2014 ◽  
Vol 238 ◽  
pp. 227-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
María J. San José ◽  
Sonia Alvarez ◽  
Francisco J. Peñas ◽  
Iris García
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
pp. 165-172
Author(s):  
Sheng Wu ◽  
Boxiang Xiao ◽  
Weiliang Wen ◽  
Xinyu Guo

Agronomy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 236
Author(s):  
Angela Libutti ◽  
Anna Rita Bernadette Cammerino ◽  
Massimo Monteleone

In the EU, bioenergy is by far the most significant renewable energy source and more than two thirds of biomass utilized for energy conversion consists of forestry and agricultural residues, such as fruit tree pruning. Although still underutilized, biomass from pruning is a relevant energy feedstock that does not generate additional demand for land, nor negative impact on the environment and biodiversity. On the other hand, previously shredded pruning left in the field may sustain agricultural processes and help provide beneficial ecological services. In the latter case, the most relevant result is the increase in soil organic carbon, an essential factor for improving soil quality and promoting climate regulation. As a result, a “dilemma” arises for farmers over two conflicting pruning management options: “pruning to energy” vs. “pruning to soil”, respectively. The present study, performed in the frame of the Horizon 2020 project “uP_running”, is offering a straightforward evaluation tool to assess weather biomass resulting from fruit tree pruning could be removed from the field and used as energy feedstock without compromising both soil quality and the provision of important ecosystem services.


2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-103
Author(s):  
Tomasz Nowakowski ◽  
Maciej Nowakowski

AbstractChanges in horticulture induce fruit producers to introduce more efficient tree pruning systems. The increase of efficiency is related to application of various cutting devices, the effect of which on cultivated fruit trees has not been completely recognized yet. Therefore, the objective of the paper was to compare and assess the fruit tree sprouts cut with various types of cutting units. Four cutting units were applied in the study: pruning shears, anvil secateur, circular saw and chain saw and four cultivars of fruit trees: apple, pear, plum and cherry tree. A fractal dimension was used for assessment of the cutting quality that allows assessment of the spatial complexity of the image of the cut sprout. The obtained results allowed determination that the least sprout damaging cutting system is in case of the use of the anvil secateur and pruning shears (the best cutting quality) then circular and chain saw. It was also proved that susceptibility to damage is characteristic for the investigated fruit trees. Pear trees proved the lowest susceptibility to damages regardless the cutting unit.


2021 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-21
Author(s):  
Manjeet Singh ◽  
Thakur Singh ◽  
Rupinder Chandel

Fruit tree pruning is the cutting and removing of selected parts of a fruit tree. It spans through quite a number of horticultural techniques. Pruning includes cutting branches back, sometimes removing smaller limbs entirely and more so the removal of young shoots, buds and leaves. Established orchard practice of both organic and nonorganic types typically includes pruning. Pruning can control growth, remove dead or diseased wood, and stimulate the formation of flowers and fruit buds. Pruning and training young trees improves their later productivity and longevity and can also prevent later injury from weak crotches or forks (where a tree trunk splits into two or more branches) that break from the weight of fruit, snow, or ice on the branches. However, the efficiency of pruning methods is also important. Manual pruning has constraints like lower field Capacity and incomplete pruning in case of tall trees. Therefore, a tractor operated 1-row frontal pre pruner with electro hydraulic control was tested for Kinnow Mandarin and Guava orchards. The time involved for top and side pruning was 23.30 and 46.80 min/acre, respectively and there was 99.32 - 99.38 % saving in time as compared to manual pruning.


2015 ◽  
Vol 58 (5) ◽  
pp. 751-760 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jong Hwan Park ◽  
Yong Sik Ok ◽  
Seong Heon Kim ◽  
Se Won Kang ◽  
Ju Sik Cho ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document