MORPHOLOGICAL AND POMOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF WILD

OLIVES ON THE ISLAND OF UGLJAN

ŠIME MARCELIĆ1*, FRANKA KLANAC2, MARIJANA MATEK SARIĆ3, MAGDALENA BARIČEVIĆ1, ANA GAŠPAROVIĆ PINTO1, IGOR PASKOVIĆ4,
MARIJA POLIĆ PASKOVIĆ4, MARKO ZORICA1, ŠIMUN KOLEGA1, ZORAN ŠIKIĆ1, TOMISLAV KOS1

1Department of ecology, agronomy and aquaculture, University of Zadar, Trg Kneza Višeslava 9, 23000 Zadar, Croatia, *simemarcelic@unizd.hr
2 Kneza Krbavskoga 39, 23000 Zadar, Croatia
3Department of health studies, University of Zadar, Splitska 1. 23000 Zadar, Croatia
4Department of Agriculture and Nutrition, Institute of Agriculture and Tourism, Karla Huguesa 8,52440 Poreč, Croatia

1. INTRODUCTION
The wild olives (Olea europaea ssp. europaea var. sylvestris) sprout from seeds of cultivated or wild
populations. Preservation of biological diversity and sources of raw materials for industry (leaf) are the basis for
their wider research. There is a large presence of wild olives in extensive olive groves on the island of Ugljan in
Zadar County. Individuals differ in fruit size, fertility and resistance to drought and harmful organisms. The size
of the fruit and the ratio of pulp to stone are the main morphological characteristics that distinguish wild olives
from their cultivated relatives. In addition to the morphological differences mentioned, the wild olive is often
characterized by smaller leaves, a long juvenile period and greater adaptability to abiotic and biotic stress.
Evident climate changes and the importance for the conservation of biological diversity have stimulated a
number of studies on wild olives. Following the above, the aim of this preliminary research is to morphologically
describe six isolated individuals (trees) of wild olive located on the island of Ugljan. Figure 1. Wild olives on the island
of Ugljan
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
Preliminary morphological survey was carried out in 2017 in Ugljan, central
Dalmatia, at the Preko location (44˚04'15" S 15°11'25" E) in a typical
Mediterranean climate suitable for growing olives (Allam et al., 2020; Figure 1.).
Morphometric analysis of leaves, flowers and fruits was carried out according
to the method described in the Catalog of World Olive Varieties by Barranco et
al. (2000) on six samples of wild olive with codes (A10, D112, G113, IV83, M12
and SZ102). Sampling of leaves was in the phenophase of winter dormancy
(BBCH 00), flowering on May 20 in the phaenophase of full bloom (BBCH 64)
and fruit when the fruit takes on a specific color. epicarp for the variety (BBCH
85) (Sanz-Cortés et al., 2002). The maturity index was determined according to
IOC (2011). The comparison of mean data values was performed by one-way
Different letters indicate statistical difference of character between individuals at p<0.05. analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the pos hok Tukey test (p<0,05). The
Figure 2. The proportion of mesorcap in the olive fruit of six computer program Statistica, version 13.2, was used for statistical processing of
wild olives on the island of Ugljan the data (StatSoft Inc., Tulsa, USA).
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
By comparing the morphological characteristics of leaves, inflorescences, fruits, and stones, significant differences were found among the studied
individuals (Figure 2 i 3). From the aspect of leaf production, individuals IV83 stood out, followed by GA13 and M12, which had the largest leaf surfaces.
Furthermore, according to the low proportion of functionally male inflorescences, individual GA13 stood out, and the highest number of flowers per
inflorescence was determined for A10 and M12. According to the weight of the fruit, the individual A10 and IV83 were milked, which has the most
favorable ratio of meat to endocarp (Figure 3). Morphological characteristics of the eaves and fruits at harvest are influenced by the variety, but also by a
number of other agroecological factors. The obtained preliminary results are useful for mass selection when selecting individuals of interest for further
