“Evaluation of varieties/local cultivars (races) of Garlic (Allium sativum L.) for
Malwa region.”
THESIS
Submitted to the
Rajmata Vijyaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Gwalior
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
In
HORTICULTURE
VEGETABLE SCIENCE
by
Harshita Prajapati
Department of Horticulture Rajmata Vijyaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya
College of Agriculture Indore (M.P.)
2015
CERTIFICATE-I
This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Evaluation of varieties/local cultivars
(races) of Garlic (Allium sativum L.) for Malwa region” submitted in partial fulfilment of the
requirement for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in HORTICULTURE of Rajmata
Vijyaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Gwalior is a record of the bonafide research work
carried out by Ms. HARSHITA PRAJAPATI under my guidance and supervision. The subject
of the thesis has been approved by the Student's Advisory Committee and the Director of
Instructions.
No part of the thesis has been submitted for any other degree or diploma (Certificate
awarded etc.) or has been published/published part has been fully acknowledged. All the
assistance and help received during the course of the investigation has been acknowledged by
the scholar.
Place:
Date:
(Dr. K.P.Asati)
Chairman of the Advisory Committee
MEMBER OF STUDENT'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Chairman (Dr. K.P.Asati
…………….
Co-Chairman (Dr R.K.Jaiswal)
…………….
Member (Dr. S.K.Sharma) ……………..
CERTIFICATE-II
This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Evaluation of varieties/local cultivars
(races) of Garlic (Allium sativum L.) for Malwa region” submitted by Ms. HARSHITA
PRAJAPATI to Rajmata Vijyaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Gwalior in partial fulfilment
of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in HORTICULTURE in the
Department of Horticulture, College of Agriculture, Indore (M.P.) has been after evaluation,
approved by the External Examiner and the Student's Advisory Committee after an oral
examination of the same.
Place:
Date: (Dr. K.P. Asati)
Chairman of the Advisory Committee
MEMBER OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Chairman (Dr. K.P.Asati) ………………………………
Co-Chairman (Dr. R.K. Jaiswal) .......…………………………
Member (Dr. S.K. Sharma) ……………………………..
Head of Department ……………………………..
Dean of the college ………………………………
Director Instruction ………………………………..
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all I thank the ‘Almighty God’ who has blessed me with the
opportunity and strength to successfully complete this work.
It is a moment of great deep sense of indebtedness to my honorable
major advisor Dr. K.P.Asati, Associate Professor, Department of
Horticulture College of Agriculture, Indore, for his valuable guidance and
constructive criticism, close supervision and constant moral support
throughout the period of my the thesis preparation which made the goal easy
and to reach this stage.
I owe sincere regards and indebtedness to Dr. N.K. Gupta Professor,
Head of Department of Horticulture, the members of the advisory committee
Dr. R.K.Jaiswal Assaciate Professor Department of Horticulture
Dr.S.K.Sharma Professor Department of Soil Science R.V.S.K.V.V, College of
Agriculture, Indore, for their help and constant guidance during the course of
investigation.
My sincere thanks to Dr.A.M. Rajput, Dean, College of Agriculture,
Indore for his exuberant interest for submission of this piece of research
work.
I am also thankful to Dr.R.L.Rajput Director of Instruction, RVSKVV,
Gwalior and Dr. Anil Kumar Singh Hon’ble Vice Chancellor, RVSKVV,Gwalior,
for the help rendered during the period of research work.
It is my pleasant duty to extend my heartfelt gratitude to Smt.
Deeksha Tembhre, Assistant Professor Department of Horticulture, Shri
B.L.Prajapati (SMS, Agronomy, KVK, Aron, Guna ) & Dr. Dipanita Gargava,
Professor, English Literature, for their continuing inspiration and all possible
help during the tenure of investigation.
I must place on record to mention my gratefulness to my friends namely
Kajal Raj, Jay sankar Dhurvey,Anusheel Maheshwari and Lenin Khwoirappam
whose help is thankfully acknowledge.
Last, but not least, I wish to express my deepest sense of veneration to
my father Shri Indramani Prasad Prajapati , mother Smt. Shivvati Prajapati ,
my aunty Shakuntla Prajapati and my whole family.
Place: Indore
Date:
(Harshita Prajapati)
CONTENTS
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE NO.
I Introduction 1-3
II Review of literature 4-13
III Materials and methods 14-26
IV Results 27-45
V Discussion 46-50
VI Summary, Conclusion and Suggestions for
furthure work
51-53
Bibliography
Appendices
Vita
LIST OF TABLE
Table Number
Title Page Number
3.1 Meteorological data observed during period of investigation from October, 2014 to March, 2015
15
3.2 Physio-chemical properties of the experimental field
16
3.3 Cropping history of experimental field 17
3.4 Details of Varieties 17
3.5 Experimental details 18
3.6 ANOVA for Randomized Block Design 26
4.1 Plant height (cm) of different varieties of garlic. 28
4.2 Number of leaves per plant of different varietiesof garlic.
29
4.3 Dry weight per plant (g) of different varieties of garlic
30
4.4 Leaf area per plant (cm2) of different varieties of
garlic.
31
4.5 Neck thickness of the bulb (cm) of different varieties of garlic.
32
4.6 Leaf area Index of different varieties of garlic
34
4.7 Net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day) of different varieties of garlic.
35
4.8 Crop growth rate (g/day) of different varieties of
garlic.
36
4.9 Fresh weight of bulb (g) of different varieties of
garlic.
37
4.10 Diameter and length of bulb (cm) of different varieties of garlic
38
4.11 Number of cloves/bulb and length of clove (cm) of different varieties of garlic.
39
4.12 Neck and bulb thickness ratio (fresh and dry basis) of different varieties of garlic
40
4.13 Root length (cm) and Maturity of different varieties of garlic
41
4.14 Bulb yield/plot (kg) and (q/hec.) of different varieties garlic
43
4.15 Quality parameters of different varietiesof garlic 44
4.16 Economics of dif ferent variet ies of garl ic. 45
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Number
Title Page after
1. Meteorological data observed during period of investigation from October, 2014 to March, 2015.
15
2. Plan of the layout of experimental plot. 17
3. Plant height (cm) of different varieties of garlic 28
4. Number of leaves per plant of different varietiesof garlic.
29
5. Dry weight per plant (g) of different varieties of garlic
30
6. Leaf area per plant (cm2) of different varieties of
garlic.
31
7. Neck thickness of the bulb (cm) of different varieties of garlic.
32
8. Leaf area Index of different varieties of garlic
34
9. Net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day) of different varieties of garlic.
35
10. Crop growth rate (g/day) of different varieties of
garlic.
36
11. Fresh weight of bulb (g) of different varieties of
garlic.
37
12. Diameter and length of bulb (cm) of different varieties of garlic
38
13. Number of cloves/bulb and length of clove (cm) of different varieties of garlic.
39
14. Neck and bulb thickness ratio (fresh and dry basis) of different varieties of garlic
40
15. Root length (cm) and Maturity of different varieties of garlic
41
16. Bulb yield/plot (kg) and (q/hec.) of different varieties garlic
43
17 Quality parameters of different varietiesof garlic 44
LIST OF PLATE
S.No. Tital Plate No.
1. Varieties of Garlic 1
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Words
Abbreviations
Benefit:Cost Ratio B:C Ratio
Centimetre Cm Co-workers et al. Critical difference C.D. Degree of Celsius oC Degree of Freedom d.f. Days after Sowing DAS Figure Fig. Fisher’s value “F” value Gram(s) G Hectare Ha Kilogram(s) Kg Mean sum of square M.S.S. Maximum Minimum
Max. Min.
Muriate of Potash MOP Nitrogen N Non-significant N.S. Number No. Per / Per cent % Phosphorus P2O5 Potash K Potential of hydrogen ions pH Quintal Q Rupees Rs Serial No. S.No. Significant at 5% level * Single Super phosphate SSP Source of variation S.V. Sum of square S.S. Square sq. Standard error of means S.Em+ Standard error of difference Temperature
S.Ed Temp.
Variety V
Chapter-1
INTRODUCTION
Chapter-2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
LITERATURE
Chapter-3
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Chapter-4
RESULT
Chapter-5
DISCUSSION
Chapter-6
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND
SUGGESTIONS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDICES
VITA
VITA
The author of this thesis, Harshita Prajapati D/o Shri Indramani
Prasad Prajapati was born on 14th February 1991 at Rewa district of
Madhya Pradesh. She passed her Higher Secondary Examination in the
year 2008 from Saraswati High School Unchehra, District Satna (M.P.)
with 78.00 per cent marks.
In 2009 she joined the R.V.S.K.V.V, B.M. College of Agriculture,
Khandwa and successfully completed her B.Sc. (Ag.) degree in the year
2013 with 7.59 OGPA out of 10.00-point scale. After graduation she
joined M.Sc. (Horti.) to specialize in Vegetable Science at College of
Agriculture, Indore. She completed her course work with an OGPA 7.71
out of 10.00-point scale. For the partial fulfillment of Master’s Degree
she was allotted need based research problem, “Evaluation of varieties/
local cultivars (races) of garlic (Allium sativum L.) for Malwa Region” which
was duly completed by her and presented in this thesis form.
During her studies she actively participated in several social and
cultural activities at the school and college level.
(HARSHITA PRAJAPATI)
******
1
Chapter-I
INTRODUCTION
Garlic (Allium sativum L.) is the second important bulb crop after onion.
It is one of the most important vegetables cum spice crop. It belongs to
family Amaryllidaceae. It might suppose to have originated from Central
Asia and Mediterranean Regions. It is used for flavoring seasonal vegetables
and non-vegetarian dishes. Garlic in general is grown as an annual crop.
Garlic is hardy plant requires cool and moist period during growth and
relatively dry period during maturity of bulbs. Bulbing takes place during
longer days and at high temperature, exposure to low temperature
subsequent to bulb formation, favors the process. The critical day length for
bulbing is 12 hrs. The exposure of dormant cloves or young plants to
temperature is around at 200C or lower depending upon varieties for 1-2
months hasten subsequent bulbing.
The edible part, which is composed of several bulb lets or segment, is
called “Clove”. Garlic has strong flavor and nutritive value and is used for
flavouring the seasonal vegetables. The therapeutic value of garlic has
attracted the attention of one and all since Vedic era and every Indian home
can prescribe garlic based effective treatment for many common ailments,
because of its medicinal properties. The uninjured bulb contains colorless,
odorless water soluble amino called Allin. On crushing the garlic bulb, the
enzyme allinase breaks down Allin to produce Allicin the antibacterial
substance in garlic of which the principle ingredient is the odoriferous diallyl-
diasulphide reported to be major flavoring component in garlic.
Garlic is grown globally, but China is the largest producer of
garlic accounting for 75% of world output. India ranks second in area and
production in the world after China. On an average ,in India, garlic is
cultivated on 2.01 lakh hectare producing 10.58 lakh million tonnes with an
average productivity of 5.27 tonnes/ha (Annonymous, 2012). In Madhya
Pradesh, it is grown on about 60 thousand hectare with total production of 270
2
thousand tonnes having productivity of 4.50 tonnes/ha. Madhya Pradesh
ranks first in India according to growing area.
Garlic has higher nutritive values than other bulb crops. It is rich in
protein, phosphorous, potash, calcium, magnesium and carbohydrates. The
fresh peeled garlic contain approximately 63% water, 28% carbohydrate, 7%
protein, 0.2% fat, 0.8% fibre and a large number of sulphur compounds which
contribute to the pungent and teste of garlic (Rabinowitch and Currah, 2002).
It also contains approximately 1% mineral matter, 1% total ash, 0.03%
calcium, 0.31% phosphorous, 0.0001% iron, 0.4% mg/100g nicotinic acid and
13 mg/100g vitamin ‘C’. Oils are often flavoured with garlic cloves. A
colorless, odorless, water soluble amino acid present known as allin is
present in uninjured garlic. Diallyl disulphide is said to possess true
garlic odour.
Garlic is flavor component in a wide variety of dishes, but mainly
in or on meats, vegetables, stews, soup, salads, tomato dishes,
spaghetti and courses (Mcgee, 2004). Garlic has been used both as
food and for medicine in many cultures for thousands of years. Garlic is
claimed to prevent heart diseases, high cholesterol, high blood
pressure, cancer, common cold and plaque. It has been successfully
used in AIDS patent to tread cryptosporidium in China (Sovovo, 2004).
Garlic has some antifungal, antimicrobial, insecticidal and other
medicinal properties also. It has hypoglycaemic (capable of lowering
blood sugar) properties. Garlic therapy has also been suggested in
flatulence, constipation, faulty digestion, inadequate food intake,
chronic coughs, leprosy and many other diseases (Adegoke et al.,
1998). Supplementation with garlic extract inhibited vascular
calcification in human patients with high blood cholesterol (Durak et al.,
2004).
