researches regarding the physical properties of the walnut ... 22(3) pdf...volume 22(3), 49- 57,...

Volume 22(3), 49- 57, 2018 JOURNAL of Horticulture, Forestry and Biotechnology

www.journal-hfb.usab-tm.ro

49

Researches regarding the physical properties of the walnut trees belonging to some genotypes (Juglans Regia L.) from Maramureș County

Buhan Ioana Paula1, Iordănescu Olimpia Alina1*

1Banat University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine “King Michael I of Romania”, Faculty of

Horticulture and Forestry, Calea Aradului 119, Timisoara *Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

Abstract Maramureș is one of the areas of our country where fruit-growing species such as walnut (Juglans regia sp.) and edible chestnut (Castanea sativa sp.) find optimal conditions for growth and fructification. The cultivation of these two well-loved fruit-growing species has deep roots in the history and the traditions of the people from this area. Starting from these premises, without question, that area also has a rich fruit-growing germoplasm for the tree nuts, which, studied and rediscovered, could be a starting point for the creation of varieties adaptable to the climatic changes of the last years.

The aim of the experimental research is to evaluate the genetic diversity in the local walnut tree populations from Maramureș area, to analyze their adaptability to the cultivation area and to select several walnut tree genotypes that can be used directly in production or in the breeding process. The paper presents partial results regarding the fruit size of the walnut genotypes studied in 2016 and 2017.

Key words walnut tree, germoplasm, Maramureș, biometrics

The walnut tree is one of the most important

fruit-growing species. The walnut kernel is a highly

concentrated food with a rich chemical composition,

used as such in consumption, in the sweets industry, in

bakery, for extraction of fine oils, varneshes etc. Green

walnuts are very rich in vitamin C and are used in the

preparation of jam, fine liqueurs and other products.

The leaves, the sprouts and the bark are used

to extract tannin and other substances used to color

wool garments in peasant households. The wood is

appreciated in the furniture industry, in manufacturing

art objects, and other purposes. From raw sap, leaves

infusions and other organs, compresses are prepared to

relieve some of the rheumatic pains.

As a result of the studies carried out in various

areas of the country: Argeş, Iaşi, Târgu Jiu, a series of

valuable biotypes were selected, with international

standards fruits (over 50% core, fine peel, pleasant

taste), which were approved as new varieties and are

multiplying in nurseries. Among these we mention:

Sibişel precoce, Jupânești, Geoagiu 65, Șibișel 44,

Germisara, Orăștie, Novaci, Sușița, Peștișani, Bratia,

Mihaela şi Roxana, Velnița, Miroslava.

The importance of the fruit-growing is

reflected in the nutritional value of the fruits; unlike the

fruits of other fruit-growing species, the nuts are rich

and, at the same time, concentrated food (Ungureanu

I.).

The fresh fruit contains: 17.57% water,

11.05% nitrogenous matter, 41.58% fatty matter,

26.5% extractive matter, 1.3% cellulose, 1.6% ash,

being the richest fruit in copper and zinc. In addition,

they contain 1.4 to 2% K, Mg, P, S, Fe, are also rich in

vitamin E (4.1 mg) B complex and vitamin PP, which

increase the nutritional value of walnuts.

Material and Method

The walnut tree cultivation study was

conducted in two localities belonging to the city of

Şomcuta Mare, in the county of Maramures,

respectively Buciumi and Vălenii Șomcutei.

Selected genotypes were encoded by letters

and numbers (V1 ... Vn, B1 ... Bn), the letter represents

the locality from which they were selected, and the

figure represents the number of the genotype. There

were studied 21 walnut tree genotypes taken from the

two locations, so the ones belonging to Vălenii

Şomcutei locality were noted V1 - V8 and the ones

from Bucium were noted: B1 - B13. Morphological characterization of the fruits

The observations were made on a sample of

30 walnut trees selected for each genotype.

50

Characteristics were recorded using the UPOV

and IPGRI descriptors, following large diameter, small

diameter, walnut height, fruit weight, core weight, core

percentage.

