The rootstock effects on plant adaptability,production, fruit quality,and nutrition in the peach (cv. ‘Suncrest’)

In clayey and calcareous soils without a stable irrigation and fertilization system, the type of rootstock can particularly affect both the vegetative and productive properties of ‘Suncrest’ peach (Prunus persica L. Batsch) plants, and the qualitative and nutritional attributes of their fruit. The GF677 rootstock (P. persica × Prunus amygdalus) promoted the highest vegetative development, followed by Julior (Prunus insistitia). The ‘Suncrest’ on Ishtara (Prunus cerasifera × P. persica) × (P. cerasifera × Prunus salicina)] and Barrier1 (P. persica × Prunus davidiana) had lower, but similar, plant vigour, but the latter rootstock differed in its higher production of pruned wood. The lowest adaptability to these cultivation conditions was observed for ‘Suncrest’ grafted onto Citation (P. persica × P. salicina), which showed the lowest plant development and production. For the plant yield, the ‘Suncrest’ grafted onto GF677, Julior, Ishtara, and Barrier1 were all similar. The fruit yield and both the canopy volume and pruned wood of ‘Suncrest’ grafted onto Ishtara showed a particular relationship, giving the best indices of yield efficiency and plant physiological equilibrium. Moreover, the same rootstock promoted the largest fruit size, while the smallest fruit were found on GF677 rootstock. The fruit from the Citation ‘Suncrest’ ripened 3 days early, while those from Barrier1 had a late fruit ripening. Firmness, soluble solids and the soluble solids to total acidity ratio were only affected slightly by the different rootstocks, while the total acidity of the fruit varied significantly according to rootstock; the fruit from ‘Suncrest’ grafted onto Barrier1, Julior, and Citation had the highest total acidities. The rootstock effects on the nutritional attributes of the fruit were relevant. The ‘Suncrest’ on Julior and GF677, followed by Ishtara, produced fruit with the greatest antioxidant activities and total phenolic contents. The ‘Suncrest’ on Citation and, especially, Barrier1 had reduced nutritional values of the fruit. The variations in antioxidant activities and total phenolic contents showed a positive correlation.