SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Meyve Bilimi / 2026 / Cilt: 13 Sayı: 1

Phenological Variation and Fruit Quality Attributes of Some Apple Cultivars in High-Density Planting Systems under the Ecological Conditions of Isparta

Isparta Ekolojik Koşullarında Sık Dikim Sisteminde Yetiştirilen Bazı Elma Çeşitlerinin Fenolojik Seyri ile Meyve Kalite Parametrelerinin Belirlenmesi

İlknur Eskimez(ISPARTA UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES)0000-0003-4443-505X
Abdullah Kankaya0000-0003-4134-593X
Cihangir Kara(USAK UNIVERSITY)0009-0005-8153-3144
Mehmet Polat(ISPARTA UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES)0000-0002-2415-4229
Kerem Mertoğlu(USAK UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-0490-9073
Pages
45–52
Publication Date
2026-07-20
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Variation in pH and SSC values indicated chemical differences among the cultivars with ‘Fuji Zehn Aztec’ (pH 3.35; SSC 15.10%) and ‘Rosy Glow’ (pH 3.11; SSC 15.20%) exhibiting higher sweetness and lower acidity compared with ‘Jeromine’ (pH 2.63; SSC 10.70%) and ‘Golden Reinders’ (pH 2.68; SSC 10.90%).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study assessed the phenological, pomological traits, and biochemical quality attributes of four apple cultivars (‘Fuji Zehn Aztec’, ‘Rosy Glow’, ‘Jeromine’, and ‘Golden Reinders’) grafted onto M9 rootstock and grown under high-density planting systems in the conditions of Isparta, Türkiye.
📊
Key Findings & Data:All cultivars produced economically adequate yields for three-year-old trees, with ‘Fuji Zehn Aztec’ demonstrating the highest performance (10.45 kg⸳tree⁻¹).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Variation in pH and SSC values indicated chemical differences among the cultivars with ‘Fuji Zehn Aztec’ (pH 3.35; SSC 15.10%) and ‘Rosy Glow’ (pH 3.11; SSC 15.20%) exhibiting higher sweetness and lower acidity compared with ‘Jeromine’ (pH 2.63; SSC 10.70%) and ‘Golden Reinders’ (pH 2.68; SSC 10.90%).
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Adaptasyon · Genotip–çevre interaksiyonu · M9 rootstock

Abstract

This study assessed the phenological, pomological traits, and biochemical quality attributes of four apple cultivars (‘Fuji Zehn Aztec’, ‘Rosy Glow’, ‘Jeromine’, and ‘Golden Reinders’) grafted onto M9 rootstock and grown under high-density planting systems in the conditions of Isparta, Türkiye. Full bloom and harvest dates differed among cultivars, reflecting distinct developmental progression. All cultivars produced economically adequate yields for three-year-old trees, with ‘Fuji Zehn Aztec’ demonstrating the highest performance (10.45 kg⸳tree⁻¹). CIE-based color measurements revealed strong cultivar-specific peel pigmentation differences, particularly the intense redness in ‘Rosy Glow’ (a* = 37.85) and the high lightness and yellowness of ‘Golden Reinders’ (L* = 76.97; b* = 41.06). Variation in pH and SSC values indicated chemical differences among the cultivars with ‘Fuji Zehn Aztec’ (pH 3.35; SSC 15.10%) and ‘Rosy Glow’ (pH 3.11; SSC 15.20%) exhibiting higher sweetness and lower acidity compared with ‘Jeromine’ (pH 2.63; SSC 10.70%) and ‘Golden Reinders’ (pH 2.68; SSC 10.90%).

