in the eastern part of Shida Kartli, on the 610 m above sea level. The zone characterized by warm climate, moderately humid air, cold winter and hot summer is appropriate of stone fruits. The average yearly temperature is 10.8 0C, the absolute minimum temperature is -17.8 0C. Dropping of temperature down to -2529 0C is not excluded, but despite this, sweet cherry tree is rarely damaged.
The duration of vegetation period is 245 days on an average. The late spring frosts may be caused once in 10-15 years till 20th May. The sum of active temperatures is 3870 0C. The annual precipitation is 591 mm.
The soils on the trial field are brown type, of granular- cumulous structure, that is characterized by friable structure, good physical properties and sufficient moistness. With the increasing of depth the soil is characterized by high carbonate content and alkali reaction.
To summarize the soil and agro climatic conditions of the experimental site is desirable for development of plum plantation.
The soils on the testing parcel are cinnamonic soil, of granular - cumulose structure. It is characterized by lightweight structure, good physical properties and sufficient moistness. With the increasing of depth the soil is characterized by high carbonate content and alkali reaction.
To summarize the soil and agro climatic conditions of the experimental site is desirable for development of sweet cherry plantation.
Plant materials was included 10 apricot (Prunus armeniaca L) cultivars in this study like: Ninfa, Pinkcot, Goldrich-Sungiant, Cafona, San Castrese, Carmen top, Pisana, Bergeron, Farbaly, Fardao and local cultivar - Alipriala, this culture was used to compare. Each accessions in the collection were represented with 15 plants grafted on the rootstock Ishtara.
The orchard has been established with 4.0x1.5 m planting layout in 2011. Plants grafted on the same rootstock Ishtara have been used for each cultivar.
The trees were eight years old and received the same agro technical and irrigation. Herbicide fallow was kept in rows. Grass in the alleys between rows was mowed. Fungicide and pesticide treatments were minimized to an essential treatment against fungal diseases and pests.
The research has been carried out using the following methods:
Phenological development of cultivars was done according to the modified version of the BBCH scale [20]. The calendar periods of the following phenologi-cal phases have been studied: swelling of bud, flowering, fruit ripening time of fruit maturity.
The date of beginning of flowering was taken when about 10% of flowers were open. Full flowering - when at least 50% of flowers were opened and first petals fell. The end of flowering - when 90% of petals were fallen. The duration of flowering was determined by the number of days from the beginning to the end of
flowering. Abundance was assessed according to a scale from 1 (no flowers) to 5 (abundant bloom).
The date of harvest has been taken as the time of ripening of fruit and seed, and when fruits had typical taste and firmness. The date when ripening started was estimated for each cultivar, considering typical coloring of the majority of fruits, strength of fruit stem attachment and characteristic taste of fruit. On that date samples of 50 fruits were taken at random from each replication.
Pomological characteristics of cultivars were collected by instructions of UPOV (2007) [31] harmonized descriptors for plum fruit. Characteristics of fruit are determined on a sample of 50 fruits for each cultivar.
Fruit samples were taken repeatedly in 3 day's interval (usually 3 times) during harvest time for each cultivar for determining of physical properties (weight of fruit, weight of stone, stone freeness). Percentage of the stone in the fruit was calculated by the formula: % =the weight of the stone * 100 / total weight of the fruit.
Productivity characteristics of the plum cultivars were studied according to Program and methods cultivar fruit, berry and nut crops Productivity were studied according to following parameters: the yield per tree and yield efficiency, were computed from the harvest date. Harvest date, the date when fruit shave full (commercial) maturity stage. They yield efficiency was expressed as the ratio of total cumulate veiled per final trunk circumferences sectional areas. The trunk circumferences were converted into trunk cross-sectional areas and the canopy diameter (in two opposite directions) were recorded annually.
Biochemical analysis of cultivars was carried out for detection of dry soluble solids, total sugars, inverse sugars and titratable acidity. The soluble solids are one of the best indications of fruit quality. The soluble solids were determined by refractometer, total sugars - by the method of Luff-Schoorl. Total acidity is determined by titration with 0.1N NaOH.
