Advertisement

Horticulture, Environment, and Biotechnology

, Volume 55, Issue 4, pp 263–270 | Cite as

Yield loss and quality degradation of strawberry fruits cultivated under the deficient insolation conditions by shading

  • Hyo Gil Choi
  • Byoung Yong Moon
  • Nam Jun Kang
  • Joon Kook Kwon
  • Khoshimkhujaev Bekhzod
  • Kyoung Sub Park
  • Sun Yi Lee
Research Report Cultivation Physiology

Abstract

Deficient insolation conditions (DICs) frequently occur during the winter and early spring season in Korea and negatively affect crop growth. This study was conducted to investigate changes in the yields and qualities of strawberry fruits under DICs that result from an insufficient input of sunlight. To induce DIC, strawberry plants were treated with 40 or 70% shading by covering the plants with curtains during growth in a plastic greenhouse. The shaded plants were cultivated from March to May of 2012. When the strawberry plants were subjected to the shading treatments, their photosynthesis and fruit yields were significantly reduced. Although the mineral element and organic acid contents of the fruits were not affected by the shading treatments, the total nitrogen (T-N) of the stems and roots were noticeably reduced. Furthermore, the shading treatments of the plants also resulted in reductions in the sugar contents and total phenolics of the fruits. In parallel with these observations, the shading treatments were also found to decrease the antioxidant activities of the fruits as measured with the DPPH assay. We suggest that the DIC-induced losses of strawberry fruit yield resulted from the reduced photosynthetic performances of the plants that were caused by insufficient sunlight.