Özet

Bu çalışma kapsamında, Isparta koşullarında M9 anacı üzerine aşılı, sık dikim sistemde yetiştirilen, dört elma çeşidinin (‘Fuji Zehn Aztec’, ‘Rosy Glow’, ‘Jeromine’ ve ‘Golden Reinders’) fenolojik, pomolojik ve biyokimyasal kalite parametreleri karakterize edilmiştir. Tam çiçeklenme ve hasat tarihleri çeşitler arasında farklılık göstermiş olup, gelişim seyrinin değişiklik gösterdiği saptanmıştır. Tüm çeşitler dört yaşlı ağaç için ekonomik açıdan yeterli verim gösterirken, en yüksek verim ‘Fuji Zehn Aztec’ (10.45 kg⸳ağaç⁻¹) çeşidinden elde edilmiştir. CIE tabanlı renk ölçümleri, özellikle ‘Rosy Glow’da yoğun kırmızı kabuk rengi (a* = 37.85), ‘Golden Reinders’ ise yüksek parlaklık ve sarılık değerleri (L* = 76.97; b* = 41.06) gösterirken, çeşitler kabuk rengi bakımından ayırmıştır. ‘Fuji Zehn Aztec’ (pH 3.35; SÇKM %15.10) ve ‘Rosy Glow’ (pH 3.11; SÇKM %15.20), ‘Jeromine’ (pH 2.63; SÇKM %10.70) ve ‘Golden Reinders’e (pH 2.68; SÇKM %10.90) kıyasla daha yüksek kuru madde ve pH değerleri sergilemiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Eskimez, İ., Kankaya, A., Kara, C., Polat, M., Mertoğlu, K. (2026). Phenological Variation and Fruit Quality Attributes of Some Apple Cultivars in High-Density Planting Systems under the Ecological Conditions of Isparta. Meyve Bilimi, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 1, 45–52. https://doi.org/10.51532/meyve.1850423

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (43)

