Influence of growing direction on seed yield and quality in bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria)

RAJESH KUMAR SHARMA; B S TOMAR

doi:10.56093/ijas.v86i7.59774

Authors

RAJESH KUMAR SHARMA ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012
B S TOMAR ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v86i7.59774

Keywords:

E-W direction, Laterals, N-S direction, Seed quality, Seed yield and Vigour index

Abstract

The present investigation was carried out to study the influence of growing direction, i.e. E-W and N-S direction on growth, flowering, fruit set, seed yield and quality attributes of bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria (Mol.) Stand) at SPU, IARI, New Delhi during kharif 2014. The results revealed that growth characters i.e. vine length, leaves/vine, leaf area, leaf nodes/vine, primary laterals and leaves on primary laterals had significantly higher in E-W direction at 45 DAS and leaves/vine, leaf area, leaf nodes/vine, leaves on primary laterals and secondary laterals at 55 DAS. The reduction in number of days to anthesis of first male flower and female flower in E-W direction as compared to N-S direction was observed. Significantly more number of male flowers and less female flower per plant were recorded in E-W direction along with less sex ratio. The fruit development attributes, i.e. fruit set/vine, fruit developed to maturity, fruit weight, fruit length, fruit width, cavity volume and thickness of fruit wall were reported significantly higher in EW direction. Seed yield attributes, i.e. seed yield/fruit, seed yield/vine and seed yield/acre were found significantly higher in E-W direction but number of total seed, filled seed and unfilled seed per fruit showed at par among the direction of sowing. Similarly seed quality attributes, viz. seedling length (43.49cm), seedling dry weight (0.687 g), vigour index I (4247.37) and VI-II (67.13), seed coat weight and embryo weight were recorded significantly superior in E-W direction than N-S direction. Germination (%) and electrical conductivity of seed leachate showed at par performance among the both the direction of sowing.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ABD EL-Maksoud M F. 2008. Effect of row direction and plant arrangement on growth, yield and yield components of two maize cultivars. Journal of Applied Sciences Research 4(10): 1 182–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21608/jpd.2008.44819

Akmal M, Ali M and Putnam D H. 2013. Row orientation and plant space in relation to nitrogen fertilizer application response on maize production. International Journal of Agronomy and Plant Production 4(6): 1 393–1 408.

Bisheshwor P P, Basnet K B, Bhatta M R, Sah S K, Thapa RB and Kandel T P. 2013. Effect of row spacing and direction of sowing on yield and yield attributing characters of wheat cultivated in Western Chitwan, Nepal. Agricultural Sciences 4(7): 309–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2013.47044

Borger C P D, Hashem A and Pathan S. 2010. Manipulating crop row orientation to suppress weeds and increase crop yield. Weed Seience 58: 174–178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1614/WS-09-094.1

Diepenbrock W, Long M and Feil B. 2001. Yield and quality of sunflower as affected by row orientation of row spacing and density. Die bodenkultur 52(1): 29-36.

Evers J B, Huth N I and Renton M. 2009. Light extinction in spring wheat canopies in relation to crop configuration and solar angle. (In) IEEE Third International Symposium on Plant Growth Modeling, Simulation, Visualization and Applications (PMA), Beijing, 9-13 November 2009, pp107-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/PMA.2009.20

FAO database 2014. www.fao.org.

Haque M M, Hasanuzzaman M and Rahman M L. 2009. Effect of light intensity on the morph-physiology and yield of bottle gourd (Lagenaria sicereria). Aca. J. Plant Sci. 2(3): 158–61.

Jha S, Sehgal V K and Subbarao Y V. 2012. Effect of direction of sowing and crop phenotype on radiation interception, use efficiency, growth and productivity of mustard (Brassica juncea L.). Journal of Agricultural Physics 12(1): 37–43.

Marcelis L F M, Broekhuijsen A G M, Meinen E, Nijs E H F M and Raaphorst M G M. 2006. Quantification for the growth response to light quality of greenhouse grown crops. Acta Horticultural 711: 97–104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2006.711.9

National Horticulture Board. 2014. Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.

Plenet D, Mollier A and Pellerin S. 2000. Growth analysis of maize field crops under phosphorus deficiency. II. Radiation- use efficiency, biomass accumulation and yield components. Plant and Soil 224: 259–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004835621371

Reza Monem, Mirtaheri S M and Ali A. 2012. Investigation of row orientation and planting date on yield and yield components of mung bean. Annals of Biological Research 3(4): 1 764–7.

Wajid A, Hussain K, Maqsood M, Ahmad A and Hussain A. 2007. Influence of drought on water use efficiency in wheat in semi- arid regions of Punjab. Soil and Environment 26: 64–8.

Zhang L, Werf W, Bastiaans L, Zhang S, Li B and Spiertz J H J. 2008. Light interception and utilization in relay intercrops of wheat and cotton. Field Crops Research 107: 29–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2007.12.014