Modern technique of cultivation, cultural methods as well as the
chemical and nutrient revolution has altered the edaphic environment of the
cultivated crops. A breakthrough in the productivity of crop can hardly be
achieved unless a multi-prompt effort is made to evolve physiologically more
efficient cultivars responsive to altered conditions of the agro eco-systems.
3
The growth development of plants is the result of the dynamic and complex
processes at cellular and molecular levels. The rate of growth and pattern of
development of a plant depends upon both its genetic constitution and on
environmental factors.
The modern agriculture is based on the use of improved and
adequate input management practices, which play a major role for
producing the good quality and higher yield in per unit area. In India
during the past three decades, intensive agriculture involving high
yielding varieties available in local market but their performance has not
been tested under Malwa agro-climatic conditions so far there is a great
confusion regarding the selection of suitable variety due to lack of knowledge
on this aspect. The garlic growers of this region are suffering to a great extent
not only due to poor production but also poor keeping quality of bulbs.
Keeping view of the above facts in mind, the present study in
garlic entitled “Evaluation of varieties/local cultivars (races) of Garlic (Allium
sativum L.) for Malwa region” has been carried out with the following
objectives:
Objectives:
To identify the suitable varieties/local cultivars (races) of garlic for Malwa
region.
To determine the morphological, growth, development and yield attributing
characters in different varieties of garlic.
To determine the quality parameters in different varieties/local cultivars of
garlic
To work out the economics of suitable variety.
4
Chapter-II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The attempt has been made to the “Evaluation of varieties/local
cultivars (races) of Garlic (Allium sativum L.) for Malwa region.” It is now
beyond doubt that exploitation of new improved varieties with high yield
potential has increased the yield of garlic. Production and profitability of garlic
crop in India and abroad but very meager information is available on these
aspects in relation to black clay soils particularly under Malwa plateau. Efforts
are, therefore, made to present in this chapter, a brief summary of results of
the studies carried out at various places, more or less related to the present
investigation. Since, the literature on the varietal performance and economics
is very meager. Attempts have been made to compile the research work done
on these aspects in present chapter under different heads.
2.1 Growth parameter
2.2 Physiological parameter
2.3 Yield parameter
2.4 Quality parameter
2.5 Economics
2.1 Growth parameter:
Tiwari et al. (2002) studied the performance of 20 garlic genotypes in a
field experiment conducted in Uttaranchal, India during 1997-2000. The
genotypes showed a high range of variability for all the characters examined.
Plant height and the number of leaves plant-1 were highest in DG-1 (74.33 cm)
and PGS-4 (7.34), respectively. G-282 and G-323 recorded the highest bulb
weight. G-41 and G-50 recorded the earliest maturity (158 days) G-323
recorded the highest. Bulb yield was highest in G-323 (114 q/ha).
Singh and Chand (2003 a) reported that the highest number of leaves
per plant was recorded for GHC-1 and Agrifound Parvati. HPG-12, HPG-13
5
and HPG-3 had the longest leaves. The highest number of cloves per bulb
was observed in K. local, HPG-1 and G-313. The average clove weight was
highest in Agrifound Parvati and GHC-1. Agrifound Parvati, GHC-1, G-41,
HPG-12, HPG-3 and BJ-1 had the greatest clove length.
Naruka and Dhaka (2004) revealed that the bulb yield have the positive
correlation with the chlorophyll content in leaves, leaf fresh weight, harvest
index, fresh weight of bulb, plant height, clove number per bulb, weight of 20
cloves, neck thickness, maturity period, bulb diameter and number of leaves
per plant in garlic genotypes.
Wani (2004) computed phenotypic correlation coefficient among 12
characters of garlic cvs. and reported that bulb yield was positively and
significantly associated with number of cloves per bulb.
Girinaik et al. (2005) studied fourteen garlic genotypes, i.e. Ankola
Collection, Arabhavi Local, China Type-1, Godawari, Gokak Collection, Indore
Local, Jabalpur Garlic, Jamnagar-1, Jamnagar-2, Kundgol Garlic-1, Kundgol
Garlic-2, Marihal Collection, North Canara and Sweta,. Data were recorded
for plant height, number of leaves, leaf size, bulb weight, cloves per bulb and
yield. Kundgol Garlic-2 recorded the highest marketable yields during the
kharif and rabi seasons (11.41 and 12.68 t ha-1, respectively), followed by
Ankola Collection (11.04 and 12.67 t ha-1, respectively). Indore Local and
Arabhavi Local also gave high yields during kharif (10.74 and 10.25 t ha-1,
respectively), while North Canara and Indore Local gave high yields during
rabi (12.05 and 11.62 t ha-1, respectively).
Khar et al. (2005) recorded data for plant height, leaves per plant,
polar diameter, equatorial diameter, neck thickness, number of cloves per
bulb, weight of five bulbs, weight of fifty cloves, marketable yield and total
yield in 47 elite line of garlic and found a wide range of variability with the
genotypes.
Shashidhar et al. (2005) reported that the cultivar BLG-1 recorded the
highest plant height (51.68 cm) and stem girth (7.12 cm), whereas, cv. GDG-1
recorded the lowest plant height (36.05 cm) and stem girth (3.62 cm). Cultivar
G-50 recorded highest number of leaves (9.35) and leaf area (40.48 dm2). Bulb
weight (14.89 g) and bulb size (2.91 cm2) were highest in cv. G-41. Cultivars
6
VNR-1, G-50 and MP Laddu recorded highest number of cloves (16.3), clove
weight (8.25 g) and clove size (6.07 cm2), respectively. Cultivar BLG-1
recorded the highest yield (63.72 q ha-1), followed by G-41 (46.92 q ha-1) and
HR-1 (42.29 q ha-1), whereas HR-2 produced the lowest yield (19.99 q ha-1).
Futane et al. (2006) reported that the G-41 recorded the highest values
for number of leaves per plant, bulb fresh weight, bulb diameter and bulb yield.
G-282 recorded the highest values for plant height, 100-clove weight and
clove thickness. G-50 recorded the highest values for number of cloves bulb-1
and clove length, whereas Godawari took the minimum period to maturity.
Gowda et al. (2007) reported that among the 13 genotypes studied the
genotypes G-282 and Call No. 323 produced maximum plant height, stem
girth and number of leaves. The local variety Rajalle-gaddi matured early (94
days) compared to all other genotypes. The bulb weight, volume of bulb and
yield of bulb hectare-1 were maximum in genotypes G-282 and Call No. 323
followed by G-50.
Ijoyah et al. (2008) conducted a field experiment to evaluate the yield
performance of four onion varieties, ‘Onion Orient’, ‘Lucy 15205’, ‘CAL 606’,
and ‘Red Creole-2’ against the commonly grown variety ‘Red Creole-1’ under
field conditions. The results obtained showed that variety ‘CAL 606’ recorded
the highest number of leaves, bulb size, biological bulb weight, economic bulb
weight as compared to those obtained from ‘Red Creole-1’. The yield of ‘CAL
606’ was the greatest, followed by ‘Red Creole-2’, ‘Lucy 15205’, ‘Onion Orient’
and ‘Red Creole-1’ respectively.
Abedi et al. (2013) studied plant height, leaf number, bulb weight, bulb
diameter, clove number bulb-1, number of bulb layers, bulb color, bulb
moisture, yield, soft neck or hard neck and found a significant difference on
bulb weight, bulb diameter, number of cloves bulb-1, pyruvic acid content and
bulb colour.
Panse et al. (2013) reported significant variation for all the traits except
leaf width (4th leaf) indicating greater variability in the germplasm. Path
coefficient analysis revealed that highest consideration for varietal
improvement should be given to plant height, polar diameter of bulb, average
7
weight of 10 cloves, number of cloves bulb-1 and pseudostem diameter and
these traits are also positively and significantly correlated with bulb yield plant-
1 in garlic.
Singh et al. (2013) reported that total bulb yield showed positive and
significant genotypic and phenotypic associations with plant height, number of
leaves per plant, pseudo-stem length, bulb weight and number of cloves per
bulb. Bulb weight showed high positive and direct effect and significant
positive correlation with total bulb yield.
Das et al. (2015) studied eight varieties namely Agrifound Dark Red,
Agrifound Light Red, N-53, Baswant -780, Arka Kalyan, Pusa Red, Nasik Red
and Bombay Red. After evaluation, it was found that maximum yield of 152.50
q ha-1 was obtained from Baswant-780 also reported highest plant height,
neck diameter, weight of fresh bulb, diameter of bulb.
2.2 Physiological parameter:
Shrivastava et al. (1999) reported that the leaf area index was
positively correlated with leaf area (LAR), crop growth rate (CGR), relative
growth rate (RGR), and bulb productivity. LAR was positively correlated with
specific leaf area (SLA) and RGR, while CGR expressed strong positive
association with RGR and bulb productivity. The multiple regression equation
showed that all components together accounted for 74.52% of the variability
in bulb productivity. The best combination of parameters (LAI, SLA, CGR, net
assimilation rate and RGR) accounted for 72.02%.
Patel et al. (2000) found that the highest crop growth rate (CGR, 8.41 g
day-1), relative growth rate (RGR, 7.88 g day-1), net assimilation rate (NAR,
7.78 g cm2-1 day-1) and tuber yield (235.14 q ha-1) were also observed in 1.75
IW: CPE. Kufri Badshah recorded the highest LAI (0.98, 1.66 and 1.06 at 30,
60 and 90 DAP, respectively), CGR (7.89 g day-1) and tuber yield (219.72 q ha-
1).
2.3 Yield parameter:
Bhatt et al. (1998) studied the physicochemical characteristics of 5
garlic genotypes (G-41, G-1, DARL-52, G-283 and Pithoragarh Local).
8
Observations were recorded for days to maturity, bulb yield, number of bulbs
kg-1 and number of cloves bulb-1. G-41 reached maturity earliest (203 days)
followed by G-1 (207.6 days). Highest vegetative growth (73.3 cm) and
number of cloves bulb-1 (23.16), and lowest number of bulbs kg-1 (26.6) were
recorded from Pithoragarh Local. The highest bulb yield (149.91 q ha-1) was
recorded from DARL-52.
Singh and Singh (1999) recorded the highest bulb yield, weight of 50
cloves, diameter of bulb and weight of fresh bulb. Variety PUG-1 recorded
highest number of cloves bulb-1 while lowest number of cloves bulb-1 was
noted in variety PUG-4.
Noor and Khalid (2000) together working with the eleven varieties of
garlic reported that aglio bianco showed the highest yield of bulb(198.80q/ha),
bulb diameter(3.67cm), bulb weight (51.26g) and number of leaves (8.25 per
plant), while variety ISRO resulted in significantly tallest plant(85.25cm) over
other varieties.
Saraf et al. (2000) recorded that the relative performance of garlic
(Allium sativum L.) varieties. The results revealed that ARU-52 produced the
highest bulb yields. Cultivation G-50, G-282, G-1, Sel-2 and LEC-1 performed
next best (in descending order). Bulb diameter, weight of bulb and plant
height showed positive relationships with bulb yield, while number of
cloves/bulb exhibited a negative association.
Mohanty and Prusti (2001) studied behaviour of 12 varieties of onion.
Arka Kalyan recorded the highest yield (21.06 t ha"1) which was at par with
Arka Niketan (19.64 t ha"1) and Pusa Madhavi (18.96 t ha"'), while Agrifound
Dark Red and N 53 displayed moderately high yield of 18.06 and 17.85 t ha"1
respectively.
Naruka and Dhaka (2001) found that the garlic variety Jawahar local
showed significantly highest plant (58.27cm), fresh weight of bulb (38.35g),
bulb diameter (4.07cm), number of cloves (32.00g) and bulb yield
(130.00q/ha) as compared to other varieties tested under jobner condition.
Cheema et al. (2003) reported that the nine exotic onion cultivars were
evaluated along with approved variety, Phulkara. Maximum number of leaves
(14.17) was observed in Ac-383-I with minimum bolting percentage. Maximum
9
bulb weight (140.50 g) and bulb diameter (8.16 cm) were found in 606 Cal.
Red Nasic depicted minimum neck diameter (1.27 cm). Cultivars Golden
globe, 606 Cal, Zeshan and Granex-429 yielded significantly higher than
Phulkara (16921 kg ha–1).
Metwally and El-Denary (2003) reported that the Balady had the
highest plant height in both seasons, with the largest leaves plant-1. VFG
180(3-1) produced the highest total yield in the first and second seasons.
Average bulb weight was highest in VFG 180(3-1) and G98-6-1-1 in the first
season and in VFG 180(3-1) in the second season. Average bulb diameter
was highest in VFTA 325 and G98-6-1-1 in the first and second seasons,
respectively.
Singh and Chand (2003 b) listed the performance of thirty varieties
/clones of garlic (Allium sativum L.). Results revealed that Agrifound parvati
significantly maximum bulb yield followed by BJ-1 and GHC-1.
Islam et al. (2004) found that plant height varied in the range 42.50-
67.33 cm. The length and width of individual bulbs varied in the range 2.40-
3.20 and 2.10-2.71 cm, respectively. The number of cloves bulb-1, pungency
and bulb weight also varied significantly among the genotypes.
