Apple Rootstock M25 and MM111 comparison pictures

[seneca196]

My problem border certainly is without anything at the moment. One of the reasons for putting something in and around the 4 trees in 9m. Whilst the spacing between trees is not ideal (the books would say 2 in that space) I would like there to be something else to look at in the long, bare strip of border, other than the 4 trees. It would add interest and be a distraction for my family who are nervous of "5 years of twigs" when there could be a boring run of evergreens just occupying space. So, I planned on placing some shade tolerant shrubs in containers in and around the trees to satisfy them. Maybe not sink them in, just leave them dotted around on top of the soil. May suppress a few weeds too!

[FB.]

R.V.Roger (Yorkshire) grow their cordons on MM106, which may give an indication of just how small MM106 can be kept if properly managed.

Link to RVR's page selling Ashmead's Kernel cordons and stepovers on MM106:

Buy Apple - Ashmead's Kernel by post from R.V.Roger Ltd

Also note that they only offer half-standards on M25, and MM106 is for bushes.
In my opinion, M25 is really a half-standard rootstock but is capable of making standards after a very long time, or in good soils, or with very vigorous varieties.

.

[seneca196]

Given my soil is moist (shade and high water table) and quite fertile how would you say an m25 half standard would behave in it, could I limit height and spread reasonably (say 4m high and 3m spread.) What expect over 5-10 years? How about number of trees/spacing in a 10m border? What are your experiences of R V Rogers, if any?

[FB.]

Further to my comment about M25 being a half-standard rootstock.....

Trials conducted by the research stations several decades ago show mature tree size (10-15yrs) roughly as follows, in size order within each set of growing conditions:
The largest trees reached about 4m in height and 5m spread (rated at 100%).

Good conditions:

M4: 100%
MM109: 96%
M16: 86%
M25: 84%
M2: 72%
MM111: 66%
M7: 62%
MM106: 59%
M1: 51%
M9: 18%

Challenging conditions:

M16: 61%
MM109: 58%
M25: 42%
MM111: 41%
M4: 41%
M7: 35%
M2: 31%
MM106: 24%
M1: 22%
M9: 10%

Notice that some rootstocks thrive in some conditions, but not in other conditions.
Among the really big rootstocks, M16 was smaller than M4 or MM109 in good conditions, but M16 was larger in challenging conditions - much larger than M4.
MM111 really shoots up the league table in the more difficult conditions and is a match for M25 (matching the M4 rootstock which was the largest in the good soil).
M7 and MM106 are similar in good conditions, but M7 does better in poorer conditions.
Similarly: MM106 is only slightly smaller than MM111 in good conditions, but is much smaller in poorer conditions (doesn't like soil which dries out easily).

[FB.]

Given my soil is moist (shade and high water table) and quite fertile how would you say an m25 half standard would behave in it, could I limit height and spread reasonably (say 4m high and 3m spread.) What expect over 5-10 years? How about number of trees/spacing in a 10m border? What are your experiences of R V Rogers, if any?

If your soil is good, M25 can be made into a standard.
My suspicion is that with your moist and fertile soil, MM106 half-standards would be about right.

My experiences with Rogers are that they're an honest and helpful bunch, but their trees are usually only average quality. Keepers trees are usually the largest, healthiest and quickest to establish and I generally go straight to Keepers nowadays.

[FB.]

-

This picture below is among the biggest one-year maiden trees (M25) that I've ever seen. It came from Keepers a few years ago - keepers maidens are usually 1.5-2x the size of maidens from other nurseries and usually need little encouragement to establish.

I'm less keen on many bare-root half standard trees because many nurseries have a habit of cutting off most of the roots when excavating the tree, such that although it's bigger above ground, it's smaller than a maiden below ground and suffers a severe shock due to having too few roots and too many stems and branches to support. This can result in slow establishment and leaning trees.

The second picture shows a hypothetical maiden whip (MM111 or M25) and how different pruning routines are likely to affect it.
Vigorous rootstocks will often produce fruit spurs and come into cropping quite early in life if the pruning is fairly minimal and mostly thinning cuts. Heading cuts and hard pruning will result in very vigorous regrowth and inhibition of fruiting spurs.