A tasting evaluation was conducted. Assessment will be carried out at the stage of ripening, on a closed tasting basis, based on the variety testing method.
Sensory characteristics of the fruit (appearance and taste) were evaluated by a five-member jury, scoring the cultivars using the scale from 1 to 5 points.
The delicious properties of the fruit are evaluated with a 5-point system. 5 - Best flavors; 4 - Good taste; 3 - medium taste; 2 - bad taste; 1 - Very bad taste: having.
By taste, varieties are grouped into the best of taste; the variety of good tasty and average tasty.
The fruit tasting assessment is more or less subjective, so chemical composition is determined to assess the quality of the fruit and eventually the breed will be evaluated according to the common breeders.
Statistical analyses have been performed by the analysis of variation, and the testing of differences by the LSD-test.
Results and Discussion
Phonological development of cultivars.
Five years (2015-2019) observations on the progress of phenophases allow drawing a conclusion that
calendar periods of phenological phases depend on biological features of a cultivar, location of collection and ambient conditions.
Climatic parameters varied from year to year. The most favorable climatic conditions for apricot cultivar were in 2015 and 2018. In those years during the blossoms, the weather was sunny and unreasonable. Relative humidity ranged between 40-60%, the rainfall was small, so the blossom varieties finished soon.
In 2016 winter was very warm and apricot varieties began to blossom very early (March 08-14), but the weather was not favorable during blossoms. There was an excess rainfall, wind, this caused the prolonged blossom period.The minimum temperatures were lowest in 2016, but did not cause problems with the vegetation period of apricot varieties. The spring frost was registered (in the Eastern region) in 2017 at the end of April
and it intensity being -0.8 -2.5°C, which significantly damaged the collection and had great influence on yield and quality of the fruit of the current year. Results of damage in all varieties were 75-80%.
The results of five years (2015-2019) observations on calendar periods of phenolocal stages are given in the Table 1.
According to Table 1, the beginning of buds swelling were especially accorded in during first weeks of March 2015-2018. The differences in beginning of buds swelling between the years of studies were noticed. The earliest beginning of buds swelling was observed in 2015 (February 24) and the most late in -2018 (March 11). The difference between cultivars according to the periods of beginning of vegetation is 4-7 days.
Table 1.
Phenological stages of apricot cultivars (average 2015-2019).
№ Cultivars Beginning of bud swelling Flowering Time of maturity (date) Days comparing to control
Beginning Full End Duration /days
1 Alipriala 02.03 26.03 01.-02.04 04.04 10 07.07 0
2 Pinkcot 24.02 19.03 24-25.04 30.03 12 15.06 -22
3 Ninfa 22.02 20.03 25-26.04 31.04 12 02.06 - 36
4 Goldrich-Sungiant 26.02 23.03 27-28.04 01.04 11 23.06 - 16
5 Cafona, 23.02 20.03 26-27.04 31.04 11 15.06 - 22
6 San Castrese 26.02 18.03 23-24.04 29.03 12 22.06 - 15
7 Carmen top 28.02 24.03 26-27.04 01.04 9 08.06 - 29
8 Pisana, 27.02 25.03 27-28.04 02.04 9 16.06 - 21
9 Bergeron 28.02 24.03 28-29.04 03.04 10 14.07 + 7
10 Farbaly 03.03 25.03 30-31.04 04.04 10 11.08 + 33
11 Fardao 01.03 26.03 01-02.04 04.04 9 26.08 + 60
The five year observations have determined that out of the studied 11 cultivars the following cultivars begin vegetation relatively early: Cafona, Ninfa, Pinckot (22-24.02), and relatively lately - Fardao and Farbely (01- 03.03).
During the research period, as well as the beginning of vegetation, the timing of flowering is quite variable. Early blossoming was celebrated in 2015 (March 08-14), the most late - in Marc 2016 (26-30).