Fruit size (mm). For the determination of the fruit

size, the electronic calliper was used with which the

two diameters and the length of the walnut were

measured.

The size index (BORDEIANU et al., 1967) was

calculated with the formula:

IM= H+D+d/3

Where: H= hight (the lenght of the walnut), D = the

large diameter of the nut, d = the small diameter of the

nut.

Fruit weight (g). The electronic balance was used

to determine the weight of the fruit. 30 fruits were

weighed from each genotype, the average fruit weight

of each genotype being the average of the 30 fruits.

The data obtained were statistically processed

and interpreted using the variance analysis method.

Results and Discussions

Results obtained for the large diameter of walnuts

in the genotypes studied in 2016

Table 1

Large diameter of the walnuts at studied genotypes 2016

No. Genotype Large diameter mm

The relative

value

%

The difference

compared to the

control

Significance

1 B1 28.80 90.62 -2.98 000

2 B2 29.70 93.46 -2.08 000

3 B3 33.00 103.84 1.22 XXX

4 B4 30.40 95.66 -1.38 000

5 B8 31.50 99.12 -0.28 -

6 B13 31.90 100.38 0.12 -

7 V1 35.20 110.76 3.42 XXX

8 V2 34.10 107.30 2.32 XXX

9 V3 33.10 104.15 1.32 XXX

10 V4 30.50 95.97 -1.28 000

11 V6 30.6 96.28 -1.18 000

12 V7 33.5 105.41 1.72 XXX

13 V8 30.9 97.23 -0.88 000

The average of the

experience 31.78 100.00 0.00

Control

DL 5%=0.42mm DL 1%=0.57mm DL 0,1%=0.76 mm

The large diameter of walnuts in the genotypes studied

in 2016 ranged from 28.8 mm for Genotype B1 and

35.2 mm for Genotype V1, with an average of 31.78

mm.

Higher values comparing to the control were

recorded at genotypes: V1, V2, V3, V7 and B3, all five

being very significantly positive comparing to the

control of the experience. A higher value comparing to

the control was also recorded in biotype B13, but

which was not provided statistically.

At the opposite pole, the lowest values of the

large diameter of the walnut were recorded in

genotypes: B1, B2, B4, V4, V6 and V8, all six being

very significantly negative comparing to the control.

Genotype B8 had a value below that of the control but

close to it, so it was not provided statistically.

Results obtained for the large diameter of walnuts in the genotypes studied in 2017

51

Table 2

Large diameter of the walnuts at studied genotypes 2017

No. Genotype Large diameter mm

The relative

value

%

The difference

compared to the

control

Significance

1 B1 27.70 93.85 -1.82 00

2 B2 24.30 82.33 -5.22 000

3 B3 32.00 108.41 2.48 XXX

4 B4 30.90 104.69 1.38 XX

5 B8 31.70 107.40 2.18 XXX

6 B13 31.90 108.07 2.38 XXX

7 V1 31.80 107.74 2.28 XXX

8 V2 31.70 107.40 2.18 XXX

9 V3 29.40 99.60 -0.12 -

10 V4 29.10 98.59 -0.42 -

11 V6 30.4 102.99 0.88 -

12 V7 32.6 110.44 3.08 XXX

13 V8 31.2 105.70 1.68 XX

The average of the

experience 29.52 100.00 0.00

Control

DL 5%=1.02mm DL 1%=1.38mm DL 0,1%=1.84 mm

In 2017, the large diameter of walnuts in the studied

genotypes ranged from 24.3 mm for Genotype B2 and

32.6 mm for Genotype V7, with an average of the

experience of 29.52 mm.

Among the genotypes that exceeded the

average of the experience, we mention: V7, B3, B13,

V1, B8, V2, all of them being very significantly

positive comparing to the control of the experience.

Higher values comparing to the control were also

recorded for genotypes V8 and B4, both of which were

distinctly significantly positive comparing to the

control.

