Samonikle Voćke

7/21/2019 Samonikle Voke

1/14

181

-

:

-

. - .

, , .- , , . - 15 26 100 - . ( ). - , , -

. , - , - .

, -

, ,

.

, , 2014, . 181-194BIBLID: 0353-4537, (2014), p 181-194

, , ,

([email protected]) -, , ,

Mratini E., Fotiri-Aki M. 2014. Indigenous fruit species as a signicant resource for

sustainable development. Bulletin of the Faculty of Forestry: 181-194.

UDK: 634.1/.8 (497.11)

DOI: 10.2298/GSF14S1181M


2/14

, -

182

INDIGENOUS FRUIT SPECIES AS A SIGNIFICANT RESOURCE FOR

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Abstract:Sustainable agriculture means increasing yields and prots without

degrading the natural resources which are the most important for agricultural

production. The aim is to meet the peoples needs for food and improve the quality

of life while preserving the environment. Among hundreds of forest species,

particular attention is drawn to the wild relatives of cultivated f ruit trees, so called

indigenous fruit trees, whose regular collection, production and use can affect allaspects of agricultural economy. The natural habitats of the Republic of Serbia

include 15 families and 26 genera with 100 species of wild fruit trees. The

primary use of the indigenous fruits is for human consumption (either fresh or

processed). A number of wild relatives of cultivated fruit t rees could be used inthe future as rootstocks for fruit production, or for large-scale production, eitherorganic or conventional. In addittion, indigenous fruit species are carriers of genes

for resistance to economically important diseases and pests, and they can be used

in breeding of fruit trees and grapevines. Wild species of fruit trees are used asplanting materials for afforestation and erosion prevention, some for timber

production, as well as some decorative forms in landscape architecture, while

some species are important bee pastures.

,,

, , ,

,

(Subi et al., 2010).

, ,

, . -

, - , ,

, - .

-- , - () - . - -

, .

, ()


3/14

183

...

- ). ,

, -

(J a n kov i, 1995; Pi m m et al., 1995; W i l s on , 1998). -

. 88 km2 2,1% , -. 39% .

, , . .

. ,

in situ ex situ.

: ,

-

, , - , -

(Mratini i Koji, 1998; Mratini et al. , 2006; Mratini et al.,

2014).

()

- . , 15

26 100 .

, , ,

. -, 314 , 100 214 (17 , 42 155 )

(Koji et al., 1994, 1997; Koji i Mratini, 1996; Stevanovi i Vasi, 1995).

- , -

. , - . 6 - . (61 )

(30 ), 90% . : 4 (), 3 ( ), 1 ( ) 1 ().


4/14

, -

184

1. Table 1.Families and genuses of indigenous fruit species

Family

Genus

Number of species

Cupressaceae Amelanchier 1

Taxaceae Berberis 1

Berberidaceae Castanea 1

Corylaceae Cornus 3

Fagaceae Cotoneaster 2

Juglandaceae Corylus 2

Rhamnaceae Crataegus 7

Vitaceae Fragaria 3

Grossulariaceae Frangula 2

Rosaceae Hippophaea 1

Elaeagnaceae Juglans 1

Cornaceae Juniperus 3

Vaccinaceae Lonicera 4

Sambucaeeae Malus 3

Pirus 4

Prunus 9

Rhamnus 2

Ribes 4

Rosa 19

Rubus 10

Sambucus 3

Sorbus 8

Vaccinium 3

Viburnium 2

Vitis 1

Taxus 1

15 26 100

2. (%)Table 2.Number of indigenous fruit species belonging to certain life forms (%)

-

Nano-phanerophyte

-

Phanerophyte

-

Hemicryptophyte

Woodyhamephyte

Phenerophytelianas

Geophyte

61 30 4 3 1 1


5/14

185

...

. 17 , ,

, . . , , -

. , - ( 11%).

2 - (Malus orentinaSchn. Rhamnus fallaxBoiss. ).

3. (%)Table 3.Belonging of wild fruit species to oral elements (%)

Floral elements

Number of species %

18 18,75

14 14,58

13 13,54

9 9,37

- 7 7,29

- 6 6,25

5 5,21

5 5,21

4 4,16

- 3 3,12

3 3,12

2 2,08

- 2 2,08

1 1,04

1 1,04

1 1,04

1 1,04

- , -

,


6/14

, -

186

, . , -

(M r a t i n i et al. 2008, 2012).

(, , , , ,

, .) , :

1. Prunus cerasifera

2. Rosa canina

3. Rosa rugosa

4. Cornus mas5. Sorbus aucuparia

6. Castanea sativa

7. Hippophea rhamnoides

8. Prunus tenella

9. Sorbus aria

10. Sambucus racemosus

11. Sambucus nigra

.

