Apple replant disease (ARD) is a common problem typified by stunted growth and reduced yields in successive plantings of apple (Malus ×domestica Borkh.) in old orchard sites. ARD is attributed to biotic and abiotic factors; it is highly variable by sites, making it difficult to diagnose and overcome. In this experiment, we tested several methods of controlling ARD in a site previously planted to apple for >80 years. Our objective was to evaluate practical methods for ARD management. We compared three different experimental factors: four preplant soil treatments (PPSTs) (compost amendments, fumigation with Telone C-17, compost plus fumigation, and untreated soil); two replanting positions (in the old tree rows vs. old grass lanes); and five clonal rootstocks (`M.26', `M.7', `G.16', `CG.6210', and `G.30') during 4 years after replanting. The PPSTs had little effect on tree growth or yields during 4 years. Tree growth was affected by planting position, with trees planted in old grass lanes performing better than those in the old tree rows. Rootstocks were the most important factor in overcoming ARD; trees on `CG.6210' and `CG.30' grew better and yielded more than those on other rootstocks. Rootstock selection and row repositioning were more beneficial than soil fumigation or compost amendments in controlling ARD at this orchard.
Michelle M. Leinfelder and Ian A. Merwin
Michelle M. Leinfelder, Ian A. Merwin, Gennaro Fazio and Terence Robinson*
We are testing control tactics for apple replant disease (ARD) complex, a worldwide problem for fruit growers that is attributed to various biotic and abiotic soil factors. In Nov. 2001, “Empire” apple trees on five rootstocks (M.26, M.7, G.16, CG.6210, and G.30) were planted into four preplant soil treatments—commercial compost at 492 kg/ha soil-incorporated and 492 kg·ha-1 surface-applied), soil fumigation with Telone C-17 (400 L·ha-1 of 1,3-dichloropropene + chloropicrin injected at 30 cm depth five weeks prior to replanting), compost plus fumigant combination, and untreated controls—at an old orchard site in Ithaca, N.Y. Trees were replanted in rows perpendicular to, and either in or out of, previous orchard rows. Irrigation was applied as needed, and N-P-K fertilizer was applied in 2001 to all non-compost treatments to compensate for nutrients in the compost treatment. After two growing seasons, the rootstock factor has contributed most to tree-growth differences. CG.6210 rootstock supported greater growth in trunk diameter, central leader height, and lateral shoot growth (P < 0.05), regardless of preplant soil treatments and replant position. Trees on M.26 grew least over a two year period. Replant growth was greater in old grass lanes than in old tree rows, despite higher root-lesion nematode populations in previous grass lanes. Growth responses to preplant soil fumigation were negligible. Preplant compost did not increase tree growth during year one, but did increase lateral branch growth in year two. Results thus far suggest that replanting apple trees out of the old tree-row locations, and using ARD tolerant rootstocks such as CG.6210, may be more effective than soil fumigation for control of ARD in some old orchard sites.
D.K. Isutsa, I.A. Merwin and B.B. Brodie
Apple replant disease (ARD) is a serious problem in fruit production, and none of the major clonal rootstocks are resistant to ARD. We have screened Malus domestica clones and species accessions from the USDA Malus Germplasm Repository at Geneva, N.Y., including M. angustifolia-2375.03 (MA), M. coronaria-2966.01 (MC), M. fusca-3031.01 (MF), M. ioensis-3059.01 (MI), M. sieversii-3530.01 (MS), and M. kirghisorum-3578.01 (MK), for resistance to ARD and root-lesion nematodes (RLN, Pratylenchus spp.), in a composite soil collected from 11 New York orchards with known ARD. Plant dry mass and height, root necrosis, and nematode populations in different apple species and clones were compared after 60 days growth in steam-pasteurized (PS), RLN-inoculated (IS), and naturally infested field (FS) soils with 1200 RLN per 100 cm3. More severe stunting, reduced plant dry mass, and root necrosis occurred in FS seedlings compared with those in PS, but M. angustifolia seedlings were substantially more resistant or tolerant to RLN and ARD than the other species tested. Plant dry mass ranked MK>MS>MA>MI>MF>MC, and these differences were significant at the 5% level. RLN root populations were negatively correlated with plant dry mass, and accounted for about 10% of its variation, with nematode populations in roots ranking MC>MF>MK>MI>MS>MA. Useful resistance to ARD and parasitic nematodes apparently exists within Malus germplasm collections, and can be identified by testing more genotypes, developing rapid resistance screening methods, and comparing RLN host preferences among Malus genotypes and various orchard cover crops.