Values below that of the control at this

parameter were recorded in genotypes B3 (24.30 mm)

which was very significantly negative and in Genotype

B1 which was distinctly significantly negative

comparing to the control. Genotypes V3 and V4

recorded lower values than the control, but close to it

for which reason they were not provided statistically.

Results for the small diameter of walnuts in genotypes studied in 2016

Table 3

Small diameter of the walnuts in studied genotypes 2016

No. Genotype Small diameter mm

The relative

value

%

The difference

compared to the

control

Significance

1 B1 27.70 91.02 -2.73 000

2 B2 28.50 93.65 -1.93 000

3 B3 32.20 105.81 1.77 XXX

4 B4 29.00 95.29 -1.43 000

5 B8 29.50 96.93 -0.93 000

6 B13 28.60 93.98 -1.83 000

7 V1 32.20 105.81 1.77 XXX

8 V2 33.30 109.42 2.87 XXX

9 V3 31.80 104.49 1.37 XXX

10 V4 29.70 97.59 -0.73 00

11 V6 29.5 96.93 -0.93 000

12 V7 32.0 105.14 1.56 XXX

13 V8 29.9 98.24 -0.53 0

The average of the

experience 30.43 100.00 0.00

Control

DL 5%=0.48mm DL 1%=0.65mm DL 0,1%=0.86 mm

52

The small diameter of the walnuts in the genotypes

studied in 2016 ranged from 27.7 mm for Genotype B1

and 33.3 mm for Genotype V2, with an average of the



recorded in genotypes: V2, V1, B3, V3 and V7, all five


control of the experience.



genotypes: B1, B2, B4, B8, B13 and V8, all six being


Genotype V4 recorded a value below that of the

control that allowed it to be distinctly significantly

negative comparing to it, whereas Genotype V8 had a

value below that of the control but close to it, therefore

not provided statistically.

Results for the small diameter of walnuts in the genotypes studied in 2017

Table 4

Small diameter of the walnuts in studied genotypes 2017

No. Genotype Small diameter mm

The relative

value

%

The difference

compared to the

control

Significance

1 B1 26.90 97.69 -0.64 -

2 B2 23.90 86.79 -3.64 000

3 B3 27.68 100.52 0.14 -

4 B4 26.70 96.96 -0.84 -

5 B8 30.90 112.21 3.36 XXX

6 B13 31.20 113.30 3.66 XXX

7 V1 30.40 110.40 2.86 XXX

8 V2 30.70 111.49 3.16 XXX

9 V3 28.10 102.05 0.56 -

10 V4 28.90 104.95 1.36 XXX

11 V6 29.8 108.21 2.26 XXX

12 V7 31.8 115.48 4.26 XXX

13 V8 30.3 110.03 2.76 XXX

The average of the

experience 27.54 100.00 0.00

Control

DL 5%=0.88mm DL 1%=1.19mm DL 0,1%=1.58 mm

In 2017, the small diameter of walnuts ranged from

23.9 mm for Genotype B2 and 31.8 mm for Genotype

V7 with an average of 27.54 mm.

Eight genotypes surpassed the control with

values that led to the obtaining of very positive

significances; two genotypes, namely V3 and B3,

exceeded the control but with values close to it, which

did not lead to obtaining significances, while only two

genotypes had values below the average of the

experience, namely Genotype B2 which was very

significantly negative comparing to the control, and

Genotype B4 that was not provided statistically.

53

Results obtained for the height of walnuts at genotypes studied in 2016

Table 5

Height of the walnuts at the studied genotypes 2016 No. Genotype Height

mm

The relative

value

%

The difference

compared to the

control

Significance

1 B1 33.40 91.34 -3.17 000

2 B2 31.20 85.32 -5.37 000

3 B3 41.10 112.40 4.53 XXX

4 B4 38.40 105.01 1.83 XXX

5 B8 42.00 114.86 5.43 XXX

6 B13 32.70 89.43 -3.87 000

7 V1 37.90 103.65 1.33 XXX

8 V2 37.70 103.10 1.13 XXX

9 V3 36.70 100.36 0.13 -

10 V4 36.90 100.91 0.33 -

11 V6 35.3 96.53 -1.26 000

12 V7 31.8 86.96 -4.76 000

13 V8 39.1 106.92 2.53 XXX

The average of the

experience 36.57 100.00 0.00

Control

DL 5%=0.52mm DL 1%=0.70mm DL 0,1%=0.93 mm

The height of the fruits in 2016 was between 31.2 mm

in Genotype B2 and 42.0 mm in Genotype B8, with an

average of the experience of 36.57 mm.

