EFFECT OF BUNCHlLEAF RATIO ON THE YIELD ANDQUALITY OF ZAGHLOUL DATE PALM

M.M. Harhash *1,M.A. Hussein2 and SheE. EI-Kassas2.

1. Fac. of Agric. Saba Basha, Alexandria University, Egypt.

2. Fac. of Agric. Assiut Univ. Assiut, Egypt.

ABSTRACT

Pruning effect on yield and quality of Zaghloul date palm wasstudied during 1983,84 and 1985.Four pruning treatments of bunch/leafratio [1:3, 1:6, 1:7 and 1:9] were investigated at Assiut, Egypt. The 1:7ratio was considered as a commercial practice. All treatments were loadedeight bunches only. The pruning 1:9 ratio gave the best yield, bunchweight, grade A and number of inflorescence, also it gave a consistentnumber of leaves during the consecutive years of the growth. Freshweights of fruit and pulp, fruit dimensions were increased as thebunch/leaf ratio increased. The moisture content and total acidity of thefruit were not affected by the bunch/leaf ratio. The 1:9 ratio gave thehighest increase in the T.S.S., reducing and non reducing sugars andanthocyanin.

Key words: Phoenix dectylifera, L.; Bunch/leaf ratio; Pruning.

INTRODUCTION

Zaghloul is the most important cultivar of soft dates in Egypt. Thefruit of this cultivar is consumed freshly at the khalal stage.

As the objective of the growers is the fruits, they must recognizethat the quantity and. quality of the fruits are directly dependent on thenumber of actively photosynthesing leave.

Several investigators (Nixon 1943, Nixon and Carpenter 1978,Comelissen, 1979) showed the importance of the presence of an adequatenumber of leaves per palm for maximum quantity and quality of fruitproduction. The bearing capacity of a date palm is in proportion to thenumber of leaves that it carries. An insufficient number of leaves inproportion to the number of flower clusters results.in low-quality fruitsduring the current season and fewer inflorescence during the successivespring. So, it is recommended to retain an adequate number of greenleaves per tree.

365

- . - ... - -. - -.

Hussein et al. (1977) studied the effect of leaf/bunch ratio on yieldand fruit quality of Barhi date palm grown in Saudi Arabia. They foundthat size, fresh weight, pulp weight, the percentage of moisture content,total soluble solids, total sugars, reducing sugars and sucrose of fruittended to increase as the number of leaves per bunch increased. The totalyield per bunch and the percentage of fruit in grade I and II increasedsignificantly with increasing leaves/bunch ratio up to 12 leaves/bunch.Similar results were reported by Abdulla et al. (1982) for Hayani datepalm cultivar grown in Kalubia province, Egypt. Also, they found that theoptimum yield of good fruit quality could be obtained in Hayani dateswith 8 active leaves of each of 5 to 8 retentive bunches per palm. Similarresults of yield and fruit quality of Zaghloul and Hayani date wereobtained by Hassaballa et al. (1983). They found that pruning level at 8leaves per bunch increased the number of productive leaves over thosemaintained under the ratio 6 : 1 especially with Zaghloul cultivar.

. Based upon the reported studies here, the purpose of this study is todetermine the most effective bunch/leaf ratio through pruning Zaghlouldate cultivar grown under the conditions of Assiut, Egypt.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was carried out at the Experimental Orchard of theFaculty of Agriculture, Assiut University during three successive growingseasons; 1983, 1984 and 1985.

A. Experimen tal work.

Twelve palm trees of uniform vigor (seven years old) grown on aclay soil were selected according to their bearing of approximately thesame number of spathes and leaves. Regular agricultural practices exceptpruning treatments were done to the studied palm trees during all seasons.Pollination was conducted by using pollen grains trom the same malepalm trees in the three studied seasons to avoid residues of metaxinia.The treatments were carried out on 15thof May in each season. Thenumber of inflorescence was adjusted to 8 by removing the extra smallflower clusters. The number of strands in every bunch was reduced to 60.So each bunch carried the same number of strands on every individualpalm tree.

The palm trees were classified at random into four treatments ofbunch/leaf ratio (A, 1 : 3; B, 1: 6; C, 1 : 7; and D, 1 : 9). Each treatmentconsisted of three replicates.

