Oran R. B., Ahı Koşar D., Koşar M. B., Sönmez E., Ertürk Ü.
PEERJ, cilt.14, ss.1-22, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
-
Yayın Türü:
Makale / Tam Makale
-
Cilt numarası:
14
-
Basım Tarihi:
2026
-
Doi Numarası:
10.7717/peerj.21816
-
Dergi Adı:
PEERJ
-
Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler:
Natural Science Collection (ProQuest), Biological Science Database (ProQuest), Scopus, Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), BIOSIS, EMBASE, CAB Abstracts, MEDLINE, Directory of Open Access Journals
-
Sayfa Sayıları:
ss.1-22
-
Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Adresli:
Evet
Özet
Rising labor costs and labor shortages are major constraints to sustainable peach production, particularly in traditional low-density orchards that rely on labor-intensive canopy architectures. Although high-density and simplified training systems are increasingly adopted worldwide, peach orchards in Türkiye remain largely based on conventional systems, limiting productivity and labor efficiency. This study evaluated two single-leader (Central Leader and Slender Spindle) and two dual-leader (Perpendicular-V and Tatura Trellis) training systems applied to three peach cultivars (Extreme
®
314, Extreme
®
436, and Extreme
®
568) under commercial conditions. During the study period, tree growth, labor requirements, yield performance, and fruit quality attributes were assessed. Central Leader produced greater vegetative vigor and canopy volume and generally high cumulative yield per tree, but was associated with greater thinning and harvesting labor. Slender Spindle maintained a compact canopy and showed the highest overall labor efficiency, whereas Perpendicular-V consistently had the lowest harvest labor per hectare. The highest cumulative yield per hectare was obtained with Slender Spindle in Extreme
®
314, Central Leader in Extreme
®
436, and Slender Spindle in Extreme
®
568. Tatura Trellis produced numerically higher cumulative yield per hectare than Perpendicular-V in all three cultivars, but also required greater cumulative labor. Fruit-quality responses varied among cultivar × training-system combinations. Overall, the relative performance of the training systems depended on cultivar and on whether yield, fruit quality, or labor requirements were prioritized.