  1. Akgül H, Uçgun K, Öztürk G, Kaymak S, 2007. M9 anaçlı Jersey Mac elma çeşidinde farklı azot dozlarının verim ve kaliteye etkileri. 5. Ulusal Bahçe Bitkileri Kongresi 4–7 Eylül, Erzurum, Türkiye.
  2. Balta MF, Karakaya O, Kurt H, Yılmaz M, Uzun S, Balta F, 2022. Phytochemical Variation of Native Apple Germplasm Resources From the Eastern Black Sea Region, Turkey. Erwerbs-Obstbau 64(4): 685-695. doi: 10.1007/s10341-022-00735-1
  3. Bayav A, Karlı B, 2020. Isparta ve Karaman İllerinde Elma Üretim Maliyetinin Karşılaştırılması. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi 25(2): 225-236. doi: 10.37908/mkutbd.687080
  4. Baytekin S, Akça Y, 2011. M9 Elma Anacı Üzerine Aşılı Farklı Elma Çeşitlerinin Performanslarının Belirlenmesi. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Gaziosmanpaşa University, 45-51.
  5. Boyer J, Liu RH, 2004. Apple Phytochemicals and their Health Benefits. Nutrition Journal 3(1): 5. doi: 10.1186/1475-2891-3-5.
  6. Çalhan Ö, Eren İ, Seçmen T, Güneylİ A, Onursal CE, Koyuncu MA, 2015. Determination of Storage and Shelf Life Quality of Jeromine Apple Variety Grown in the Isparta. Sixth International Scientific Agricultural Symposium (Agrosym 2015), 15–18 October 2015, 1001–1006, Jahorina, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
  7. Eskimez İ, Polat M, Mertoğlu K, 2020. Phenological and Physico-Chemical Characteristics of Arapkızı, Jonagold and Fuji Kiku Apple (Malus Domestica Bork.) Varieties Grafted on M9 Rootstock in Isparta Ecological Conditions. Uluslararası Tarım ve Yaban Hayatı Bilimleri Dergisi 6(2): 152–159. doi: 10.5555/20203569174
  8. Fallahi E, Fallahi B, Shafii B, Amiri ME, 2009. Bloom and Harvest Dates, Fruit Quality Attributes, and Yield of Modern Peach Cultivars in the Intermountain Western United States. HortTechnology 19(4): 823-830. doi: 10.21273/HORTTECH.19.4.823
  9. FAOSTAT, 2025. Crops and livestock product. Apples Production Statistics. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC. Accessed 10 December 2025.
  10. Hyson DA, 2011. A Comprehensive Review of Apples and Apple Components and their Relationship to Human Health. Advances in Nutrition 2(5): 408–420. doi: 10.3945/an.111.000513
  11. Iglesias I, Echeverría G, Soria Y, 2008. Differences in Fruit Colour Development, Anthocyanin Content, Fruit Quality and Consumer Acceptability of Eight ‘Gala’ apple Strains. Scientia Horticulturae 119(1): 32-40.doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2008.07.004
  12. Kalvāne G, Gribuste Z, Kalvāns A, 2021. Full Flowering Phenology of Apple Tree (Malus domestica) in Pūre Orchard, Latvia from 1959 to 2019. Advances in Science and Research 18: 93-97. doi: 10.5194/asr-18-93-2021
  13. Kamoutsis A, Matsoukis A, Bolla V, 2023. Apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) Phenology in Relation to Topoclimate in Central Macedonia, Greece. Current Agriculture Research Journal 11(2): 411-418. doi: 10.12944/CARJ.11.2.05
  14. Karaçalı İ, 2012. Bahçe Ürünlerinin Muhafazası ve Pazarlanması. Hasat Öncesi Dönemde Gelişmeyi Etkileyen Faktörler. Ege Üniversitesi Yayınları, Yayın No: 494, İzmir, Türkiye.
  15. Kaşka N, 1997. Türkiye’de Elma Yetiştiriciliğinin Önemi, Sorunları ve Çözüm Yolları. Yumuşak Çekirdekli Meyveler Sempozyumu, 2-5 Eylül, Yalova, Türkiye.
  16. Kuang L, Wang Z, Cheng Y, Li H, Li J, Shen Y, Zhang J, Xu G, 2024. Cultivar and Origin Authentication of ‘Fuji’ and ‘Gala’ Apples from Two Dominant origins of China based on quality attributes. Food Chemistry X 23: 101643. doi: 10.1016/j.fochx.2024.101643
  17. Macit İ, Aydın E, Tas A, Gundogdu M, 2021. Fruit Quality Properties of the Local Apple Varieties of Anatolia. Sustainability 13(11): 6127. doi: 10.3390/su13116127
  18. Mertoğlu K, Akkurt E, Evrenosoğlu Y, Çolak AM, Esatbeyoglu T, 2022. Horticultural Characteristics of Summer Apple Cultivars from Turkey. Plants 11(6): 771. doi: 10.3390/plants11060771
  19. Musacchi S, Serra S, 2018. Apple Fruit Quality: Overview on Pre-Harvest Factors. Scientia Horticulturae 234: 409-430. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2017.12.057
  20. Mushtaq R, Pandit A, Ali MT, Raja RHS, Sharma MK, Nazir N, Khalil, A, 2018. Phenological Features of Four Exotic Apple Cultivars on M9T337 Rootstock Under High Density Plantation in North Himalayan Region of India. Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology 29: 43317. doi: 10.9734/CJAST/2018/43317
  21. Ozkan Y, Yildiz K, Kucuker E, Cekic C, Ozgen M, Akca Y, 2016. Performance of ‘Fuji’ Apple on M9 Rootstock in Different Tree Training Systems for the First Five Years. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 18(1): 1647–1653.
  22. Özçağıran R, Ünal A, Özeker E, İsfendiyaroğlu M. 2005. Ilıman İklim Meyve Türleri, Yumuşak Çekirdekli Meyveler. Ege University Press, Vol 2, İzmir, Türkiye.