Agarwal and Tiwari (2004) conducted an study to determine the garlic
variability in 21 genotypes of garlic (Allium sativum L.) and found significant
variability among the genotypes used for yield and yield attributing traits. High
genetic and phenotypic variance along with high degree of genotypic
coefficient variation were observed for clove weight, bulb yield, number of
clove per bulb, whereas, moderate value were obtained for bulb weight and
leaf area index.High genetic advance was exhibited by clove weight, bulb
yield and number of cloves bulb-1.
Mirzaei et al (2007) studied in the effect of different farming systems
and garlic (Allium sativum L.) clones on yield quality and quantity of garlic.
The studied factors in this experiment consisted of leaf number, LAI, stem
height and diameter, bulb yield weight of bulbs, number of cloves, weight of
cloves and level of allicin. All of the top factors were significantly (p≤0.01)
affected by garlic clones. Maximum and minimum yield were obtained from
Hamedani, Atoo (9.2 ton / ha) and Virani (7.1 t/ ha) clones, respectively.
10
Supe et al. (2008) conducted an experiment to evaluate 5 new garlic
selections (P.B. Sel.2, P.B. Sel.8, P.B. Sel.9, Rahuri local and Malaypur
local). The RB. Sel.2 recorded significantly superior mean yield ha-1 (169.54 q
ha-1). The selection P.B. Sel.2 was also found superior in average weight of
bulb (26.15 g), average weight of 10 cloves (10.12 g) and dark violet colour.
Choudhuri and Chatterjee (2009) reported that the maximum bulb
weight (29.67 g) and bulb diameter (41.35 mm) were exhibited by G-323
followed by Jalpaiguri Local (26.05 g and 38.38 mm) and G-282(23.65 g and
36.49 mm) and was minimum in Malaypur Local (6.36 g and 9.42 mm). The
maximum number of cloves bulb-1 (28.40) was recorded in the genotype G-
323 followed by Jalpaiguri Local (21.57) and G-282 (18.07). The minimum
value (5.23) for this character was observed in Malaypur Local. Highest yield
was recorded in G-323(8.98 t ha-1) followed by Jalpaiguri Local (5.29 t ha-1),
Tufanganj Local (5.06t ha-1) & 6-282 (4.73 t ha-1). Malaypur Local recorded
the lowest yield (1.38 t ha-1).
Varga and Vasic (2009) conducted an experiment to study thirty spring
garlic ecotypes. The largest variability of clove weight (64.42%) was caused
by the year, while ecotype and year caused a large variability in clove number
(31.14 and 40.61%, respectively).
Volk (2009) studied garlic (Allium sativum L.) cultivars grown under
diverse conditions have highly elastic environmental responses, particularly
relating to skin color and yield. Result showed that scape presence varied
with cultivar Bulb wrapper color and intensity were highly dependent on
location and cultivar.
Gouda (2012) during 2010/2011 and 2011/2012 seasons studie six
garlic entries (five cvs namely Sids–40, Egaseed-1, Chinease, Balady, Balady
El-Wady and the clone Egaseed-2) for their growth, bulb characteristics and
total yield. Major variations were observed among all garlic entries for all the
studied parameters. Sids-40 cultivar gave the maximum bulb weight clove
weight and total fresh yield in relative to the other garlic cvs. On the contrary,
Balady El-Wady and Balady garlic cvs occupied the last position in this
respect.
11
Pardeshi and Waskar (2012) conducted an experiment to investigate
the performance of improved onion (Allium cepa L.) varieties under
Marathwada region. The results revealed that variety Arka Niketan (Check)
was early in maturity, while variety PKV Selection White was best for low twin
bulb per cent. The neck thickness was lowest in variety Sel-383. Yield of bulb
was found to be highest in variety JNDWD-207.
Gashua (2013) conducted an experiment to determine the optimum
plant density for different local cultivars (Ex-Borno, Kano Red, Local Red and
White). The results indicated that the cultivars respond well with the 30
plants/m2 while the Ex-Borno cultivar proved to be prominent among the
cultivars studied with an average of 6.406t/ha.
Brown and Conway (2013) conducted an experimental trial including
23 varieties. Prince, Highlander, and Copra had the best performance overall,
primarily due to excellent establishment, high marketable yield, and low
storage losses.
Mishra et al. (2013) reported that the germplasm of garlic was
obtained significantly as to the different morphological attributes, yield and
other desirable traits. The height of plants varied from 85 to 95 cm in different
genotypes whereas; there was a significant difference in number of leaves,
neck thickness plant-1, bulb diameter (cm), no. of cloves bulb-1 and bulb
diameter (cm).
Baliyan (2014) concluded that all the six varieties namely; Arad, Galil,
Hanna, Shahar, Texas Grano 502 P.R.R. and Red Creole contributed
differently to the total yield, marketable yield and percentage marketable yield.
Onion variety Hanna followed by Shahar produced the highest marketable
yield whereas Galil variety gave the lowest marketable yield.
Hazem and Obiadalla (2014) conducted an experiment with thirteen
Egyptian accession of garlic (Allium sativum L.) to assess yield, earliness and
some quality characteristics. There were significant differences among
genotypes for all studied characters. Beni Sweif, El-Minia and Sids 40
landraces were the earliest in maturity, while Assiut accession was the latest.
Aswan and El-Faiyum accessions were the largest for bulb diameter while, El-
Minia landrace was the smallest. Sids 40 accession exceeded all other
12
genotypes in plant fresh weight, weight of cloves/bulb and total yield.
However, Sids 40 accession had the least number of cloves/bulb.
Islam et al. (2015) evaluated the selected garlic varieties/lines viz.,
BARI Roshun-1, BARI Roshun-2, GC0018, GC0024, GC0027, GC0034 and
one local cultivar under zero tillage mulched condition to find out the suitable
varieties/lines. There were significant differences among genotypes for all
studied characters except number of leaves per plant. The advanced lines
GC0018, GC0027 and GC0034 were graded as the highest bulb yield and it
was more than 10 t/ha.
2.4 Quality parameter
Singh and Tiwari (1995) conducted an experiment to determine bulb
yield and quality characteristics (protein and sulphure content). Genotype G-
282 performed best for bulb yield (258.8 q/ha) and sulphure content (0.896%)
Highest protein content (9.0%) was observed in Pantnagar Selection-6.
2.5 Economics
Hamad et al. (2004) conducted an experiment to evaluate the main
factors affecting garlic productivity, to analyze the profitability of two varieties
of garlic (local and Chinese) and to draw some policy implications for
improving garlic productivity in the Northern State. The study used cross
sectional data in the agricultural season 2003/04. The survey results indicated
that farmers prefered growing the Chinese variety due to its high return but
still the number of farmers growing it was less compared to the local variety
(ratio 7:13) and the main reasons were the high price of Chinese variety
seeds and lack of knowledge about its cultural practices. The analysis of cost
of production showed that seeds cost amounted to 28.3% of the total cost of
production followed by land rent (17%), irrigation (16.3%), harvesting (11.7%),
weeding, (10.7%), fertilizer (5%), Zakat (4.7%), land preparation (3.3%) and
planting (3%).The results of the multiple regression analysis revealed that
fertilizers, seed rate and weeding were the most important factors affecting
garlic productivity in the study area. The budget analysis showed that the two
varieties of garlic grown were profitable and the Chinese variety was more
profitable than the local variety. For improving productivity, the study
recommended the supply of fertilizers, seeds and herbicides at the
13
appropriate time and reasonable prices in addition to the adoption of improved
cultural practices through extension services.
14
Chapter-III
MATERIAL AND METHODS
This chapter comprises the details about the materials used and
the methods adopted during the course of present investigation entitled
“Evaluation of varieties/local cultivars (races) of Garlic (Allium sativum L.) for
Malwa region” was carried out during the year 2014-15.
3.1 Experimental site
The present experiment was laid out in the field of the Research Farm
of Department of Horticulture, Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa
Vidyalaya, College of Agriculture, Indore, during 2014-15. The topography of
the experimental site was uniform with an adequate surface drainage.
3.2 Location and climate
Indore is situated in Malwa plateau region in the Western part of the
state of Madhya Pradesh at an altitude of 555.5 meters above mean sea level
(MSL). It is located at latitude 22.43o N and longitude of 75.66o E. It has
subtropical climate having a temperature ranges from 21o C to 45o C and 6o C
to 31o C in summer and winter seasons, respectively. The rainfall in the region
has been mostly inadequate and erratic in most of the recent past seasons.
Late commencement, early withdrawal of monsoon and occurrence of two to
three dry spells during the rainy season are the common features. The mean
annual average rainfall is 964 mm. The meteorological data during crop
growth period from the 15th October, 2014 to 1st April, 2015 are given in Table
3.1.
The meteorological parameter during the crop season such as
minimum and maximum temperature, rainfall, wind speed and relative
humidity were recorded in AICRP for Dryland Agriculture; College of
Agriculture, Indore (M. P.) and are presented in Table 3.1.
15
Table 3.1: Meteorological data observed during period of investigation
from October, 2014 to March, 2015
SMW Month and date RH (%) Temp (0C) Rainfall
(mm)
Wind speed
(km/hrs) Max. Min.
42 Oct. 15 – Oct. 21 78.86 31.79 18.79 7.0 1.90
43 Oct. 22 – Oct. 28 81.71 31.21 15.71 0.0 1.74
44 Oct. 29 – Nov. 04 80.0 31.2 14.8 0.0 1.3
45 Nov. 05 – 11 79.0 31.0 14.2 0.0 1.9
46 Nov.12 – 18 81.0 30.2 17.7 0.0 2.01
47 Nov.19 – 25 82.0 29.3 12.5 0.0 1.5
48 Nov.26 – Dec.02 80.0 29.8 11.7 2.2 1.3
49 Dec.03 – 09 78.0 27.7 9.5 0.0 2.1
50 Dec.10 – 16 82.0 25.7 8.5 5.8 3.1
51 Dec.17 – 23 76.0 21.5 5.3 0.0 2.5
52 Dec. 24 - 31 77.0 22.8 5.5 0.0 2.7
1 Jan. 01- 07 82.0 17.2 6.0 45.8 2.9
2 Jan. 08 – 14 77.0 23.6 6.7 0.0 1.7
3 Jan. 15 – 21 78.0 23.3 6.7 0.0 3.1
4 Jan. 22 – 28 80.0 22.5 8.6 14.8 4.0
5 Jan. 29 – Feb. 04 77.0 23.7 6.9 0.0 2.7
6 Feb. 05 – 11 75.5 21.9 8.6 0.0 4.5
7 Feb.12 – 18 70.85 29.0 9.9 0.0 2.5
8 Feb.19 – 25 72.2 30.7 10.28 0.0 1.6
9 Feb. 26 – March 4 76.0 27.6 12.0 2.0 4.7
10 March 05 – 11 76.4 27.9 10.2 0.0 3.2
11 March 12 – 18 78.0 29.0 14.2 0.9 4.5
12 March 19 – 25 65.2 34.1 17.2 0.0 2.5
Total - - - 78.5 -
Average 77.55 25.59 10.9 2.60
Source:AICRP for Dryland Agriculture; College of Agriculture,Indore (M. P.)
The data (Table 3.1 and Fig. 1) indicate that the total rainfall received
during crop growth period was 78.5 mm. There were no rains during SMW 43 –
47, 49, 51, 52, 02, 03, 05 to 08 10 and 12. The minimum and maximum
temperature during crop growth period varied 5.30C to 18.790C and from 17.20C
to 34.10C, with season’s average values of 10.90C and 25.590 C respectively.
16
The relative humidity and wind speed ranged between 65.2 to 82.0 % and 1.3 to
4.7 km hrs-1 with season’s average of 77.55% and 2.60 km hrs-1.
The soil of the experimental field has been grouped under medium black
clay soil (Vertisols) belonging to Kamliakhedi series, which is a member of fine,
smectitic, hyperthermic family of Vertic, Ustochrepts. In order to determine the
textural class and fertility status of the experimental area, the soil samples were
collected randomly from each plot with the help of soil auger before sowing from
the experimental field. Primary samples were mixed to prepare and composite
soil sample from each replication was drawn to study the physio-chemical
properties of the experimental field. The data pertaining to various physio-
chemical properties have been presented in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Physio-chemical properties of the experimental field
S. No.
Composition Content Category Method used
A. Mechanical composition
1 Sand (%) 10.6 - Bouyoucos Hydrometer method (Piper, 1967) 2 Silt (%) 35.9 -
3 Clay (%) 53.0 -
4 Textural class Clayey
B. Chemical composition
S. No.
Analysis Values Category Method adopted
1. Soil pH 7.7 Slightly alkaline
Glass electrode method (pH meter) (Jackson, 1967)
2. Electrical conductivity (ds/m)
0.35 Normal Conductivity meter at 25ºC (Jackson, 1967)
3. Organic carbon (%) 0.74 Medium Wakley and Black rapid titration method (Wakley & Black 1934)
4. Available Nitrogen (kg N /ha)
213.0 Low Alkaline permanganate method (Jackson 1967)
5. Available phosphorus (kg P2O5 /ha)
13.6 Medium Olsen’s method (Jackson, 1967)
6. Available potash (kg K2O /ha)
412 High Flame photometer (Jackson, 1967)
Source: - All India Co-ordinated Research Project on Salt Affected Soils and Use
of Saline Water in Agriculture, Indore.
