Professional Documents
Culture Documents
International Journal of Biological, Biomolecular, Agricultural, Food and Biotechnological Engineering Vol:9, No:2, 2015
International Science Index, Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Vol:9, No:2, 2015 waset.org/Publication/10000565
175
scholar.waset.org/1999.1/10000565
TABLE I
THE PITAYA MATERIALS USED IN THIS STUDY AND THEIR FLOWERING RESPONSE TO LIGHTING TREATMENT IN SOUTHERN TAIWAN
Cultivar/clone
Species
Flesh color
Breeding system
Origin
H. undatus
white
SC
Vietnam
VN-White
white
SC
H. undatus
Taiwan
Chuchi luu
white
SC
H. undatus
Taiwan
P Long
Hylocereus sp.
Taiwan
light pink
SI
Pink
Hylocereus sp.
Taiwan
light pink
SI
WE 23
Hylocereus sp.
SI
red
Central America
Orejona
Hylocereus sp.
red
SI
Central America
Criollo
Hylocereus sp.
red
SI
Central America
Malagu
Hylocereus sp.
red
SI
Central America
Cebra
Hylocereus sp.
red
SI
Central America
Lisa
Hylocereus sp.
red
SI
Central America
Rosa
Hylocereus sp.
red
SI
Taiwan
Damao 9
Hylocereus sp.
red
SI
Taiwan
Jhubei 1
Hylocereus sp.
red
SI
Taiwan
Jhubei 3
Hylocereus sp.
SI
Taiwan
magenta
D2
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SC
Taiwan
D4
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SI
Taiwan
D11
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SI
Taiwan
D13
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SI
Taiwan
D15
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SI
Taiwan
D18
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SI
Taiwan
D22
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
P-SC
Taiwan
Chaozhou large
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
P-SC
Taiwan
Chaozhou 5
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SI
Taiwan
Small Nick
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SC
Taiwan
F4
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SI
Taiwan
F11
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SI
Taiwan
F13
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SI
Taiwan
F17
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SI
Taiwan
F18
Hylocereus sp.
magenta
SI
Taiwan
F22
SC, self-compatible with70-100% fruit set after selfing; P-SC, partially self-compatible with 40-70% fruit set after selfing; SI, self-incompatible with 0-10%
fruit set after selfing. Selfing means hand self- pollination.
Daylength
T. 2012-13
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
O
13.0
12.5
12.0
11.5
11.0
10.5
10.0
F
Daylength (hrs)
(a)
R-H
Max-T.
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
Relative humidity
(%)
35
Temperature (oC)
Temperature (oC)
International Science Index, Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Vol:9, No:2, 2015 waset.org/Publication/10000565
30
25
20
15
10
O
(b)
Fig. 1 Climatic data for the four study sites (Pingtung, Taiwan) (a)
The monthly average daylength and temperature (T.) from Oct. 2012
Mar. 2013 and from Oct. 2013 Mar. 2014. (b) The monthly
average maximum (Max) and minimum temperature (Min), and
relative humidity (R-H) during the experimental period from Oct.
2013 Mar. 2014
176
scholar.waset.org/1999.1/10000565
International Science Index, Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Vol:9, No:2, 2015 waset.org/Publication/10000565
C. Statistical Analysis
All parameter values were represented by the arithmetic
means using excel software 2007.
III. RESULTS
A. Flowering Induction and Fruit Formation by Lighting
Treatment
The flowering response to the lighting treatment of the
pitaya cultivars and clones tested is indicated in Table II.
Among the thirty cultivars and clones investigated, twentythree genotypes were positively sensitive to additional lighting
in the winter season. The duration of the night-breaking
treatment for successful flower initiation varied depending on
the genotypes, which ranged from 33 - 48 days. Two domestic
materials, Chaozhou 5 and Small Nick, showed the earliest
flowering induction resulting from the night-breaking.
Floral and fruit stages in the winter season took 21-26 and
46-59 days, respectively. The lighting-sensitive genotypes
bore 1-2 flowering flushes with various numbers of flowers
(1- 15). The higher fruit set rates were found in Damao 9, D4,
D13, Chaozou large, Chaozhou 5, Small Nick and F22. The
other clones and cultivars could not produce fruits or set only
a few fruits.