366

---

The date palm growers in Upper Egypt commonly cut off moreleaves because they have a value in certain industry and which represent asource of income. They also believe that reduction the number of leavesper tree facilitates the operations of pollination and harvesting. Thus,treatment A represented the commercial practices of palm pruning by thegrowers of Upper Egypt to seedling palms.

Regarding the treatment D, there were 56 leaves on each palmrepresenting the commercialpractice of Zaghlouldatepalmpruningby .

the growers of Rosette and Edco regions. The bunch/leaf ratio was 1 :7.

It was noticed at the beginning of the 2ndand 3rdseasons that thepalms of treatment A gave less than 8 bunches per palm. So it wasnecessary to adjust the number of bunches to 7 and to remove moreleaves to maintain the bunch/leaf ratio of 1 : 3 at the proper value.

B. Productive capacity and fruit characteristics.

The number of both inflorescences and new leaves were annuallyrecorded for each replicate during the three studied growing seasons. Allfruit bunches were harvested and weighed during the first week ofSeptember. Hundred fruits were picked at random from all bunches ofeach tree for the determination of physical and chemical characteristics.Two grades of fruits were identified as class A and B as recommended by(Rygg, 1948). Sugars were determined according to the method of Laneand Eynon outlined in A.O.A.C. (1975). The anthocyanin pigments infruit skin were extracted by ethanolic and determined according to themethod of Francis (1957) and Ranganna (1977). Data were statisticallyanalyzed and the differences between treatment means were tested usingL.S.D. test (Steel and Torrie, 1960).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A. The productive capacity:

(1) Fruit yield:

Figure (1) shows the effect of four leaf/bunch ratios oh Zaghloulyield during the present study. It was found that the total yield per palmincreased significantly as the ratio increased. Maximum yield productionfrom year to another was obtained for 1 : 9 ratio in comparison to eitherof the other ratio. As a mean of three seasons, the relative increases ofyield were 39.7, 66.4 and 44.0% when the ratio ofleaves per bunch wasincreased from 3 to 6, 9 and 7, respectively. These results are in

367

- --- - - -- -

agreement with those published by Bakr et al. (1976), on samani Husseinet al. (1977) on Barhi, Abdulla et al. (1982) on Hayani cv. and Hassaballaet al. (1983) on Zaghloul.

(2) Bunch weight:

The bunch weight is given in Figure (2), it is observable that thebunch weight exhibits similar trend as the yield. Thus, it could beobtained that a positive correlation between number of leaves per bunchand its average bunch weight. The mean of the three successive seasonsof bunch weight increased according to the order of23.7, 47.4 and 27.6%for 3, 6, 9. and 7 ratios, respectively. These results were in closeagreement with those reported by Bakr et al. (1976), Hussein et al.(1977), Abdulla et al. (1982) and Hassablla et al. (1983).

(3) Number of inflorescence:

Figure (3) summarized the effect of bunch/leaf ratio on thesubsequent number of inflorescence emerged during 1984 and 1985seasons. Pruning level at 9 leaves per bunch proved superiority over theother pruning levels on producing maximum number of flower clusters.Thus, as a mean, the relative percent of increase in the number of theinflorescence of both 1984 and 1985 seasons were 39.3, 71.0 and 56.20/0when the number of leaves per bunch was increased from 3 to 6, 9 and 7respectively. The importance of leaves in this respect, however, wasreported by many investigators; Aldrich and Young (1941), Nixon(1943), Nixon and Carpenter (1978) and Carnelissen (1979).

(4) Number of productive leaves:

Pruning treatment at 9 leaves (Fig. 4) gave a considerable yieldaccompanied by appropriate number of productive leaves. However,pruning treatment at 3 leaves per bunch produced more relative percent ofleaves represented of the total retained leaves (24 leaves per palm). Suchbehaviour could be explained on the basis that the palm tended to modifythe unbalanced top/root ratio. These results were in accordance with thoseof Hassaballa et al. (1983).

(5) Grade quality:

The percentage of grade A truits was increased significantly towardsa peak as the number of leaves per bunch increased from 3 : 1 to 9 : 1during 1983 and 1984 seasons (Fig. 5). These results are agreement withthose of Hussein et al. (1977) and Nixon and Carpenter (1978).