:

1. Sambucus nigra


3. Sorbus umbellata

4. Sorbus austriaca

5. Rosa spinosissima

6. Rosa rubifolia

7. Rosa pomifera

8. Rosa glutinosa

9. runus tenella

10. Crataegus nigra

11. Cornus mas

12. uniperus communis

13. uniperus oxycedrus14. uniperus sibirica

15. Cotonaster tomentosa

16. Cotonaster integerrimus

17. melancher ovalis

18. uglans regia

19. Coryllus avellana


7/14

187

...

- :

1. uglans regia

2. runus avium

3. Castanea sativa .

.

1. Corylus avellanavar. atropurpurea2. runus cerasiferavar.pissardii

3. runus padus4. runus laurocerasus

5. Sorbus aucuparia

6. Sorbus torminalis

7. Sorbus domestica

8. Sorbus aria

9. Sorbus greaca

10. alus orentina

11. Sambucus nigra


13. Rosa gallica

14. Rosa glutinosa

15. Rosa rubiginosa16. Rosa rubrifolia

17. Cornus mas

18. Cornus sanguineus

19. iburnum lantana

20. iburnum opulus

21. uniperus oxycedrus

22. uniperus sibirica

23. Taxus baccata

24. Cotonaster tomentosa

25. Cotonaster integerrimus

-

, . .

, . :

1. Sambucus nigra




8/14

, -

188

4. Prunus avium

5. Prunus fruticosa

6. Prunus mahaleb

7. Prunus padus

8. Prunus amygdallus

9. Prunus spinosa

10. alus silvestris

11. alus orentina

12. alus dasiphyla

13. Pirus communis

14. Pirus amygdaliformis

15. Sorbus aucuparia

16. Castanea sativa

17. Cornus mas

18. Corylus avellana

19. Rosa20. Rubus21. Ribes22. Vaccinium .

, : - , (

), ,

. :

1. Malus silvestris

2. Malus orentina

3. Malus dasyphilla

4. Pirus communis


6. Pirus nivalis

7. Pirus eleagrifolia8. Prunus fruticosa

9. Prunus mahaleb


11. Prunus spinosa


13. Rubus idaeus

14. Fragaria elatior


9/14

189

...

15. Fragaria moschata

16. Sorbus domestica

17. Corylus avellana

18. Juglans regia

- ,

.

-

(M r a t i n i et al. 2011,2012b).

, - .

- ( ),

, .

, -

, , .

:

1. Malus silvestris

2. Pirus communis

3. Prunus avium


5. Prunus mahaleb

6. Juglans regia

:


2. Corylus colurna3. Corylus avellana


5. Crataegus monogina

6. Crataegus nigra

7. Crataegus oxyacanta

8. Sorbus domestica

9. Castanea sativa


10/14

, -

190

(Bu k v i et al. , 2007; Mratini et al., 2007;

Mil ivo jev i et al., 2010).

: (Rosa canina - 400-4800 mg%), (800-1200 mg%), (100-300 mg%). - Ribes(do 200 mg%) (Mi li voje vi

et al., 2013),melnchier ovalis, Sambucus racemosus, Sorbus aucupariai dr.

: Sorbus aucuparia, Hippophea rhamnoides,

Rosa sp., Crataegus sp., Sorbus aria, Sambucus racemosus . Rosa sp., Fragaria sp. Vaccinium uliginosum

. , : Ribes sp., Sorbusaucuparia, Rosa sp.,iburnumopulus .

- .

(K, Ca, P, Fe, Mg Mn), , , , , , , , -

, .

.

, ,

, , -, - .

,

, .

- , -

.

,

. -

,

, .

, , ,

, , -. 324 h


11/14

191

...

1100 h .

(, , -) ( 4).

4. Table 4.Indigenous fruit species grown by following organic principles

Name of species

In conversion

(ha)

Certied

(ha)

1. Cornus mas 0.08 -

2. Sambucus nigra 2,34

3. Prunus spinosa 0.01 -

4. Prunus cerasifera 0.41 -

-

. 100. ,

. ,

,

.

Buk vi B. , Mr at i ni E . , Fot i r i M. 2007.Kvalitet ploda i mogunost prerade samoniklog

voa sa podruja erdapske klisure. Arhiv za poljoprivredne nauke 68:53-63.

Gaji, M. (1980): Pregled vrste ore SR Srbije sa biljno-geografsk im oznakama. Glasnik

umarskog fakulteta, 111-191.

Jankovi, M.M. (1995): Biodiverzitet sutina i znaaj. Zavod za zatitu prirode Srbije,

Beograd.Koji, M., Popovi, R., Karadi, B. (1994): Fito-indikatori i njihov znaaj u proceniekolokih uslova stanita. Nauka i Institut za istraivanja u poljoprivredi Srbije,Beograd.

Koji, M., Popovi, R., Karadi, B. (1997): Vaskularne biljke Srbije kao indikatori

stanita. Institut za Bioloka istraivanja Sinia Stankovi, Beograd.

