Field evaluation of Indian gooseberry (Emblica officinalis) accessions for yield, fruit quality and antioxidant potential

D PANDEY; G PANDEY; AVNISH PANDEY; APARNA DUBE

doi:10.56093/ijas.v86i11.62942

Authors

D PANDEY ICAR–Central Institute for Subtropical Horticulture, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh 226 101
G PANDEY ICAR–Central Institute for Subtropical Horticulture, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh 226 101
AVNISH PANDEY ICAR–Central Institute for Subtropical Horticulture, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh 226 101
APARNA DUBE ICAR–Central Institute for Subtropical Horticulture, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh 226 101

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v86i11.62942

Keywords:

Field evaluation, Genotypes, Indian gooseberry, Pysico-chemical, Quality, Yield

Abstract

Ten diverse promising genotypes of Indian gooseberry (Emblica officinalis Gaertn.) along with two commercial varieties, viz, NA-6 and NA-7 were evaluated during the year 2013 and 2014 for commercial potential based on tree growth and physico-chemical characteristics. Maximum plant height was recorded in genotype CISH A-19 (7.11m) and minimum in NA-6 (4.13m). Plant spread in East-West and North-South directions varied from 3.01-5.13m and 2.91-4.89m respectively, while plant girth was recorded maximum in CISH A-19 (63.88 cm). Pulp weight varied from (22.91-33.92g), recorded highest in genotype CISH A-31 (33.92g) while lowest weight was found in CISH A-17 (22.91g). Large variations in fruit shape, viz. oval round, flattened round, round, conical, flattened oblong and flattened oval was noticed amongst the genotypes. Similarly, fruit colour at maturity among different genotypes recorded as green, light green and pinkish. Fruit weight varied from 24.37 to 35.41g among the different genotypes being highest in genotype CISH A-19 (35.41g) which is significantly higher than the standard check varieties NA-6 (28.49g) and NA-7 (30.30g). No significant difference was recorded amongst the studied material with respect to standard check for fruit length and fruit diameter. Significantly higher percentage of pulp was recorded in CISH A-31 (95.60%) compared to check NA-6 (94.77%) and NA-7 (95.01%). Stone size with respect to length ranged from 1.02-1.15cm being highest in CISH-A-15 (1.15 cm) while stone width was recorded maximum in CISH A-1 and CISH A-2 (1.06cm). Stone weight varied from 1.46-1.57g being maximum recorded in CISH A-19 (1.57g) and minimum in CISH A-17 (1.46g). Considerable variation in fruit yield (26.14 to 52.50 kg/tree) from 6 years old trees were observed. Highest fruit yield was recorded in genotype CISH A-31 (52.50 kg/tree) followed by CISH A-3 (48.11 kg/tree) which is highly significant compared to standard check NA-6 (32.90 kg/tree) and NA-7 (35.76kg/tree). The chemical parameters, viz. vitamin-C content ranged from 309.66-473.13 mg/100g, TSS (9.3-10.6 0B), acidity (1.49-2.88%), total sugar content (5.66-6.89%), polyphenol content (0.633-1.427 mg/100g) and FRAP activity (102.01-235.76 mg/100g FeSO4) among different accessions evaluated. Conclusively, based on yield, associated physico-chemical traits and antioxidant value, genotype CISH A-31 found most promising and can be recommended for future commercialization.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bajpai P N and Shukla H S. 1985. Aonla in Fruits of India- Tropical and Subtropical, pp 591–600. Naya Prokash, Calcutta, India.

Gomez K A and Gomez A A. 1984. Statistical Procedure for Agricultural Research, 2nd edn. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York.

Hazarika B N, Deka B C, Choudhury S and Sarma B. 2009. Studies on variability in physico-chemical characters of different aonla accessions from Jorhat region of Assam. Indian Journal of Horticulture 66(2): 190–2.

Jaiswal R, Singh G and Singh A K. 2007. Studies on physico- chemical characteristics of aonla (Emblica officinalis G.) fruits. Progressive Agriculture 7(1/2) : 90–2.

Kumar Sanjeev and Singh I S. 2013. Physico-chemical studies of various cultivars of aonla fruits. Progressive Horticulture 45(1): 80–2.

Mishra, Dushyant, Pandey D, Mishra, Rajneesh and Pathak R K. 2007. Performance of improved aonla cultivars during top- working on senile trees. Indian Journal of Horticulture 64(4): 396–8.

Pandey D, Pandey G and Tripathi M. 2014. Variability in aonla (Emblica officinalis Gaertn.) accessions collected from Madhya Pradesh. Progressive Horticulture 46(2): 279–83.

Pandey D, Shukla S K and Kumar A. 2008. Variability in aonla (Emblica officinalis Gaertn.) accessions collected from Panna forest area of Madhya Pradesh. Indian Journal of Agro forestry 10(1): 73–7.

Pathak R K and Pathak S. 2001. Fruit production in problematic soils. Indian Journal of Hortuculture 58(1&2): 16–22.

Pathak R K. 2003. Status report on Genetic Resources of Indian gooseberry-aonla (Emblica officinalis Gaertn.) in South and Southeast Asia. IPGRI office for South Asia, National Agriculture Science Centre (NASC), Pusa Campus, New Delhi.

Ranganna S. 1984. Handbook of Analysis and Quality Control for Fruits and Vegetable Products. TataMcGraw-Hill Publishing Ltd, New Delhi.

Radha T and Mathew L. 2007. Fruit Crops: Horticulture Science, pp 287–8. New India Publishing Agency, New Delhi.

Shukla A K, Dhandar D G and Shukla A K. 2010. Evaluation of aonla germplasm for growth, yield and quality attributes in hot arid ecosystem. Indian Journal of Horticulture 67: 43–6.

Singh E, Sharma S, Pareek A, Dwivedi J, Yadava S and Sharma S. 2011. Phytochemistry, traditional uses and cancer chemopreventive activity of amla (Phyllanthus emblica): The Sustainer. Journal of Applied Pharmaceutical Science 2(1):

–83.

Singh Om and Singh, Richa. 2014. Development and evaluation of aonla based blended nectar drink from different fruits using stevia for low calorie. Plant Archives 14(1): 115–9.