Sep 15, 2013 - Various concentrations of low biurete urea (LBU) were sprayed in February, 2005 ... new orchards. [11]. because; in mango previous year physiologically .... form control trees for blooming (Table 2). Moreover, results clarify ...
World Applied Sciences Journal 24 (10): 1368-1372, 2013 ISSN 1818-4952 © IDOSI Publications, 2013 DOI: 10.5829/idosi.wasj.2013.24.10.908
Sustainable Production of Mango Fruit by Managing Irregular Bearing Through Foliar Spray of Urea at Critical Growth Stages Muhammad Nafees, 1Ishtiaq Ahmad, 1Irfan Ashraf, Moazzam Jameel, 1Tanveer hussan and 2Maryam
1,2
1
University College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur 60100, Pakistan 2 Institute of Horticultural Sciences, University of Agriculture Faisalabad, 38000, Pakistan 1
Submitted: Jun 21, 2013;
Accepted: Jul 28, 2013;
Published: Sep 15, 2013
Abstract: Effect of time of urea spray on irregular bearing of most commercial cultivars of mango (Chounsa, Dushehari and Anwar Ratool) of Pakistan was investigated. Various concentrations of low biurete urea (LBU) were sprayed in February, 2005 (before blooming) and September, 2005 (After harvest at flower bud differentiation) and its effect on blooming of tagged shoots was studied during on year 2005. Percentage of emergence of vegetative and flowering buds on shoots emerged during on year 2005 was recorded during off year 2006. Means and standard deviations of results reflected that there was significant effect of time and concentration of urea spray on blooming as compared to control. Significantly high blooming was recorded in off year on plants, received 3% urea compared with control. Key words: Mango cultivars
Urea spray
Critical growth stages
INTRODUCTION The King of fruits in Asia “Mango” is the most important fruit crop with ranking at 5th position in world and 2nd in Pakistan after Citrus [1]. Commercial production of mango is limited only in tropical and sub-tropical regions of the world with latitude 30°N-S [2]. Pakistan is producing more than 1954.6 thousand tons from an area of about 157.2 thousand hectares [3]. Mango is commercially produced under diverse agro-ecological conditions of Pakistan [4 ,5] but our per hectare production (11.2 tons/ha.) is low compared with hidden potential which is about 25 tons per hectare. There is a great potential to increase yield by controlling various production problems like low fruit setting, high ratio of male to hermaphrodite flowers, high fruit drop and intricate physiological disorders and diseases like of irregular bearing, malformation of inflorescence and various postharvest problems and issues [6-8]. These problems could only be minimized through proper management practices in existing orchards while inducing improved cultivars for establishing new orchards. Corresponding Author:
Flushing and Panicle emergence
Growth systems of mango are enigmatic. It is because; in mango previous year physiologically mature shoots having equal chance to not bloom or bloom abnormally. The fate of vegetative growth has direct effect on flowering. Heavy blooming during on year with no or a few terminals left for vegetative growth in that season; results in no flushing or flushing late after harvest when terminals become free. These physiologically immature late flushes have less chance to bloom or bloom normally in coming spring season. In this way, this season become off year with no or very less fruit production. Growth patterns of mango trees vary greatly depending upon variety and environmental conditions [9]. In mango cultivar “Langra”, shoots bearing fruits seldom make extension growth during that season and seldom bear fruit in upcoming year [10]. Shoots with single and double flush (respectively) were proved more fruitful then triple flush for regular bearing in mango. Inspite of all above under normal conditions a healthy mango plants terminal produces four to five flushes per year [11].
Muhammad Nafees, University College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur 60100, Pakistan.
