‘DIGGING FOR MARKET DIFFERENCE’. ‘DINOSAUR EGGS’.
This Celebrity Fruit has Attracted the Attention of Consumers in China

In recent years, as the consumption of foods has increased in China, commonly grown local fruits no longer meet the needs of consumers. ‘Dinosaur Eggs’, the affectionate nickname given to the Californian plum has jumped to become a web-celebrity-fruit because of its unique flavour.

The booming market demand attracted the attention of more and more fruit growers who began to plant the crop even though they were not familiar with this kind of fruit. So, the questions were raised; what kind of fertiliser is suitable and when and how do you apply them? This was the farmer’s challenge.

Based on global experience, RLF China developed a specific nutrition program for the ‘Dinosaur Eggs’.

With the guidance of the RLF Technical Team, Guo Qin Agricultural Science and Technology Park adopted a standardised planting pattern, and their plum produce has enjoyed popularity in the fruit’s online market. The park has continuously used an RLF crop nutrition program for several years.

Recently, at the maturity stage of the ‘Dinosaur Eggs’, the RLF Technical Team paid a field visit to make the comparisons between the RLF-treated and the Control field by the size, weight and sugar content of the mature plum.

Crop Californian Plum (Dinosaur Eggs)
Location Guo Qin Park, Gaotant Town, Huaxian County, Shan’xi Province
Nutrition Program Timing Products and Foliar Application Control Field
Blossom Period Plant Milk High-N
5kg per Mu, via fertigation
Compound fertilisers
Young fruit period Plant Milk High-P
5kg per Mu, via fertigation
Compound fertilisers
Developing fruit period

The Comparisons

By Size

The RLF-treated fruit had an average diameter of 56mm, whilst the Control fruit had an average diameter of 53mm.

By Weight

The average weight of the RLF-treated fruit was 97.9 grams, and that of Control fruit was 79.9 grams.

The weights of three random samples are as follows:

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Average Increased by (g)
Control 82.9g 74.6g 82.2g 79.9g
RLF Treated 101.7g 83.0g 109.0g 97.9g 18g

By Sugar Content
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Average Increased by (g)
Control 10.4g 8.8g 8.7g 9.3g
RLF Treated 13.6g 11.7g 13.5g 13.0g 3.7

The average measurement for the RLF-treated sugar content was 13.03 whilst the Control sugar content was 9.3.

The sugar degree of the RLF-treated fruit is obviously higher than that of Control, and this has a marked influence on the degree of flavour the fruit holds. This makes it very appealing for consumers.