The sweet orange (Citrus sinensis Osbeck.) occupies
the first position among all the commercial citrus species
grown in the world. It prefers dry, sub-tropical climate for
good growth yield and for producing quality fruits. It produces
a well-spread canopy with well-developed leaders, laterals
and sub-laterals. Sweet orange plants are generally planted
at a spacing of 5 x 5 meters, and economical orchard life
varies from 15 to 25 years depending upon the rootstock
used, management practices followed and the prevailing
agro-climatic conditions in a particular area. It is observed
that on attaining the age of seven to eight years, the canopy
of the sweet orange plant becomes dense and overcrowded,
which results in susceptibility of the plant to insect-pests
and diseases thereby drying up of shoots. Besides, excessive
growth of the leaders and laterals may result in shade falling
on the plants nearby. Due to formation of the dense canopy
and the shading effect, fruit yield gradually decreases.
Pruning, which is the art of removal of unwanted growth of
plant parts in a scientific manner, is needed for sustained
production and for increasing the efficiency of the orchard.
In citrus per se, drastic pruning may not be desirable, but

Short communication

Effect of pruning on productivity in sweet orange

S.N. Ghosh and B. Bera1
Department of Fruits and Orchard Management

 Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalay
Mohanpur, Nadia - 741252, West Bengal, India

E-mail : profsnghosh@yahoo.co.in

ABSTRACT
To sustainable production of quality fruits in eight year old sweet orange plants of cv. Mosambi budded onto Citrus

jambheri rootstock, and grown in laterite soil at Jhargram, Paschim Medinipur, a canopy management trial was
conducted for two consecutive years. The treatments included T1: No pruning; T2: Removal of dead and dry shoots and
branches; T3: T2 + Removal of thin shoots and water-sprouts arising from the leaders at 90

o angle; T4: T3 + Removal
of selected laterals; T5: T4 + Removal of selected leaders for formation of open-centre-canopy. Randomized Block
Design with five replications was set up. Results indicated that fruit production improved with regular pruning.
Significantly high fruit retention (68%) with maximum number of fruits (250) was recorded in plants where
open-canopy was maintained by judicious removal of the leaders, laterals, thin shoots and dead wood. Trees with
open-canopy not only resulted in 71.4% increase in fruit number, but also enhanced fruit weight by 17.9% over
Control. Significantly good fruit quality in terms of TSS, total sugars and Vitamin C content was recorded in fruits
from the open canopy treatment. Dry weight of shoots / branch was lowest (1.50kg) in open-canopy treatment and
highest in the unpruned Control (3.0kg). Foliar N, P and K status did not vary significantly with different pruning
practices.

Key words: Canopy management, fruit production and quality, sweet orange, laterite soil

1MPS Farm, Dighisole, Dahijuri, Jhargram-721504, West Bengal, India

reports are available on the effect of pruning in sweet orange
(Philips, 1978; Bevingten, 1980; Joubert et al., 2000) from
different countries. In India, this information is lacking,
particularly, in sweet orange grown in laterite soils. With a
view to increasing production and for improving fruit quality,
this investigation was undertaken with different pruning
intensities.

The experiment was conducted in a private orchard
at Jhargram, Paschim Medinipur, West Bengal, on eight year
old sweet orange plants cv. Mosambi, budded onto Jambheri
(Citrus jambheri) rootstock planted at a spacing of 5m x
5m. Before pruning, the plants were over-crowded and had
excessive growth of leaders and laterals. The pruning
treatment comprised of: T1: No pruning; T2: Removal of
dead and dry shoots and branches; T3: T2 + Removal of
thin shoots and water-sprouts arising from the leaders at
900 angle; T4: T3 + Removal of selected laterals; T5: T4 +
Removal of selected leaders for formation of open-centre-
canopy. The pruning operation was conducted in the first
week of January. In the first year (2010), all the pruning

J. Hortl. Sci.
Vol. 9(2):206-208, 2014



207

Effect of pruning on productivity in sweet orange

treatments were imposed as per schedule, while, in the
second year (2011), dead shoots were removed. The
experiment was laid out in Randomized Block Design, with
five-replication by taking two plants as a unit. The plants
were fertilized with 30kg FYM, 400g Nitrogen, 200g P2O5
and 300g K2O plant