Additional key words

antioxidant photosynthesis sugar contents 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Bae, J.H., S.O. Yu, Y.M. Kim, S.U. Chon, B.W. Kim, and B.G. Heo. 2009. Physiological activity of methanol extracts from Ligularia fischeri and their hyperplasia inhibition activity of cancer cell. J. Bio-Environ. Cont. 18:67–73.Google Scholar
  2. Blom-Zandstra, M. and J.E.M. Lampe. 1984. The role of nitrate in the osmoregulation of lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) grown at different light intensities. J. Expt. Bot. 36:1043–1052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Callejón-Ferre, A.J., F. Manzano-Agugliaro, M. Díaz-Pérez, A. Carreño-Ortega, and J. Pérez-Alonso. 2009. Effect of shading with aluminised screens on fruit production and quality in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) under greenhouse conditions. Span. J. Agric. Res. 7:41–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Critchley, C. and R.M. Smillie. 1981. Leaf chlorophyll fluorescence as an indicator of high light stress (photoinhibition) in Cucumis sativus L. Austr. J. Plant Physiol. 8:133–141.Google Scholar
  5. Dokoozlian, N.K., and W.M. Kliewer. 1996. Influence of light on grape berry growth and composition varies during fruit development. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 121:869–874.Google Scholar
  6. Fu, W., P. Li, Y. Wu, and J. Tang. 2012. Effects of different light intensities on anti-oxidative enzyme activity, quality and biomass in lettuce. Hort. Sci. 39:129–134.Google Scholar
  7. Gill, S.S. and N. Tuteja. 2010. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 48:909–930.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gregoriou, K., K. Pontikis, and S. Vemmos. 2007. Effects of reduced irradiance on leaf morphology, photosynthetic capacity, and fruit yield in olive (Olea europaea L.). Photosynthetica 45:172–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hijmans, R.J. 2003. The effect of climate change on global potato production. Amer. J. Potato Res. 80:271–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jackson, M.L. 1973. Soil chemical analysis. Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, p. 111–192.Google Scholar
  11. Kim, S.K., R.N. Bae, and C.H. Chun. 2011. Changes in bioactive compounds contents of ‘Maehyang’ and ‘Seolhyang’ strawberry fruits by UV light illumination. Kor. J. Hort. Sci. Technol. 29:172–180.Google Scholar
  12. Kjeldahl, J. 1883. A new method for the determination of nitrogen in organic matter. Z. Anal. Chem. 22:366–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Li, P., S. Huo, W. Su, R. Lu, C. Deng, L. Liu, Y. Deng, N. Guo, G. Lu, and C. He. 2011. Free radical-scavenging capacity, antioxidant activity and phenolic content of Pouzolzia zeylanica. J. Serb. Chem. Soc. 76:709–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lichtenthaler, H.K., C. Buschmann, M. Döll, H.J. Fietz, T. Bach, U. Meier, and U. Rahmsdorf. 1981. Photosynthetic activity, chloroplast ultrastructure, and leaf characteristics of high-light and low-light plants and of sun and shade leaves. Photosynth. Res. 2:115–141.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Marschner, H. and I. Cakmak. 1989. High light intensity enhances chlorosis and necrosis in leaves of zinc, potassium, and magnesium deficient bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) plants. J. Plant Physiol. 134:308–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mensor, L.I., F.S. Menezes, G.G. Leitao, A.S. Reis, T. dos Santos, C.S. Goube, and S.G. Leitao. 2001. Screening of Brazillian plant extracts for antioxidant activity by the use of DPPH free radical method. Phytotherpy Res. 15:127–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Meyers, K.J., C.B. Watkins, M.P. Pritts, and R.H. Liu. 2003. Antioxidant and antiproliferative activities of strawberries. J. Agric. Food Chem. 51:6887–6892.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ordidge, M., P. García-Macías, N.H. Battey, M.H. Gordon, P. Hadley, P. John, J.A. Lovegrove, E. Vysini, and A. Wagstaffe. 2010. Phenolic contents of lettuce, strawberry, raspberry, and blueberry crops cultivated under plastic films varying in ultraviolet transparency. Food Chem. 119:1224–1227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Peng, S., J. Huang, J.E. Sheegy, R.C. Laza, R.M. Visperas, X. Zhong, G.S. Centeno, G.S. Khush, and K.G. Cassman. 2004. Rice yields decline with higher night temperature from global warming. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 101:9971–9975.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Slinkard, K. and V.L. Singleton. 1977. Total phenol analysis: Automation and comparison with manual methods. Amer. J. Enol. Vitic. 28:49–55.Google Scholar
  21. Thaipong, K., U. Boonprakob, K. Crosby, L. Cisneros-Zevallos, and D.H. Byrne. 2006. Comparison of ABTS, DPPH, and ORAC assays for estimating antioxidant activity from guava fruit extracts. J. Food Compos. Anal. 19:669–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Treutter, D. 2005. Significance of flavonoids in plant resistance and enhancement of their biosynthesis. Plant Biol. 7:581–591.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tulipani, S., B. Mezzetti, F. Capocasa, S. Bompadre, J. Beekwilder, C.H. Ric-devos, E. Capanoglu, A. Bovy, and M. Battino. 2008. Antioxidants, phenolic compounds, and nutritional quality of different strawberry genotypes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 56:696–704.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vaast, P., B. Bertrand, J.J. Perriot, B. Guyot, and M. Génard. 2006. Fruit thinning and shade improve bean characteristics and beverage quality of coffee (Coffea arabica L.) under optimal conditions. J. Sci. Food Agric. 86:197–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wurr, D.C.E., J.R. Fellows, and K. Phelps. 1996. Investigating trends in vegetable crop response to increasing temperature associated with climate change. Sci. Hort. 66:255–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society for Horticultural Science and Springer-Verlag GmbH 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hyo Gil Choi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Byoung Yong Moon
    • 3
  • Nam Jun Kang
    • 2
  • Joon Kook Kwon
    • 1
  • Khoshimkhujaev Bekhzod
    • 1
  • Kyoung Sub Park
    • 1
  • Sun Yi Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.Protected Horticulture Research Station, National Institute of Horticultural & Herbal ScienceRural Development AdministrationHamanKorea
  2. 2.Institute of Agriculture & Life ScienceGyeongsang National UniversityJinjuKorea
  3. 3.Department of Biological SciencesInje UniversityGimhaeKorea

Personalised recommendations