17
The physio-chemical analysis of soil showed that the soil of experimental
site was predominantly clayey in texture. The organic carbon content (0.74%)
and ailable nitrogen (213.0 kg ha-1) were low. The available phosphorus (13.6 kg
ha-1) and potash (412 kg ha-1) were medium and high respectively. The soil pH
was (7.7) slightly alkaline. Electrical conductivity (0.35 dS m-1) of soil was found
normal (Table 3.2).
3.4 Cropping history of the experimental field
The knowledge about previous crops on experimental field is essential to
know its previous history. The experimental field was planted to different crops
during past 3 years. A brief history of crops sequence followed during the last
three years is shown in the Table 3.3.
Table 3.3: Cropping history of experimental field
Year Kharif Rabi Summer
2012- 2013 Fallow Carrot Fallow
2013-2014 Fallow Carrot Fallow
2014-2015 Fallow Present experiment -
3.5 Experimental material
The experimental materials for this study comprised 10 genotypes
are presented in Table 3.4.
Table 3.4: Details of Varieties
S. No. Varieties S. No. Varieties
1. G – 1 6. G – 323
2. G – 41 7. Amletha
3. G -189 8. Jamnagar
4. G – 282 9. Malkapuri
5. G – 283 10. Local-1
18
3.6 Experimental details
3.6.1 Design of experiment
The experiment was laid out in Randomized Block Design (RBD)
with three replications. Each replication consists of 10 genotypes. All the
genotypes were randomized separately in each replication. The plan of
layout is given in Fig. 3.2 and other experimental details are given as
below:-
Table 3.5: Experimental details
Crop : Garlic (Allium sativum L.)
Season : 2014-15 (Rabi)
Design : Randomized Block Design
Replication : Three
Treatment : Ten
Gross area of experimental field : 159.00 sq.m
Net area of experiment field : 97.20
Total number of plots : 30
Gross plot size : 1.80m X 1.50m
Row to row distance : 15 cm
Plant to plant distance : 7.5 cm
Number of rows in each plot : 10
Number of plants for observation
per plot
: 10
Plot to plot distance : 0.75 m
Distance between replication : 1.0 m
Date of sowing : 21 – 10 – 2014
Manure and fertilizers applied : FYM 20 tones, NPK 100:50:50 kg ha-1
19
Plan of layout
13.25m
1.0 m 1.5m
T5 T10
Re
plica
tio
n b
ord
er
T4 T9
Re
plica
tio
n b
ord
er
T3 T8
T4 T9 T3 T8 T1 T5
T3 T8 T2 T7 T2 T9
T2 T7 T1 T6 T10 T6
T1 T6 T10 T5 T7 T4
R-I R-II R-III
Fig. 2 Plan of the layout of experimental plot
S
W E
N
0.75m
m
0.75
m
12.
0 m
1.8
m
20
3.7 Agronomical Operations
3.7.1 Land preparation
The experimental area was ploughed and harrowed in order to bring the
soil in well-pulverized condition. FYM was applied @ 20 t ha-1. Plots were made
according to the layout plan after leveling.
3.7.2 Planting
Pre-planting seed treatment was done with thirum @ 3.0 gm/kg
seed to avoid fungal infection. Healthy and uniform sized garlic clove at
the rate of 5.75 q ha-1 was used. Shallow furrows were opened 15 cm
apart with the help of pickaxe manually and cloves were dibbled at a
distance of 7.5 cm within rows.A week after planting gap filling was done. All
the other recommended package of practices was followed to raise a healthy
crop.
3.7.3 Irrigation
The first irrigation was given immediately after planting to ensure
proper germination. Subsequent irrigation was given at 15 days interval up
to month of January and the interval was reduced to 10 days from the
month of February.
3.7.4 Intercultural operations
The experimental plots were kept weed free by two manual
weedings. The crop was sprayed with Trizophos (1.5 ml lit-1 water) twice to
keep the crop free from pest during the growth period.
3.7.5 Fertilizer Application
Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium were applied through urea, single
super phosphate and muriate of potash, respectively. A uniform dose of 100 kg N
ha-1, 50 kg P ha-1 and 50 kg K ha-1 was applied to all the plots. The full quantity of
recommended phosphorus and potassium fertilizer along with half dose of
21
nitrogen was applied before planting. Rest of the nitrogen was applied in two
splits at 45 and 60 days after planting.
3.8 Sampling
Sampling of plants was done at 30 days after planting and data were
taken up to harvest for growth analysis. The ten plants were randomly selected
from each genotypes and replication for the study.
Observation recorded
The data recorded on various parameters during the period of
experimentation. The data were recorded as per standard procedure.
3.9.1 Growth Parameters
3.9.1.1 Plant height (cm)
The plant height was measured from the ground level to the tip of the
longest leaf with the meter scale at 30, 60, 90 and 120 days after planting.
3.9.1.2 Number of leaves per plant
The numbers of leaves of the each tagged plant in all the genotypes were
counted at 30, 60, 90 and 120 days after planting.
3.9.1.3 Dry weight per plant (g)
At random three plants of garlic from each plot and replication were
uprooted, cleaned and dried in the oven at 600C after sun drying up to brittle and
moisture free and then were weighted at 30, 60, 90 and 120 days after planting.
3.9.1.4 Leaf area Index
The assimilatory surface area (A) was recorded by using electronic leaf
area meter (Li Cor 3000). LAI is the leaf area (A) or the assimilatory surface area
over a certain ground area (P) and is calculated by the formula given by (Watson,
1952) at 30, 60, 90 and 120 DAP.
LAI = A
P
22
where,
A= Leaf area
P= Ground area
3.9.1.5 Neck Thickness of the bulb (cm)
The neck thickness of the bulbs of all the observational plants were
measured in cm with the help of vernier calipers at 30 days interval commencing
from 30 days after planting to 120 days after planting.
3.9.1.6 NAR (Net assimilation rate)
It is the measurement of the rate of photosynthesis per unit time on the
basis of dry matter and is expressed as g/cm2/day. It was worked out as per the
following formula (Watson, 1952).
W2 - W1 log A2 – log A1 NAR = X A2 – A1 (t2 – t1)
Where,
A1 and W1 are the leaf area and dry weight of the plant sample
respectively at time t1 and A2 and W2 are the leaf area and dry weight of
the plant sample respectively at time t2.
3.9.1.7 Crop growth rate
Crop growth rate also called the rate of dry matter production
(Blackman and Black, 1968). The crop growth rate is expressed as g/day.
where,
P = Ground area on which W1 and W2 were estimated.
W1= Dry weight of plant at 1st observation.
CGR = W2 - W1
P (T2 – T1)
23
W2= Dry weight of plant at 2nd observation.
T1 & T2 = interval between observation.
3.9.2 Yield parameters
3.9.2.1 Fresh weight of bulb per plant (g)
Ten bulbs were randomly selected and weighted replication wise in
each genotype by using electronic weight machine.
3.9.2.2 Diameter of bulb (cm)
Diameter of ten randomly selected bulbs from each genotype was
recorded and the mean diameter of bulb was work out with the help of
vernier calipers.
3.9.2.3 Length of bulb (cm)
Length of bulb from each genotype and replication was recorded
with the help of scale and the mean length of bulb was work out.
3.9.2.4 Number of cloves per bulb
Number of cloves from each bulb were separated and counted to
determine number of cloves per bulb.
3.9.2.5 Length of clove (cm)
Length of clove from tagged plants in each genotype and replication
were recorded with the help of scale and the mean clove length was work
out.
3.9.2.6 Neck and bulb thickness ratio (fresh basis)
Ratio of neck and bulb thickness of fresh bulbs was calculated in each
genotype and replication.
3.9.2.7 Neck and bulb thickness ratio (dry basis)
The ratio of neck and bulb thickness of dry bulbs was calculated in each
genotype and replication.
24
3.9.2.8 Root length (cm)
At random five plants from each genotype and replication were
uprooted and cleaned very carefully then length of root was measured.
3.9.2.9 Bulb yield per plot
The bulb obtained from each plot and replications were weighted
and the bulb yield plot-1 was worked out and expressed in kg plot-1.
3.9.2.10 Bulb yield per hectare (q ha-1)
Bulb yield in (kg/ plot) was converted in q/ hec by multiplying with factor.
3.9.3 Qualitative parameters
3.9.3.1 Sulphur content (%)
Sulphur was estimated by turbidometric method (Tabatabai and Bremner,
1970). Plant samples were digesting with triacid mixture (nitric acid, perchloric
acid and hydrochloric acid) using gelatin barium chloride solution for
development of turbidity. The resultant turbidity was measured by colorimeter
and sulphur content expressed in percentage on dry weight basis.
3.9.3.2 Protein content (%)
The protein content of bulb was calculated by multiplying percent nitrogen
content in bulb with the factor 6.25 (AOAC, 1060). Therefore, it is multiplied and
estimated the protein percentage.
3.9.3.3 Ash content (%)
One gram of dried and grinded bulb was transferred into a crucial plate
was placed into the muffle furnace at 6500C. The digested material was
transferred on a paper and was taken the ash weight.
3.9.4 Computation of economics of treatments
The economics of treatments is the most important consideration for
making any recommendation to the farmer for its adoption. For calculating
25
economics, the average yield of different varieties along with prevailing market
prices/ rates for inputs and outputs were used.
3.9.4.1 Gross monetary returns (Rs /ha)
Gross returns are the total monetary value of economic produce and
byproducts obtained from the crop raised in the different treatments is calculated
based on the local market prices.
3.9.4.2 Cost of cultivation (Rs /ha)
Cost of cultivation is the total expenditure incurred for raising crop in a
treatment. The cost included for this purpose consists of own or hired human
labour, owned or hired bullock labour, value of seed, manures, fertilizers,
pesticides and herbicides and irrigation charges etc.
3.9.4.3 Net monetary returns (Rs /ha)
It is computed by subtracting cost of cultivation from gross returns. It is
good indicator of suitability of a cropping system since this represents the actual
income of the farmer. Monetary returns for different treatments were calculated
with the help of prevailing market rates of produce and different inputs used in
the experiments.
Net monetary returns (Rs/ha) =Gross return (Rs/ha) –Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha)
3.9.4.4 Benefit cost ratio
It is the ratio of gross returns to cost of cultivation. It is expressed as
returns per rupee invested. This index provides an estimate of the benefit a
farmer derives for the expenditure he incurs in adopting a particular cropping
system. Any value above 2.0 is considered safe as the farmer gets Rs. 2 for
every rupee invested.
Benefit cost ratio = Gross return (Rs ha-1) / Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1)
26
3.10 Statistical analysis
The observation recorded for the different characters were
statistically analyzed by the methods of analysis of variance as described
by Fisher (1938). The significance of different treatments were judged at
5% level of “F” test. The skeleton of analysis of variance used was as
follows:
Table 3.6: ANOVA for Randomized Block Design
Source of variation
DF SS MSS F calculated
F value at 5%
Replication r-1
Varieties v-1
Error (r-1)(v-1)
Total rv-1
A significant value of F test indicates that the test entries differ
significantly among themselves, which requires computing.
CD at 5% prob. Level = SE diff x t5% table value
where,
MSE = Mean square error (Error variance)
r = Number of replication
SE diff = Standard error of difference
C.D. = Critical difference
t 5% = t, table value 5% probability level at error d.f.
diff SE 2
r
MSE
27
Chapter-IV
RESULTS
Various growth parameters, yield parameters, yield and quality grade of
garlic obtained under the study entitled “Evaluation of varieties/ local cultivars
(races) of garlic (Allium sativum L.) for Malwa Region” are analyzed statistically
and presented here as under:
4.1 Growth parameters
4.1.1 Plant height:
The plant height of garlic plant as influence by different varieties is given in
Table 4.1 presented in Fig.3 and illustrated in Appendix – I to IV.
Plant height was recorded at 30, 60, 90 and 120 days after planting. The
plant height increased significantly with the different varieties at all the growth
stage.
At 30 days after planting, the significantly maximum (26.19 cm) plant
height was recorded in varieties Amletha followed by and at par with G-282
(26.00 cm), Jamnagar (25.98 cm),G-323 (25.91 cm), Malkapuri (25.90 cm), G-
283 (25.12 cm), G-1 (24.90 cm) and Local-1 (24.60 cm) over G-189 (23.63 cm)
and G-41 (23.03 cm). Hence, minimum plant height was observed in genotype
G-41 (23.03 cm).
At 60 days after planting, the significantly maximum plant height (39.66
cm) was recorded in genotype Amletha over all other varieties. While, minimum
plant height was recorded in genotype G-41 (35.15 cm).
