Biological and Agronomical Characteristics of Local and Introduced Plum (Prunus domestica L.) Cultivars in Georgia

Document Type: Research paper


1 Department of perineal crops, Scientific-Research Center of Agriculture, Georgia, Tbilisi.

2 Head of Department of Horticulture and Viticulture, Scientific-Research Center of Agriculture.Tbilisi, Georgia, Tbilisi.

3 Head Department Institute of Horticulture, Viticulture and Oenolog, Grapevine and Fruits Germplasm Research, Genetics and Breeding Georgia, Tbilisi.


Plum local varieties and forms are widespread in all regions of Georgia. Despite the wide dissemination of this crop, the number of cultivars is not quite a lot. Due to this reason, study of cultivars has been carried out in a collection plot of the Scientific-Research Center of Agriculture, in village Jighaura. Eight plum (Prunus domestica L.) cultivars including: Amers, Bluefree, Chanchuri, Empresss, President, Stanley, Shaviqliavi, Tophit were used in this study. The following agronomic and biological characteristics were studied for the cultivars: calendar periods of phenological phases, pomological description of fruits, fruit chemical analysis and productivity. The results showed that average time of maturity was from 02.08. to 30.09. The average fruit yield in this trial for Empress and President Stanley cultivars was 88.4- 98.1 kg per tree. The weight of fruit ranged from 58.4 g to 26.2 g. The cultivars Tophit, Empresss and President contain the highest contents for soluble solid substance – respectively 14.23%, 12.81%, 12.64%. According to the obtained results, the following cultivars of plum can be chosen for further cultivation which can improve the local assortment of plum like Tophit and President (fresh production), Empress and Stanley (fresh/dry production). They are characterized by early starting production, high-productivity and high quality of fruits.


Avanzato D. 2002. Plum cultivars in Georgia. Actual Questions of fruit-growing Publishing by FAO project. Tbilisi-Gori-Akhaltsike. In Georgian. 33-36.

Baden M.L, Byrne D.H. 2012. Fruit breeding. Hand book of breeding. Springer Science 571-621.

 Blažek, J, Pištěková I. 2009. Preliminary evaluation results of new plum cultivars in a dense planting. Hort Science 36(2), 45-54.

Eristavi E, Gambashidze T. 1978. Sweet cherry and cherry. In: fruit growing, Khomizurashvili N, 4, 335-344.

Ertekin C, Gozlekci S, Kabas O, Sonmez S, Akinci I. 2006. Some physical, pomological and nutritional properties of two plum cultivars. Journal of Food Engineering 75(4), 508-514.

Gadze J, Cmelik Z, Katelanac D. 2011. Pomological and chemical prperties of introduced plum cultivars (Prunus dometica L.). Pomologia Croatica 17(3–4), 67-75.

Ganji Moghaddam E, Hossein Ava S, Akhavan S, Hosseini S. 2011. Phenological and pomological characteristics of some plum (Prunus spp.) cultivars grown in Mashhad, Iran. Crop Breeding Journal 1(2), 105-108.

García-Montiel F, Serrano M, Martinez-Romero D, Al- burquerque N. 2010. Factors influencing fruit set and quality in different sweet cherry cultivars. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research 8, 1118-1128.

Geostat. 2016. Geostatic National Statistics Office of Georgia. 2016.

Hartmann W, Fische M. 2003. Pflaume (Prunus domestica L.). Farbatlas Obst-sorten. Stuttgart (Hohenheim), Eugen Ulmer GmbH and Co 167-189.

Jacob H. 1998. Top, Topper and Tophit: Three new late ripening plum cultivars for a profitable market. Acta Horticulurae 478, 165-167. 

Kader A. 1999. Fruit maturity, ripening and quality relationships. Acta Horticulturae 485, 203-208.

Krska B. 2000. Plum production in the Czech Republic, International Science Symposium Production, processing and marketing of plums and plum products, Kostunici, Yugoslavia 9-11  September, 19-20.

Meier U. 2001. Growth stages of mono and dicotyledonous plants. BBCH monograph, federal biological research centre for agriculture and forestry, Bonn.

Milatović P.D, Đurović B.D, Đorđević S.B, Vulić B.T, Zec N.Z. 2013. Pomološke osobine novijih sorti trešnje na podlozi Colt. [Pomological Properties of sweet cherry cultivars grafted on ‘Colt’ rootstock.] Journal of Agricultural Sciences 58, 61-72.

Milošević T, Milošević N, Glišić I, Nikolić R, Milivojević J. 2015. Early tree growth, productivity, fruit quality and leaf nutrients content of sweet cherry grown in a high density planting system. Horticultural Science. 42, 1-12

 Minev I, Stoyanova T. 2012. Evaluation of plum cultivar in Troyan region. Jouranl of Pomology 46, 49-54.

Molnár A, Ladányi M, Kovács S. 2016. Evaluation of the production traits and fruit quality of german plum cultivars. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis 64, 109-114.

Nenadović -Mratinić E, Milatovic D, Durovic D. 2007. Biological characteristics of plum cultivars with combined trans. Voćarstvo 41, 31-35.

Program and methods for fruit cultivars, berry and nut crops. (In Russian). 430-486.

Son L. 2010. Determination of quality characteristics of some important Japanese plum (Prunus salicina Lindl.) cultivars grown in Mersin-Turkey. African Journal of Agriculture Research 5, 1144-1146.

Surányi D. 2006. Estimation of plum and prune cultivars with morphological traits. International Journal of Horticultural Science 12, 147-152.

UPOV. 2003. Plum species UPOV Code: PRUNU_DOM Prunus domestica L. TP/41/1 F.

Vangdal E. 1985. Quality criteria for fruit for fresh consumption. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 35, 41-47.

Vangdal E, Flatland S. 2007. Consumer’s preferences for new plum cultivars (Prunus domestica L.). Acta Horticultirae, 734, 169-172

Vavilov N.I. 1935. Theoretical basis of plant breeding (in Russian). Moscow: Selkhozizdad publishing house 1(1), 26-79.

Vitanova I, Ivanova D, Dimkova S.1998. Some biological characteristics of selected plum cultivars. Acta Horticulturae 478, 305-308.

Westwood M.N. 1993. Temperate zone pomology, physiology and culture. Third ED. Timber Press, Inc. Portland, Oregon. 694-700.

Zhukovsky P.M. 1971. Cultivated plants and their relatives (in Georgian). Moscow: Kolos publishing house 481-565.