|
|
|
Çѱ¹»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸ / v.12, no.1, 2003³â, pp.17-21
|
Àú±¤µµ Á¶°Ç½Ã Âü¿ÜÀÇ Àû°ú¿Í ¿±¸é½Ãºñ È¿°ú
( Effect of Fruit Thinning and Foliar Fertilization under the Low Light Intensity in Oriental Melon(Cucumis melo L. var. makuwa MAKINO) ) |
| ¼ÅÂö;°¿ë±¸;À±Çü±Ç;±è¿µÃ¶;¼È¿´ö;ÀÌ»ó±Ô; ¿ø¿¹¿¬±¸¼Ò ä¼ÒÀç¹è°ú;¿ø¿¹¿¬±¸¼Ò ä¼ÒÀç¹è°ú;¿ø¿¹¿¬±¸¼Ò ä¼ÒÀç¹è°ú;¿ø¿¹¿¬±¸¼Ò ä¼ÒÀç¹è°ú;¿ø¿¹¿¬±¸¼Ò ä¼ÒÀç¹è°ú;¿ø¿¹¿¬±¸¼Ò ä¼ÒÀç¹è°ú;
|
|
|
 |
|
| |
| ÃÊ ·Ï |
| Âü¿ÜÀç¹è½Ã Àú±¤µµ Á¶°Ç½Ã »óǰ¼ö·®ÀÇ ±Þ°ÝÇÑ ÀúÇϸ¦ ¸·±â À§ÇÏ¿© º» ¿¬±¸°¡ ¼öÇàµÇ¾ú´Ù. °ú½Ç ºñ´ë±â¿¡ ÇØ´çµÇ´Â Âø°úÈÄ 10ÀϺÎÅÍ 400 $mu$mol$.$m$^{-}$2$.$S$^{-1}$Á¤µµÀÇ Àú±¤µµ Á¶°ÇÀÌ Áö¼ÓµÇ¸é ±¤ÇÕ¼º ¼Óµµµµ ¶³¾îÁö°í, ¿±·Ï¼Ò ÇÔ·®µµ ³·¾ÒÀ¸¸ç ƯÈ÷ ¿ä¼Ò ¹«¿±¸é½Ãºñ±¸ÀÇ ±¤ÇÕ¼º¼Óµµ´Â Å©°Ô ÀúÇϵǾú´Ù ´çµµ¿¡ À־ ÀÚ¿¬±¤¿¡ ºñÇØ Àú±¤µµ 󸮱¸°¡ Àü¹ÝÀûÀ¸·Î ³·¾Ò´Âµ¥, Âø°ú¼ö°¡ ¸¹°í ¹«¿±¸é½Ãºñ±¸Àϼö·Ï ³·¾Ò´Ù. ¹ßÈ¿°ú ¹ß»ý·üÀº ¿ä¼Ò ¿±¸é½Ãºñ À¯¹«¿¡ °ü°è¾øÀÌ ÀÚ¿¬±¤¿¡¼´Â 4% ¹Ì¸¸À¸·Î ¹ß»ýµÇ¾ú´Âµ¥, Àú±¤µµ Á¶°Ç¿¡¼´Â 10% ÀÌ»ó ¹ß»ýµÇ¾ú´Ù. ƯÈ÷ Àú±¤µµ Á¶°Ç¿¡¼ Àû°ú¼ö¸¦ Àû°Ô ÇÑ Ã³¸®±¸Àϼö·Ï ¹ßÈ¿°ú ¹ß»ý·üÀÌ ³ô¾Ò´Âµ¥, Àû°ú¸¦ ÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀº 󸮱¸´Â °¢°¢ 39¿Í 48%·Î ¸Å¿ì ³ôÀº ¹ß»ýÀ²À» º¸¿´´Ù. ¼öÈ®½Ã±â Áö¿¬Àº ¿ä¼Ò ¿±¸é½Ãºñ À¯¹«¿Í °ü°è¾øÀÌ ÀÚ¿¬±¤¿¡ ºñÇØ Àú±¤µµ Á¶°Ç¿¡¼ ´Ê¾îÁö´Â °æÇâÀ» º¸¿´´Âµ¥, Àû°ú¼ö°¡ ÀûÀ»¼ö·Ï Áö¿¬Á¤µµ´Â ½ÉÇß´Ù ÁÖ´ç »óǰ¼ö·®¿¡ À־ Àú±¤µµ Á¶°ÇÇÏ¿¡¼ ÀÚ¿¬±¤¿¡ ºñÇØ 16¡34% ¼öÁØ Á¤µµ·Î ¸Å¿ì ³·Àº ¼ö·®À» º¸¿´´Âµ¥, ¿ä¼Ò 0.5% ¾×À» ¿±¸é½ÃºñÇϰí 2°³¸¦ Àû°úÇÑ Ã³¸®±¸°¡ 34%¼öÁØÀ¸·Î ÀÚ¿¬±¤¿¡ ºñÇØ ´Ù¸¥ 󸮺¸´Ù ³ôÀº »óǰ¼ö·®À» º¸¿´´Ù. µû¶ó¼ Âü¿ÜÀç¹è½Ã °ú½Ç Âø°úÈÄ 10ÀϰæºÎÅÍ °¿ì µî¿¡ ÀÇÇØ Àå±â°£ Àú±¤µµ Á¶°ÇÀÌ Áö¼ÓµÉ °ÍÀ¸·Î Àü¸ÁµÇ¸é »óǰ¼ö·®ÀÇ ±Þ°ÝÇÑ ÀúÇϸ¦ ¸·±â À§ÇÏ¿© ÁÖ´ç 6°³ÀÇ Âø°ú °ú½ÇÁß¿¡¼ 2°³¸¦ Àû°úÇϰí, ¿ä¼Ò 0.5%¾×À» 2ȸ Á¤µµ ¿±¸é½Ãºñ ÇØÁÖ´Â °ÍÀÌ ¹Ù¶÷Á÷ ÇÒ °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù. |
|