[orangepippin]

The heights given for M25 are always much bigger than wild trees you see in hedgerows, which has long puzzled me. Many of these are probably ungrafted seedlings (i.e. discarded motorist apple cores) and therefore theoretically "100%" size (if growing in good conditions). So the question is, if these typical 4m-5m hedgerow seedling apple trees are 100%, how could M25 be bigger?

Well there are many reasons M25 might be bigger ... but the gist of FB's info is that perhaps it isn't bigger after all!

[seneca196]

Are those illustrations your own? They're very useful, unlike so many I've looked at, which are preoccupied by the later development stage, when the tree looks like the finished article. A diagram is so often more informative than a vague photograph.
Your photos of whips got me thinking about growing vertically for height and scarifying spreading branches, and more fruit. Prefer to not take up large amounts of garden space with spreading trees. I'll sacrifice quantity of a few varieties and happily settle for fewer apples of more varieties. This can be conventionally achieved with oblique cordons, but then I can't have many of those either. (stay tuned for my new "cordon" thread.)
I have thought about experimenting to create a few tall columnar trees or something similar using a vigorous rootstock. You given me something else to think about now. You're a bad influence FB and should could come with a warning! You're leading me astray

[FB.]

The heights given for M25 are always much bigger than wild trees you see in hedgerows, which has long puzzled me. Many of these are probably ungrafted seedlings (i.e. discarded motorist apple cores) and therefore theoretically "100%" size (if growing in good conditions). So the question is, if these typical 4m-5m hedgerow seedling apple trees are 100%, how could M25 be bigger?

Well there are many reasons M25 might be bigger ... but the gist of FB's info is that perhaps it isn't bigger after all!

Firstly the wild trees don't have clear ground underneath, are not sprayed, watered or fed - unlike commercial trees.

Another reason is that wild hedgerow or roadside trees are unpruned, therefore form spurs more readily.

If M25 is hard-pruned - such as that carried out to encourage branching in commercial orchards - it won't be precocious and will grow rapidly. Precocity will be delayed further by having clear ground around it.

I also think that the extra vigour of seedling is more to do with "juvenile phase" where it is very reluctant to crop until it reaches a certain age or a certain number of internodes. This "juvenile phase" is virtually absent in the cloned rootstocks.

The trials actually noted that the trees were only lightly pruned and the people conducting the trials reported being quite surprised at how precocious and compact even vigorous rootstocks became if they weren't hard-pruned.

I've been experimenting with some M9 trees for a few years and I find that I can make it vigorous and unproductive if I prune it hard each winter, whereas if left alone for a couple of years it stops growing entirely and spurs-out. However, more vigorous rootstocks tend to be less likely to spur-out and stop growing even though light or minimal pruning makes them less vigorous and more fruitful.

I've also noted the response of the local "John Downie" vigorous-rootstocked crabs in my area. Those which have been hard-winter-pruned are larger than those which have been left to do their own thing. As a tree grows larger, it develops more spur systems which draw a lot of nutrients to supply the fruits. But if hard-pruned the spurs are removed and the vast energy that would have been spent on fruit is spent on growth for the following couple of seasons. It's quite surprising how much "growth" energy is drawn out of the tree by the fruits.

[seneca196]

Forgot to mention I had originally checked with keepers for 1/2 standard mm106, as they get many recommendations. However, they never had my first choice of James Grieve (the tree I thought most likely to succeed in the most difficult spot. They had all the others and a james grieve "reduced" which apparently is a perfectly good tree, but with a less developed head. Same went for a possible alternative, Fiesta. I could go with a less developed head (like me!) or chose something else. Maybe egremont russet instead (probably my favourite tasting apple that I was saving for a better place on the sunny side of the garden... may get duplicated, I'm such a fan.) This is for my (1 to 4 scheme of Plum, Apple 1, Apple 2, Pear.)

[FB.]

The problem you'll find is that common varieties will be more susceptible to pests and diseases because there will be many old trees of that variety around the country which harbour well-evolved diseases.

As time passes, varieties which are widely grown lose their resistance as the diseases are forced to adapt.

James Grieve, Egremont Russet and Fiesta are all OK in their own way, but I wouldn't choose any of them over Annie Elizabeth, Ashmead's Kernel, Jupiter, Winter Gem or Kidd's Orange-Red.