Impacts and comparisons of pruning and sanding on cranberry uprights and yield production

Impacts and comparisons of pruning and sanding on cranberry uprights and yield production

Summary

In Spring 2003, 6 study beds were selected at one site in Rochester, MA and one site in South Carver, MA. The six treatments are: pruning + 0, 20, 40, or 60 lb/A nitrogen, sanding + 30 lb/A nitrogen, and no pruning + 30 lb/A nitrogen. The sites received pruning and nitrogen treatments as proposed. However, the first South Carver site was abandoned in 2003 due to the grower’s management decision to renovate the section of cranberry bog (poison ivy infestation). Another site in South Carver was selected in 2004 and 5 of the 6 treatments were applied to both Rochester and the second South Carver site in 2004. The sanding treatment is planned for the winter 2004-05. Upright samples and fruit were collected and evaluated from both sites in 2004. Treatment effects must be interpreted carefully as one of the treatments has not yet been performed (sanding). Various treatment effects were noted in a few of the measured variables, but overall, no negative effects of pruning were noted. Treatment effects on yield were also variable, but overall, nitrogen had a minimal negative effect on yield. Pruning did not seem to adversely affect yield production.

Objectives/Performance Targets

• Comparison of sanding (common practice) and mechanical pruning (uncommon practice) as horticultural practices to increase cranberry vine vigor and improve canopy architecture.

• Determine if pruning has any negative impacts on yield or general plant health.

• Evaluate interaction of pruning and various nitrogen management plans on cranberry productivity.

Accomplishments/Milestones

Demonstration beds were selected and monitored.

Treatments (pruning and nitrogen rates) were applied by the grower.

Baseline and post-treatment upright samples were collected from 2 sites by research personnel.

Fruit samples were collected in the fall.

One site was dropped from the study in 2003. This is certainly an unfortunate event as we lost one year of data. However, the site was quite compromised by poison ivy infestation and may have affected treatment results. The grower assigned a new site to the project in 2004. Two years of data have been collected for the Rochester site.

Sanding was not accomplished in Year 2 due to labor shortage and management choices on the grower’s part. The grower has informed the PI that sanding of the selected beds will occur during the winter of 2004-05. This is not a serious set back as sanding is typically done only once every 3 to 5 years and within the scope of this project, would have only occurred once in any event.

Impacts and Contributions/Outcomes

This is the second year of a 3-year study. We interacted with our farmer-cooperator only in Years 1 and 2. Impacts on the grower community and audiences are anticipated to occur in the latter stages of the project.