1368
World Appl. Sci. J., 24 (10): 1368-1372, 2013
Being tropical and subtropical region crop, mango tree produces growth flushes throughout the year and most of late flushes remain unproductive and hence adversely affects fruit yield. It is required to check vegetative growth to minimize alternate bearing. Lately emerged flushes have less chance to bloom and they bear very low ratio of hermaphrodite flowers, fruit set and its retention. Moreover, productivity of mango fruit could be increased by manipulation of physiological growth characteristics of the crop by chemical means [12]. Plant C: N ratio is associated with balance between reproductive and vegetative growth. Balance in vegetative and reproductive growth could be achieved by maintaining optimum nitrogen status in mango plants. Application of nitrogen in excess or at wrong time may develop undesirable vegetative growth while application at proper times may reduce irregular bearing in mango. Foliar spray of urea @ 2% and 4% significantly improved vegetative growth and fruit weight in Dushehari [13]. Spray of urea and P2O5 @ 2% and 4% on Chaunsa during December, April and August, significantly increase terminal length and yield [14]. 2%, 4% and 6% urea spray increased perfect flowers and fruit set ratio in mango [13]. Spraying mango cv. Dushehari, twice before flowering with urea (0, 3 and 6%) and gibberellic acid (0, 15 and 30 ppm) singly and in combination increased vegetative growth, length of panicle, number of secondary branches, duration of flowering, number of flowers per panicle, fruit set, fruit retention and fruit quality but reduced the sex ratio of flowers [15]. Floral initiation in mango is the result of complex interactions between shoot development stage and environmental condition [9]. A lot of work has been done on nutritional status of mango to improve yield. Over dosage of nitrogen cause soft nose of fruit and also delay fruit maturity. It also enhance floral malformation with more vegetative growth, Lot of work done on this aspect but spray of low biurete urea at critical growth stage was missing. Therefore, present research activity was planned to minimize irregular bearing in commercial mango cultivars by searching efficient spray of urea at critical growth stage. MATERIALS AND METHODS Ten year old fruit bearing commercial mango cultivars; Chaunsa, Dushehari and Anwar Retool were selected for a period 2005-2006. Experimental Plants were
growing in uniform agro climatic conditions at plains of central Punjab (Pakistan) district “Khanewal” (30°18'0N 71°56'0E) honored by a progressive mango grower. One batch of experimental plants were sprayed with 0 (tape water), 1%, 2% and 3% Low biurete urea (LBU) before blooming (February) with aim to get new growth flushes during on year and another batch was sprayed at fruit bud differentiation (September after fruit harvest) to reduce nutritional stress during differentiation period in order to regularize blooming in selected mango cultivars having a history of irregular bearing and malformation of inflorescence. It was insured that all experimental plants including control, received similar cultural practices of irrigation, fertilizer application and all plant protection measures. Layout design of experiment was Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with four treatments (including control) along with two stages of spray and three cultivars replicated three times in each cultivar while whole plant was considered as experimental unit. Ten terminals of thumb thickness were selected at shoulder height to collect data regarding vegetative and reproductive growth of selected mango plants. Data was analyzed in RCBD with two factor factorial design under [16]. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Effect of Urea Spray on Mango Blooming During on and off Years: Blooming intensity in selected mango cultivars during on and off years was significantly high in response to spray of various concentrations of urea during (Table 1). Mean blooming shoots during on and off years proved that there was significant difference between control and urea sprayed plants while there was nonsignificant difference among various levels of urea. Highest percentage of bloom (29.06%) was recorded on plants treated with 3% urea. Lowest percentage of blooming (23.57%) was observed in control plants. Blooming was significantly high (29.42%) during on year than off year (23.43%) (Table 1). Interaction of urea level and year of blooming was statistically significant. Blooming percentage was statistically at par for different levels of urea spray including control while it was highest during off year on plants received 3% urea (Table 1). In our results, there was significantly higher percentage of blooming in plants received urea as compared to control during off year proved that urea spray may be helpful to reduce irregular bearing in mango.
1369
World Appl. Sci. J., 24 (10): 1368-1372, 2013
spray (control) proved that optimum level of LBU has positive correlation with increasing yield and support to the finding of [17, 14].