368

B. Fruit characteristics:

Data concerning the physical and chemical properties in bothseasons are presented in Tables 1 and 2.

Physical properties:

1. Fruit weight (g):

The data obtained indicate that, the fruit weight was increasedsignificantly by increasing leaf/bunch ratio. The bunch/leaf ratio 1 : 9gave the largest fruit weight than that occurred with the other treatments.On the other hand, bunch/leaf ratio 1 : 3 gave the lowest fruit weight.Meanwhile, treatment 1 : 9 led to increase the fresh weight by 12.96 &11.93% over treatment 1 : 3, 6.42 and 10.6% over treatment 1 : 6 and4.6% & 2.64% over treatment 1 : 7 in 1983 and 1984 seasons,respectively. These results are in agreement with those reached byHussein et al. (1977), Abdulla et al. (1982) and Hassaballa et al. (1983).

2. Fruit dimensions (cm):

Significant differences in fruit dimensions between treatment wereobtained in 1983 season but there was no significant difference between1:9 and 1:7 or between 1:6 and 1:3 ratios. However, in the 1984 season,such differences were not statistically significant. However, treatment 1:9improved the fruit dimensions than other treatments. Such results are inpartial agreement with those found by Abdulla et al. (1982) andHassaballa et al. (1983).

3. Pulp weight percentage:

It is noticed from these data that during the two seasons, the pulpweight percentage of treatment ratio 1 : 3 was higher than that occurred intreatment 1 : 9 ratio. However, the flesh weight of fruits of treatment ratio1 : 9 was higher than that of treatment 1 : 3 ratio. This result might be dueto the lower seed weight of treatment ratio 1 : 3 than seed weight oftreatment ratio 1 : 9. Meanwhile, pulp and seed weight increasedsignificantly as the number of leaves per bunch was increased. Though,the differences between treatments were insignificant in 1983 season.

These data are in partial agreement with those reported by Husseinet al. (1977) and Abudalla et al. (1982). They found that the pulp weightof fruit increased with increasing leaf/bunch ratio. However, Hassaballaet al. (1983) illustrated that eight leaves per bunch increased flesh weight

.and flesh percentage than that occurred in six leaves per bunch.

369

Chemical properties:

1. Moisture content (%»:

Noticeably, the moisture content was not significantly affectedwith bunch/leaf ratio during the investigated seasons. Though, Hussein etal. (1977) found that increasing the number of leaves per bunch increasedthe moisture content within the fruit pulp of Barhi cultivar at SaudiArabia. Contradictive results were reported by Abdulla et al. (1982), whofound that the percent of dry weight of fruit increased with increasing thenumber of leaf/bunch.

2. Total soluble solids:

Regarding the investigated treatments, data illustrate that as thenumber of leaves per bunch was increased, the total soluble solidssignificantly increased. Meanwhile, the treatment ratio (1 : 9) gave thehighest values 35.13 & 35.33, followed by treatment ratio (1 : 7) 32.20 &30.06 treatment ratio (1: 6) 27.53 & 28.00 and treatment ratio (1 : 3)exhibit the lowest values 25.60 & 27.66 in 1983 and 1984 seasons,respectively.

Such results could be due to the effect of adequate number ofleaves on producing more carbohydrates.

These data are in parallel with those reported by Bakr et al. (1976),Hussein et al. (1977), Abdulla et al. (1982) and Hassaballa et al.(1983).

3. Total acidity (%».

Total acidity was not affected significantly by bunch/leaf ratiotreatments in both seasons of the study.

These results somewhat agreed with those found by Abdulla etal. (1982) who reported that no significant changes occurred in thetitratable acidity due to leaf/bunch ratio except in both 2 and 4 leaves perbunch which showed an increase in the acidity. but, the leaf/bunch ratioof 8 : 1 and 12 : 1 treatments slightly decreased fruit pulp acidity.However, Bakr et al. (1976) and Hassaballa et al. (1983) demonstratedthat the fruit acidity showed a negative correlation with leaf/bunch ratio.

370

-- -- - -- ---

4. Sugar contents.

a. Reducing sugars (%):

Obtained data indicated that truits of treatment 1 : 9 produced thehighest values during 1983 season and 1:9 in 1984 season, however,fruits of 1 : 3 ratio gave the lowest percentages of reducing sugars. Suchresults might be due to the effect of more leaves per bunch whichsupplied the fruits with more sugars.