As regards to 90 DAP, varieties Amletha (51.93 cm) was recorded
significantly maximum plant height followed by and at par with G – 282 (48.77
28
cm), Jamnagar (48.44 cm) and G -189 (47.86 cm). However, it was observed
lowest in genotype G - 41 (41.70 cm).
In case of 120 DAP, the significantly maximum plant height (64.96 cm),
was recorded in varieties Amletha over all other varieties. While, the genotype G
- 41was recorded minimum plant height (47.44 cm).
Table 4.1 Plant height (cm) of different varieties of garlic.
S.No. Varieties Plant height(cm)
30days 60days 90days 120days
1. G-1 24.90 36.09 46.70 53.59
2. G-41 23.03 35.15 41.70 47.44
3. G-189 23.63 36.07 47.86 52.11
4. G-282 26.00 36.58 48.77 54.73
5. G-283 25.12 35.23 45.42 53.58
6. G-323 25.91 35.82 43.82 51.12
7. Amletha 26.19 39.66 51.93 64.96
8. Jamnagar 25.98 36.50 48.44 54.68
9. Malkapuri 25.90 36.46 45.88 53.90
10. Local-1 24.60 35.51 43.59 53.50
SEm± 0.66 0.75 1.90 1.02
C.D. at 5% level 1.97 2.23 5.66 3.02
4.1.2 Number of leaves/plant:
The number of leaves per plant of different varieties is given in Table 4.2.,
presented in Fig. 4 and depicted in Appendix-V to VIII.
Number of leaves per plant was recorded at 30, 60, 90 and 120 days
after planting. At 30 days after planting, the significantly maximum leaves per
plant (5.50) was recorded in genotype Amletha followed by and at par with G -
282 (4.90), Jamnagar (4.81) and G -189 (4.70) as compared to other varieties.
While, minimum leaves per plant was recorded in genotype G -41 (3.61).
29
The varieties Amletha (5.98) was recorded significantly maximum leaves
per plant followed by G-282 (5.78), Jamnagar (5.69) and G -189 (5.58) which
were at par with each other over other varieties. While, minimum number of
leaves per plant was recorded in genotype G-41 (4.81) at 60 days after planting.
In case of 90 days after planting, the significantly maximum leaves per
plant was recorded in varieties Amletha (6.75) followed by and at par with G -282
(6.61), Jamnagar (6.12), G -189 (6.10), Local-1 (6.02) and G-1(6.01) as
compared to all other varieties. While, genotype G-41 recorded minimum number
of leaves per plant (4.99 leaves).
Table 4.2 Number of leaves/plant of different varieties of garlic.
S.No. Varieties No. of leaves/plant
30days 60days 90days 120days
1. G-1 3.74 5.03 6.01 6.21
2. G-41 3.61 4.81 4.99 5.72
3. G-189 4.70 5.58 6.10 6.24
4. G-282 4.90 5.78 6.61 6.83
5. G-283 4.10 5.09 6.09 6.02
6. G-323 4.50 4.98 5.26 5.89
7. Amletha 5.50 5.98 6.75 6.98
8. Jamnagar 4.81 5.69 6.12 6.26
9. Malkapuri 4.52 4.97 5.25 5.78
10. Local-1 3.94 5.07 6.02 6.09
SEm± 0.31 0.24 0.34 0.25
C.D. at 5% level 0.93 0.73 1.02 0.75
At 120 days after planting, the significantly maximum leaves per plant was
recorded in genotype Amletha (6.98) followed by and at par witth G - 282 (6.83),
Jamnagar (6.26) and G-189 (6.24) as compared to other varieties. While,
minimum leaves per plant was recorded in genotype G-41(5.72).
30
4.1.3 Dry weight per plant (g)
The dry weight per plant of different varieties is given in Table 4.3,
presented in Fig. 5 and depicted in Appendix-IX to XII.
Table 4.3 Dry weight per plant (g) of different varieties of garlic
S.No. Varieties dry weight (g)
30days 60days 90days 120days
1. G-1 6.01 8.23 11.83 13.93
2. G-41 4.50 6.42 9.12 10.65
3. G-189 6.25 8.68 12.58 15.16
4. G-282 7.46 10.16 14.27 17.21
5. G-283 6.06 8.13 11.46 13.53
6. G-323 5.52 7.53 11.16 13.32
7. Amletha 8.12 10.88 15.06 18.23
8. Jamnagar 6.94 9.40 13.42 16.33
9. Malkapuri 5.63 7.97 11.78 14.18
10. Local-1 5.01 6.96 9.93 11.94
SEm± 0.568 0.025 0.246 0.028
C.D. at 5% level 1.688 0.077 0.787 0.085
Dry weight per plant was recorded at 30, 60, 90 and 120 DAP. At 30
days after planting, the significantly maximum dry weight per plant was recorded
in genotype Amletha (8.12 g) as compared to all other varieties. While, minimum
dry weight per plant (4.50 g) was recorded in genotype G - 41.
Similarly, at 60 days after planting, the significantly maximum dry weight
per plant was recorded in genotype Amletha (10.88 g) as compared to all other
varieties. While, the genotype G – 41 was recorded minimum value of dry weight
per plant (6.42 g).
At 90 days after planting, the significantly maximum dry weight per plant
was recorded in genotype Amletha (15.06 g) followed by and at par with G - 282
31
(14.27 g) as compared to all other varieties. While, the genotype G – 41 was
recorded minimum value of dry weight per plant (10.68 g).
The varieties Amletha (18.23 g) recorded significantly maximum dry
weight as compared to other variet ies. While, minimum dry weight per
plant (10.65 g) was recorded in genotype G - 41 at 120 days after planting.
4.1.4 Leaf area per plant (cm2)
The Leaf area per plant of different varieties is given in Table 4.4,
presented in Fig. 6 and depicted in Appendix-XIII to XVI.
Table 4.4 Leaf area per plant (cm2) of different varieties of garlic.
S.No. Varieties Leaf area per plant (cm2)
30days 60days 90days 120days
1. G-1 22.15 80.15 140.18 148.56
2. G-41 15.12 68.47 132.74 138.18
3. G-189 27.08 84.68 146.62 154.82
4. G-282 30.23 91.18 151.79 160.84
5. G-283 20.19 76.39 138.79 147.54
6. G-323 25.07 82.68 142.82 150.76
7. Amletha 35.18 95.21 155.88 162.97
8. Jamnagar 28.89 86.59 148.69 156.22
9. Malkapuri 26.92 83.75 145.71 152.49
10. Local-1 16.44 70.89 135.49 142.37
SEm± 0.054 0.043 0.030 0.056
C.D. at 5% level 0.160 0.129 0.090 0.167
Leaf area per plant (cm2) was recorded at 30, 60, 90 and 120 DAP.
At 30 days after planting, the significantly maximum leaf area per plant (cm2) was
recorded in genotype Amletha (35.18 cm2) as compared to all other varieties.
While, minimum leaf area per plant (15 cm2) was recorded in genotype G - 41.
Similarly, at 60 days after planting, the significantly maximum leaf area per
plant was recorded in genotype Amletha (95.21 cm2) as compared to all other
32
varieties. While, the genotype G – 41 was recorded minimum value of leaf area
per plant (68.47 cm2).
At 90 days after planting, the significantly maximum leaf area per plant
was recorded in genotype Amletha (155.88 cm2) as compared to all other
varieties. While, the genotype G – 41 was recorded minimum value of leaf area
per plant (132.74 cm2).
The varieties Amletha (162.97 cm2) was recorded significantly maximum
leaf area per plant as compared to other variet ies . While, minimum leaf
area per plant (138.18 cm2) was recorded in genotype G - 41 at 120 days after
planting.
4.1.5 Neck thickness of the bulb
The neck thickness of the bulb of different varieties is given in Table 4.5,
presented in Fig. 7 and depicted in Appendix-XVII to XX.
Table 4.5 Neck thickness of the bulb (cm) of different varieties of garlic.
S.No. Varieties Neck thickness of the bulb (cm)
30days 60days 90days 120days
1. G-1 0.342 0.612 0.734 0.829
2. G-41 0.275 0.529 0.704 0.782
3. G-189 0.454 0.682 0.805 0.884
4. G-282 0.481 0.692 0.827 0.893
5. G-283 0.395 0.604 0.801 0.815
6. G-323 0.451 0.643 0.804 0.807
7. Amletha 0.527 0.701 0.969 0.992
8. Jamnagar 0.461 0.687 0.808 0.885
9. Malkapuri 0.374 0.680 0.798 0.869
10. Local-1 0.315 0.549 0.729 0.803
SEm± 0.051 0.024 0.018 0.036
C.D. at 5% level 0.152 0.071 0.054 0.106
33
Neck thickness of the bulb was recorded at 30, 60, 90 and 120 DAP.
At 30 days after planting, the significantly maximum neck thickness of the bulb
was recorded in genotype Amletha (0.527 cm) followed by and at par with G -
282 (0.481 cm), Jamnagar (0.461 cm), G - 189 (0.454 cm), G-323 (0.451 cm)
and G-283 (0.395 cm) as compared to other varieties. While, minimum neck
thickness of the bulb (0.275 cm) was recorded in genotype G - 41.
At 60 days after planting, the significantly maximum neck thickness of the
bulb was recorded in genotype Amletha (0.701 cm) followed by and at par with
G - 282 (0.692 cm), Jamnagar (0.687 cm), G-189 (0.682 cm), Malkapuri (0.680
cm) G-323 (0.643 cm) as compared to other varieties. While, the genotype G –
41 was recorded minimum neck thickness of the bulb (0.529 cm).
At 90 days after planting, the significantly maximum neck thickness of the
bolb was recorded in genotype Amletha (0.969 cm) as compared to other
varieties. While, the genotype G – 41 was recorded minimum dry weight per
plant (0.704 cm).
The varieties Amletha (0.992cm) was recorded significantly maximum
neck thickness of the bulb followed by G -282 (0.893 cm) and are at par with
each other. While, the genotype G – 41 was recorded minimum dry weight per
plant (0.782 cm) at 120 days after planting.
4.2 Growth analytical parameter
4.2.1 Leaf area index
The leaf area Index of different varieties is given in Table 4.6, presented
in Fig. 8 and depicted in Appendix-XXI to XXIV.
The leaf area Index of garlic increased significantly with the different
varieties. Varieties Amletha (0.44) was recorded significantly maximum leaf
area Index followed by and at par with G-282 (0.40) and Jamnagar (0.39) as
compared to other varieties. However, minimum leaf area Index was observed in
genotype G - 41 (0.18) at 30 DAP.
34
Table 4.6 Leaf area Index of different varieties of garlic.
S.No. Varieties Leaf area Index
30 DAP 60 DAP 90 DAP 120DAP
1. G-1 0.27 0.67 0.82 0.89
2. G-41 0.18 0.57 0.71 0.79
3. G-189 0.36 0.74 0.90 0.99
4. G-282 0.40 0.78 0.93 1.17
5. G-283 0.26 0.64 0.76 0.87
6. G-323 0.29 0.69 0.85 0.95
7. Amletha 0.44 0.82 0.99 1.23
8. Jamnagar 0.39 0.77 0.92 1.06
9. Malkapuri 0.32 0.71 0.88 0.97
10. Local-1 0.20 0.61 0.74 0.82
SEm± 0.019 0.025 0.018 0.023
C.D. at 5% level 0.057 0.075 0.055 0.070
At 60 DAP, Varieties Amletha (0.82) was recorded significantly
maximum leaf area Index fol lowed by and at par with G-282 (0.78) and
Jamnagar (0.77) as compared to other varieties. However, leaf area Index was
observed minimum in genotype G - 41 (0.57).
In case of 90 DAP, significantly maximum leaf area Index were
recorded in varieties Amletha (0.99) as compared to all other varieties. While,
genotype G - 41 leaf area Index was observed minimum in (0.71).
In case of 120 DAP, significantly maximum was recorded in varieties
Amletha (1.23) fol lowed by and at par with G-282 (1.17) as compared
to other varieties. However, minimum leaf area Index was observed in genotype
G - 41 (0.79).
35
4.2.2 Net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day)
The data on net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day) of different varieties is given
in Table 4.7 Its graphical presented in Figure 9 and is depicted in Appendix-XXV
to XXVII.
Net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day) was recorded at 60, 90 and 120 DAP.
The data presented in Table 4.7 clearly showed that there was significant
difference amongst the varieties at all stages of observations. The NAR in
general increased at 90 DAP in all the varieties.
Table 4.7 Net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day) of different varieties of garlic.
S.
No.