Koji, M., Marini, E. (1996): Pregled umske ore Srbije Florodiverzitet divljih vrsta

voaka umskih ekosistema Srbije.10. Jugoslovenski Kongres voara, aak.


12/14

, -

192

Mil ivo jev i J . , Rakonjac V . , Fo t i r i Ak i M. , Bogdanovi Pr i s tov J . , Mak-simovi V. 2013. Classication and ngerprinting of different berries based onbiochemical proling and antioxidant capacity. Pesquisa Agropecuria Brasileira,

48(9): 1285-1294.Mil ivojevi J . , Nikol i M., Bogdanovi-Pr i tov J . 2010. Physical, chemical and an-

tioxidant properties of cultivars and wild species of Fragaria and Rubus genera.Voarstvo 44(169-170): 55-64.

Mratini, E., Koji, M. 1998. Samonikle vrste voaka Srbije. Institit za istraivanja u pol-joprivredi Srbija, Beograd.

Mart ini E. , Miranovi K. , Koj i M. 2006. Samonikle vrste voaka Crne Gore.Poljo-privredni fakultet, Beograd

Mratini, E., Fotiri, M. 2007. Selection of black elderberry (Sambucus nigra L.) andevaluation of its fruits usability as biologically valuable food. Genetika 39(3):

305-314.Mrat ini, E. , Milet i , R. , Fot i r i , M., iki, M. 2008. Bioloka raznovrsnost popu-

lacije drena (Cornus mas L.) na podruju Stare planine. Arhiv za Poljoprivrednenauke 69(247):43-53.

Mratini E., Fotric kic M. 2011. Evaluation of phenotypic diversity of apple (Malus

sp.) germplasm through the principle component analysis.Genetika, ol 43, No.2, 331 - 340.

Mr ati ni, E. Foti r i Ak i, M. 2012a. Phenotypic Diversity of Apple (Malus sp.) Germplasm

in South Serbia. Brazilian archives of biology and technology 55 (3):349-358.Mr ati ni E. , Foti r i - kic M., Jovkovi c R. 2012b nalysis of wild sweet cherry

(Prunus avium L.) germplasm diversity in South-East Serbia.Genetika 44(2): 259

- 268.Mra t i ni E. , Fot i r i A ki M., Ra konja c V. , Milet i R. , ik ic M. 2014. Mor-

phological diversity of cornelian cherry (Cornus mas L.) populations in the Stara

Planina Mountain, Serbia. Plant Systematic and Evolution, DOI 10.1007/

s00606-014-1079-8Pim m, S.L. , Rusel l , G.J . , Gi t t lem en, J .L. , roo ks , T.M. 1995. The future biodiver-

sity. Science, 269:347-350.Stevanovi, V., Vasi, V. Eds. 1995. Biodiverzitet Jugoslavije sa pregledom vrsta od meu-

narodnog znaaja. Bioloki fakultet i Ecolibri, Beograd.Subi J. , Beki, B., Jelonik M. 2010. Znaaj organske poljoprivrede u zatiti okoline i

savremenoj proizvodni hrane. kola biznisa 3:50-56.Wilson, O.E. 1998.:Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington, USA.


13/14

193

...

Evica MratiniMilica Fotiri-Aki

INDIGENOUS FRUIT SPECIES AS A SIGNIFICANT RESOURCE FOR SUSTAINABLE

DEVELOPMENT

Summary

Research on indigenous fruit species has accumulated considerably in Serbia, and its role

is being recognized in the domain of conservation strategies (in situand ex situplant protection),

identication of wild ora species for which urgent action plans/protection programs are neededand poverty reduction. The presence of over 100 wild fruit species classied in 15 families and26 genera within natural and primarilly forest eco-systems, has been reported in Serbia. It is arealistic assumption that the territory of Serbia is the primary genetic center of the greatest num-

ber of fruit cultivars nowadays, the indicator of which being their major presence in natural andprimarilly forest ecosystems. A number of wild relatives of cultivated fruit t rees could be usedin the future as rootstocks for fruit production, or for large-scale production, either organic orconventional. Their use may be directed to afforestation and erosion prevention, timber produc-tion, landscape architecture, and as a bee pasture. It is also important for economic reasons be-cause it is the basis of sustainable agriculture and forestry and can provide a chance for farmers,plant breeders and scientists to develop new and more productive cultivars, preferably resistantto various pests and diseases and adapted to changing environments. It is also a basis of foodsecurity because indigenous fruit harvesting from forests and semi-domesticated trees growingon-farm and homesteads can substantially boost rural income and employment opportunities.

Ethical reasons for genetic diversity are reected in the conservation in an undamaged state since

it is an important component of the national heritage.


14/14

, -

194

Documents

Samonikle Voćke