The highest values for this parameter were

recorded in genotypes: B8, B3, V8, B4, V1 and V2, all

six being very significantly positive comparing to the

control, followed by two genotypes, namely V3 and

V4, which had values above the control but close to it,

as a result, were not provided statistically.

The lowest values of the fruits height were

recorded in genotypes: B2, V7, B13, B1 and V6, all

five being very significantly negative comparing to the


Results obtained for the height of walnuts at genotypes studied in 2017

Table 6

Height of the the walnuts at studied genotypes 2017

No. Genotype Height mm

The relative

value

%

The difference

compared to the

control

Significance

1 B1 29.50 83.12 -5.99 000

2 B2 26.20 73.82 -9.29 000

3 B3 36.90 103.97 1.41 XX

4 B4 35.80 100.87 0.31 -

5 B8 39.50 111.30 4.01 XXX

6 B13 38.30 107.92 2.81 XXX

7 V1 35.10 98.90 -0.39 -

8 V2 38.00 107.07 2.51 XXX

9 V3 31.40 88.48 -4.09 000

10 V4 38.30 107.92 2.81 XXX

11 V6 36.0 101,43 0.51 -

12 V7 39.0 109.89 3.51 XXX

13 V8 37.4 105.38 1.91 XXX

The average of the

experience 35.49 100.00 0.00

Control

DL 5%=1.01mm DL 1%=1.37mm DL 0,1%=1.82 mm

54

The height of the fruits in 2017 ranged from 26.2 mm

for Genotype B2 and 39.5 mm for Genotype B8, with

an average experience of 35.49 mm.

Interestingly, seven of the genotypes studied

had the same significance as in the previous year, while

in six of the studied genotypes, the values obtained led

to the obtaining of opposite significances.

Results obtained in order to identify the size and shape indices in the studied genotypes

Table 7

Size and shape index for studied genotypes Genotype Size index (average

2016-2017)

mm

Shape index

(average 2016-2017)

Size Shape

B1 28.99 113.16 Medium-sized Ovoid

B2 27.63 107.31 Medium-sized Spheroidal



B8 34.18 131.94 Medium-sized Ellipsoidal


V1 33.76 112.70 Medium-sized Ovoid

V2 36.51 116.84 Big Ovoid


V4 32.22 127.47 Medium-sized Ellipsoidal


V7 33.44 109.20 Medium-sized Spheroidal


The size and shape index were calculated as the

average of the two years of study. Depending on the

obtained values we can classify the walnut studied

genotypes as follows:

- By size, 12 of the 13 genotypes studied were

in the medium-sized group, the only one who managed

to pass into the group of big walnuts was Genotype V2;

- By the shape of the fruit, most of the

genotypes studied have ovoid fruits (B1, B3, B4, B13,

V1, V2, V3, V6 and V8, two have spheroid fruits (B2

and V7) and two have ellipsoidal fruits (B8 și V4).