Flowering is one of the most important phenolog-ical stage for apricot, because the future yield depends on the start, duration and abundance of flowering. The flowering time is greatly influenced by weather, particularly by temperature and relative humidity before the beginning of flowering and during flowering. [4, 19,]. Flowering begins in the second decade of March, and it lasts for 9 - 12 days (8 days on average).
The earliest season of apricot flowering in 2015. The first flowers appeared on the cultivars Pinckot on March 08th, whereas the latest flowering was observed in 2016 on cultivars Farbaly on the March 30th. The earlier flowering in the year 2015 can be explained by higher average monthly temperatures, as compared to the period analyzed. In 2016, the duration of flowering was 7-9 days. The largest flowering intensity was found (In 2015) in cultivar Bergeron, Goldrich- Sungiant,
Farbaly, (grade 5.0), while the smallest intensity was found (in 2016) in cultivar Ninfa, San Castrese (grade 3.0). The period between the beginning of flowering and the end of it is 9-12 days.
The cultivars blossomed before mid of March are early (Pinkcot, Ninfa, Cafona, San castrese) flowering were exposed to the risk of spring frost damage, but the late season flowering cultivars (Bergeron, Goldrich-Sungiant, Farbaly, Fardao) were found under the minimum spring frost damages to flowers (Table 1). There was a 9-10-day difference between early and late flowering cultivars.
In the present study, ripening dates starts in early June and lasts until late of August. The optimum harvesting period is very short.
Farbely had latest harvest at the end of August are important cultivar for late ripening fruits followed by cultivar Farbely, Bergeron were harvested on mid-July.
Comparing the years of studies, it can be concluded that the differences in the time of maturation for the same cultivar were not big (8-10 days).
The obtained results of calendar periods of pheno-logical phases are in accordance with the results of Vachun (2002).
Yields and yield efficiency.
Yield of the apricot trees was primarily determined by weather conditions but also influenced by genetic component of cultivar affected the winter and spring frost sensibility of the buds, flower and fruit sets, as found in other studies (Alburquerque et al., 2004; Ruiz and Egea, 2008) and in different fruit species such
as pear (Atkinson and Taylor, 1994; Atkinson and Lucas, 1996) or sweet cherry (Choi and Andersen, 2001; Garcia-Montiel et al., 2010).
In the Table 2 the yield (in kg) per one tree of each cultivar according to years (2015-2019) and the average yield for five years are given.
Table 2.
Yields per tree and yield efficiency of apricot cultivars.
№ Cultivars Yield (kg) Average Yield efficiency Per tree
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Kg/cm2 Kg/m3
1 Alipriala 3.5± 0.01c 22.4± 0.01b 20.6± 0.05a 6.2± 0.14a 28.9± 0.12b 16.32± 1.40a 0.26± 0.16a 0.10± 0.01a
2 Pinkcot 4.0± 0.12b 14.50.16a 17.4± 0.00a 4.1± 0.12b 22.4± 0.02b 12.48± 1.22a 0.28± 0.05b 0.07± 0.01b
3 Ninfa 3.7± 0.04c 18.21.42d 20.6± 0.03b 5.4± 0.04b 31.4± 0.02b 15.86± 0.30d 0.32± 0.02b 0.09± 0.00c
4 Goldrich- Sungiant 5.0± 0.12a 27.0± 0.00c 30.1± 0.02b 4.5± 0.03b 40.4± 0.05a 21.4± 0.08c 0.52± 0.04a 0.12± 0.02b
5 Cafona, 2.0± 1.16a 15.8± 0.04c 14.2± 1.11b 3.4± 0.11b 34.5± 0.12c 13.98± 0.52d 0.28± 0.02d 0.07± 0.00c
6 San Castrese 3.2± 0.04d 24.1± 0.02a 18.8± 1.22b 3.0± 0.06c 20.6± 0.05a 13.94± 1.42d 0.19± 0.01c 0.04± 0.00d
7 Carmen top 1.5± 1.11b 16.4± 0.00a 22.4± 1.01b 6.4± 0.56c 25.0± 0.04c 14.4± 0.21b 0.40± 0.05d 0.03± 0.02c
8 Pisana 2.2± 0.04c 10.2± 1.22b 12.4± 0.58c 3.8± 0.02a 24.1± 1.14a 10.54± 0.16a 0.44± 0.12a 0.13± 0.02a
9 Bergeron 6.4± 0.01c 30.2± 1.14b 26.0± 0.02a 3.7± 0.04d 36.0± 1.02a 20.46± 1.22b 0.56± 0.01d 0.14± 0.00d
10 Farbaly 3.5± 0.05b 20.0± 0.04c 21.9± 0.05b 6.2± 0.12a 30.1± 0.05b 16.34± 1.11b 0.28± 0.01d 0.06± 0.01d
11 Fardao 5.4± 0.11b 28.0± 0.02a 34.5± 0.04c 7.01.11b 46.1± 0.16b 25.6± 1.14b 0.60± 0.04a 0.14± 0.01d
cultivar means in the same column followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to the LSD test (P = 0.05); (mean ± SE).