These data are in line with those of Hussein et al. (1977), Abdullaetal. (1982) and Hassaballa et al. (1983).

b. Non-reducing sugars (%):

The non-reducing sugars showed similar trend in both 1983 and1984 seasons. Nevertheless, higher values of non reducing sugar contentwere recorded in 1984 more than 1983 season. Such results might be

. attributed to the higher temperature during 1984 than 1983 season asrecorded by Assiut Agrometerological Station. Moreover, both bunchweight and the average yield per palm in 1983 season were higher thanthat occurred in 1984 season.

Concerning the effect of bunch/leaf ratio on non-reducing sugars,data also indicate that non-reducing sugars percentage was not affectedsignificantly in the first season (1983), however, such percentageincreased significantly with increasing the number of leaves per bunch.Meanwhile, the truits of treatment 1 : 9 gave the highest percentage ofnon-reducing sugars, whereas truits of treatment 1 : 3 produced thelowest percentage.

Actually, it is obvious that 9 leaves per bunch induced the highestvalues of non-reducing sugars by 2 weeks earlier than the other studiedtreatments. These findings might be due to the truits of this treatmentmatured and began to discolour earlier than the other treatments.

These results are in line with those published by Hussein et al.(1977) and Abdulla et al. (1982) who found that non-reducing sugarswere increased with increasing number of leaves per bunch. However,Hassaballa et al. (1983) reported that non-reducing sugars decreasedsignificantly of 8 leaves per bunch compared with 6 leaves per bunch.

c. Total sugars (%):

Concerning the effect of bunch/leaf ratio on total sugars, it isevident that the percentage of total sugars tended to increase significantly

371

as the number of leaves per bunch was increased up to the ratio of 1 : 9 in1983 and 1984 seasons. Moreover, the pruning level at 1 : 9 inducedfruits to reach its more total sugars two weeks earlier than the pruninglevel of 1 : 3 or 1 : 6.

These results are in accordance with those reported by Hussien etal. (1977), Abdulla et al. (1982) and Hassaballa et aI., (1983).

5. Total anthocyanin (%):

The total anthocyanine values were increased by increasingleaf/bunch ratio during the two investigated seasons. Meanwhile,treatment ratio 1 : 3 ratio get lowest values of total anthocyanine.Whereas, treatment ratio 1 : 9 get the highest values of the anthocyanine.Moreover, treatment ratio 1 : 9 reached maximum values of totalanthocyanine two weeks earlier than both treatments 1 : 3 and 1 : 6.Concerning this subject, there is no available literature.

In conclusion, pruning treatment at 9 leaves per bunch and 8 bunchper palm was the most suitable pruning treatment for Zaghloul cultivar\lnder Assiut conditions for improvement the yield production and theleast tendency of irregularity of bearing capacity from year to year.Moreover, such pruning level improved the fruit physical and chemicalqualities of dates, superior quality and enhancing fruit maturity 2 weeksearlier than the commercial practices of palm pruning by the growers ofUpper Egypt to seedling palms (3 leaves per bunch). Thus it could berecommended.

LITERATURE CITED

Abdulla, K.M., M.A. Meligi and S.Y. Risk 1982. Influence of cropload and leaf/bunch ratio on yield and fruit properties of Hayany dates.Proc. 1st. Symp. on Date palm in Saudi Arabia (1): 222-232.

Aldrich, W.W., and T.R. Young. 1941. Charbohydrate changes inthe palm during the summer. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 39: 110-118.

Association of Official Agricultural Chemists. 1975. OfficialMethods of Analysis. A.O.A.C. 12th. Ed. Published by A.O.A.C.Washington, D.C. U.S.A.

Bakr, E.I., H.H.A. Selim and K.M. Abdalla. 1976. Effect ofdifferent leaf/bunch ratio on yield fruits quality of "Samani" datescultivars. Bull. Fac. Agric. Cairo Univ. 27 (2): 425-437.

372

- -

Cornelissen, J.H. 1979. Henkries date project. Fanners' Hits,infonnation Bull. No. 432, Fruit and Fruit Techn. Res. Inst., Dept. Agr.and Fisheries, Stellenbosch, South Africa.

