Advertisement

Determining the Morphologic, Yield and Phytochemical Properties of ’Damaye’ and ’Nq-7’ Goji Berry Varieties Under Semi-Arid Climate Conditions

  • Halil İbrahim OğuzEmail author
  • Oktay Erdoğan
  • Zafer Karaşahin
  • Osman Gökdoğan
Original Article
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

This study has been conducted during the 2015–2016 period in Aksaray, with semi-arid climate conditions, with the purpose of defining the morphologic, yield and phytochemical parameters of ’Damaye’ and ‘NQ-7’ Goji Berry varieties. The trial was conducted with ‘Damaye’ and ‘NQ-7’ varieties in randomized blocks experimental design, with three repetitions and 10 plants in each repetition, tubed saplings in every 3 m × 2 m intervals, during the years 2015 and 2016. Morphologic and yield parameters such as plant stem diameter, plant crown height, plant shoot size, plant size, yield per plant, yield per decare, yield efficiency, 100 grain weight and phytochemical parameters such as antioxidant ratio, total phenolic matter quantity, C vitamin quantity, glycose quantity, fructose quantity and sucrose quantity were examined. In the study, year × variety interaction was found to be statistically meaningful at a rate of 5% in plant stem diameter, plant crown width, plant crown height, plant size, yield per plant, yield per decare parameters; while year was found to be statistically meaningful at a rate of 5% in plant crown width, plant shoot size and yield efficiency parameters. And in terms of phytochemical properties, the difference between varieties were found to be statistically insignificant. In 2015, the average plant stem diameter (4.01 mm), plant crown height (71.12 cm), plant size (84.27 cm), yield per plant (0.22 kg/tree) and yield per decare (47.71 kg/decar) values of ‘Damaye’ variety were observed to be higher than the ‘NQ-7’variety. In 2016, the average plant stem diameter (15.12 mm) and plant size (167.50 mm) values were higher in ‘Damaye’ variety, while the average yield per plant (2.12 kg/tree) and average yield per decare (468.29 kg/decar) values were higher in ‘NQ-7’variety. As for plant corolla height, both ‘NQ-7’ (114.73 cm) and ‘Damaye’ (105.06 cm) varieties were ranked first and statistically placed within the same group. In conclusion, in 2015 ‘Damaye’ variety displayed a better performance in terms of morphologic and yield parameters, while in 2016, ‘NQ-7’variety displayed a better performance. But in both years, yield efficiency and yield per decare values were higher in ‘NQ-7’variety when compared to the ‘Damaye’ variety.

Keywords

Lycium barbarum Morphologic characteristics Yield Phytochemical properties 

Untersuchung von Morphologie, Ertragseigenschaften und sekundären Pflanzeninhaltsstoffen bei den unter semi-ariden Klimabedingungen angebauten Goji-Beerensorten ’Damaye’ and ’Nq-7’

Schlüsselwörter

Lycium barbarum Morphologische Merkmale Ertrag Sekundäre Pflanzeninhaltsstoffe 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to extend our gratitude to HZR Fidancılık A.Ş. for their assistance in trail area and sapling procurement.