TABLE II
FLOWERING-SENSITIVITY, FLOWERING AND FRUITING INDUCTION BY LIGHTING TREATMENT (STARTING OCT. 10, 20130) OF 30 RED PEELED PITAYA CULTIVARS
AND CLONES
Lighting days
Flowering
Number of
Number of
Number of
Fruiting
Cultivar/clone
Flowering
for flower
duration (day)
flowering
flowers/
fruits/ plant
duration (day)
sensitivity to
initiation
cycles
plant
lighting*
VN- White
Chuchi luu
P Long
Pink
2
10
0
+
39
25
WE 23
1
1
1
+
48
24
53
Orejona
1
2
0
+
48
25
Criollo
1
4
0
+
48
25
Malagu
1
3
0
+
48
24
Cebra
2
5
2
+
36
26
46
Lisa
1
2
1
+
35
25
48
Rosa
2
5
3
+
38
26
54
Damao 9
2
2
1
+
42
22
57
Jhubei 1
2
4
1
+
42
22
59
Jhubei 3
2
4
0
+
39
26
D2
1
3
2
+
43
21
52
D4
1
2
0
+
48
24
D11
2
6
5
+
43
22
55
D13
2
15
1
+
43
21
58
D15
2
9
1
+
39
23
59
D18
1
6
4
+
42
24
55
D22
2
8
6
+
40
21
55
Chaozhou large
2
5
3
+
33
20
54
Chaozhou 5
2
4
3
+
33
24
53
Small Nick
F4
F11
F13
1
1
1
+
44
20
57
F17
2
5
0
+
43
20
F18
2
5
3
+
44
21
59
F22
*
+ or indicate positive or negative flowering response to lighting treatment
- no data
177
scholar.waset.org/1999.1/10000565
International Science Index, Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Vol:9, No:2, 2015 waset.org/Publication/10000565
TABLE III
COMPARISON OF FRUIT CHARACTERISTICS BETWEEN FRUITS OBTAINED FROM NATURAL PRODUCTION IN SUMMER 2013 AND THOSE FROM THE LIGHTING
TREATMENT IN WINTER 2013-2014 IN 16 PITAYA CULTIVARS AND CLONES
TSS content (oBrix)
Fruit weight (g)
Peel thickness (mm)
Edible rate (%)
Cultivar/clone
In-season*
Off-season
In-season
Off-season
In-season
Off-season
In-season
Off-season
18.1
Orejona
196.6
331.4
4.9
6.1
49.9
53.0
18.8
17.1
Lisa
297.2
289.5
4.8
3.9
65.2
61.0
17.5
16.2
Rosa
251.7
472.0
4.6
4.6
60.7
66.8
17.6
18.4
Damao 9
251.5
147.9
3.7
4.2
60.4
49.7
17.8
18.2
Jhubei 1
265.3
206.6
3.9
5.6
60.8
51.6
19.4
16.1
Jhubei 3
176.8
277.2
3.9
4.2
55.6
70.6
20.7
18.3
340.8
568.0
2.7
3.8
73.7
77.7
19.7
D4
18.6
D13
214.7
179.8
4.0
4.3
56.6
53.8
18.8
17.2
179.1
168.7
3.6
3.3
54.6
61.7
18.8
D15
16.2
D18
186.2
186.9
3.9
3.5
52.0
57.2
18.4
19.2
264.0
242.0
3.2
4.0
63.4
59.2
19.4
D22
18.8
Chaozhou large
421.2
541.8
3.5
4.3
66.7
66.8
20.0
17.7
Chaozhou 5
314.1
329.0
4.0
4.0
64.2
60.8
18.3
57.9
20.0
Small Nick
288.2
350.5
3.6
3.8
62.4
18.1
72.5
18.9
359.7
142.2
2.5
3.3
56.0
17.3
F17
61.7
20.6
319.1
165.0
3.5
3.6
61.2
20.1
F22
*
In-season data from our research in 2013
178
scholar.waset.org/1999.1/10000565
International Science Index, Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Vol:9, No:2, 2015 waset.org/Publication/10000565
temperature [17]. Flowering and fruiting stages in the offseason (Table II) were much longer than that in-season (15-19
and 31-32 days, respectively) [21]. These data are in
correspondence with the results of off-season fruit production
in Vietnam [5] and Thailand [19]. It is obvious that the low
temperatures in winter season (Figs. 1 (a), (b)) extended the
reproductive processes.
Regarding fruit weight in cacti, [22] found that it was
positively correlated with seed numbers that depended on the
efficiency of pollination. In addition, [24] noted that the fruits
produced during the cool season in Taiwan were more
desirable in the market than fruits from summer because the
off-season fruits were larger and sweeter. These conclusions
are in agreement with our results that showed fruits produced
off-season were larger in six cultivars and clones, and sweeter
in most cultivars and clones as compared with those formed
in-season (Table III). Cooler temperatures at the earlier fruit
growth stages was considered favorable for cell division and
thus for the formation of a larger fruit size [4], [13]. Large
differences between day and night temperatures (Fig. 1 (b))
may achieve higher photosynthetic accumulation and sweeter
fruit. For example, the optimal day/night air temperatures for
total daily net CO2 uptake by Hylocereus undatus were at
30/20C [18]. However, some genotypes produced fruits in the
off-season that were smaller than fruits produced in-season
(Table III). This may due to the fact that in the off-season
there were fewer flowers induced with different blooming
times and a decrease of pollinator activity at lower
temperatures, which led to a lack of pollen sources or
inadequate pollen amounts for self-incompatible genotypes to
set fruit by out-crossing.
V. CONCLUSION
The flowering induction by artificial lighting in off-season
in southern Taiwan was different among pitaya genotypes and
also was affected by temperature. Red-fleshed pitaya showed
more application to induce flowers by a night-breaking
treatment than white-fleshed pitaya which required lower
temperatures. The time of lighting treatment (starting October)
for successful flower initiation and formation varied from 33 48 days. Lighting-sensitive pitaya genotypes bore 1-2
flowering flushes and it took in total 7282 days for flowering
stages and fruit growth. Off-season fruits in several pitaya
genotypes were larger than in-season fruits. In addition, fruits
produced in the off-season contained higher TSS content than
those produced in-season.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[1]
[2]
REFERENCES
G. Barbeau. La pitahaya rouge, un nouveau fruit exotique. Fruits, 45,
pp 141-147. 1990.
T. Chang. Yield and quality of pitaya (Hylocereus undatus Britt. &
Rose) as affected by fruiting regulation. Master thesis, National Chung
Hsing University, Taiwan. 2003.
[24]
179
scholar.waset.org/1999.1/10000565