Table 1: Effect of urea spray on mango blooming during on and off years Control
1 % LBU
2 % LBU
3 % LBU
Means
On Year
28.29ab
28.93ab
Off year
18.85e
22.85d
29.55ab
30.92a
29.42a
24.81cd
27.2bc
Means
23.57c
25.89b
23.43b
27.18ab
29.06a
Means followed by different letters are significantly different by LSD test at P < 0.05. Table 2: Effect of dose and time of urea spray on blooming of irregular bearing mango cultivars Spray in February
Control
1 % LBU
46.11b
54.55a
2 % LBU 3 % LBU 55.89a
Means
58.32a
53.71a 44.7b
Spray in September
45.96b
43.28b
43.92b
45.62b
Means
46.03b
48.91ab
49.91a
51.97a
Means followed by different letters are significantly different by LSD test at P < 0.05. Table 3: Effect of urea spray on flushing during on and off years Control
1 % LBU
2 % LBU
3 % LBU
Means
On Year
36.31c
43.76b
45.72b
47.55b
43.33b
Off year
55.76a
54.07a
54.1a
56.39a
55.08a
Means
46.03b
48.91ab
49.91a
51.97a
Means followed by different letters are significantly different by LSD test at P < 0.05.
Effect of Dose and Time of Urea Spray on Blooming of Irregular Bearing Mango Cultivars: Significantly higher percentage of blooming (53.71%) was recorded on plants sprayed in February followed by 44.7% blooming in plants received urea in September (Table 2). Means of blooming shoots were significantly higher in all urea levels compared with control. Statistically mean value of blooming shoots were at par for selected levels of urea. Highest percentage of blooming (58.32%) was recorded in interaction of level of urea (3%) and time of spray (February) as shown in Table 2. Spray of urea in September was statistically non-significantly different form control trees for blooming (Table 2). Moreover, results clarify that spray of LBU before blooming (February) correlate with high percentage of blooming as compared to spray at differentiating stage (September). This may be due to reason that sprays before blooming improves plant nutritional level. It may be because of improving the C: N ratio in leaves. Low percentage of blooming in response to September spray might disturb the fruit bud differentiation process and this result in higher vegetative shoot emergence in upcoming spring season. Our results are in line with the findings of [14] who sprayed urea and P2O5 on Chaunsa during December, April and August and found significant yield during off year. Maximum blooming in plants received high rate of LBU compared with low concentration of urea and water
Effect of Urea Spray on Flushing During on and off Years: Statistically higher percentage was recorded in plants sprayed with urea compared with control (Table 3). Significantly higher flushes (55.08%) emerged during off year compared than on year. Interaction of urea spray and flushing during on and off years was significantly different. Effect of urea spray was significantly higher for the emergence of flushes during on year while percentage of flushes was statistically at par during off years for all treatments (Table 3). There was higher emergence of flushes in plants received urea compared with control during on year as proved in our results, shows that this modification in flushing during on year might be helpful to bloom during off year as a result; biannual bearing could possibly be reduced. Effect of Time of Urea Spray in Mango Cultivars for Flushing During on and off Years: Interaction of time of urea spray, cultivars and the year of blooming showed that there was highest emergence of flushes (61.5%) in Chaunsa during off year in plants sprayed in February (Table 4). This was statistically at par with cv. Dushehari sprayed in February and September during off year and this was at par to Anwar Retool sprayed in February and September during off year (Table 4). Highest percentage of flushes recorded in plants sprayed during February proved that spray of urea might be helpful in the induction of flushes during on year. In this way we may promote the emergence of shoots during heavy blooming (On) year for regular blooming in upcoming off year. Results are in line with the finding of [13] who reported that foliar spray of urea @ 2% and 4% significantly improved vegetative growth in Langra, Dushehari and Totapari and provide sufficient biomass for reproductive growth in upcoming spring season. Our results proved that emergence of flushes during on year support to heavy blooming in off year which is against the finding of [18-21]. Effect of Urea Spray on Fruit Set in Mango Cultivars During on and off Years: Significantly higher percentage of fruit set (6.9%) was recorded in Dushehari compared with Chaunsa and Anwar Retool (Table 5). Percentage of fruit set was significantly different in selected cultivars during on and off years. Statistically, there was higher fruit set (5.83%) during on year followed by 3.75% in off
