Table 1:
Average monthly air temperature and precipitation during the experiment period, Vitomarci agrometeorological station (year 2019)
| Parameter | Month | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May | June | July | August | September | |
| Temperature (°C) | 12.4 | 22.4 | 21.3 | 21.6 | 16.1 |
| Precipitation (mm) | 208.6 | 58 | 89.8 | 42.2 | 77.6 |
Table 2:
Soil analysis in the raspberry orchard at the beginning of the experiment
| Measurement | Value | Class |
|---|---|---|
| Potassium K2O (available) (mg/100 g sample) | 17.51 | B |
| Phosphorus P2O5 (available) (mg/100 g sample) | 17.80 | C |
| Humus (%) | 2.99 | |
| pH value | 6.65 |
Table 3:
Fertilisation/fertigation program and dynamics in relation to development stage of raspberry plants (BBCH: Biologische Bundesanstalt und Chemische Industrie; BS: biostimulant; N: nitrogen)
| Growth phase/period | Fertiliser/measure | Fertiliser rates | Treatment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dormant period (BBCH 00) | Pelletized manure | 1 T/ha (20 kg N/ha or 3 g/plant); | All treatments |
| Initiation of growth, flower bud development (BBCH 51-59) | Fertiliser A (Solinure®) | 25 kg/ha/week (3,17 g/plant); | 60 kg N/ha |
| 37,5 kg/ha/week (5,62 g/plant); | 80 kg N/ha, 80 kg N/ha + BS | ||
| Flowering, fruit formation, ripening (BBCH 61-79) | Fertiliser B (Hakaphos Violeta®) | 25 kg/ha/week (3,75 g/plant); | 60 kg N/ha |
| 37,5 kg/ha/week (5,62 g/plant); | 80 kg N/ha, 80 kg N/ha + BS | ||
| Harvesting period (BBCH 81-89) | Fertiliser C (NovaTec® Solub) | 25 kg/ha/week (3,75 g/plant); | 60 kg N/ha |
| 37,5 kg/ha/week (5,62 g/plant) | 80 kg N/ha, 80 kg N/ha + BS | ||
| 4 times during the growing season (BBCH 51-89) | Biostimulant (Vitanica® Si) | 8,75 ml/28 plants (0.31 mL/plant) - 2.08 l/ha | 80 kg N/ha + BS |
Table 4:
Effect of nutrition regime on yield characteristics in raspberry cultivar 'Himbo -Top' (average values for one harvest period and cumulative values) (N: nitrogen, BS: biostimulant). Effect of nutrition approach is evident from the line “Nutrition program information”, effect of nitrogen rate is evident from the first three values in the line “N-rate” and effect of used biostimulant is evident from the last two values in the line “BS”. Different letters (in the individual line) mean statistically significant differences according to the Duncan’s MRT test (α < 0.05).
| Treatment: → Parameter:↓ | Control (20 kg N/ha) | 60 kg N/ha | 80 kg N/ha | 80 kg N/ha + BS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yield (g/plant; average of all harvest periods) | 61.11±10.91 | 64.83±11.25 | 71.30±18.85 | 72.37±18.82 |
| Impact of: Nutrition program | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| N-rate | ns | ns | ns | / |
| BS | / | / | ns | ns |
| Weight of 1 fruit (g; average of all harvest periods) | 3.46±0.09 | 3.58±0.10 | 3.85±0.15 | 3.86±0.14 |
| Impact of: Nutrition program | b | b | a | a |
| N-rate | b | b | a | / |
| BS | / | / | ns | ns |
| Yield weight (g/plant) (cumulative for all harvest periods) | 916.65±163.65 | 972.45±168.75 | 1069.5±282.65 | 1085.5±282.14 |
| Impact of: Nutrition program | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| N-rate | ns | ns | ns | / |
| BS | / | / | ns | ns |
Table 5:
Impact of treatment on soluble solids content, titratable acids and sweetness index (SSC: soluble solids content, TA: titratable acids; N: nitrogen, BS: biostimulant). Effect of nutrition approach is evident from the line “Nutrition program”, effect of nitrogen rate is evident from the first three values in the line “N-rate”, effect of used biostimulant is evident form the last two values in the line “BS”. Different letters (in the individual line) mean statistically significant differences according to the Duncan’s MRT test (α < 0.05).
| Treatment: → Parameter:↓ | Control (20 kg N/ha) | 60 kg N/ha | 80 kg N/ha | 80 kg N/ha + BS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soluble solids (°Brix) | 7.1±0.24 | 6.48±0.18 | 6.65±0.19 | 6.43±0.25 |
| Impact of: Nutrition program | a | b | b | b |
| N-rate | a | b | ab | / |
| BS | / | / | ns | ns |
| Titratable acids (g/L) | 11.71±1.00 | 12.43±0.77 | 12.68±0.78 | 13.08±1.08 |
| Impact of: Nutrition program | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| N-rate | ns | ns | ns | |
| BS | ns | ns | ||
| Thiault index | 6.10±0.34 | 5.21±0.54 | 5.24±0.53 | 4.96±0.39 |
| Impact of: Nutrition program | a | ab | ab | b |
| N-rate | a | b | b | / |
| BS | / | / | ns | ns |
Table 6:
Effect of treatment (nutrition program) on the storability of raspberries (change in fruit weight and volume and microbiological activity - occurrence of moulds) after storage at 5 °C for 7 days). Effect of nutrition approach is evident from the line “Nutrition program”, effect of nitrogen rate is evident from the first three values in the line “N-rate”, effect of used biostimulant is evident form the last two values in the line “BS”. Different letters (in the individual line) mean statistically significant differences according to the Duncan’s MRT test (α < 0.05).
| Treatment: → Parameter:↓ | Control | 60 kg N/ha | 80 kg N/ha | 80 kg N/ha + BS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mass reduction (%) | 3.22±0.34 | 3.27±0.35 | 3.51±0.49 | 3.54±0.34 |
| Impact of: Nutrition program | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| N-rate | ns | ns | ns | / |
| BS | / | / | ns | ns |
| Volume reduction (%) | 16.78±7.64 | 22.08±13.37 | 17.03±8.4 | 22.67±9.39 |
| Impact of: Nutrition program | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| N-rate | ns | ns | ns | / |
| BS | / | / | ns | ns |
| Incidence of mould (%) | 57.12±4.37 | 68.07±5.31 | 69.65±6.61 | 75.61±7.55 |
| Impact of: Nutrition program | b | ab | ab | a |
| N-rate | b | a | a | / |
| BS | / | / | ns | ns |