Varieties N A R (g/cm2/day)
30-60 DAP 60-90 DAP 90-120 DAP
1. G-1 0.0014 0.0312 0.0021
2. G-41 0.0007 0.0058 0.0011
3. G-189 0.0063 0.0528 0.0082
4. G-282 0.0078 0.0808 0.0081
5. G-283 0.0042 0.0202 0.0069
6. G-323 0.0058 0.0501 0.0062
7. Amletha 0.0084 0.0892 0.0096
8. Jamnagar 0.0070 0.0718 0.0079
9. Malkapuri 0.0061 0.0415 0.0076
10. Local-1 0.0039 0.0158 0.0049
SEm± 0.00013 0.00026 0.00020
C.D. at 5% level 0.00038 0.00077 0.00059
At 60 DAP, the maximum net assimilation rate was observed under the
varieties Amletha (0.0084 g/cm2/day) over all other varieties. The minimum
value of NAR was recorded in G-323 (0.0007 g/cm/day).
At 90 DAP, the highest value of NAR was found in Amletha (0.0892
g/cm2/day) as compare to all other varieties. The lowest value of NAR was
observed in G-41(0.0058 g/cm2/day).
36
At 120 DAP, the highest value of NAR was found in Amletha (0.0096
g/cm2/day) as compared to all other varieties. The lowest value of NAR was
observed in G-41 (0.0011 g/cm2/day).
4.2.3 Crop growth rate (g/day)
The crop growth rate of different varieties are given in Table 4.8,
presented in Figure 10 and is depicted in Appendix-XXVIII to XXX. The crop
growth rate was recorded at 60 - 30 DAP, 90 - 60 DAP and 120 – 90 DAP.
The data presented clearly indicated that there were significant differences
amongst the varieties at 60 - 30 DAP, 90 - 60 DAP. In general CGR increased
with increase in crop growth stages but decrease at 120 – 90 DAP.
Table 4.8 Crop growth rate (g/day) of different varieties of garlic.
S. No. Varieties Crop Growth Rate (g/day)
30-60 DAP 60-90 DAP 90-120 DAP
1. G-1 0.074 0.120 0.070
2. G-41 0.064 0.090 0.051
3. G-189 0.081 0.130 0.086
4. G-282 0.090 0.137 0.098
5. G-283 0.069 0.111 0.069
6. G-323 0.067 0.121 0.072
7. Amletha 0.092 0.140 0.105
8. Jamnagar 0.082 0.134 0.097
9. Malkapuri 0.078 0.127 0.080
10. Local-1 0.065 0.099 0.067
SEm± 0.0018 0.0012 0.0016
C.D. at 5% level 0.0055 0.0038 0.004
At 60 DAP, the significantly maximum crop growth rate was observed
under the varieties Amletha (0.092 g/day) as compared to all other varieties.
However, CGR was observed lowest in G-41 (0.064 g/day).
37
At 90 DAP, the significantly highest CGR was observed in the
varieties Amletha (0.140 g/day) followed by and at par with G-282 (0.137 g/day),
as compared to all other varieties. However, the lowest value of CGR was
found in G-41 (0.090 g/day) as compared to other varieties.
At 120 DAP, the highest CGR was observed in the genotype Amletha
(0.105 g/day) as compared to al l other varieties. However, the lowest
value of CGR was found in G-41 (2.806 g/day).
4.3 Yield parameter
4.3.1 Fresh weight of bulb (g)
The fresh weight of bulb per plant in different treatments of organic
manures and inorganic fert i l izers is given in Table 4.9, presented in Fig. 11
and depicted in Appendix-XXXI.
Table 4.9 Fresh weight of bulb (g) of different varieties of garlic.
S. No. Varieties Fresh weight of bulb (g)
1. G-1 32.51
2. G-41 29.43
3. G-189 28.54
4. G-282 34.26
5. G-283 27.78
6. G-323 28.62
7. Amletha 36.94
8. Jamnagar 33.58
9. Malkapuri 29.46
10. Local-1 27.08
SEm± 1.26
C.D. at 5% level 3.76
Significantly Amletha (36.94g) recorded maximum fresh weight of bulb per
plant followed by and at par with G-282 (34.26 g) and Jamnagar (33.58 g) as
compared to all other varieties. Whereas, the minimum value of fresh weight of
bulb per plant was observed in genotype Local-1 (27.08g).
38
4.3.2 Diameter of bulb (cm)
The diameter of bulb was recorded genotype wise. The data have been
depicted in Table 4.10 and diagrammatically exhibited in Fig 12 and depicted in
Appendix – XXXII.
Table 4.10 Diameter and length of bulb (cm) of different varieties of garlic
S. No. Varieties Diameter of bulb (cm) Length of bulb (cm)
1. G-1 4.02 3.76
2. G-41 3.59 2.95
3. G-189 4.67 3.49
4. G-282 4.88 3.85
5. G-283 4.12 3.25
6. G-323 3.96 3.09
7. Amletha 4.98 3.99
8. Jamnagar 4.78 3.82
9. Malkapuri 3.98 3.78
10. Local-1 3.92 3.01
SEm± 0.193 0.18
C.D. at 5% level 0.575 0.55
The diameter of bulb increased significantly due to different varieties.
Significantly maximum diameter of bulb was exhibited in the genotype Amletha
(4.98 cm) followed by and at par with G-282 (4.88 cm), Jamnagar (4.78 cm) and
G-189 (4.67 cm) as compared to other varieties. However, the minimum diameter
of bulb was observed in genotype G - 41 (3.59 cm).
4.3.3 Length of bulb (cm)
The length of bulb was recorded genotype wise. The data have been depicted in
Table 4.10 and diagrammatically exhibited in Fig 12 and depicted in Appendix –
XXXIII.
It is obvious from the Table 4.10 that the length of bulb was significantly
influenced by the different varieties of garlic. The significantly maximum length of
39
bulb was recorded in genotype Amletha (3.99 cm) followed by and at par with G-
282 (3.85 cm), Jamnagar (3.82 cm), Malkapuri (3.78 cm), G-1 (3.76 cm) and G-
189 (3.49 cm) as compared to other varieties. The lowest value of length of bulb
was recorded in G – 41 (2.95 cm).
4.3.4 Number of cloves per bulb
The number of cloves/bulb of different varieties is given in Table 4.11,
graphically presented in Fig.13 and depicted in Appendix– XXXIV.
Table 4.11 Number of cloves/bulb and length of clove (cm) of different
varieties of garlic.
S.No. Varieties Number of cloves bulb/plant Length of clove(cm)
1. G-1 21.33 2.19
2. G-41 15.58 1.96
3. G-189 22.01 2.08
4. G-282 24.68 2.88
5. G-283 16.29 2.12
6. G-323 17.69 2.15
7. Amletha 26.50 2.99
8. Jamnagar 22.59 2.68
9. Malkapuri 20.08 2.29
10. Local-1 18.29 1.98
SEm± 1.12 0.22
C.D. at 5% level 3.33 0.68
The genotype Amletha (26.50) was observed significantly maximum
cloves per bulb which was followed by and at par with G-282 (24.68 cloves), as
compared to all other varieties. However, the number of cloves per bulb was
observed lowest in genotype G-41(15.58).
4.3.5 Length of clove (cm)
The length of cloves was recorded and has been presented in table 4.11
and diagrammatically exhibited in Fig. 13 and depicted in Appendix – XXXV.
40
It is obvious from the Table 4.11 that the length of cloves was significantly
influenced by the different varieties in garlic. Varieties Amletha (2.99 cm) was
observed maximum length of cloves followed by and at par with G-282 (2.88 cm)
and Jamnagar (2.68 cm) as compared to all other varieties. The lowest value of
length of cloves was recorded in genotype G-41 (1.96 cm).
4.3.6 Neck and bulb thickness ratio (fresh basis)
The ratio of neck and bulb thickness ratio (fresh basis) of different
varieties is given in table 4.12, graphically presented in Fig. 14 and depicted in
Appendix – XXXVI.
Table 4.12 Neck and bulb thickness ratio (fresh and dry basis) of different
varieties of garlic
S. No. Varieties Neck and bulb thickness
ratio (fresh basis)
Neck and bulb thickness
ratio (dry basis)
1. G-1 0.022 0.148
2. G-41 0.031 0.102
3. G-189 0.025 0.105
4. G-282 0.038 0.217
5. G-283 0.012 0.104
6. G-323 0.028 0.181
7. Amletha 0.044 0.292
8. Jamnagar 0.035 0.199
9. Malkapuri 0.025 0.180
10. Local-1 0.019 0.169
SEm± 0.004 0.014
C.D. at 5% level 0.012 0.04
Genotype Amletha (0.044) was observed significantly maximum neck
thickness and bulb ratio (fresh basis) which was followed by and at par with G-
282 (0.038) and Jamnagar (0.035) as compared to other varieties. However, the
41
value of neck and bulb thickness ratio (fresh basis) was observed lowest in G-
283 (0.012).
4.3.7 Neck and bulb thickness ratio (dry basis)
The ratio of neck and bulb thickness (dry basis) of different varieties is
given in table 4.12, presented in Fig. 14 and depicted in Appendix –XXXVII.
Genotype Amletha was observed significantly maximum (0.292) as regard
of ratio of neck and bulb thickness (dry basis) as compared to all other varieties.
However, the ratio of neck and bulb thickness (dry basis) was observed lowest in
G-41(0.102).
4.3.8 Root length (cm)
The root length was recorded and has been presented in table 4.13 and
diagrammatically exhibited in Fig. 15 and depicted in Appendix – XXXVIII.
Table 4.13 Root length (cm) and Maturity of different varieties of garlic
S. No. Varieties Root length (cm) Maturity
1. G-1 9.21 152
2. G-41 7.50 135
3. G-189 8.78 120
4. G-282 9.91 115
5. G-283 8.57 125
6. G-323 8.52 110
7. Amletha 10.58 115
8. Jamnagar 9.88 135
9. Malkapuri 9.56 130
10. Local-1 7.52. 140
SEm± 0.63 1.29
C.D. at 5% level 1.87 3.84
The root length was significantly influenced by the different varieties in
garlic. Varieties Amletha (10.58 cm) was observed maximum root length followed
by and at par with G-282 (9.91cm), Jamnagar (9.88 cm), Malkapuri (9.56 cm), G-
42
1 ( 9.21 cm) and G–189( 8.78 cm) as compared to all other varieties. The lowest
value of root length was recorded in genotype G-41(7.50 cm).
4.3.9 Date of maturity
The data for various varieties with respect to date of maturity are
summarized in Table 4.13 and illustrated in Fig. 15 and depicted in Appendix-
XXXIX.
The minimum days for maturity (110 days) were observed for G- 323 followed by
Amletha and G-282 (115 days) and G- 189 (120 days) as compared to other
varieties. However, the varietie G-1 required maximum 152 for maturity
4.3.10 Bulb yield plot-1 (kg)
The data for various varieties with respect to the bulb yield plot-1 are given
in Table 4.14 and illustrated in Fig.16 and depicted in Appendix – XL.
It is evident from the Table 4.12 that the bulb yield plot-1 was significantly
increased by the different varieties. Genotype Amletha was found significantly
superior (6.39 kg) which was statistically at par with varieties G-282 (6.29 kg plot-
1), Jamnagar (6.24 kg), G-189 (6.11 kg), Malkapuri (5.55 kg) and G-323 (5.41
kg) as compared to other varieties. While, the lowest value of bulb yield plot-1
was noted in genotype G-41(3.226 kg).
4.3.11 Bulb yield ha-1 (q)
The data for various varieties with respect to the bulb yield ha-1 are
summarized in Table 4.14 and illustrated in Fig. 16 and depicted in Appendix –
XLI.
The yield of any crop is the final index of the experiment which indicates
the success or failure of any treatment with this view the bulb yield of garlic was
recorded. The data for the bulb yield plot-1 under different varieties were recorded
and converted into bulb yield q ha-1.
The data was analyzed statistically and the analysis of variance is given in
Appendix–III. The bulb yield hectare-1 as influenced by different varieties is
presented in Table 4.14 and it’s illustrated in Fig. 23.
43
Table 4.14 Bulb yield/plot (kg) and (q/hec.) of different varieties garlic
S. No. Varieties Bulb yield (kg/plot) Bulb yield (q/ha)
T1 G-1 5.05 120.46
T2 G-41 4.64 110.59
T3 G-189 6.11 145.49
T4 G-282 6.29 149.82
T5 G-283 5.01 119.32
T6 G-323 5.41 128.91
T7 Amletha 6.39 152.21
T8 Jamnagar 6.24 148.61
T9 Malkapuri 5.55 132.28
T10 Local-1 4.92 117.21
SEm± 0.33 7.93
C.D. at 5% level 0.99 23.58
The analysis of variance table (Appendix - XXXVIII) showed that garlic
bulb yield in q ha-1 was significantly affected due to various varieties. The
significantly maximum, bulb yield were recorded in the varieties Amletha (152.21
q ha-1) followed by and at par with G-282 (149.82 q ha-1), Jamnagar (148.61 q
ha-1), G-189 (145.49), Malkapuri (132.28 q ha-1) and G-323 (128.91 q ha-1) as
compared to all other varieties. However the minimum value of bulb yield quintal
ha-1 was recorded in genotype G-41(110.59 q ha-1).