The agro technical background for all cultivars is the same. As primary research has shown, that average fruit yield differed among aprcot cultivars. Therefore, the difference between cultivars according to growth parameters is explained by the biological peculiarities of cultivars (Polat, and Caliskan 2010).
The average fruit yield in this trial for cultivars Bergeron, Goldrich- Sungiant, Fardao was 20.46- 25.6 kg per tree. The highest yield year was in 2018 (46,140.0kg), the lowest yield in 2017 (3.0-7.0kg). According to the cropping, the highest returns were noted for trees of cultivars Fardao (46.1 kg) and Goldrich- Sungiant (40.4kg), whereas the least productive were in 2017, of cultivars San Castrese (3.0 kg) and Cafona (3.4kg).The reason of the low yield in 2017 was the occurrence of late spring frost (-2.5°C on 26 April).
The obtained results of yield are in accordance with the results of Vachûn (2002), and Milatovic (2016).
Cumulative yield efficiency ranged from 0.19 to
-2
0.60 kg cm and mostly was higher than in the control. The obtained results of yield efficiency are in accordance with the results Milatovic (2016), who studied the productivity of 9 introduced apricot and found, that Introduced apricot cultivars generally were more vigorous than the control.
The highest values of yield efficiency was on cultivars Fardao (0.60 kg/m2) whilst the lowest ones were recorded on San Castrese (0.19 kg/m2).
Fruit and stone weight and its dimensions.
Fruit size is considered important trait to select the apricot cultural [9, 11] Large size of fruit might be the genetic character of a cultivar to consume the available nutrients competently to attain a certain fruit size [15, 34].
Shida Kartli by its climatic conditions is one of the best for planting of fruit cultivars, therefore the biological properties, manifested by the introduced cultivars determine their further propagation with the commercial purpose. The best is a cultivar that together with high yield is characterized by good commercial properties of fruit. The commercial properties of fruit, besides peculiarities of a cultivar, depend on soil and climatic factors and a complex of agrotechnical measures. [30, 32]
With the purpose of estimation of quality of fruit, the mechanical characteristics of fruit (mass, dimensions and size of stone) have been studied.
As the Table 4 shows the big mass of fruit is characteristic for the cultivars: Bergeron, Pinkcot, Fardao, Goldrich- Sungiant, and the cultivar Carmen top has relatively small fruit. The biggest fruits were recorded with Bergeron, having an average fruit weight of 80.4 g. The next in sequence were Pinkcot 73.2g, Fardao 67.4g, Goldrich-Sungiant 62.2g. On the contrary the
cultivar means in the same column followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to the LSD test (P =0.05). (mean ± SE). Chemical composition of aprocot cultivars
During the research the chemical analysis of the apricot has been carried out - total soluble dry substance, total sugars and titrable acidity were determined. The results are presented in the Table 4.