Francis, F.J. 1957. Color and pigment measurement in freshcranberries. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 69: 296-301.

HassabalIa, L.A., M.M. Sharaf, M.M. Ibrahim, A.Z. Abd-Elazizand N.A. Hagagy. 1983. Growth, yield and fruit quality of some softdate cultivars as influenced by pruning level. Annals. Agric. Sci.Moshtohor, 20: 15-23.

Hussein, F., S. Moustafa and M. El-Kahtany. 1977. Effect ofleaves/bunch ratios on yield and fruit quality of "Barhi" dates grown atSaudi Arabia. Zagazig J. Agric. Res., 4 (1): 94-103.

Nixon, R.W. 1943. Flower and fruit production of the date palm inrelation to the retention of older leaves. Date Grower's Inst. Rpt. 23: 10-12. (C.A. Nixon and Carpenter. 1978).

Nixon, R.W. and J.B. Carpenter. 1978. Growing dates in theUnited States. U.S. Dept. Washington D.C. Agric. Bull. 207.

Ranganna, S. 1977. Mannual of analysis of fruit and vegetableproducts. Tata McGrow Hill publishing Company limited. New Delhi.633 pp.

Rygg, G.L. 1948. Acidity in relation to quality in the date fruit. DateGrower's Inst. Rept. Vol. 25.

Steel, R.G. and J.H. Torrie. 1960. Principles and Procedure ofstatistics. McGraw Hill Book. Co. Inc. NY. 1960.

373

Table (1). Effect of bunchlleaf ratio on fruit characteristics of Zaghloul datepalm during the 1983 season.

Fruit characters

Fruit weight (g)Fruit length (cm)

Fruit diameter (cm)

Pulp weight %Moisture %

T.S.S.%

Total acidity %

Reducing sugars %

Non-redu(fing%

Total sugar %

Total anthocyanin %

1 : 3-20.255.46

2.62

91.15

65.23

27.660.17

14.48

11.46

25.96

24.57

Bunch/leaf ratio1:6 1:9 1:7

21.23 22.64 22.095.65 5.85 5.66

2.67 2.70 2.71

90.90 91.50 91.45

64.13 61.56 64.73

27.53 35.13 32.200.19 0.16 020

14.91 17.76 16.51

9.94 15.44 13.05

24.85 33.20 29.56

25.28 26.99 25.61

L.S.D,o.051.1400.197

0.060

(N.S)

(N.S)0.42

(N.S)0.48

(N.S)0.42

0.67

- - -- - - ---

374

----

Table (2). Effect of bunchlleaf ratio on fruit characteristics of Zaghloul datepalm during the 1984 season.

Bunch/leaf ratioFruit characters 1 : 3 1:6 1 : 9 1 : 7 L.S.D.o.os

Fruit weight (g) 23.05 22.36 25.28 24.65 1.364

Fruit length (cm) 5.61 5.70 5.82 5.79 (N.S)

Fruit diameter (cm) 2.76 2.79 2.85 . 2.79 (N.S)

Pulp weight % 92.56 91.94 92.48 92.12 0.29

Moisture % 57.31 58.84 59.38 60.35 (N.S)T.S.S.% 27.66 28.00 35.33 30.06 0.734

Total acidity % 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.16 (N.S)

Reducing sugars % 9.19 10.52 9.96 11.11 0.51

Non-reducing % 15.75 14.32 21.52 19.26 0.88

Total sugar % 24.92 24.90 31.55 30.37 1.00

Total anthocyanin % 26.51 31.67 41.53 38.23 1.15

(;.,~

S-

." (;., l (, (;., (;., L

[~' 1 -t r-

['

\-() 1,.' .

