Pruning in guava (Psidium guajava) and appraisal of consequent flowering phenology using modified BBCH scale

V K SINGH; H RAVISHANKAR; ANURAG SINGH; MANOJ KUMAR SONI

doi:10.56093/ijas.v85i11.53752

Authors

V K SINGH Principal Scientist, ICAR-Central Institute for Subtropical Horticulture, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh 226 101
H RAVISHANKAR Principal Scientist, Indian Institute of Horticultural Research, Hessaraghatta, Bengaluru, Karnatka
ANURAG SINGH Research Associate, ICAR-Central Institute for Subtropical Horticulture, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh 226 101
MANOJ KUMAR SONI Research Associate, ICAR-Central Institute for Subtropical Horticulture, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh 226 101

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v85i11.53752

Keywords:

Flowering, Guava, Modified BBCH scale, Phenology, Psidium guajava

Abstract

The guava (Psidium guajava L.) shows well defined phenological stages during growth, flowering and fruiting stages depending upon climatic conditions which of course is amenable to manipulations through cultural interventions. The BBCH scale (Biologische Bundesantalt Bundessortenant and Chemiscle Industrie) is used for recording the data of the different phenological stages in coded form starting from bud development, vegetative stages, floral stages and ends in fruit maturity. Pruning is an important tool for increasing the production but it impacts the normal phenological stages by causing variation in the occurrence of principal and secondary stages. Therefore, the normal BBCH scale proves to be erroneous. In order to assess the quantum of variation on the normal phenology, an experiment was carried out in the guava cv. Lalit for collection of phenological data using the traditional nomenclature described by Fleckinger (1945) and to relate them to the BBCH general scale in pruned or unpruned trees. Significant variation in the principal growth stages was observed as a result of pruning during February, May and September. The duration between the pruning and the beginning bud sprout was from 11 to 15 days during different times of pruning. In contrast, the control unpruned tree showed bud emergence within 2-3 days. The flowering in February and September pruned trees ranged from 78 to 93 days from flower opening and took 153 and 150 days, respectively, for the fruit ripeness as compared to control (129-146 days). Interestingly, beginning of bud sprout occurred in 7 days in May pruning as compared to 3 days in control and the 50 % flowering was hastened and occurred in 43 days and fruit ripening took 136 days. Thus the normal BBCH scale proved to be erroneous in trees subjected to pruning. Phenology of guava according to the traditional Fleckinger Code and the aberrations in the BBCH General Scale resulting from pruning is described in this paper.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Crane J H and Balerdi C F 2005. Guava Growing in the Florida Home Landscape. Horticultural Sciences Department document HS4, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, pp 1–8.

Fleckinger J. 1945. Notations phe´nologiques et repre´sentations graphiques du de´veloppment des bourgeons de poiriers. (In) C.R. Congre‘s de Paris de l’Association franc¸aise pour l’avancement des Sciencies. Bibliographical reference in ‘‘Fruticultura de Coutanceau’’, 1971, Oikos-tau, Barcelona: p 118.

Meier U W E, Bleiholder H, Buhr L, Feller, C, Hack H, Heb M, Lancashire P D, Uta Schnock, Staub R, Theo van den Boom, Weber E and Zwerger P. 2009. The BBCH system to coding the phenological growth stages of plants – history and publications. Journal für Kulturpflanzen, 61 (2): S 41–52.

Miller P, Lanier W, Brandt S. 2001. Using Growing Degree Days to Predict Plant Stages. Extention communications coordinator, communications services, Montana State University, Bozeman, MO, 1–8.

Pratibha, Lal S and Goswami A K. 2013. Effect of pruning and planting systems on growth, flowering, fruiting and yield of guava cv. Sardar. Indian Journal of Horticulture 70(4): 496– 500.

Rajan S, Tiwari D, Singh V K, Saxena P, Singh S, Reddy Y T N, Upreti K K, Burondkar M M, Bhagwan A and Kennedy, Richards. 2011. Application of extended BBCH scale for phenological studies in mango (Mangifera indica L.) Journal of Applied Horticulture 13(2): 108–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37855/jah.2011.v13i02.25

Raoofi, Faranak and Javadi, Seyed Akbar. 2014. Modeling phonological stages of Artemisia sieberi using GDD. International Journal of Biosciences. 4 (1): 225–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12692/ijb/4.1.225-230

Rathore, D.S. 1976. Effect of season on the growth and chemical composition of guava (Psidium guajava L.) fruits. Journal of Horticultural Science. 51: 41–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00221589.1976.11514662

Salazar D M, Melgarejo P, Martinez R, Martinez J J, Hernandez F and Burguera M. 2006. Phenological growth stages of guava tree (Psidium guava L.). Scientia Horticulturae 108: 157–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2006.01.022

Schwartz M D 1999. Advancing to full bloom: planning phenological research for the 21st century. International Journal of Biometeorology. 42 (3): 113–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s004840050093

Singh V K and Singh G. 2007. Photosynthetic efficiency, canopy micro climate and yield of rejuvenated guava trees. Acta Hortlcultural (ISHS) 735: 249–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2007.735.33

Singh V K, Soni MK, and Singh, Anurag. 2015. Effect of drip irrigation and polyethylene mulching on fruit yield and quality of guava cv. Allahabad Safeda under ultra high density planting. International conference on dynamics of smart horticulture for livelyhood and rural development., 28-31 May, Chitrakoot, Satna, Madhya Pradesh, pp 56–7.

Thakre M, Goswami A K and Pratibha Lal, S. 2013. Effect of various methods of crop regulation in guava under doublehedge row system of planting. Indian Journal of Horticulture 70(2): 211–6.

Venkateswarlu B and Visperas R M. 1987. Source- sink relationships in crop plants. IRRI Research Paper Series No. 125, pp 1–19.