Table 4.
Chemical composition of apricot cultivars (average, 2015-2019).
smallest mean fruit weights belonged with Carmen top averaging only 36.7 g. Stone weight showed also considerable variation among cultivars, from 2.2g (Carmen top) to 3.6g (Bergeron).
The lowest share of the stone in total weight of the fruit was in cultivar Pinkcot and Bergeron (4.5), and
highest in cultivar Pisana (8.1). Apricots with lower weight of the stone have better value, as well as those having lower share of the stone in total weight of the fruit. Similar results have been reported by Lo Bianco et al., 2010; Milatovic, 2016.
Table 3.
Fruit traits of apricot cultivars (average 2015-2019).
№ Cultivars Fruit Weight (g) Fruit Dimension (mm) Fruit shape index (%) Stone properties Output %
Length Width Thickness Weight (g)
1 Alipriala 52.5± 3.91± 3.21± 3.10± 5.7± 3.0± 91.5±
0.18c 0.16b 0.32c 0.10a 0.01d 0.12c 0.01d
2 Pinkcot 73.2± 5.36± 5.24± 5.56± 4.5± 3.3± 94.6±
0.18a 020a 0.20a 0.22b 0.02a 0.06d 0.09d
3 Ninfa 56.1± 4.64± 4.18± 4.94± 4.6± 2.6± 94.2±
0.10c 0.24a 0.24b 0.18a 0.00c 0.09c 0.12b
4 Goldrich- Sungiant 62.2± 0.14c 5.04± 0.30b 4.65± 0.17a 4.40± 0.14c 5.3 ± 0.02c 3.3± 0.06a 96.3± 0.04b
5 Cafona, 44.2± 3.98± 4.34± 4.04± 5.4± 2.4± 92.5±
0.11b 0.30b 0.22b 0.12a 0.1b 0.08b 0.11c
6 San Castrese 40.4± 4.24± 3.92± 3.64± 7.4 ± 3.0± 90.4±
0.14b 0.12b 0.14a 0.21c 0.00b 0.21a 0.11b
7 Carmen top 36.7± 4.22± 3.79± 3.42± 6.0± 2.2± 93.7±
0.18d 0.24c 0.15c 0.16a 0.10c 0.20b 0.08a
8 Pisana 30.6± 3.71± 3.48± 3.20± 8.1 ± 2.5± 94.5±
0.24a 0.28a 0.21a 0.12a 0.02a 0.07a 0.04c
9 Bergeron 80.4± 22.6± 25.4± 0.89± 4.5 ± 3.6± 95.6±
0.21c 0.15c 0.08b 0.36c 0.06b 0.08c 0.02a
10 Farbaly 60.5± 4.94± 4.34± 3.9± 5.1± 3.10 ± 95.2±
0.16b 0.24b 0.20c 0.15c 0.20b 0.14a 0.12a
11 Fardao 67.4± 5.12.± 4.58± 4.50± 4.2± 2.8± 96,2±
0.15c 0.18c 0.16c 0.22c 0.14b 0.10b 0.08a
№ Cultivars Soluble solids Total sugars Total acids Fruit tasting
(TSS) (%) (%) (%) assessment
Taste Aspect
1 Alipriala 14.5±0.11b 9.0±0.12b 1.35.0±0.20a 4.2 4.5
2 Pinkcot 12.4±0.10c 7.2±0.14a 1.91±0.10d 4.0 3.8
3 Ninfa 13.8±0.22d 8.2±0.15c 1.35.4±0.12a 3.8 4.0
4 Goldrich- Sungiant 15.6±0.21a 8.6±0.11b 1.37±0.24a 4.8 4.5
5 Cafona 12.8±0.14c 7.4±0.21c 1.48.0±0.16c 3.6 4.0
6 San Castrese 13.5±0.26d 6.4±0.16c 1.51±0.12c 4.0 3.6
7 Carmen top 14.6±0.18c 8.8±0.18d 1.36±0.12a 3.5 3.8
8 Pisana, 13.2±0.21b 9.4±0.16a 1.44±0.22b 3.6 4.0
9 Bergeron 15.0±0.14a 11.1±0.20b 0.84.±0.11a 5.0 4.8
10 Farbaly 14.4±0.12a 10.0±0.16b 1.46±0.18b 5.0 4.8
11 Fardao 14.8±0.12a 8.5±0.22b 1.37±0.20a 4.6 4.5
cultivar means in the same column followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to the LSD test (P = 0.05). (mean ± SE).
