High-density olive orchards in Israel

Dag, A., Avidan B. and Lavee, S.ARO, The Volcani Center, Israel

Birger, R, Israeli Olive Board, Israel

Objective

To facilitate the use of ‘overhead’

mechanical harvesters

↓Reduces costs relative to hand harvesting

and brings orchards into production within

a few years.

Tools

• Growth regulators

• Selection of cultivars

• Tree-training design

• Mechanical pruning

• Economic calculation

Using growth regulators to reducevegetative growth

Gibberellin inhibitors reduce branch elongation

ControlUniconazole

Effect of gibberellin inhibitors on branch elongation, cv. Barnea

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Bra

nch

elon

gati

on (

cm /

2 m

onth

)

A

BC

D

AB

D

A

A

A

CD

Effect of Uniconazole on tree height and yield of cv Barnea

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2002 2003 2004 2005Year

Fru

it y

ield

/ t

ree

(k

g)

200

220

240

260

280

300

320

340

360

380

Tre

e h

eig

ht

be

fore

win

ter

pru

nin

g (

cm

)

Control0.1 g/tree Uniconazol / soil applicationגובה ביקורתגובה טיפול

Height

Yield

Using growth regulators to reducevegetative growth – side effects

Loosely hanging Branches

Promotion of lateral-bud development

ControlUniconazole

Using growth regulators to reducevegetative growth – conclusions

• Growth regulators can reduce tree growth.

• Growth inhibition may be followed by increased fruit set.

• 0.1 g/tree Uniconazole in soil application gave the best results in terms of growth inhibition and fruit set.

Performance of different varieties in ‘High-density’ orchards, Golan Heights, 2005/6.

CultivarCultivarFruit yield Fruit yield

(kg/ha.)(kg/ha.)

% of oil% of oilOil yieldOil yield

(kg/ha.)(kg/ha.)

Leccino6,76015.31,034

Arbequina11,58018.92,195

Barnea5,69019.61,110

Maalot1,98022.2442

Askal10,60026.42,800

Souri1,96417.3340

Picholine7,27318.91,371

Korneiki9,81123.12,269

CultivarCultivarFruit yield Fruit yield

(kg/ha.)(kg/ha.)

% of oil% of oilOil yieldOil yield

(kg/ha.)(kg/ha.)

Leccino10,48020.32,139

Arbequina17,64020.23,560

Barnea12,03022.52,700

Maalot6,41027.51,762

Askal

Souri7,10720.81,480

Picholine9,14019.21,756

Korneiki16,52022.12,421

Performance of different varieties in ‘High-density’ orchards, Golan Heights, 2006/7.

Tree-shaping design

Central leader:‘Y-form’:Cordon:

Effect of different training systems on tree Effect of different training systems on tree growth in a high-density orchard-Magal, 2005growth in a high-density orchard-Magal, 2005..

CultivarCultivarTrainingTraining system systemLeaf area indexLeaf area index

33rdrd year year 44thth year year

BarneaCentral leader4.9 a6.1 bc

BarneaY- trellis4.3 b6.3 bc

BarneaCordon3.3 c5.8 cd

ArbequinaCentral leader4.8 a7.1 a

ArbequinaY- trellis4.3 b5.6 cd

ArbequinaCordon3.4 c5.5 cd

MaalotCentral leader5.0 a6.0 ab

MaalotY- trellis4.0 b5.9 c

MaalotCordon2.7 d7.7 d

Effect of different training systems on tree Effect of different training systems on tree growth in a high-density orchard-Magal, 2005growth in a high-density orchard-Magal, 2005..

CultivarCultivarTraining systemTraining systemYield Yield

Fruit (kg/tree) Fruit (kg/tree) Oil (kg/ha)Oil (kg/ha)

BarneaCentral leader8.72,522

BarneaY- trellis6.01,739

BarneaCordon1.3362

ArbequinaCentral leader7.71,990

ArbequinaY- trellis5.41,420

ArbequinaCordon1.1285

MaalotCentral leader3.81,043

MaalotY- trellis0.6173

MaalotCordon0.254

Effect of different training systems in a high density orchard – conclusions

• The heavy pruning required to achieve a ‘Cordon’ tree shape delays tree development and reduces yield the first year.

• This delayed development is disappearing in the second year.

• Cultivar-yield ranking was:

‘Barnea’ > ‘Arbequina’ > ‘Maalot’.

• Highest leftover fruit at harvest: ‘Arbequina’ (ca. 15%)

• A small number of trees were uprooted during harvesting, mainly in the ‘Y’-form pruning system.

השפעת שיטת העיצוב על יבול 2006 בשלושה זנים, מגל

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Y זקוף קורדון

שיטת העיצוב

ד')ג/

ק")

שבחו

מרי

פל

בו י

ארבקינה

ברנע

Aמעלות

A

B

a

ab

b

א

אא

השפעת הזן ושיטת העיצוב על יבול שנתי ממוצע (2005-06)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Y זקוף קורדון Y זקוף קורדון Y זקוף קורדון