l'c- ~ t: :,"'-te.. {J , '" Lee' v -'" ..

~~~ Lee'_ - ~ __c__~ [, [. f~' .[ t ~ .[ .~ ~ f(if ,I:' );, L Cl' l L t}. ~ r-'E;

.~ [ ~ ,~ J' .

f.' e;. :: ..: ~1

:;..s> - ,~ c; . f ,[,!;; >~~. (, '~ L ,[' ~ I .~' [7\ t" -

[. 1 ,C- - [ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b- r-

~, r f.' tJ tJ .C- { C ~ ~ l :;f:: ~, ~ ~ .L t1 1 LV t r:

le.. t' ~,. N ~, l. ~ 'S- c. ~ . tG" '1:, - .r '- L. ~ c... ... (~ f I::; ~ g ~~ ~ ~ - ~ '''1' ,

~ ~ .t ~ :, .[ 1 ~ t ~. \- ~' ~~ .1:"" L ~ ~ .1:"" E~' > (;.'. L l,t, f1 ~ >(;) c. g; ~ ~. \- tJ t1 \::.

1.

o p ~: 1. ~, t:. ~ [. e.. b- t1 ~ '~t' fu '

f.' L ~~.

~~ f l~ (;., C.

~~ .1:" L., \::. _"1:' - 'I:- /'v . .~. .f, - - ~ ('., t: f

O'

[, c. ~. r- ~ £ ..s>

~

: t. ~ ~: ~

f 'E. ,lA' - 00 < f' ('(I r. , , ... Lb- f ,t 'cO' . -'" r- . -'" . . t'f 't ~ ~ .f'" ~ ~ .t' ~' ~ _ ~. '( c- e.. - [.""t- ,t, ():"8. c \ fu ( e.. ~C. 1 J:' ~'-~. E ~ £:. L. ~ !" ,cl- ~ ~.

~ ~ ~ f - t1 0 0 ~ \. ..s> ~, \::.

~ ~ ~ - "!-. [, ~ t' ,<, t ::. ~,~ ,['~. 'C: '" F;: (;., t '" c (;.,

~' r- t 'E; ~,.

1.1>.,0 1,.' - ~ I) . L

tp L- ~ {J Cl' - f' '

, '~ t.' .. ~ '.r f' ~ £s ~ '- f ~. r -- cl- :

w:J

V\

(;.,L~

f'I

~~I

1:r..:£:'!;[,

~

I

{' o[

t.: ~1[-

~ ,~ ~'T I l..- {' <..

~ ~ ff:'[ ,~ ~

f r ~o~ of' LI' I -

I °t~, r.:t) 01:"" t~ of t

I -

t' i..8~ );

r

r

}

}

,~'

-c

,~'

~

...

~

~ ~~

~

f0'

$<..(.1,H

\(;.,ti.

E(;.,

~,

or

~,.G'

--

Ec; 100C-L.Cl) 80C-C/)tn 60~-

"C

.S! 40>-.....:] 20L.U.

120

o

.01:03rm01:061101:09001 :07

1983 1984 1985

Fig. (1): Fruit yield (kgs per palm) of Zaghlouldates as influenced by bunch/leaf ratio during

1983, 1984 and 1985 seasons.

1983 1984 1985

Fig. (2): Bunch weight in (kgs) of Zaghloul datesas influenced by bunch/leaf ratio during 1983,

1984 and 1985 seasons.

-

376

l

16

o 14j .Il.01:03

12 I!I01:06

f 1 I .01:09...JdIl 001:07-,.t: 6uc 4:]"-

DJ 2

0

Fig. (3): Effect of bunch/leaf ratio on total numberof infloroscences of Zaghloul date palm produced

during 1983, 1984 and 1985 seasons.

Fig. (4): Effect of bunch/leaf ratio on the totalnumber of functional leaves of Zaghloul date palm

produced during 1983, 1984 and 1985 seasons.

377

If) 14IVuc

121

.01 :03IVu

.Ill0 10 I!I01 :06...0

1;:8 11101:09c-

001:070 6...IV.c 4E::I 2c

0.....0I-

1983 1984 1985

:g 35>ca30 .01:03

S 25 III01 :06;:g 20

---rmdIIl.01 :09

::I::: 15 001:070...

10E

5::IC

0.....0I- 1983 1984 1985

- --

...cQ) 90(J

~ 80Co 70Inca 60Q)

"C 50caC>40

~ 30ca 20::3

er 10...':; 0...u..

... 90c~ 80...

8. 70~ 60I

~ 50caC> 40>-~ 30

~ 20er

~ 10::3

.t: 0

1983

Grade B

1983

GradeA

1984

1984

Fig. (5): Fruitquality grade of Zaghlouldates as influenced by bunch/leaf ratio

during 1983 and 1984 seasons.

--

378

.01 :03I!l01:06.01:09001:07

.01 :03I!I01:06.01 :09001:07