Dorcas K. Isutsa and Ian A. Merwin
We tested 40 seedling lots and 17 clonal accessions—representing 941 genotypes and 19 species or interspecific hybrids of Malus—for their resistance or tolerance to apple replant disease (ARD) in a mixture of five New York soils with known replant problems. Total plant biomass, root necrosis, root-infesting fungi, and root-lesion nematode (RLN; Pratylenchus penetrans Cobb) or dagger nematode (DN; Xiphinema americanum Cobb) populations were evaluated in apple seedlings and clones grown for ≈60 days in the composite soil. In addition to phytophagous nematodes, various Pythium, Cylindrocarpon, Fusarium, Rhizoctonia and Phytophthora species were isolated from roots grown in the test soil. Plant growth response was categorized by a relative biomass index (RBI), calculated as total plant dry weight in the pasteurized field soil (PS) minus that in an unpasteurized field soil (FS), divided by PS. Nematode reproduction on each genotype was defined by a relative reproduction index (RRI), calculated as final nematode populations in roots and soil (Pf) minus initial soil populations (Pi), divided by Pi. The RBI, RRI, and other responses of accessions to ARD soil were used to rate their resistance, tolerance, or susceptibility to apple replant disease. None of the accessions was completely resistant to ARD pathogens in our test soil. Seedling accessions of M. sieversii Roem. and M. kirghisorum Ponom. appeared to have some tolerance to ARD, based upon their low RRIs and RBIs. Three clonal rootstock accessions (G.65, CG.6210, and G.30), and four other clones (M. baccata Borkh.—1883.h, M. xanthocarpa Langenf.—Xan, M. spectabilis Borkh.— PI589404, and M. mandshurica Schneid.—364.s) were categorized as tolerant to ARD. The disease response of other accessions was rated as susceptible or too variable to classify. We concluded that sources of genetic tolerance to ARD exist in Malus germplasm collections and could be used in breeding and selecting clonal rootstocks for improved control of orchard replant pathogens.
P. Gordon Braun, Keith D. Fuller, Kenneth McRae and Sherry A.E. Fillmore
variance and contrast analysis on yield, trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA), and yield efficiency for apple trees in apple replant disease infested soil. z Fig. 1. Yearly means (2002 to 2007) and regression analysis of the trunk cross-sectional area of
Joseph F. Costante, Wesley R. Autio and Lorraine P. Berkett
Shengrui Yao, Ian A. Merwin and Michael G. Brown
Root observations in situ with a rhizotron camera enabled us to compare the performance of apple (Malus ×domestica Borkh.) trees on 3 rootstock clones planted in a New York orchard with a history of apple replant disease. Visual observations were conducted in situ at monthly intervals during 2 growing seasons through minirhizotron tubes for trees grafted onto 3 rootstocks: M.7 (M.7), Geneva 30 (G.30), and Cornell-Geneva 6210 (CG.6210). There were 3 preplant soil treatments (fumigation, compost amendment, and untreated checks) and 2 tree planting positions (within the old tree rows or in the old grass lanes of the previous orchard at this site). Preplant soil treatments and old-row versus grass-lane tree planting positions had no apparent influence on root systems, whereas rootstock clones substantially influenced root growth and demography. New root emergence was suppressed during the first fruit-bearing year (2004) on all 3 rootstock clones compared with the previous nonbearing year (2003). A root-growth peak in early July accounted for more than 50% of all new roots in 2003, but there was no midsummer root-growth peak in 2004. The median lifespan for roots of CG.6210 was twice that of G.30 and M.7 in 2004. Also, CG.6210 had more roots below 30 cm depth, whereas M.7 had more roots from 11 to 20 cm depth. Trees on CG.6210 were bigger, yielded more fruit, and had the highest yield efficiency in the third year after planting compared with trees on G.30 and M.7 rootstocks. Crop load appeared to inhibit new root development and changed root-growth dynamics during the first bearing year, with a resurgence in new root growth after fruit was harvested in October 2004. Rootstock genotype was the dominant influence on root lifespan and distribution in this study, whereas preplant soil fumigation, compost amendments, and replanting positions had little apparent impact on root characteristics despite their influence on above-ground tree growth and yield.