Main factor of fruit quality, is the content of soluble solids. It depends on many factors, and mostly on the cultivar, rootstock and stages of fruit ripeness. In
the present study, total soluble solids (TSS) ranged between 12.4% (cv. Pinkcot ) to 15.6% (cv. Goldrich-Sungiant). The content of total sugars ranged from cv.San Castrese (6.4%) - cv. Bergeron (11.1 %).The content of acids ranged from 0.84% (cv. Bergeron) to 1.91% (cv. Pisana,).
The data on the chemical composition of fruits are in accordance with the previous findings (Gurrieri et al., 2001; Ristevski, B. and Mitreski, Z. 1986; Burgos L et al 1999; Lo Bianco et al., 2010, Milatovic, 2010).
The differences between our results and results of other authors, who are studying this cultivars, can be explained by the influence of different rootstock, soil and climate conditions, cultural practeces, and stage of maturity [20, 25, 30, 32].
Conclusion
Having studied some biological and agricultural properties of apricot (Prunus armeniaca L.) cultivars grafted on rootstock Ishtara Sida Kartli Region of Georgia we have drawn the conclusions. The results of five-year research allow to choose from the early ripening cultivar of best biological and commercial properties cv.Goldrich- Sungiant, for mid-season production with high yields are recommended - cv. Bergeron and for late season production - cv. Fardao and Farbaly These varieties are recommended for planting in Shida Kartli provine as well as in the similar soil and climatic conditions of other regions of Georgia.
References
1. Agricultural rules of fruit growing - Tbilisi, Publishing House "Education", 1986 (In Georgian).
2. Agrobiodiversity of Georgia (Catalog) Tbilisi, 2015 (In Georgian).
3. Avanzato D. (2002). Sweet cherry cultivars in Georgia. Actual Questions of fruit-growing Publishing by FAO project. Tbilisi-Gori-Akhaltsike. pp. 29-31(In Georgian).
4. Baden M L, Byrne D H. 2012. Fruit breeding. Hand book of breeding. Springer Science pp.571 -621.
5. Bianco, LO. R., Farina, V., Indelicato, S.G., Filizzola, F., and Agozzino, P. (2010). Fruit physical, chemical and aromatic attributes of early, intermediate and late apricot cultivars. J. Sci. Food Agric. 90, 10081019.
6. Bobokashvili Z., Dzeria K. Gardening. Tb., 2010 (In Georgian).
7. Bobokashvili Z., Maghlakelidze E., Mdi-naradze I. The fruit culture in Georgia. International simpozium (ISHS) Erevan. Tb., 2013 (In Georgian).
8. Burgos L., Egea J., Dicenta F., Effective pollination period in apricot (Prunus armeniaca L.) varieties, Ann. Appl. Biol. 119 (1991) 533-539.
9. Ercisli, S. 2009. Apricot culture in Turkey. Scientific Research and Essays. 4: 715-719.
10. Eristavi E., and Gambashidze T.1978. Fruit Growing. In four volumes. Volume 4. Khomizurash-vili, N. (Ed). Tbilisi, pp. 71-109 (In Georgian).
11. Ertekin, C., S. Gozlekci, O. Kabas, S. Sonmez, and I. Akinci. 2006. Some physical, pomological and nutritional properties of two plum cultivars. J. Food Eng. 75(4): pp 508-514.