Results obtained in order to identify the mass at the studied genotypes

Table 8

Weight of the walnuts at studied genotypes No. Genotype Walnuts' weight

average 2016-2017 g

The relative

value

%

The difference

compared to the

control

Significance

1 B1 6,90 68,77 -3,13 000

2 B2 4,98 49,63 -5,05 000

3 B3 10,39 103,55 0,36 X

4 B4 10,45 104,15 0,42 X

5 B8 12,70 126,58 2,67 XXX

6 B13 12,38 123,39 2,35 XXX

7 V1 12,10 120,60 2,07 XXX

8 V2 12,07 120,30 2,04 XXX

9 V3 8,03 80,03 -2,00 000

10 V4 10,30 102,66 0,27 -

11 V6 11,02 109,83 0,98 XXX

12 V7 12,86 128,17 2,82 XXX

13 V8 10.03 99,66 -0,03 -

The average of the

experience 9.75 100.00 0.00

Control

DL 5%=0.33g DL 1%=0.45g DL 0,1%=0.60 g

55

Representative images with each studied genotype

Genotype V1 Genotype V2 Genotype V3

Genotype V4 Genotype V5 Genotype V6

Genotype V7 Genotype V7

Genotype B1 Genotype B2 Genotype B3

56

Genotype B4 Genotype B8 Genotype B13

Conclusions

Concluding the genotypes of the two studied

localities, in the number of 21 studied, we have come

to certain determinations, presented below as the large

diameter, the small diameter, the height, the size and

the shape.

The large diameter of walnuts in the

genotypes studied in 2016 ranged from 28.8 mm for

Genotype B1 and 35.2 mm for Genotype V1, with an

average of 31.78 mm.


recorded at genotypes: V1, V2, V3, V7 and B3, all five


control of the experience. A higher value comparing to

the control was also recorded in biotype B13, but

which was not provided statistically.



genotypes: B1, B2, B4, V4, V6 and V8, all six being


Genotype B8 had a value below that of the control but

close to it, so it was not provided statistically.

In 2017, the large diameter of walnuts in the studied

genotypes ranged from 24.3 mm for Genotype B2 and

32.6 mm for Genotype V7, with an average of the


Among the genotypes that exceeded the

average of the experience, we mention: V7, B3, B13,

V1, B8, V2, all of them being very significantly

positive comparing to the control of the experience.

Higher values comparing to the control were also

recorded for genotypes V8 and B4, both of which were

distinctly significantly positive comparing to the

control.

Values below that of the control at this

parameter were recorded in genotypes B3 (24.30 mm)

which was very significantly negative and in Genotype

B1 which was distinctly significantly negative

comparing to the control. Genotypes V3 and V4

recorded lower values than the control, but close to it

for which reason they were not provided statistically.

The large diameter of the walnuts in the

genotypes studied in the years 2016 and 2017

concluded that there are some major differences from

year to year. Considering that in 2016 we had for

genotype B2 the value of 29.7 and in 2017 a value of

24.8. For genotype V1, also in 2016 a value of 35.2,

and in 2017, the value of 31.8. We also mention V2

and V3, which in 2016 had values of 34.1 and 33.1

respectively, and in 2017 the values dropped to 31.7

and 29.4.

The small diameter of the walnuts in the

genotypes studied in 2016 ranged from 27.7 mm for

Genotype B1 and 33.3 mm for Genotype V2, with an

average of the experience of 30.43 mm.


recorded in genotypes: V2, V1, B3, V3 and V7, all five





genotypes: B1, B2, B4, B8, B13 and V8, all six being


Genotype V4 recorded a value below that of the

control that allowed it to be distinctly significantly

negative comparing to it, whereas Genotype V8 had a

value below that of the control but close to it, therefore

not provided statistically.

In 2017, the small diameter of walnuts ranged

from 23.9 mm for Genotype B2 and 31.8 mm for

Genotype V7 with an average of 27.54 mm.

Eight genotypes surpassed the control with

values that led to the obtaining of very positive

significances; two genotypes, namely V3 and B3,

exceeded the control but with values close to it, which

did not lead to obtaining significances, while only two

genotypes had values below the average of the

experience, namely Genotype B2 which was very

significantly negative comparing to the control, and

Genotype B4 that was not provided statistically.

The height of the fruits in 2016 was between

31.2 mm in Genotype B2 and 42.0 mm in Genotype

B8, with an average of the experience of 36.57 mm.

The height of the fruits in 2017 ranged from 26.2 mm

for Genotype B2 and 39.5 mm for Genotype B8, with

an average experience of 35.49 mm.