-1 year-1 in two splits, viz., during March
and June. The plants were irrigated at monthly interval after
fruit-set (i.e. February) and this was continued until the onset
of monsoon. Observations on fruit-retention (from the marble
stage of fruit development to maturity), fruit yield (by number,
and weight) was recorded each year. Shoot mortality
(biomass) was recorded at the time of pruning and was
expressed in kg, on fresh weight basis. Foliar N, P and K
status was estimated from six month old leaves as per
standard procedure (Bhargava, 1999). Physico-chemical
characteristics of mature fruits were record each year using
standard methods (A.O.A.C, 1990).

Fruit yield, which was the main focus of the
experiment, improved significantly with various pruning
treatments (Table 1). Highest fruit retention (68%) was
observed in plants where open-canopy was formed by
judicious removal of the leaders and laterals (T5) thereby
resulting in production of highest number of harvestable fruits
in both the years. Highest fruit production in open-canopy
plants (T5) may be due to greater penetration of sunlight
and better air circulation, creating a micro-climate conducive
to synthesis of carbohydrates and phyto-hormones. The
second best treatment was T4, where laterals had been
removed selectively. Control plants (T1) produced the lowest
number of fruits (140) in both the years. It was observed
that fruit production was higher in the first year, and relatively

less in the second year, irrespective of the treatment. This
indicated that the sweet orange has a tendency for alternate
bearing. This is in conformity with the findings of Ghosh
and Tarai (2007) in sweet orange and Sharma et al (1997)
in Kinnow mandarin.

Just as with fruit number, fruit yield was highest
(41.3kg plant-1) in the open-canopy plants (T5), followed by
plants (36.8kg plant-1-) where laterals were removed
selectively (T4) (Table 1). Highest fruit yield in T5 may be
due to best fruit retention and to production of weighable
fruits (Table 2). Yield improvement in aged citrus plants
due to pruning practices was also reported by Tayde and
Ingle (1997) in Nagpur mandarin, Nath (1994) in Assam
lemon, Sharma et al (1997) in Kinnow mandarin and Joubert
et al (2000) in sweet orange and grapefruit.

Fruit weight increased significantly with various
pruning treatments (Table 2). Highest fruit weight (165g)
was recorded in the open-canopy plants (T5), followed by
T4 (160g), while, the lowest was recorded in Control plants
(140g). Highest fruit weight seen in open-canopy plants (T5)
may be attributed to better assimilation of reserve foods in
the branches remaining on the plant. Sharma et al (1997)
also recorded higher fruit weight in Kinnow plants where
extra growth was removed judiciously. Fruit size (length and
breadth) did not significantly vary among treatments. Quality
of the fruits improved significantly with different pruning
treatments. The highest juice percentage (52.5%), T.S.S.
(8.6ºB), total sugars (5.6%) and Vitamin C (34.5mg/100ml)
content were recorded in fruits from the open-canopy plants
(T5). These findings corroborate with those of Joubert et al

Table 1. Effect of canopy management on fruit production and shoot mortality, and, foliar N, P and K status in sweet orange cv. Mosambi
Treatment Fruit  Number of fruits plant-1 Average Shoot   Foliar N, P and K status

retention 2010         2011      Average fruit yield mortality  N (%)       P (%)       K (%)
(%) plant-1 plant-1 on

(kg) fresh weight
basis (kg)

T1 : No pruning (Control) 47 150 130 140 19.6 3.00 1.70 79.00 1.45
T2 : Removal of dead shoots only 50 185 175 180 27.0 2.35 1.68 78.00 1.50
T3 : T2 + Removal of thin shoots 56 205 195 200 31.4 2.30 1.68 78.00 1.55

and water sprouts, arisen from
the leaders

T4 : T3 + Removal of selected  laterals 64 240 220 230 36.8 1.50 1.70 80.00 1.55
T5 : T4 + Removal of selected leaders 68 270 230 250 41.3 1.20 1.74 88.50 1.58

 for formation of open canopy
CD (P=0.05) 5.2 10.5 7.4 8.0 3.8 0.20 N.S.* N.S.* N.S.*
CV (%) 9.2 16.4 11.7 12.2 8.1 3.9 2.4 3.6 1.8

*N.S. = Non-significant

J. Hortl. Sci.
Vol. 9(2):206-208, 2014



208

(2000) and Tayde and Ingle (1997). The lowest values in
quality parameters were recorded in fruits from Control
plants.