ארבקינה ברנע מעלות

זן ושיטת עיצוב

ד')ג/

ק"ב (

שחו

מל

בוי

השפעת הזן ושיטת העיצוב על יבולי השמן מגל 2005 / 6

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

400.0

450.0

Y זקוף קורדון Y זקוף קורדון Y זקוף קורדון

ארבקינה ברנע מעלות

זן ושיטת עיצוב

ד')ג/

ק"ב (

שחו

ממן

של

בוי

2005

2006

ממוצע 2005-6

A

B

C

A

A

B

A

A

B

a

b

c

a

a

a

a

a

b

א

ב

א

א

אא

א

ב

אב

דרך השמןדרך השמן

עיצוב מטע לבוצרת- היקף גזע05באר חייל, דצמבר

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

ʣʧ ʯʥʣyʥ̫ʬʫʩʣʣʁ

ʮ

ʬʫr ʥ̫ʦʮ

ʥʣʯʥʣyʥ̫ʮ ʬʫʩʣʣʁ

Vʮ ʬʫ Yʮ ʬʫ ʮ ʬʫr ʥ̫ʦ

ʮʱ

ʲʦʢʤr

ʷʩʤ

ʤhʩʨy ʥ̫ʲ ʰʸ ʡc

abb

d

ab a

B

A

B

C

B

A

השפעת שיטת העיצוב על היקף הגזע -באר חייל - 6.8.06

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

קורדון חד צדדיכל 1.5מ'

זקוף כל 1.5מ' קורדון דו צדדיכל 3מ'

Vכל 3 מ' Yכל 3מ' זקוף כל 3 מ'

טיפול

מ)ס"

ע (גז

הף

קהי

ברנע

קורטינה

עיצוב מטע לבוצרת, קורטינה- שטף קרינה,

06באר חייל, מרץ

0.000

0.500

1.000

1.500

2.000

2.500

3.000

קורדון חד צדדי כל1.5 מ'

זקוף כל 1.5 מ' קורדון דו צדדי כל3 מ'

Vכל 3 מ' Yכל 3 מ' זקוף כל 3 מ'

טיפול

LA

I

עיצוב מטע לבוצרת, ברנע- שטף קרינה06באר חייל, מרץ

0.000

0.500

1.000

1.500

2.000

2.500

3.000

3.500

4.000

4.500

קורדון חד צדדי כל1.5 מ'

זקוף כל 1.5 מ' קורדון דו צדדי כל3 מ'

Vכל 3 מ' Yכל 3 מ' זקוף כל 3 מ'

טיפול

LA

I

השפעת שיטת העיצוב על LAI (מדידה באמצעות ספטומטר) רביבים 6.8.06

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

קורדון חד צדדיכל 1.5מ'

זקוף כל 1.5מ' קורדון דו צדדיכל 3מ'

Vכל 3 מ' Yכל 3מ' זקוף כל 3 מ'

טיפול

LAI

ברנעקורטינה

בניסוי שיטות עיצוב- באר 2006יבולי חייל

טיפוליבול (לשורה)

מ3ברנע, זקוף, ק"ג712

מ'1.5ברנע- זקוף, ק"ג759

מ'3קורטינה, זקוף, ק"ג120

מ'1.5קורטינה, זקוף, ק"ג209

17.1%, קורטינה: 12.5%אחוזי שמן (אבנקור)- ברנע:

Comparing productivity and harvesting costs: Comparing productivity and harvesting costs: high-density orchards vs. trunk-shaking high-density orchards vs. trunk-shaking

cultivation systemscultivation systems Traditional olive orchards –

ca. 10 x 10 m

Intensive olive orchards – ca. 4 x 7 - 7 x 7 m

High-density olive orchards – ca. 2-2.5 x 4 m ?

Comparing productivity and harvesting costs: Comparing productivity and harvesting costs: high-density orchard vs. trunk-shaking high-density orchard vs. trunk-shaking cultivation systemscultivation systems – harvesting costs– harvesting costs

• ‘Trunk shaker’- 1,650$ / ha.

• ‘Overhead harvester’- 533$/ ha.

Olive yield (kg/ha) in two adjacent ‘Arbequina’ plots: one plot pruned for ‘overhead’ harvester,

other plot pruned for ‘trunk-shaker’, Halutza 2003-6.

2003200420052006Average

Trunk-shaker7,03013,7205,54017,5009,365

Overhead

harvester (act.)

3,2008,3805,54010,6606,945

Overhead

harvester (cal.)*

5,60014,6609,70018,66412,156

* Calculated for 4 m between rows

Comparing productivity and harvesting Comparing productivity and harvesting costs: high-density orchard vs. trunk-costs: high-density orchard vs. trunk-

shaking cultivation systems- conclusionsshaking cultivation systems- conclusions

• Reduction in harvest costs

• Not much change in fruit yield

• Higher costs in orchards establishment

Mechanical pruning

Topping:Hedging:After thepruning:

Mechanical pruning – Results

• Four different regimes of topping and hedging with the high-vigor ‘Barnea’ cv.

• Yield ranged from 1.3 to 4.6 kg/tree for the different treatments

(differences not significant).

• Low yields seem to be the result of heavy pruning, which reduced the proportion of fruit-bearing shoots.

- Small proportion of leafs and branches- Small proportion of leafs and branches-Relatively low level of damage to the harvested fruit Relatively low level of damage to the harvested fruit

Jojoba HarvesterJojoba Harvester  

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements

• Kibutz Magal, Kibutz Gshur,Hulda, Halutza

• R & D Ramat Negev

• Chief Scientist – Ministry of Agriculture

• Technicians; Izak Zipory, Yair Meny, Yulia Sabutin, Moshe Aharon

• Ehud Hanoch; Yonis Morira

Thank You