Conflict of interest

H.İ. Oğuz, O. Erdoğan, Z. Karaşahin and O. Gökdoğan declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Abdulkasım P, Songchıtsomboon S, Techagumpuch M, Balee N, Swatsıtang P, Sungpuag N (2007) Antioxidant capacity, total phenolics and sugar content of selected Thai health beverages. Int J Food Sci Nutr 58(1):77–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anonymous (2011) Çed Hizmetleri ve Çevre İzinleri İşleri Şube Müdürlüğü, Aksaray İl Çevre Durum Raporu, p. 242Google Scholar
  3. Bartolome AP, Ruperez P, Fuster C (1995) Pineapple fruit: Morphological characteristics, chemical composition and sensory analysis of red Spanish and smooth cayenne cultivars. Food Chem 53:75–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bensky D, Clavey S, Stöger E (2004) Chinese herbal medicine: Materia Medica, 3rd edn. Eastland Press, Seattle. ISBN 978-0939616824Google Scholar
  5. Cemeroğlu B (2010) Gıda Analysis vol 34. Food Technologies Association, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  6. Dzhugalov H, Lichev V, Yordanov A, Kaymakanov P, Dimitrova V, Kutoranov G (2015) First results of testing goji berry (Lycium barbarum L.) in Plovdiv Region, Bulgaria. Sci Pap Ser B Hortic 59:47–50 (http://horticulturejournal.usamv.ro/pdf/2015/art7.pdf)Google Scholar
  7. Endes Z, Uslu N, Özcan MM, Er F (2015) Physico-chemical properties, fatty acid composition and mineral contents of goji berry (Lycium barbarum L.) fruit. J Agroaliment Process Technol 21(1):36–40Google Scholar
  8. Hampson CR, Quamme HA, Kappel F, Brownlee RT (1998) Effects of apple tree density and training system on productivity. 41 st Annual IDFTA Conference, Pasco, Washington, February 21–25Google Scholar
  9. Hänsel R, Keller K, Rimpler H, Schneider G (1993) Drogen E–O. Hagers Handbuch der pharmazeutischen Praxis, vol 5. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York. ISBN 978-3642579936Google Scholar
  10. Istrati D, Vizireanu C, Iordachescu G, Dima F, Garnai M (2013) Physico-chemical characteristics and antioxidant activity of goji fruits jam and jelly during storage. Ann Univ Dunarea De Jos Galati Fascicle Vi-food Technol 37(2):100–110Google Scholar
  11. Klimczak I, Malecka M, Szlachta M, Gliszczyńska-Świglo A (2007) Effect of storage on the content of polyphenols, vitamin C and the antioxidant activity of orange juices. J Food Compos Analysis 20:313–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kulczyński B, Michałowska AG (2016) Goji berry (Lycium barbarum): composition and health effects: A review. Pol J Nutr Sci 66(2):67–75Google Scholar
  13. Lu W, Jiang Q, Shi H, Niu Y, Gao B, Yu L (2014) Partial least-squares-discriminant analysis dierentiating chinese wolfberries by uplc—ms and flow ınjection mass spectrometric (FIMS) Fingerprints. J Agric Food Chem 62(37):9073–9080.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jf502156n CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Mencinicopschi IC, Bălan V (2013) Scıentıfıc substantiation for the introductıon, on Romanian territory, of Lycium barbarum L.: A species with sanogene properties. Agrolife Sci J 2(1):95–102Google Scholar
  15. Mocan A, Vlase L, Vodnar DC, Bischin C, Hanganu D, Gheldiu AM, Oprean R, Dumitrescu RS, Crişan G (2014) Polyphenolic content, antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of Lycium barbarum L. and Lycium chinense Mill. Leaves. Molecules 19(7):10056–10073.  https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules190710056 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Oğuz HI, Erdoğan O (2016) A study on the development performances of goji berry (Lycium barbarum L.) Varieties. Fresenius Environ Bull 25(12):5581–5586Google Scholar
  17. Potterat O (2010) Goji (Lycium barbarum and L. chinense): Phytochemistry, pharmacology and safety in the perspective of traditional uses and recent popularity. Planta Med 76(1):7–19.  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1186218 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Qian J, Liu D, Huang A (2004) The efficiency of flavonoids in polar extracts of Lycium chinense Mill. fruits as free radical scavenger. Food Chem 87(2):283–288.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2003.11.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Steel RGD, Torrie JH, Dickey DA (1997) Principles and procedures of statistics: A biometrical approach, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 400–428Google Scholar
  20. Yang R-f, Zhao C, Chen X, Chan S-w, Wu J-y (2015) Chemical properties and bioactivities of Goji (Lycium barbarum) polysaccharides extracted by different methods. J Function Food 17:903–909Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Halil İbrahim Oğuz
    • 1
    Email author
  • Oktay Erdoğan
    • 2
  • Zafer Karaşahin
    • 3
  • Osman Gökdoğan
    • 1
  1. 1.Biosystem Engineering Department, Engineering-Architecture FacultyNevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli UniversityNevşehirTurkey
  2. 2.Department Organic Farming Business ManagementUniversity of Pamukkale, School of Applied SciencesPamukkaleTurkey
  3. 3.Postharvest Physiology DepartmentAlata Horticultural Research InstituteMersinTurkey

Personalised recommendations