Plants showing less intensity of shoot-drying is an
indication of good plant health and vice versa. The lowest
amount of dry shoots was recorded (1.2kg) in open-canopy
plants (T5), while it was highest (3.0kg) in Control plants
(T1), followed by T2 (2.35kg). Results in Table 1 indicate
that removal of dry and dead shoots every year is essential
for maintaining plant health in citrus species like the sweet
orange. The leaf is considered as the most suitable index
tissue, and represents nutrient status of the plant (Bhargava,
1999). Foliar N, P and K status was assessed to ascertain
the nutrient status of pruned and unpruned plants.  It was
found that N, P and K values did not vary significantly with
various pruning treatments (Table 1). However, T5 plants
showed a slightly higher value for foliar N, P and K
compared to the other pruning treatments imposed.

REFERENCES
A.O.A.C. 1990. Official methods of Analysis (15th edn.).

Association of official Agricultural Chemists,
Washington D.C.

Bevingten, K.B. 1980. Response of Valencia orange trees
in Australia to hedging and topping. Procs. Fla. State
Hort. Soc., 93:65-66

Bhargava, B.S. 1999. Leaf analysis for diagnosing nutrient
need in fruit crops. Indian Hort., 43:6-8

Ghosh, S.N. and Tarai, R.K. 2007. Performance of Mosambi
sweet orange on different rootstocks grown in laterite
soil in West Bengal. J. Hortl. Sci., 2:153-155

 Joubert, F.J., Plessis, M.H. du, Stassen, P.J.C. and du
Plassis, M.H. 2000. Pruning strategies to alleviate
overcrowding in high density citrus orchard. J. Appl.
Hort., 2:1-5

Nath, J.C. 1994. Effect of pruning intensity on growth, yield
and quality of Assam lemon (Citrus limon). Haryana
J. Hortl. Sci., 23:281-285

Philips, R.L. 1978. Hedging and topping citrus in high density
plantings. Procs. Fla. State Hort. Soc., 91:43-46

Sharma, J.N., Josan, J.S. and Thind, S.K. 1997. Effect of
pruning intensities on the productivity of Kinnow
mandarin. Indian J. Hort., 54:304-307

Tayde, G.S. and Ingle, H.V. 1997. Studies on the effect of
severity of pruning on growth, yield and quality of
Nagpur mandarin. Procs. Nat’l. Symp., NRC Citrus,
Nagpur, pp. 185-187

Table 2. Effect of canopy management on physico-chemical characteristics of fruits (average of two years)
Treatment Fruit Length Breadth Juice T.S.S. Acidity Total Vitamin C

weight (g) of fruit of fruit content (0B) (%) sugars (mg/100 ml
(cm) (cm) (%) (%) juice)

T1 : No pruning (Control) 140 7.4 7.4 49.2 7.2 0.26 5.20 29.60
T1 : Removal of dead 150 7.5 7.5 50.3 7.8 0.27 5.30 30.50

shoots only
T1 : T2 + Removal of thin 157 7.7 7.7 50.5 8.0 0.25 5.40 31.50

shoots  and water sprouts,
arisen from the leaders

T4 : T3 + Removal of 160 7.8 7.8 52.0 8.2 0.26 5.50 34.10
selected laterals

T5 : T4 + Removal of 165 7.9 7.9 52.5 8.6 0.26 5.60 34.50
selected leaders for
formation of open canopy

CD (P=0.05) 4.8 N.S.* N.S.* 1.1 0.30 N.S. 0.20 0.60
CV (%) 6.5 2.1 1.6 4.4 3.9 2.7 4.1 3.8
N.S. = Non-significant

(MS Received 14 September 2013, Revised 15 July 2014, Accepted 05 August 2014)

Ghosh and  Bera

J. Hortl. Sci.
Vol. 9(2):206-208, 2014