Accumulated yields per tree through the third growing season, 1998, were not affected by the
rates of application of nitrogen fertilizer (Table 3).However, trees spaced at 11.5 ft produced
slightly more fruit than those trees planted at 4.5 ft apart.This difference occurred during the
third growing season (Table 4).Pounds of fruit per tree were positively correlated to tree size
(Tables 3 and 4).Tree spacing had little effect on yield per tree during the tree development
phase of the orchards.As the trees become older, spacing is expected to cause differences in tree
size.

Yield per acre through the third growing season was affected by tree density more than by
nitrogen fertilizer application rates (Table 5).Per acre yield from trees spaced 4.5 ft apart was
double the yield of trees spaced 11.5 ft apart.Per acre yields increased dramatically from 1997
to 1998, as would be expected from a young orchard (Table 6).However impressive these data
are, it is important to consider that the orchard remains in the growth stage and long-term
production, especially as the trees mature, will beimportant.It will be necessary to continue to
observe the growth and fruiting over the life of the orchard and to assess the economic feasibility
to ascertain any real benefit for increasing tree density.Figure 7 shows the expected yields from
central leader orchards and the actual yields that have been obtained through year 3.

HIGH DENSITY FUSETTO ORCHARDS
We also are attempting to develop procedures for the production of peaches from high density
orchards of vertically trained fusetto trees.As before, this is being accomplished with the
cooperation of three growers.

Trees in these orchards are spaced 1.22 m (4 ft) apart in rows 4.36 m (14 ft) apart, giving
1924 trees/ha (777 trees/acre).The varieties being compared, Veecling, Babygold 5 and
Babygold 7, all are nonmelting clingstone peaches for processing.Factors studied include
variety, rootstock, trellis support systems, ground covers and pruning techniques.The
experimental orchards range in size between .4 and 2 ha (1 and 5 acres).The orchards were
established in 1996 and, except for the factors being compared, they have been maintained under
cultural and integrated pest management practices that are standard for the area.

The training system used is an adaptation of the fusetto system that is similar to the spindle
system used for apples.The tall and narrow cone-shaped trees have an upright central trunk
terminating with an apical bud (Figure 8).There are numerous small scaffold branches spiraled
along the dominant upright trunk.

At planting, the nursery trees were pruned the same way as the central leader tree described
above. During the first growing season, it was important to obtain maximum leaf surface early.
A minimal number of summer pruning cuts was needed to single out the leader and eliminate
undesirable growth such as upright shoots.The following years, both late dormant and summer
pruning were used again to single out the leader and to select and direct the scaffolds outwardly
at regular intervals along the trunk.Scaffolds selected were 1) less than a third of the diameter of
the central trunk, 2) oriented somewhat horizontally and 3) of medium vigor.They were
encouraged to develop lateral secondary scaffolds and branches.Vigor was reduced by
eliminating more upright growth in favor of lateral growth.Branches in the upper part of the
canopy were shorter than those in the lower canopy to provide strong light conditions that
encourage more vigor in the lower branches.

Pruning was always done in two stages.During the spring pruning, problem branches were
eliminated.During the summer pruning, fine cuts assured proper spacing of the fruiting
branches and directed the growth properly.These cuts restricted the tree growth and encouraged
secondary growth from the scaffolds.

Our trees developed rapidly and quickly established a large enough canopy to support a crop
(Table 7).Trees were taller than 1.83 m (6 ft) at the end of the first growing season and, by the
end of the third growing season, they were taller than 3.35 m (11 ft) with a maximum width of
2.3 m (7.5 ft).As a result, accumulated yields through the third leaf were 12 tons/acre in the
Rydal Park orchard (Table 8) and 6-8 tons/acre in the Belmor Farm (Table 9).Babygold 5 trees
were more productive than either Veecling or Babygold 7 trees (Table 10), and production also
was affected by rootstock.Veecling and Babygold 5 were more productive on the standard
Bailey rootstock while Babygold 7 was most productive on Chui Lum Tao (CLT) rootstock.The
data are from nonreplicated plots so variations in growth and production could be related to site
variability.

Figure 9 compares the actual yield to the goals established for the experiment.During the first
3 years, production was near the goal.Fruit size, color and quality seemed to be normal for these
varieties and quite acceptable for processing standards.

After the third leaf, the tree canopy appears to be established well enough to support a larger
crop next year. Training procedures used have created the desirable upright tree canopy that
exposes leaves and fruit to optimal sunlight conditions.

These high density orchards of fusetto trees have provided encouraging results through the
developmental stage of the orchard.There remain serious concerns whether the trees can be
maintained within the allotted space yet continue to be productive throughout the life of the
orchard.However, the outlook for the 1999 crop is encouraging.

CONCLUSION
Ontario peach orchardists have a strong need to develop and adopt training procedures that will
promote better production efficiency.They have been encouraged by the benefits of central
leader trained trees—primarily reduced labor costs.The central leader has changed the shape of
Ontario orchards.Now, over two-thirds of the canopy remains close enough to the ground so
that hand labor can be accomplished without the use of ladders.Attempts to improve the system
likely will lead to orchards with closer spaced trees within the rows.

The fusetto high density orchard, if shown to be an improvement, will reshape Ontario orchards
once again.The orchards of the future would contain upright and narrow cone-shaped trees with
leaves and fruit well exposed to sunlight.New procedures and redesigned orchard equipment
will be necessary for managing the orchards and harvesting the fruit.

The preliminary results from the high density fusetto orchards are encouraging.

LITERATURECITED
Miles, N.W.1998.New training approaches for Ontario peach and nectarine trees.127thAnnual
Report of the Secretary of the State Horticultural Society of Michigan.pp. 102-6.
Miles, N.W.1992.Production efficiency of peaches on trellises.Compact Fruit Tree 25:87-89.

Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.1998.Fruit Production
Recommendations 1998-1999, Pub. 360.pp. 15-26.

Table 1. Trunk cross-sectional area (cm2) of central leader trained Vinegold peach trees after the
third growing season in relation to tree spacing within the row and nitrogen fertilizer application
rates (Smith Orchard).

Tree spacing within rows
(m; ft in brackets)
_________________________________________________

N fertilizer
% of recommended

1.4(4.5)

2.2(7.5)

3.4(11.5)

Average

Trunk cross-sectional area (cm2)

25
50
100
Average

25
20
28
24

28
29
29
28

30
30
35
31

27
26
30

Table 2.Growth rate in the first three seasons of central leader trained Vinegold peach trees
planted in 1996 at various within-row spacings (Smith Orchard).

Tree spacing within rows
(m; ft in brackets)
_______________________________________________

Date measured

1.4(4.5)

2.2(7.5)

3.4(11.5)

Trunk cross-sectional area (cm2)

Planting
Fall 1996
Fall 1997
Fall 1998

1.9
6.7
16.0
24.0

1.7
6.6
18.9
28.4

1.7
5.6
18.5
30.0