12. FAOSTAT (2017): http://faostat.fao.org/default.aspx.
13. Georgian Fruits (Catalog) Kvaliashvili V., edited by Tbilisi, 2001. (In Georgian).
14. Geostat (2019). Geostatic National Statistics Office of Georgia. 2016. www.geostat.ge).
15. Guleryuz, M. 1988. A study on breeding by selection of wild apricots quality and resistance to spring frosts in Erzincan plain. Professor thesis, Ataturk University Faculty of Agriculture, Erzurum Turkey.
16. Gurrieri, F., Audergon, J.M., Albagnac, G., and Reich, M. (2001). Soluble sugars and carboxylic acids in ripe apricot fruit as parameters for distinguishing different cultivars. Euphytica 117, 183-189.
17. Javakhishvili, I., Essays: 12 volumes / Sak. USSR Sci. Academy. Tb., 1986, Vol. (In Georgian).
18. Ketskhoveli, N. Vegetation of Georgia. USSR Sci. Academy. Tb., 1960 (In Georgian).
19. Licznar-Malanczuk M., Sosna I., 2005. Evaluation of several apricot cultivars and clones in the lower Silesia climatic conditions. Part I: Blossoming of trees, yield and fruit quality. Journal of Fruit and Ornamental Plant Research, 13: 39-48.
20. Meier, U. (2001) Growth Stages of Mono and Dicotyledonous Plants. BBCH Monograph, Federal Biological Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry, Bonn.
21. Martinez-Mora, C., Rodriguez, J., Cenis, J. L. and Ruiz-Garcia, L. 2009. Genetic Variability Among Local Apricots (Prunus armeniaca L.). Spanish J. Agr. Res., 7: 855-868.
22. Milosevic, T., Milosevic, N., Glisic, I. and Krska, B. 2010. Characteristics of Promising Apricot (Prunus armeniaca L.) Genetic Resources in Central Serbia Based on Bloosoming Period and Fruit Quality. Hort. Sci., 37: 46-55.
23. Milatovic D., Durovic D., Zec G. 2016. Evaluation of some American apricot cultivars in the region of Belgrade. ActaHortic.1139.24.
24. Panda, D., Panda, S., Pramanik, K. and Mon-dal, S. Karonda (Carissa spp.): An Underutilized Minor Fruit Crop with Therapeutic and Medicinal Use. Int. J. Econ. Plants, 1(1) (2014) 36-41.
25. Paunovic, A. S. and Paunovic, S. A. 1995. Investigation of Apricot Germplasm Prunus armeniaca L. in situ in SFR Yugoslavia. Acta Hort., 384: 55-60. 29.
26. Polat, A. A. and Caliskan, O. 2010. Determination of Growth and Fruit Quality Parameters of Some Apricot Cultivars in Subtropical Climate Conditions of Turkish Mediterranean Region. Acta Hort., 862: 320330.
27. Program, (1999). Program and methods Cultivar fruit, berry and nut crops. Orel, 1999. pp. 430-486. (In Russian).
28. Ristevski, B. and Mitreski, Z. 1986. Biological and Pomological Characteristics of Some Late Varieties of Apricot in SR Macedonia. Acta Hort., 192: 369376.
29. Ruiz, D., Egea, J., 2008b. Phenotypic diversity and relationships of fruit quality traits in apricot (Prunus armeniaca L.) germplasm. Euphytica, 163: 143-158.
30. Unal, M.S., M. Sahin, H. Olmez, B. Celik, B. M. Asma, M. Bas. 1999. The Breeding of Late Flowering and Resistance to Late Spring Frosts Apricots through Crossing (First Phase). Tagem /IY/96- 06-02014, Fruit Research Institute, Malatya Turkey.
31. UPOV (2007). International Union the Protection of New Varieties of Plants. (2007). Apricot species UPOV Code: PRUNU_ARM Prunus armeniaca L. TG/70/4.
