trees. 



Obviously, the amount of fi*\iit obtained 

 fix)m individual trees is of little importance 

 when the trees are at different densities. Fig- 

 ures 3 and 4 show the cumulative yield per acre 

 for the rootstock treatments and the Mcintosh 

 strains, respectively. M.9 trained to a trelHs 

 resulted in the highest jdelds per acre. M.9 

 trained to a post, M.26, and M.7 were statisti- 

 cally similar in cumulative yield, and M.9/ 

 MM.lll resulted in the poorest yield per acre, 

 yielding only 60 percent of trees on M.9 trained 

 to a trelUs. Macspur trees outyielded Rogers 

 trees on a per-acre basis. 



Factors other than yield must be consid- 

 ered before selecting the most desirable root- 



stock or training system. Establishment, grow- 

 ing, and harvesting costs vary fi-om treatment to 

 treatment. Estimates of these differences are 

 presented in Table 2. Also, packout is an impor- 

 tant consideration. Table 2 presents the percent 

 of a whole-canopy random sample which made 

 the U.S. Extra Fancy grade in 1987 and 1988. 

 Trees on M.9/MM.111 produced the most high 

 grade fruit; whereas, trees on M.7A produced 

 the least. Of the M.9-rooted trees, those on posts 

 produced more U.S. Extra Fancy finiit than 

 those on trellises. These numbers were used to 

 approximate the grade distribution of fi-uit. It 

 was assimaed that one half of the fi-uit not 

 making U.S. Extra Fancy were Number 1 and 

 the other half were used for cider. These esti- 



Fruit Notes, Winter, 1993 



11 