4.4 Quality Parameters
The data for various varieties with respect to the bulb yield plot-1 are
summarized in Table 4.15 and illustrated in Fig. 17 and depicted in Appendix –
XLII to XLIV.
4.4.1 Sulphur content of bulb
Sulphur content of bulb generally ranged from 0.36 to 0.52 percent
around agrand men of 0.45 percent.Maximum and minimum values were
44
recorded in Amletha (0.568%) and G-282 (0.519%), respectively. Genotype
Amletha recorded significantly maximum sulphur content as compared to all
other varieties.
Table 4.15 Quality parameters of different varieties of garlic.
S. No. Varieties Sulphur
content (%)
Protein
content (%)
Ash Content
(%)
1. G-1 0.470 0.98 1.26
2. G-41 0.430 0.92 0.98
3. G-189 0.482 1.81 1.08
4. G-282 0.519 2.52 1.86
5. G-283 0.492 1.23 1.21
6. G-323 0.412 1.40 1.19
7. Amletha 0.568 2.89 1.98
8. Jamnagar 0.495 1.98 1.82
9. Malkapuri 0.479 1.46 1.07
10. Local-1 0.435 1.01 1.39
SEm± 0.0023 0.034 0.049
C.D. at 5% level 0.0068 0.103 0.147
4.4.2 Protein content of bulb
Variety Amletha (2.89%) recorded significantly highest protein content in
bulb as compared to all other varieties. The minimum protein content was
recorded in genotype G-41(0.92%).
4.4.3 Ash content of bulb
It is evident from the table 4.15 that the significant differences were shown
by the various varieties in ash content. Significantly highest ash content (1.98%)
was associated with variety Amletha (2.89%) followed by and at par with G-282
(1.86%) over all other varieties. While, the lowest value of ash content was
recorded in genotype G-41(0.98%).
45
4.5 Economics
The economics of the treatment was worked out. The date pertaining to
economics of different treatment is depicted in Table 4.16 and cost of cultivation
incurred in various varieties is presented in Appendix XLV.
Table 4.16 Economics of different varieties of garlic.
S.No. Varieties
Bulbyield
(q/ha)
Gross
income
(Rs/ha)
Cost of
cultivati
on
(Rs/ha)
Net
income
(Rs/ha)
B:C
Ratio
1. G-1 120.46 361380 88040 273340 1: 4.10
2. G-41 110.59 331770 88040 243730 1: 3.76
3. G-189 145.49 436470 88040 348430 1: 4.95
4. G-282 149.82 449460 88040 361420 1: 5.10
5. G-283 119.32 357960 88040 269920 1: 4.06
6. G-323 128.91 386730 88040 298690 1: 4.39
7. Amletha 152.21 456630 88040 368590 1: 5.18
8. Jamnagar 148.61 445830 88040 357790 1: 5.06
9. Malkapuri 132.28 396840 88040 308800 1:4.50
10. Local-1 117.21 351630 88040 263590 1:3.99
Sale rate of produce = Rs 3000 q-1
It is revealed form the date obtained that a significantly maximum bulb
yield of 152.21q ha-1 was obtained in garlic variety Amletha and gave the net
return of Rs 357790 ha-1 and cost benefit ratio 1:5.18 followed by G – 282 was
found the bulb yield of 149.82 q ha-1 and net return of Rs 361420 ha-1 with cost
benefit ratio of Rs 1:5.10, while lowest bulb yield 110.59 q ha-1 and net return of
Rs 243730 ha-1 along with cost benefit ratio 1:3.76.
46
Chapter-V
DISCUSSION
The production or yield is an ultimate goal of the plants which depends on
the genetic constitution of the plant and environmental factors which consists of
different weather components and soil characteristics. Varieties play an important
role in increasing the productivity of crops. Improvement in crop varieties and
suitability according to climatic conditions for high yield is essential to increase
the productivity of crop at sufficient level.
Keeping this in view, the present investigation was carried out to evaluate
the comparative performance of different varieties. Various observations were
recorded periodically on morphological parameters, yield and qualities. The
inferences obtained from these observations were critically described in the
previous chapter. These findings are being discussed in this chapter with the
support of the data, scientific facts and views of other researchers. The
discussion is centered around the effect of garlic cultivars on the various
characters.
5.1 Morphological characters
The significant varietal differences of garlic were noticed with respect to
the plant height, number of leaves per plant, dry weight per plant and neck
thickness were studied in garlic at different plant growth intervals viz., 30, 60,90
and 120 DAP and at maturity stages. Amongst the varieties, Amletha resulted in
higher values of all these characters, followed by and at par with G -282 and
Jamnagar at almost all the crop growth stage. The differential behaviour of garlic
varieties with respect to morphological characters could be explained solely by
the variation in their genetic makeup and adaptability to soil and climatic
conditions i.e. genotypic and phenotypic interaction. These findings are in
agreement with Singh et al. (2013). The results are also in close conformity with
47
the findings of Tiwari et al. (2002) who reported that genotypes showed a high
range of variability for all the morphological characters. Panse et al. (2013) has
also stated that genetic variability is responsible for variation among different
treatments.
Similar findings were reported by Singh and Ramesh Chand (2003),
Naruka and Dhaka (2004), Girinaik et al. (2005), Shashidhar et al. (2005), Khar
et al. (2005), Sharma et al. (2006), Futane et al. (2006), Gowda et al. (2007),
Ijoyah et.al. (2008), and Abedi et al. (2013) Panse et al. (2013)
5.2 Growth analysis parameters
Growth analysis technique has made substantial contribution to the
current understanding of the physiological basis of yield variation in different
crops.
Efforts to relate crop yields to canopy architecture began in the early 20th
century with the development of “growth analysis” by British plant physiologists.
They recorded total plant dry weight (W) and leaf area (L) in the growing season.
In fact leaf is the factory for the conversion of solar energy into the
chemical energy for the growth and development of plants. Leaf area or
photosynthetic area fairly gives a good idea of the photosynthetic capacity of the
plant. The LAI, NAR and CGR are the important growth parameters influencing
yield which are dependent not only on the genotype but also on the
environmental and different horticultural practices.
In the present study, the leaf area, leaf area index (LAI), net assimilation
rate (NAR) and crop growth rate (CGR) increased up to 90 DAP and decreased
thereafter due to senescence and aging of leaves as well as complicated
physiological functions in the plant. The varieties in general showed a profound
effect over these growth analysis parameters and significant differences were
noticed among the varieties at almost all the growth stages. Amongst the
varieties, Amletha recorded almost significantly higher growth analysis
parameters at most of the stages of observations. The varietal differences
48
amongst these growth analysis parameters attributed to the variability in the
genetic inheritance among the varieties. This has been supported by Shrivastava
et al. (1999).
The average daily increment of stand biomass is an important
characteristic and is called either the rate of dry matter production or crop growth
rate i.e. CGR (Watson, 1952). It is a widely used character for estimating
production efficiency of the crop stand and enables to make comparisons
between the aspects of study. Net assimilation rate (NAR), synonymously called
as “unit leaf rate”, which expresses the rate of dry weight increase at any instant
on a leaf area basis with leaf representing an estimate of the size of the
assimilatory surface area. The maximum NAR values were recorded in Amletha
variety. Watson (1952) suggested that NAR does not measure real
photosynthesis rate but represents net result of photosynthetic gain over
respiratory loss and it gives no direct indications of respiratory losses. Further the
NAR was maximum at early stages and decreased with advancement in crop
growth and development. Since leaf area is taken in account while computing
NAR, the leaf area steadily increased with crop growth and at later stages a
mutual shading of leaves in the canopy occurs leading to lower NAR values.
Leaf area fairly gives a good idea of the photosynthetic capacity of the
plant. In the present study, the leaf area and leaf area index (LAI) increased up to
75 DAP and decreased thereafter due to senescence and ageing of leaves. In
general, the varieties showed a profound effect over these parameters and
significant differences were noticed among the varieties at all the growth stages.
However, Amletha recorded significantly higher leaf area and LAI as compared to
other cultivars at all the growth stages. These results are confirmed with the
findings of Patel et al. (2000).
5.3 Yield attributing characters
The factors which are directly responsible for ultimate bulb production viz.
fresh weight of bulb per plant, diameter of bulb, length of bulb, number of cloves
49
per bulb, length of cloves, ratio of neck and bulb thickness (fresh basis), ratio of
neck and bulb thickness (dry basis), root length, maturity of the bulb, bulb yield
per plot and bulb yield per hectare were augmented almost significantly due to
Amletha variety over the other nine garlic varieties.
The minimum maturity period (110 days) was observed for G-323 followed
by Amletha and G-282 (115 days) as compared to other varieties. However, the
varieties G-1 required maximum 152 days for maturity. Variation in days to
maturity was due to the inherent genetic makeup of the variety. These finding are
in agreement with the findings reported by Bhatt et al. (1998), Tiwari et al. (2002),
Futane et al. (2006) and Gowda et al. (2007).
The fresh weight of bulb (36.94 g), diameter of the bulb (4.98 cm), length
of the bulb (3.99 cm), number of cloves per bulb (26.50), length of the clove
(2.99 cm), neck and bulb thickness ratio on fresh weight basis (0.044 ), neck and
bulb thickness ratio on dry weight basis (0.292), root length (10.58 cm), bulb yield
per plot (6.39kg) and bulb yield per hectare (152.21 q) was recorded maximum in
the variety Amletha. The higher yield attributes in Amletha may be owing to
maximum increase in growth parameters as well as growth analysis parameters.
The present findings on varietal differences are in consequence with those of
other research workers Bhatt et al. (1998), Singh and Singh (1999), Noor and
Khalid (2000), Saraf et al. (2000), Mohanty and Prusti (2001), Naruka and Dhaka
(2001), Cheema et al. (2003), Metwally and El-Denary (2003), Singh and Chand
(2003 b), Islam et al. (2004), Agarwal and Tiwari (2004), Mirzaei et al (2007),
Supe et al. (2008), Choudhuri and Chatterjee (2009), Varga and Vasic (2009),
Volk (2009), Gouda (2012), Pardeshi and Waskar (2012), Gashua (2013), Brown
and Conway (2013), Mishra et al. (2013), Baliyan (2014), Hazem and Obiadalla
(2014) and Islam et al. (2015)
5.4 Qualitative parameters
Among quality parameters, the sulphur content per cent, protein content
and ash content were studies in garlic.
50
Amongst the garlic varieties, Amletha recorded significantly highest
percentage of sulphur 0.568%. This was followed by jamnagar, G-283 and G-
189 as compared to other varieties. The lowest sulphur contents 0.30% were
obtained from G-41 variety. The significant variations in sulphur contents in
different varieties of garlic might be owing to differences in their genetic
inheritance and also due to soil nutrient content which is ultimately responsible to
such qualitative variations. Variation was observed in protein content of garlic
varieties, Amletha (2.89%) recorded the highest percentage of protein content.
This may be due to inherent genetic makeup of the variety. These finding are
in agreement with the findings reported by Singh and Tiwari (1995).
In case of ash content, Amletha recorded the highest ash content (1.98%)
this is probably due to more solid content which is accumulated during the crop
growth period. It also depends on the varietal character and status of soil
nutrient.
5.5 Economical gain
The maximum net income per hectare after deduction of cost of cultivation
is the ultimate goal of any farm owner or producer. Amongst the garlic varieties,
Amletha recoeded the maximum net income (Rs.3,68,590/ha) with B: C ratio
1:5.18 followed by G-282 and Jamnagar. The lowest net income (Rs.
2,43,730/ha and B: C ratio 1:3.76) were obtained from G-41 variety. The net
economical gain was secured in accordance with the per hectare yield of the
varieties and thereby gross income. Similar findings were reported by Hamad et
al. (2004)
51
Chapter-VI
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND SUGESTIONS FOR FURTHUR WORK
The present investigation entitled “Evaluation of varieties/local cultivars
(races) of Garlic (Allium sativum L.) for Malwa region” was carried out during
the year 2014-2015 at the Research Farm of Department of Horticulture,
Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, College of Agriculture
Indore, (M.P.). The experimental material for the present investigation was
comprised of ten varieties of garlic. These varieties were sown in
Randomized Complete Block Design with three replications, to observed
morphological, growth analytical, yield and quality parameters. Observations
were recorded on the basis of five random competitive plants selected
from each genotype separately for morphological, growth analytical, yield
and quality parameters were evaluated as per standard procedure and
also estimate the economics of the genotypes.
On the basis of results and their computation, the present investigation
has summarized as under:
The significant varietal differences in garlic genotypes were noticed with
respect to the morphological characters including plant height, number of
leaves per plant, dry weight per plant and neck thickness at different stages of
plant growth and at maturity stages. Amongst the varieties, Amletha recorded
the higher values of all these characters, followed by and at par with G -282
and Jamnagar.