32. Vachun Z., 2002. Variability of Phenophase of Blossoming and Differences between Beginning of Fertile Period in Apricots (Prunus armeniaca L.). Acta Univ. Agric. et Silvic., Mendel. Brun., L (1): 21-32
33. Vakhushti Batonishvili Description of the Life of Kartli in the Kingdom of Georgia - Volume IV. S. Kaukhchishvili's edition. 1973 (In Georgian).
34. Vangdal E. (1985). Quality criteria for fruitfor fresh consumption. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, 35. pp. 41-47
35. Vavilov N.I. (1935) Theoretical basis of plant breeding [in Russian]. Volume I, Moscow: Selkhozizdad publishing house, pp.26-79.
36. Zhebentyayeva, T., Ledbetter, C., Burgos, L. & Llacer, G. Apricot. Fruit Breeding 415-458 (Springer, 2012).
37. Zhukovsky, P.M. (1971) Cultivated plants and their relatives [in Georgian]. Moscow: Kolos publishing house, pp.481-565.
ANALYSIS OF THE STATE OF ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES USE AND THEIR IMPACT ON
THE ENVIRONMENT AND LIVING ORGANISMS
Matusiak M.,
Candidate of Agricultural Sciences, Senior Lecturer, Vinnytsia National Agrarian University
Vargatiuk O.
Lecturer of the Vinnytsia Transport College, Vinnytsia, Ukraine
Abstract
Ecological features of the organochlorine pesticides use in agriculture are investigated in the paper. In addition, general characteristics of the pesticide preparations found in Ukraine and specific features of the organochlorine pesticides have been analyzed. The toxicological effect of organochlorine pesticides on humans and other living organisms and technology of their application in agriculture have been examined.
The review of hygienic indicators of pesticides rationing is carried out in the work.
Ways to reduce pesticide environmental pollution are considered. The basic directions of their application, which allow to minimize toxic loading on the environment are offered. Methods of neutralization of unusable pesticides are considered. Among the various techniques of disposal, recycling and recovery of toxic waste, which are used today, three main groups are distinguished: thermal, chemical and biological methods.
Keywords: pesticides, toxic waste, rationing, maximum permissible concentration, lethal dose, insecticides, fungicides.
Introduction. On the territory of Ukraine, a significant quantity of inapplicable and banned pesticides of the category «A» (prohibited), «B» (unusable), «C» (unidentified) has been accumulated. The final amount is not established, despite repeated attempts to conduct a comprehensive state inventory, what indicates a negative status of their recording and storage. The current state of storage of pesticides has affected the multiple exaggeration of their maximum permissible concentration (MPC) in the soils of a number of regions of Ukraine.
This, in turn, contributes to the increase in the incidence rate of the population of Ukraine, which is characterized by regional differentiation. It is associated with the general environmental pollution, in which the pesticide component has a significant share. Recently, there has been a significant increase in the number of diseases in different parts of the country. Thus, these data suggest that pesticides of category «A», «B» and «C» can be considered highly toxic substances of slow action against living systems.
Meanwhile, in the world practice there are neither specially developed accepted methods of the banned pesticides disposal, nor the scientific methodology or basic technologies developments for doing such work. As a rule, utilization is reduced to their incineration,
containerization or burial on the specially designated sites. The possibility of effective use of the eleminated active substances of pesticides in various industries has determined the development of reagent methods for the removal of unusable organochlorine pesticides.
The purpose and objectives of the study. The aim of the work is to determine the number of unusable orga-nochlorine pesticides and methods of their neutralization. To achieve this goal it is necessary to solve the following tasks:
- analyze the current state of storage, technical processing and disposal of pesticides, including unusable ones;
- characterize the toxic effect of pesticides on the environmental medium and living organisms;
- substantiate ways to reduce the toxic effects of pesticides on the environment and living systems.
The object of the research is the process of the orga-nochlorine pesticides toxity elimination.
Materials and methods of research. Theoretical studies of the basic laws of the organochlorine pesticides reagent treatment are executed on the basis of provisions of the general organic substances chemical technology. The operational characteristics of various technical mixtures, which included organochlorine pes-