vegetative reproduction, which would be a preparation for genetic identification research.
Plant organ Character A 10 D 112 GA13 IV83 M12 SZ 102 Statistika
Value Category Value Category Value Category Value Category Value Category Value Category F p
Leaf blade length (mm) 46.97 ± 0.55d short 46.91 ± 0.50d short 49.41 ± 0.49c short 54.70 ± 0.60b medium 60.77 ± 0.67a medium 48.14 ± 0.60cd short 92.99 ***
width (mm) 10.54 ± 0.18c medium 10.22 ± 0.20c medium 15.25 ± 0.22c medium 14.94 ± 0.24a medium 11.52 ± 0.22b medium 10.94 ± 0.18bc medium 116.08 ***
leaf surface (mm 2) 363.62 ± 8.12c n.d. 373.35 ± 6.59c n.d. 531.49 ± 8.25b n.d. 597.58 ± 11.16a n.d. 529.08 ± 11.63b n.d. 383.23 ± 7.77c n.d. 124.11 ***
Inflorescence length (mm) 28.48 ± 0.55a medium 22.40 ± 0.42c short 29.64 ± 0.49a medium 25.61 ± 0.79b medium 17.53 ± 0.54d short 23.35 ± 0.44c short 64.30 ***
flower number 13.64 ± 0.33b low 8.93 ± 0.21d low 11.08 ± 0.25c low 15.07 ± 0.44a low 12.08 ± 0.45c low 9.56 ± 0.20d low 50.95 ***
male flowers portion (%) 57.20 ± 2.82a n.d. 33.44 ± 2.54b n.d. 21.6 ± 2.14c n.d. 36.76 ± 3.31b n.d. 49.56 ± 2.92a n.d. 31.00 ± 2.24bc n.d. 42.90 ***
ratio flower number/length 0.49 ± 0.01a n.d. 0.40 ± 0.01b n.d. 0.38 ± 0.01c n.d. 0.61 ± 0.01b n.d. 0.69 ± 0.02a n.d. 0.42 ± 0.01bc n.d. 14.83 ***
Fruit length (mm) 21.35 ± 0.18a n.d. 15.46 ± 0.15e n.d. 18.08 ± 0.17c n.d. 19.56 ± 0.14b n.d. 16.8 ± 0.10d n.d. 16.86 ± 0.11d n.d. 221.02 ***
width in position B (mm) 17.51 ± 0.15a n.d. 13.94 ± 0.11d n.d. 15.21 ± 0.11b n.d. 14.99 ± 0.1bc n.d. 14.74 ± 0.1c n.d. 14.76 ± 0.08c n.d. 121.85 ***
weight (g) 4.06 ± 0.07a High 1.86 ± 0.03d Low 2.62 ± 0.04b Medium 2.58 ± 0.03b Medium 2.25 ± 0.04c Medium 2.07 ± 0.03c Medium 311.58 ***
ratio length/width 1.23 ± 0.02b Spherical 1.11 ± 0.01c Spherical 1.19 ± 0.01b Spherical 1.31 ± 0.01a Ovoid 1.14 ± 0.01c Spherical 1.14 ± 0.01c Spherical 42.65 ***
maturity index 2.67 ± 0.17a n.d. 1.32 ± 0.2b n.d. 3.04 ± 0.12a n.d. 0.20 ± 0.07c n.d. 3.19 ± 0.16a n.d. 0.16 ± 0.06c n.d. 101.20 ***
flesh/seed 6.60 ± 0.14a medium 3.66 ± 0.09e low 4.62 ± 0.08c low 5.21 ± 0.07d medium 4.72 ± 0.08c low 4.20 ± 0.05d low 124.21 ***
Endocarp length (mm) 13.93 ± 0.11a n.d. 10.19 ± 0.1d n.d. 12.52 ± 0.15b n.d. 14.29 ± 0.1a n.d. 12.54 ± 0.12b n.d. 11.7 ± 0.09c n.d. 171.29 ***
width (mm) 8.29 ± 0.11a n.d. 7.63 ± 0.09c n.d. 8.11 ± 0.07ab n.d. 7.19 ± 0.05d n.d. 7.9 ± 0.06bc n.d. 7.85 ± 0.12bc n.d. 19.19 ***
ratio length/width 1.69 ± 0.02b ovoid 1.35 ± 0.02e spherical 1.55 ± 0.02cd ovoid 2.00 ± 0.02a elliptic 1.59 ± 0.02c ovoid 1.51 ± 0.02d ovoid 148.00 ***
weight (g) 0.63 ± 0.01a high 0.53 ± 0.01c medium 0.58 ± 0.01b medium 0.50 ± 0.01cd medium 0.48 ± 0.01d medium 0.50 ± 0.01cd medium 33.50 ***
Different letters indicate statistical difference of character between individuals at p<0.05.
Figure 3. Morphological characteristics of leaves, blossoms, buds and pits of six wild olives on the island of Ugljan

4. CONCLUSION
The description of autochthonous varieties is the basis for the monological
analysis of wild olives carried out in this work, in which two wild olives with large
fruits and a higher proportion of mesocarp in the fruit were singled out (A10 and
M12). The long-term perspective of wild olive research on the island of Ugljan lies
in the evaluation of the oil, the analysis of the phytochemical composition
5. REFERENCES
1. Allam, A., Moussa, R., Najem, W., and Bocquillon C. (2020). Specific climate classification for Mediterranean hydrology and
future evolution under Med-CORDEX regional climate model scenarios. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 24 (9):
4503–452.
2. Barranco, D., Cimato, A., Fiorino, P., Rallo, L., Touzani, A., Castaneda, C., Serafini, F., and Trujillo I. (2000). World catalogue
of olive varietes, Madrid, Spain, pp. 360.
3. Sanz-Cortés, F., Martínez-Calvo, J., Badenes, M. L., Bleiholder, H., Hack, H., Llácer G., and Meier, U. (2002). Phenological
growth stages of olive trees (Olea europaea L.). Annals of Applied Biology 140 (2): 151-157. (Sanz-Cortés et al., 2002)

V Balkan Symposium on Fruit Growing, Zagreb, Croatia, June 18-21, 2023