Joseph F. Costante, Wesley R. Autio and Lorraine P. Berkett
`Rogers Red McIntosh' apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) trees on MM. 111, MM. 106, M.7a, or M.26 were planted in 1984 on an old orchard site, diagnosed with an apple replant disease (ARD) problem. Soil treatments included Telone c-17, Vorlex, Nemacur 3, or not treated. After six years, tree performance problems usually associated with severe ARD did not develop. Lesion nematode [Pratylenchus penetrans (Cobb) Filipjev and Schuurmans-Stekhoven] populations feeding within or on the surface of roots were not affected by nematicide treatments nor rootstocks, even though slightly damaging levels were found in 1986. At the end of the sixth growing season, trunk cross-sectional areas were similar for trees in treated and in untreated soils. Trees on MM. 111 and MM. 106 were the largest, and those on M.26 were the smallest. Cumulative yield was not influenced by soil treatments, but trees on MM. 111 produced the greatest cumulative yields, whereas trees on M.26 were the most yield efficient.
Mike Willett, T.J. Smith, A.B. Peterson, H. Hinman, R.G. Stevens, T. Ley, P. Tvergyak, K.M. Williams, K.M. Maib and J.W. Watson
In the mid-1980s, a statewide educational program was initiated to help improve productivity in replanted apple orchards. This effort began with a study of the background of the problem in Washington and an assessment of the problems growers faced when replanting orchards. An array of potential limiting factors were identified-most important, specific apple replant disease (SARD)-but also low soil pH, poor irrigation practices, arsenic (As) spray residues in the soil, soil compaction, nematodes, nutrient deficiencies, and selection of the appropriate orchard system. The educational program was delivered using a variety of methods to reach audience members with different learning styles and to provide various levels of technical information, focusing on ways to correct all limiting factors in replant situations. Results have been: Acceptance of soil fumigation as a management tool: increased recognition of soil physical, chemical, and moisture problems; reduced reliance on seedling rootstock, and an increase in the use of dwarfing, precocious understocks; and better apple tree growth and production in old apple orchard soils.
Ian A. Merwin, Terence L. Robinson, Steven A. Hoying and Rachel R. Byard
We are evaluating the severity of apple replant disease (ARD)-characterized by stunted tree growth in replanted orchards, attributed to root pathogens and/or edaphic conditions-and testing preplant soil treatments for control of this wide-spread problem. Soil samples were collected during 1996–98 at 17 orchards in New York's major fruit growing regions and plant-parasitic nematodes and nutrient availability were quantified. Apple seedlings and potted trees on M.9 rootstocks were grown in fumigated and non-fumigated soil samples as a diagnostic bioassay for ARD severity. Factorial combinations of metam sodium, consecutive cover crops of Brassica juncea `Forge' and Sorghum sudanense `Trudan 8', and fertilizer/lime amendments were applied as preplant treatments at each orchard, 9 to 12 months before trees were replanted. Diagnostic bioassays indicated severe ARD at more than half the sites, and nematodes were not a major factor. Responses to preplant soil treatments were highly variable across the 17 farms. The best tree growth and yields followed preplant metam sodium at some sites, Brassica juncea and Sorghum sudanense at others, or fertilizer amendments at a few others. Tree responses to combined preplant soil treatments were often additive, and greater at irrigated sites. Comparisons of preplant diagnostic bioassay results with subsequent tree responses to metam sodium at the 17 orchards indicated that diagnostic tests predicted from 7% to 75% of tree growth response to soil fumigation, varying substantially across years and sites. It appeared that ARD was variable and site specific in New York orchards, and could not be controlled effectively with a uniform preplant soil treatment across our major fruit-growing regions.