The size and shape index were calculated as

the average of the two years of study. Depending on

57

the obtained values we can classify the walnut studied

genotypes as follows:

- By size, 12 of the 13 genotypes studied were

in the medium-sized group, the only one who managed

to pass into the group of big walnuts was Genotype V2;

- By the shape of the fruit, most of the

genotypes studied have ovoid fruits (B1, B3, B4, B13,

V1, V2, V3, V6 and V8, two have spheroid fruits (B2

and V7) and two have ellipsoidal fruits (B8 și V4).

Considering the reported reports, we can say

that there are various factors that can occur in this

change, among which we mention the most important

aspect of finding the weather conditions. Bibliography

1.Bîrsanu Ionescu M., Cosmulescu S.N. – 2016, Genetic

diversity based on the morphological traits of the walnut

from the local populations of walnut tree on the lefr side of

the Jiu river, Analele Universității din Craiova, Seria

Biologie, Horticultură, TPPA, Ingineria Mediului,

XXI(LVII):93-100

2.Botu I., Botu M. - 1997, Metode şi tehnici

de cercetare în pomicultură, Edit. Conphyus,

Râmnicu Vâlcea;

3.Branişte N. – 2000, Ghid pt. Pomicultori, edit. Ceres,

Bucureşti;

4.Cociu V. - 1983, Cultura nucului, Edit. Ceres,

Bucureşti;

5.Cociu V. - 2003, Culturile nucifere, Edit. Ceres,

Bucureşti;

6.Constantinescu N., Popa P. - 1964, Altoirea nucului,

Edit. Agrosilvică, Bucureşti;

7.Cosmulescu Sina, Bîrsanu Ionescu Mariana -2018,

Variabilitatea genetică în populațiile de nuc din zona

nisipurilor din stânga Jiului, Revista Hortus

8.Drăgănescu E. – 1993, Comportarea unor soiuri de nuc în

condiţiile ecologice din partea de vest a ţării, Buletin U.S.A.

Cluj Napoca;

9.Iordanescu Olimpia Alina – 2012, Pomicultură generală și

specială , Edit. Eurobit, Timişoara;

10.Mackay J. W. – 1966, Late flowering walnut hybrids,

Ann. Rept. No. Nut Grow. Assoc., pg. 70 – 75;

11.Mihuţ E., Blidariu A., Iordănescu A. – 1999, Cercetări

privind arhitectonica sistemului radicular la nuc, Cercetări

Ştiinţifice seria a III-a a Facultăţii de Horticultură Timişoara;

12.Voiculescu N. şi col. – 1990, Nucul, revista producţiei

vegetale, Horticultura;

13.Wang S., Zhao B. – 1999,A brief introduction to wallnut

cultivar – present no. 1 – Fourth International Walnut

Symposium, Bordeaux, France;

14.http://www.cjmaramures.ro/coordonate-

geografice/retea-hidrografica-clima

15.https://www.ropedia.ro/judetul/Maramures/

16.https://www.meteoblue.com/ro/vreme/prognoza/mo

delclimate/%C5%9Eomcuta-

mare_rom%C3%A2nia_666475

17.https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C8%98omcuta_Mar

e

18.https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buciumi,_Maramure%

C8%99

19.https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C4%83lenii_%C8

%98omcutei,_Maramure%C8%99

http://www.cjmaramures.ro/coordonate-geografice/retea-hidrografica-clima

http://www.cjmaramures.ro/coordonate-geografice/retea-hidrografica-clima

https://www.ropedia.ro/judetul/Maramures/

https://www.meteoblue.com/ro/vreme/prognoza/modelclimate/%C5%9Eomcuta-mare_rom%C3%A2nia_666475



https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C8%98omcuta_Mare

https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C8%98omcuta_Mare

https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buciumi,_Maramure%C8%99

https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buciumi,_Maramure%C8%99

https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C4%83lenii_%C8%98omcutei,_Maramure%C8%99

https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C4%83lenii_%C8%98omcutei,_Maramure%C8%99

researches regarding the physical properties of the walnut ... 22(3) pdf...volume 22(3), 49- 57,...

Documents