In 1999, the number of fruit per tree was indirectly 

 related to density (i.e., the high-density, or smaller trees, 

 had fewer fruit than did low-density, or larger, trees), 

 but estimated yield (either as number of fruit per acre 

 or bushels per acre) was unaffected by density (Tables 

 2 and 3). Third-level IPM, on the other hand, resulted 

 in similar number of apples per tree as first-level IPM 

 but resulted in significantly greater estimated yields 

 per acre (Tables 2 and 3). Crop density was not af- 

 fected by IPM techniques but was slightly greater for 

 low-density plantings than for high-density plantings 

 (data not shown). 



These data suggest that planting density affected 

 some aspects of fruit quality and yield but not others. 

 Clearly, a high degree of variability still exists among 

 blocks in this trial. To further define the relationships, 

 additional blocks will be required. All results to date, 

 however, suggest that bio-intensive IPM can result in 



a similar product and yield with lower chemical in- 

 puts. As we finish analyzing related parts of this 3- 

 year study, such as the effects of planting density on 

 light penetration, temperature, and relative humidity 

 in the apple tree canopy, we hope to improve our un- 

 derstanding of the complex interactions among horti- 

 culture, tree and orchard architecture, and IPM in 

 apples. 



A ckn o wledgem en ts 



We are grateful to the eight growers who partici- 

 pated in this study: Bill Broderick, Dave Chandler, 

 Dave Cheney, Dave Shearer, Joe Sincuk, Tim Smith, 

 and Mo Tougas. This work was also supported by 

 State/Federal IPM Funds and SARE Grant #97 LNE 

 97-90 (USDA 96-COOP- 1-2700). 



%i^ %1^ «1^ %1^ «1^ 

 #Y* *x* *jj|* *(ii* *jj|^ 



Fruit Notes, Volume 64 (Number 4), Fall, 1999 