  23. Özturk B, Bektas E, Aglar E, Karakaya O, Gun S, 2018. Cracking and Quality Attributes of Jujube Fruits as Affected by Covering and Pre-Harvest Parka and GA3 Treatments. Scientia Horticulturae 240: 65-71. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2018.06.004
  24. Polat M, Mertoğlu K, Eskimez İ, 2020. Elmada Bazı Özelliklerin Birlikte Ele Alınabilme Potansiyelleri: Pinova Örneği. Ziraat Mühendisliği 370: 115-125. doi: 10.33724/zm.743345
  25. Polat Y, Eren H, İmrak B, Kafkas NE, 2025. Determination Phenologial and Fruit Quality Performances of Some Standard Apple Varie.7161ties Grown in the Ereğli (Konya) Region. Anadolu Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi 40(3): 557-575. doi: 107161/omuanajas.1707829
  26. Reig G, Lordan J, Hoying S, Fargione M, Donahue DJ, Francescatto P, Acimovic D, Fazio G, Robinson T, 2020. Long-term performance of ‘Delicious’ apple trees grafted on Geneva® rootstocks and trained to four high-density systems under New York State climatic conditions. HortScience 55(10): 1538-1550. doi: 10.21273/HORTSCI14904-20
  27. Ropelewska E, Szwejda-Grzybowska J, Mieszczakowska-Frąc M, Celejewska K, Kruczyńska D E, Rutkowski KP, Konopacka D, 2023. Physicochemical Properties, Image Textures, and Relationships between Parameters of Red-Fleshed Apples Collected on Different Harvest Dates. Agronomy 13(10): 2452. doi: 10.3390/agronomy13102452
  28. Saure MC, 1990. External Control of Anthocyanin Formation in Apple. Scientia Horticulturae 42(3): 181-218.
  29. Sharma S, Rasool A, Sharma G, Mir JI, Mansoor S, 2025. Genetic Diversity of Wild Apple and Sustainable Utilization. In Genetic Diversity of Fruits and Nuts. CRC Press (1): 251-267.
  30. Sidhu RS, Bound SA, Hunt I, 2022. Crop Load and Thinning Methods Impact Yield, Nutrient Content, Fruit Quality, and Physiological Disorders in ‘Scilate’ Apples. Agronomy 12(9): 1989. doi: 10.3390/agronomy12091989
  31. Su Q, Li X, Wang L, Wang B, Feng Y, Yang H, Zhao Z, 2022. Variation in Cell Wall Metabolism and Flesh Firmness of Four Apple Cultivars during Fruit Development. Foods 11(21): 3518. doi: 10.3390/foods11213518
  32. Tarımsal Ekonomi ve Politika Geliştirme Enstitüsü (TEPGE), 2025. Elma Tarım Ürünleri Piyasaları Raporu. T.C. Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı. https://arastirma.tarimorman.gov.tr/tepge. Acces 10 December 2025.
  33. Treutter D, 2001. Biosynthesis of Phenolic Compounds and its Regulation in Apple. Plant Growth Regulation,34(1): 71-89.
  34. Ubi BE, Honda C, Bessho H, Kondo S, Wada M, Kobayashi S, Moriguchi T, 2006. Expression Analysis of Anthocyanin Biosynthetic Genes in Apple Skin: Effect of UV-B and Temperature. Plant Science 170(3): 571-578. doi: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2005.10.009
  35. Uzun S, Ateş U, Yarılgaç T, Öztürk B, 2022. Fruit Quality Characteristics of Some Apple Varieties Cultivated in Ordu Ecology. Proceedings of the IV. Balkan Agricultural Congress (Agribalkan) p. 749, Edirne, Türkiye.
  36. Webster AD, Wertheim SJ, 2003. Apple Rootstocks. In Apples: Botany, Production and Uses. Wallingford UK: CABI Publishing, 91-124.
  37. Yan T, Shi K, Li R, Bai Y, Zheng X, Shan D, Jiang A, Wang C, Zhang H, Hu Z, Sun Y, Piao X, Guo Y, Kong J, 2025. Transcription Factor MdWRKY50 Correlates with Spur-Type Formation in Apple by Modulating Endogenous Gibberellin Biosynthesis. BMC Plant Biology 25(1): 1500. doi: 10.1186/s12870-025-07496-5
  38. Yao Y, Jing S, Nambeesan SU, Malladi A, 2025. Growth Regulation During Early Fruit Development in Apple (Malus× domestica Borkh.): a Temporal Event Map of Transcriptome and Phytohormone Changes. BMC Plant Biology 25(1): 1628. doi: 10.1186/s12870-025-07632-1
  39. Yarılgaç T, Uzun S, Karakaya O, Ateş U. Öztürk B, 2023. Ordu Ekolojisinde Farklı Klon Anaçları Üzerinde Yetiştirilen Elma Çeşitlerinin Fenolojik, Morfolojik ve Verim Özellikleri. Harran Tarım ve Gıda Bilimleri Dergisi 27(3): 325-332.
  40. Yaseen I, Bhat ZA, Mir MA, Pandith AH, Simnani SA, Bhat SA, Shafi F, Been TJ, 2024. Assessment of Phenological and Yield Characteristics of Apple (Malus× domestica Borkh) Varieties. International Journal of Plant & Soil Science 36(12): 270-279.
  41. Yoon HK, Kleiber T, Zydlik Z, Rutkowski K, Woźniak A, Świerczyński S, Bednarski W, Kesy J, Marczak L, Seo JH, Choi TY, Kang KJ, Kafkas NE, Bocianowski J, Jeandet P, Morkunas I, 2020. A Comparison of Selected Biochemical and Physical Characteristics and Yielding of Fruits in Apple Cultivars (Malus domestica Borkh.). Agronomy 10(4): 458. doi: 10.3390/agronomy10040458
  42. Wang Z, Zuo C, Wang M, Song S, Hu Y, Song J, Tu K, He H, Lan W, Pan L, 2024. Optical Properties Related to Cell Wall Pectin Contribute to Determine the Firmness and Microstructural Changes during Apple Softening. Postharvest Biology and Technology 218: 113150. doi: 10.101/j.postharvbio.2024.113150
  43. Zar JH, 2013. Biostatistical Analysis. Pearson Higher Edition, UK.