| This experiment was conducted to find out the method of preventing decrease in the marketable yield of oriental melon (Cucumis melo L. var. makuwa MAKINO) under low light intensity. By maintaining low light of 400 $mu$mol$.$m$^{[-10]}$ 2$.$S$^{-1}$ from 10 days after fruit set to fruit enlargement period, the photosynthetic rate and chlorophyll contents of leaf were reduced. Leaves which had no urea application showed largely decreased photosynthetic rate The content of soluble solids was lower$.$ in the low light than natural light treatment. Regardless of foliar application of urea, % fermentation fruits was under 4% in the natural light treatment and over 10% in the low light treatment. The less the fruit thinning, the greater was % fermentation fruits under low light condition. The % fermentation fruits were 39% and 40% in no fruit thinning treatment. The harvest was delayed under low light condition regardless of foliar fertilization. As the number of thinned fruits was decreased, the harvest time was delayed more. Marketable yield per plant sharply decreased under low light intensity. Compared with natural light, the yield under low light treatment was 16¡34%. The treatment fertilized with 0.5% urea on leaf had 34% greater harvest index of marketable yield than other treatments. In conclusion, when the long low light condition from 10th day after fruiting was forecasted, thinning two fruits out of six fruits and two times foliar fertilization with 0.5% urea should be applied. |
| |
| Ű¿öµå |
| ±¤ÇÕ¼º;¿±·Ï¼Ò;¿±¸é½Ãºñ;Àû°ú;Àú±¤µµ;photosynthesis;chlorophyll;foliar fertilization;fruit thinning;low light; |
| |
|
|
 |
|
»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸÁö / v.12, no.1, 2003³â, pp.17-21
Çѱ¹»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1229-4675
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200311922407583)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î |
|
| ³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø |
|
|
|
|
|
|