Under- and Overtree Microsprinkler Irrigation for Frost Protection of Peaches

Abstract

Spring frost events reduce fruit production in the southeastern United States more than any other factor, with some losses occurring in 5 out of 7 years. Orchard heaters, wind machines, and overhead irrigation are sound methods of reducing losses, but their relatively high cost is a major deterrent for fruit growers (Castaldi, 1990). A potentially leas-costly and more water- efficient approach to frost protection is overtree microsprinkling. Microsprinkler irrigation was applied either beneath or onto canopies of 4-year-old `Loring' peach [Prunus persica (L.)] trees at a rate of 38 liters/h per tree to evaluate the relative efficacy of low-volume undertree and overtree microsprinkling for frost protection. Overtree microsprinkling maintained flower bud temperatures 2C during a calm, radiative frost on 20-21 Mar. 1990 (minimum air temperature -4.4C), whereas undertree sprinkling provided 0.5C of air temperature elevation at a comparable height in trees (2 m). Twelve days later, fruit set was lower for nonirrigated and undertree-irrigated trees (none to one fruit/m of shoot length) than for trees irrigated with overtree microsprinklers (eight to nine fruit/m of shoot length). Economic analysis showed that capital costs of overtree microsprinkler systems increased annual costs of peach production by 8% to 13%, which required increased yield (or price per unit yield) of 17% to 20% before profits exceeded those of nonirrigated orchards, assuming all else equal. The estimated 1% increase in annual production costs of overtree microsprinkling compared to undertree microsprinkling appears to be justified by the increased efficacy of the overtree system.