Eur.J.Hortic.Sci. 81 (6) 321-326 | DOI: 10.17660/eJHS.2016/81.6.5|
ISSN 1611-4426 print and 1611-4434 online | © ISHS 2016 | European Journal of Horticultural Science | Original article
Comparison of nonstructural carbohydrates across cranberry cultivars
L.W. DeVetter1,2, E. Beaver1, J. Colquhoun1, J. Zalapa1,3 and R. Harbut1,4
1Department of Horticulture, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA
2Current address at: Northwestern Washington Research and Extension Center, Washington State University, Mount Vernon, WA 98273, USA
3U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Vegetable Crops Research Unit, Madison, WI 53706, USA
4Current address: Kwantlen Polytechnic University, Surrey, BC V3W2M8, Canada
Carbohydrate competition within reproductive (fruiting) uprights has been proposed to explain low fruit set and biennial bearing tendencies of cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon). Yet, comparisons of nonstructural carbohydrate concentrations during critical phenological stages across cultivars that differ in biennial bearing tendencies and return bloom potential are lacking. This study sought to address this deficiency by comparing total nonstructural carbohydrates (TNSC), soluble sugars (SS), and starch concentrations across cultivars that reportedly differ in biennial bearing tendencies and return bloom potential. Plant material representing 'Grygleski Hybrid 1' ('GH1'), 'Stevens', and 'HyRed' were collected from a commercial cranberry marsh located in central Wisconsin. Concentrations of sucrose, glucose, fructose, and starch were determined via high-performance liquid chromatography. Vegetative uprights generally had greater concentrations of carbohydrates relative to reproductive uprights, while roots had the lowest concentration across all cultivars. Concentrations of TNSC and SS in reproductive uprights were lowest on 30 July 2013, which corresponds to late bloom/early fruit set and terminal bud development. 'Stevens' and 'HyRed' TNSC and SS concentrations subsequently increased after this period, whereas concentrations remained low in 'GH1'. Return bloom potential was lower in 'GH1' relative to 'Stevens' and 'HyRed'. These findings support the explanation that carbohydrate limitation in reproductive uprights may contribute to biennial bearing by reducing the potential for return bloom.
biennial bearing, carbohydrate partitioning, soluble sugars, starch, Vaccinium macrocarpon
Significance of this study
What is already known on this subject?
What are the new findings?
Cranberries exhibit biennial bearing, but the physiological mechanisms responsible for this phenomenon have undergone limited study.
What is the expected impact on horticulture?
Cultivars with higher return bloom potential had greater concentrations of carbohydrates than those with low return bloom potential during critical sampling periods.
Results suggest techniques that increase plant nonstructural carbohydrate status may also enhance return bloom and circumvent biennial bearing.
Baumann, T.E., and Eaton, G.W. (1986). Competition among berries on the cranberry upright. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 111, 869–872.
Birrenkott, B.A., Henson, C.A., and Stang, E.J. (1991). Carbohydrate levels and the development of fruit in cranberry. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 116, 174–178.
Botelho, M.R., and Vanden Heuvel, J.E. (2005). High dissolved oxygen concentration of floodwater reduces carbohydrate concentration of cranberry uprights during flooding. HortScience 40, 569–573.
Brown, A.O., and McNeil, J.N. (2006). Fruit production in cranberry (Ericaceae: Vaccinium macrocarpon): A bet-hedging strategy to optimize reproductive effort. Amer. J. Bot. 93, 910–916. https:/doi.org/10.3732/ajb.93.6.910.
Costantini, E., Landi, L., Silvestroni, O., Pandolfini, T., Spena, A., and Mezzetti, B. (2007). Auxin synthesis-encoding transgene enhances fecundity. Plant Physiol. 143, 1689–1694. https:/doi.org/10.1104/pp.106.095232.
Dennis, F.G., and Neilsen, J.C. (1999). Physiological factors affecting biennial bearing in tree fruit: the role of seeds in apple. HortTechnology 9, 317–322.
DeVetter, L.W., Harbut, R., and Colquhoun, J. (2013). Bud development, return bloom, and external bud appearance differ among cranberry cultivars. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 138, 338–343.
Eaton, G.W. (1978). Floral induction and biennial bearing in the cranberry. Fruit Var. J. 32, 58–60.
Eaton, G.W., and Kyte, T.R. (1978). Yield component analysis in the cranberry. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 103, 578–583.
Eck, P. (1990). The American Cranberry. (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press).
Hagidimitriou, M., and Roper, T.R. (1994). Seasonal changes in nonstructural carbohydrates in cranberry. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 119, 1029–1033.
Harley, C.P. (1925). Normal variation in the chemical composition of fruit spurs and the relation of composition to fruit bud formation. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 22, 134–146.
Goldschmidt, E.E., Aschkenazi, N., Herzano, Y., Schaffer, A.S., and Monselise, S.P. (1985). A role for carbohydrate levels in the control of flowering in citrus. Sci. Hortic. 26, 159–166. https:/doi.org/10.1016/0304-4238(85)90008-1.
Lacroix, D.S. (1926). Cranberry flower-bud investigations. J. Agr. Res. 33, 355–363.
Mezzetti, B., Landi, L., Pandolfini, T., and Spena, A. (2004). The defH9-iaaM auxin-synthesizing gene increases plant fecundity and fruit production in strawberry and raspberry. BMC Biotechnol. 4, 4. https:/doi.org/10.1186/1472-6750-4-4.
Patten, K.D., and Wang, J. (1994). Leaf removal and terminal bud size affect the fruiting habits of cranberry. HortScience 29, 997–998.
Roberts, R.H., and Struckmeyer, B.E. (1943). Blossom induction of the cranberry. Brief paper. Plant Physiol. 18, 534–536. https:/doi.org/10.1104/pp.18.3.534.
Roper, T.R. (2008). Growing cranberries in Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Extension Publication. https://fruit.wisc.edu/cranberries/ (accessed Sept. 19, 2016).
Roper, T.R., and Klueh, J.S. (1994). Removing new growth reduces fruiting in cranberry. HortScience 29, 199–201.
Roper, T.R., and Klueh, J.S. (1996). Movement patterns of carbon from source to sink in cranberry. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 12, 846–847.
Roper, T.R., Klueh, J.S., and Hagidimitriou, M. (1995). Shading timing and intensity influences fruit set and yield in cranberry. HortScience 30, 525–527.
Smith, H.M., and Samach, A. (2013). Constraints to obtaining consistent annual yields in perennial tree crops. I: Heavy fruit load dominates over vegetative growth. Plant Sci. 207, 158–167. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2013.02.014.
Strik, B.C., Roper, T.R., DeMoranville, C.J., Davenport, J.R., and Poole, A.P. (1991). Cultivar and growing region influence return bloom in cranberry uprights. HortScience 26, 1366–1367.
Workmaster, B.A., Palta, J.P., and Roper, T.R. (1997). Terminology for cranberry bud development and growth. Natl. Cranberry Mag. Cranberries 61, 11–14.
Vanden Heuvel, J.E., and Davenport, J.R. (2005). Effects of light, temperature, defoliation, and fruiting on carbon assimilation and partitioning in potted cranberry. HortScience 40, 1699–1704.
Received: 27 July 2016 | Accepted: 4 October 2016 | Published: 23 December 2016 | Available online: 23 December 2016