<mets:mets OBJID="oai:orgprints.org:6207" LABEL="Eprints Item" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/METS/ http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/mets.xsd http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-0.xsd" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mets="http://www.loc.gov/METS/"><mets:metsHdr CREATEDATA="2010-03-19T10:44:52Z"><mets:agent TYPE="ORGANIZATION" ROLE="CUSTODIAN"><mets:name>Organic Eprints</mets:name></mets:agent></mets:metsHdr><mets:dmdSec ID="DMD_oai:orgprints.org:6207_mods"><mets:mdWrap MDTYPE="mods"><mets:xmlData><mods:titleInfo><mods:title>Baumstreifenpflege im Obstbau</mods:title></mods:titleInfo><mods:abstract>To control weed competition in organic fruit orchards there are only few and expensive devices on the market. Alternatives with mulching methods or weed burners do satisfy only in specific conditions. Tillage systems that provide sufficient, reliable weed competition control over a large range of soil and site conditions and for low costs are still to be developed.&#13;
&#13;
In order to ensure a sufficient supply of water and nutrients in orchards it is necessary to regulate weed growth in the in-row strips. In organic fruit growing this is achieved by keeping the soil open with special tillage equipment (very costs intensive), or by mulching with organic material, such as bark, wood shavings and straw (high costs and high deposition of potassium, which increase the risk of bitter pit) or water permeable synthetic ground covers. The mulching systems can considerably increase mice damage and are suited only for specific soil and site conditions.&#13;
&#13;
Project aims:&#13;
i) to develop and validate an alternative system (Sandwich System) that allows a sufficient supply of water and nutrients, but needs a lower input of resources; &#13;
ii) comparing growth and yields of the trees under Sandwich-System versus usual tillage over the whole width of the tree strip.&#13;
Methodology:&#13;
The systems were compared in 7 apple cultivars. Two repetitions in each cultivar. Collected data was yield, trunk perimeter, nutrients contained in fruits and leaves (T-Stage). For the statistical analysis we used the Program JMP 4.02 (SAS incorp.), ANOVA model; variety, System, repetition, variety*system, variety*repetition, system*repetition&#13;
Results, conclusion, state of the art:&#13;
-	No significant differences in the yields of both systems were observed (annually and accumulated)&#13;
-	The accumulated vegetative growth of the trees was significantly higher under sandwich-system (11%).&#13;
-	In leaf and fruit analysis for mineral uptake (from 2000 to 2003) there was no consistent tendency to be found that could indicate any better or less optimal nutrient availability between the two systems. From totally 74 data sets, there were 14 significantly different but of a low practical relevance.&#13;
-	Due to its low costs (60 % cheaper than good usual tillage devices) and its high performance (up to 9 km working speed) the Swiss Sandwich–System is an interesting alternative to the usual tillage devices.&#13;
-	If with the Sandwich System, the establishment of a low growing vegetation in the centre aisle is difficult (as in the case of our investigation), it becomes necessary to mulch the central green strip 1-3 times a year. &#13;
-	Due to passive tools, only, the Sandwich acts very softly to soil structure.&#13;
-	Together with the industry (Santini and Braun, CH-Sulgen) we could develop a now commercially available tillage device for the Sandwich-System Our results show, that with the Sandwich System tree performance is equal to whole-width tillage. The advantages are: i) about 60 % cheaper than usual good tillage devices, ii) high working speed (6-9 km/h); iii) soft to soil structure due to passive tools, only.&#13;
</mods:abstract><mods:classification authority="lcc">Fruit and berries</mods:classification><mods:genre>Project description</mods:genre></mets:xmlData></mets:mdWrap></mets:dmdSec><mets:amdSec ID="TMD_oai:orgprints.org:6207"><mets:rightsMD ID="rights_oai:orgprints.org:6207_mods"><mets:mdWrap MDTYPE="mods"><mets:xmlData><mods:useAndReproduction>
<p xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><strong>Deposit Agreement</strong></p> 
<p xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">In depositing this eprint (a collection of files and associated bibliographic 
metadata), I grant Organic Eprints the right to make 
it permanently available on-line, with open access to all or in accordance 
with any access restrictions that I have specified. (Removal of eprints from the 
public archive is strongly discouraged, but will be granted upon request.)<br /> 
I understand that Organic Eprints does not assume any responsibility 
if there is any breach of copyright in distributing these 
files or metadata.</p>
<p xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><strong>For work being deposited by its own first author:</strong> 
I declare that this eprint is my own intellectual property and that I have 
the right to make it available in Organic Eprints in the manner chosen.</p>
<p xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><strong>For work being deposited by someone other than its first
author:</strong> I declare that I have gained the proper permissions
from someone with the right to make this eprint available in Organic Eprints 
in the manner chosen - or that the material is in the public domain.</p>
<p xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Clicking on the deposit button indicates your agreement to these 
terms. If you do not wish to deposit the eprint right now you can 
<a href="http://orgprints.org/perl/users/myhome">return to your user area</a>, where you will find 
this eprint in your workspace. You can then later edit, clone and deposit it.</p>
    </mods:useAndReproduction></mets:xmlData></mets:mdWrap></mets:rightsMD></mets:amdSec><mets:fileSec></mets:fileSec><mets:structMap><mets:div DMDID="DMD_oai:orgprints.org:6207_mods" AMDID="TMD_oai:orgprints.org:6207"></mets:div></mets:structMap></mets:mets>