1370
World Appl. Sci. J., 24 (10): 1368-1372, 2013 Table 4: Effect of time of urea spray on mango cultivars for flushing during on and off years Spray in February
Spray in September
----------------------------------
-------------------------------------
Anwar Chaunsa Dushehari Ratool
Anwar Chaunsa Dushehari
Retool
On Year 50.05f
47.46e
51,37cde 39.58f
36.08f
35.45f
Off Year 61.5a
57.4ab
54.5bcd
55.98abc
51.67bcde
49.43de
Means followed by different letters are significantly different by LSD test at P < 0.05. Table 5: Effect of urea spray on fruit setting in mango cultivars during on and off years On Year
Chaunsa
Dushehari
3.95b
9.92a
Anwar Retool
Means
3.62b
5.83a 3.75b
Off Year
3.91b
3.87b
3.47b
Means
3.93b
6.9a
3.54b
Means followed by different letters are significantly different by LSD test at P < 0.05. Table 6: Effect of urea spray on yield in mango cultivars during on and off years On Year
Chaunsa
Dushehari
87.29b
124.92a
Anwar Retool
Means
68.6c
93.6a 40.35b
Off Year
38.79de
53.8cd
28.48e
Means
63.04b
89.35a
48.54c
Effect of Urea Spray on Yield in Mango Cultivars During on and off Years: Fruit yield was significantly different in selected mango cultivars in different years. Significantly, higher fruit production (89.35kg/ plant) was recorded in Dushehari followed by 63.04 kg/ plant and 48.54 kg/ plant in Chaunsa and Anwar Retool respectively (Table 6). Statistically significant difference was recorded during on and off years. Significantly higher fruit production (93.6kg/ plant) was recorded during on year compared with 40.35kg/ plant during off year. Significant difference was recorded in interaction of cultivar and year of fruit production (Table 6). Significantly higher fruit production (124.92kg/plant) was recorded in cv. Dushehari during on year followed by 87.29kg/plant in Chaunsa during on year. Significantly higher fruit production (53.8kg/plant) was recorded in Dushehari during off year. It is clear that response of selected mango cultivars against urea spray was different. Urea spray is more effective in Dushehari for optimum fruit production followed by Chaunsa and Anwar Retool (respectively) during on and off years. Our results are in line with the finding of 15, 5 and [14]. CONCLUSION
Means followed by different letters are significantly different by LSD test at P < 0.05.
year (Table 5). Interaction of cultivars and year of blooming was statistically significantly different. Significantly higher percentage of fruit set (9.92%) was recorded in Dushehari during on year followed by Chaunsa and Anwar Retool with 3.95% and 3.62% fruit set respectively. There was non-significant difference between all selected cultivars for fruit set during off year (Table 5). Fruit set percentage in selected cultivars of mango was statistically different. This might be due to change in genetic make up and physiochemical reactions in various mango cultivars as it proved by [22] and stated that blooming in mango differ greatly depending upon variety and environmental conditions. Moreover, our results are in line with the findings of [13] who reported that fruit set in Langra, Dushehari and Totapari was different in response to foliar spray of urea. Results in this manuscript endorsed the findings of [18] who stated that there was on-significant difference for fruit set percentage in Anwar Ratool during on and off years while our results opposed the findings of [18] who stated that there was no statistical difference between Chaunsa and Dushehari for fruit set percentage.
Effect of spray of low biurete urea before blooming enhanced blooming and also promote flushing even during on year. These flushes received bloom in upcoming off year. In this way irregular blooming could be minimized in mango cultivars. REFERENCES 1. Anonymous, 2012. Agricultural Statistics of Pakistan. Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Food, Agriculture and livestock, Islamabad, Pakistan. 2. Millington, A.J., 1984. The Mango a review of the world scene. Proceeding of First Australian Mango Research Workshop, Melbourne: CSIRO, Australia. pp: 14. 3. Anonymous. 2011-2012. Pakistan Economic Survey, 2010-11. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and livestock. Federal bureau of Statistics. Finance division. Economic advisor’s wing Islamabad. 4. Ziaf, K., M.I. Chaudhary and R. Anwar. 2004. Effects of panicle thinning on vegetative and blooming behavior of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Langra. Pak. J. Agri. Sci., 41: 72-75. 5. Amin, M., A.U. Malik, M.S. Mazhar, I. Din, M.S. Khalid and S. Ahmad. 2008. Mango fruit desapping in relation to time of harvesting. Pak. J. Bot., 40: 1587-1593.
1371
World Appl. Sci. J., 24 (10): 1368-1372, 2013
6. Maqbool, M., A.U. Malik and A. Jabbar. 2007. Sap dynamics and its management in commercial mango cultivars of Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 39: 1565-1574. 7. Fateh, F.S., M.R. Kazmi, I. Ahmad and M. Ashraf, 2006. Ceratocystis fimbriata isolated from Vascular bundles of declining mango trees in Sindh, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 38: 1257-1259. 8. Malik, A.U., Z. Singh and S.C. Tan. 2006. Exogenous application of polyamines improves shelf life and fruit quality of mango. Acta Hort., 699: 291-296. 9. Chacko, E.K., 1991. Mango flowering still an enigma. Acta Horticulturae. 291: 12-21. 10. Reece, P.C., J.R. Furr and W.C. Cooper, 1999. Further studies of floral induction in Haden mango. Amer. J. Bot., 36: 734-740. 11. Davenport, T.L. and R. Nunez-Elisea, 1997. Reproductive physiology. In: The Mango: Botany, Production and Uses (Ed.) R.E. Litz, pp: 69-146. CAB International, New York. 12. Subhadrabandhu, S., K. Iamsub and I. Kataoka. 1999. Effect of Paclobutrazol application growth of mango trees and detection of residues in leaves and soil. Japanese J. Tropi. Agri., 43: 249-253. 13. Rajput, C.B.S. and J.P. Tiwari, 1975. Effect of foliar sprays of urea on flowering and fruiting characters of three cultivars of mango. Bangladesh Hortic., 3(2): 1-5. 14. Singh, R.R., 1976. Effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on vegetative growth characters of mango (Mangifera indica L.) variety Chaunsa.Orrissa J. Hort., 4(1/2): 23-29. 15. Rajput, C.B.S. and J.N. Singh, 1989. Effect of urea and GA3 sprays on the growth, flowering and fruiting characters of mango. Acta Horticulturae, 31: 301-305.
16. MSTAT. 1989. MSTAT user’ guide: A microcomputer programme for the design management and analysis of agronomic research experiments. Michigan State Univ. East Lansing, USA. 17. Samara, J.S., R.S. Thankur and K.L. Chadha. 1987. Effect of foliar application of urea on yield and yield parameters of mango. Indian J. Hort., 34(1): 2629. 18. Nafees, M., M. Faqeer, S. Ahmad, M.A. Khan, M. Jamil and M.N. Aslam. 2010. Paclobutrazol Soil Drenching Suppresses Vegetative Growth, Reduces Malformation and Increases Production in Mango. Inter. J. Fruit Science, 10: 431-440. 19. Yeshitela, T., P.J. Robbertse and P.J.C. Stassen, 2004. Paclobutrazol suppressed vegetative growth and improved yield as well as fruit quality of ‘Tomy Atkins’ mango (Mangifera indica L.) in Ethiopia. N. Z. J. Crop Hort. Sci., 32: 281-293. 20. Burondkar, M.M. and R.T. Gunjate. 1993. Control of vegetative growth and induction of regular and early cropping in ‘Alphonso’ mango with Paclobutrazol. Acta Hort., 341: 206-215. 21. Kurian, R.M. and C.P.A. Iyer, 1993. Chemical regulation of tree size in mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. ‘Alphonso’. I. Effects of growth retardants on vegetative growth and tree vigour. J. Hort. Sci., 68: 349-354. 22. Chacko, E.K., 1984. Physiology of vegetative and reproductive growth in mango trees: A Review paper. Proceeding first Australian Mango Research Workshop. Queensland. pp: 54-70.
1372