The present study revealed that the leaf area thereby leaf area index (LAI),
net assimilation rate (NAR) and crop growth rate (CGR) increased up to 90
DAP and thereafter decreased. The varieties in general showed a profound
effect over these growth analysis parameters and significant differences were
noticed among the varieties at almost all the growth stages. Amongst the
52
varieties, Amletha recorded almost significantly higher growth analysis
parameters at most of the stages of observations. However, the G-41
recorded the lowest values of these parameters.
The minimum maturity period of 110 days was observed in G-323 followed
by Amletha and G-282 (115 days) as compared to other varieties. However,
the varieties G-1 were required maximum 152 days for maturity. Variation in
days to maturity was due to the inherent genetic makeup of the variety.
The fresh weight of bulb (36.94 g), diameter of the bulb (4.98 cm), length of
the bulb (3.99 cm), number of cloves per bulb (26.50), length of the clove
(2.99 cm), neck thickness and bulb ratio on fresh weight basis (0.044 ), neck
thickness and bulb ratio on dry weight basis (0.292), root length (10.58 cm),
bulb yield per plot (6.39kg) and bulb yield per hectare (152.21 q) were
recorded in the varieties Amletha. However, the lowest values of yield
attributes as well as yield were found in G-41 variety.
Amongst the garlic varieties, Amletha recorded the significantly highest
percentage of sulphur 0.568%. This was followed by jamnagar, G-283 and
G-189 as compared to other varieties. The lowest sulphur content (0.30%)
was obtained from G-41 variety.
The variation in protein and ash content of garlic varieties was also recorded.
The variety Amletha recorded the highest percentage of protein (2.89%) and
ash (1.98%) content. However the minimum values of protein and ash
content were found in G-41variety.
Amongst the garlic varieties, Amletha recorded the maximum net income
(Rs.3,68,590/ha) with B: C ratio 1:5.18 followed by G-282 and Jamnagar. The
lowest net income (Rs. 243730/ha and B: C ratio 1:3.76) were obtained from
G-41 variety.
Conclusion
Among the different varieties of garlic investigated for their potential
under Malwa region. Amletha recorded maximum growth, yield attributing,
53
quality as well as yield over other varieties. The G-282 and Jamnagar were
also performed almost equally under prevelling condition. Amletha recorded
the maximum net income (Rs.3,68,590/ha) with B: C ratio 1:5.18 followed by
G-282 and Jamnagar. The lowest net income (Rs. 243730/ha and B: C ratio
1:3.76) were obtained from G-41 variety. Thus, on the basis of performance
and higher values in most of the desirable characters it can be concluded
that Amletha, G-282 as well as Jamnagar are the most suitable and
considerable varieties of garlic under Malwa agro-climatic conditions for
adoptation.
Suggestions for future works
1. The experiment should be repeated for conformity of the present findings.
2. The findings of the present experiments should be tested in different
locations of Malwa region.
3. Collection and evaluation of germplasm is a continuous process for crop
improvement programme hence the work must be carried out with new
entries.
4. The parameters related to processing quality may be included for future
experimentation.
i
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abedi, M.; Biat, F. and Nosrati, A. E. (2013). Evaluation of agronomical traits and pyruvic acid content in
hamedan garlic (Allium sativum L.) ecotypes. World Applied Sciences Journal. 22 (5): 628-631.
Adegoke,G.O.; Kumar,V.M.; Gopalakrishna,A.G.; Varadaraj,M.C.; Sambaiah,K. and Lokesh,B.R.
(1998). Antioxidant and Lipid oxidation in foods- A critical appraisal. Journal Food
Science Technology. 35: 283-298.
Agarwal, A. and Tiwari, R. S. (2004). Genetic variability in garlic (Allium sativum L.). International
J. Trop.Agric., 14 (1&4): 247-250.
Anonymous (2011-12) Horticulture Division, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi,
Baliyan, S. P. (2014). Evaluation of Onion Varieties for Productivity Performance in Botswana. World
Journal of Agricultural Researc,.Vol. 2, No. 3, 129-135
Bhatt, R. P.; Biswas, V. R. and Narendra Kumar (1998). A note on the physico-chemical characteristics of
some genotypes of garlic. Vegetable Science. 25 (1): 95-96.
Blackman, G.E. and Black, J.N. (1968). Physiological and ecological studies in analysis of plant
environment. Ann. Bot. 23 (89): 51-63.
Brown, R. and Conway, N. L.(2013) RIAES: Research Bulletin No. 5
Cheema, K. L.; Saeed, A. and Habib M. (2003) Performance of Exotic Onion Cultivars in Spring Season
Under Faisalabad (Pakistan) Condition. International journal of agriculture &biology 1560–8530-
4–484–486.
Choudhuri, P. and Chatterjee, R. (2009). Evaluation of some garlic (Allium sativum L.) germplasm for their
suitability under terai zone of West Bengal. International Journal of Agriculture Environment &
Biotechnology. 2 (3): 271-273.
Das, R.; Thapa, U.; Chattopadhyay, N. and Mandal, A. R. (2015). Performance of kharif onion genotypes
under different dates of planting for productivity and economics in gangetic plains of West
Bengal. Annals of Plant and Soil Research 17 (1): 19-23
Durak, I.; Kavatcu, M. and Aytac, B. (2004). Effects of garlic extract consumption on blood lipid
and oxidant/antioxidant parameters in human with high blood cholesterol. Journal Nutr.
Biochemistry. 16 (6): 373-377.
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
7
ii
Futane, N. W.; Jogdande, N. D.; Gonge, V. S.; Warade, A. D. and Khandagale, S. S. (2006). Evaluation of
garlic (Allium sativum L.) genotypes. International Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2 (1): 4-5.
Gashua, I. B. and Abbator, A. (2013) Effect of plant population density and varietal differences on yield ad
yield components of onion (Allium cepa L.) in north eastern Nigeria. International journal of
Agronomy and Agricultural Research (IJAAR) vol. 3. No. 3. p. 22-27.
Girinaik,D.; Hegde, N.K.; Hanamashetti, S.I. and Rokhade, A.K. (2005). Comparative performance of garlic
genotypes during kharif and rabi seasons for growth and yield attributes. Indian Journal of
Horticulture. 62 (3): 310-311.
Gouda, A. E. A. I. (2012) Evaluation of Some Garlic (Allium sativum L.) Cultivars Grown Under Mansoura
Region Conditions. Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 8 (5): 407-410
Gowda, M. C.; Baby Madineni and Gowda, A. P. M. (2007). Evaluation of garlic (Allium sativum L.)
genotypes for growth, yield and quality. Crop Research (Hisar). 33 (1/3): 141-143.
Hamad, A. H.; Mohamed, El Ameen and Emad El Deen, M. Ali (2004). Economics of garlic production in the
Northern State. Gezira Journal of Agricultural Science.ISSN 9556-1728 Vol7 No2
Hazem, A. and Obiadalla Ali (2014). Screening of Thirteen Garlic (Allium sativum L. Genotypes for
Characteristics of Yield and Quality under Sohag Conditions. American-Eurasian J. Agric. &
Environ. Sci., 13 (12): 1626-1631.
Ijoyah, M.O.; Rakotomavo, H. and Naiken, M.V. (2008). Yield performance of four onion (allium cepa l.)
varieties compared with the local variety under open field conditions at anse boileau,
Seychelles. Journal of Science and Technology, Vol. 28, No. 3.
Islam, M. J.; Islam, M. A.; Tania, S. A.; Saha, S. R.; Alam, M. S. and Hasan, M. K. (2004). Performance
evaluation of some garlic genotypes in Bangladesh. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences. 3 (1): 14-
16.
Islam, M. R.; Uddin, M. K.; Mian, M. A. K.; Zaman R. and Hossain J. (2015). Performance of garlic (Allium
sativum L.) genotypes after transplant aman rice harvest under zero tillage mulched condition.
International Journal of Applied Science and Biotechnology. Vol 3 (1): 26-30.
Jackson, M. L. (1967). Soil chemical analysis, Pub. Prentice Hall India, New Delhi, pp. 87-93.
Khar, A.; Devi, A. A.; Mahajan, V. and Lawande, K. E. (2005). Genetic divergence analysis in elite lines of
garlic (Allium sativum L.). Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities. 30 (3): 277-280.
iii
Mcgee, H. (2004). On food and cooking. The onion family: Onions, Garlic and leeks. Revised Edition pp.
310- 313 Obtained from http:ffodorst/v/garlic.html.
Metwally, E. I. and El-Denary, M. E. (2003). Evaluation of "AVRDC" international garlic collection under
Egyptian conditions. Acta Horticulturae. (604): 559-564.
Mirzaei, R.; Liaghati, H.; and Damghani, A.M. (2007). Evaluting yield quality and quantity of garlic as
affected by different farming systems and garlic clones. Pakistan journal of biological sciences
10 (13):2219-2224.
Mishra, R. K.; Prasad, K.; Pandey, S. and Gupta, R. P. (2013). Evaluation of garlic accessions for growth,
yield, quality and resistance to Stemphylium blight disease in northern India. Vegetos. 26 (2):
291-296.
Mohanty B. K. and Prusti A. M. (2001). Performance of common onion varieties in kharif seasons. Journal of
Tropical Agriculture 39 21-23.
Naruka, J.S. and Dhaka, R.S. (2001). Interactive effect of nitrogen and cultivars on the growth, yield and
quality of garlic (Allium sativum L.). HAU J.Res., 31: 39-38
Naruka, I.S. and Dhaka, R.S. (2004). Correlation studies in garlic (Allium sativum L.). Prog. Hort., 36 (1):
128-131.
Noor, B. and Khalid, U. (2000). Evaluation of garlic cultivars grown under the agro-climatic conditions of
Peshawar Valley. Hort. Abst. 70 (1): 644.
Panse, R.; Jain, P. K.; Avneesh Gupta and Sasode, D. S. (2013). Morphological variability and character
association in diverse collection of garlic germplasm. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 8
(23): 2861-2869.
Patel, J. C.; Patel, L. R.; Amin, A. U. and Patel, J. K. (2000). Effect of irrigation and nitrogen levels on
growth and yield of potato. Journal of the Indian Potato Association. 27 (1/2): 51-53.
Piper, C S. (1967). Soil and plant analysis. Uni.of Adelaide, Australia. Hans Publishers, Bombay.
Pardeshi, R.G. and Waskar, D.P. (2012). Performance of improved onion (Allium cepaL.) varieties under
Marathwada region in respect of growth and yield parameters The Asian Journal of
Horticulture Volume 7 pp. 333-336.
Rabinowitch, H. and Currah, L. (2002). Allium crop science: recent advances. CABI, International
Wallingford United Kingdom. 616 pp.
iv
Saraf R.K.; Kurmvanshi S.M.; Sharma R.S. and Parihar M.S. (2000). Relative performance of garlic
(Allium Sativum L.) varieties in Vindhyan Plateau of M.P. Crop Research (Hisar). 19 (1):149-
151.6
Shashidhar, T. R.; Dharmatti, P. R. and Nagaraja, T. E. (2005). Performance of garlic genotypes under
northern Karnataka region. Karnataka Journal of Horticulture. 1 (2): 27-32.
Shrivastava, R. K.; Verma, B. K.; Mehta, A. K. and Dwivedi, S. K. (1999). Correlation and multiple
regression analysis of physiological parameters in onion (Allium cepa L.). Vegetable Science.
26 (2): 170-171.
Singh, J. P. and Singh, S.B. (1999) Ecaluation of different section/varieties of garlic for yield and some yield
contributing characters. Crop Res. 18 (2): 2016-2017.
Singh, Y. and Chand, R. (2003). Performance studies of some garlic (Allium sativum L.) clones. Himachal
Journal of Agricultural Research. 29 (1/2): 35-42.
Singh, S. R.; Ahmed, N. A.; Lal, S.; Amin, A.; Amin,; Ganie M. S. A. and Jan, N. (2013) Character
association and path analysis in garlic (allium sativum l) for yield and its attributes SAARC J.
Agri., 11(1): 45-52.
Sovovo, M. and Sova, P. (2004). Pharmaceutical importance of garlic. (Allium sativum) Hypolipemic
effects in vitro and in vivo. Ceska Slov Farm, 53 (3); 117 - 123; Obtained from
htt[://garlicistorlovers .com.
Supe, V. S.; Marbhal, S. K.; Patil, B. T. and Patil, S. D. (2008). Response of violet coloured garlic (Allium
sativum L.) genotypes in rabi season. International Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 4 (1): 17-
19.
Tiwari, R. S.; Agarwal, Ankur and Sengar, S. C. (2002). Performance of garlic genotypes under Tarai
Region of Uttaranchal. Progressive Horticulture. 34 (2): 183-186.
Varga, J. G. and Vasic, M. (2009). Response of spring garlic ecotypes to environmental growth conditions.
Natura Montenegrina. 8 (2): 73-81.
Volk, G. M. (2009). Phenotypic Characteristics of Ten Garlic Cultivars Grown at Different North American
Locations. Hort. Science 44 (5):1238–1247.
Walkley, A. J. and Black, J. A. (1934). Estimation of organic carbon by chromic acid titration method. Soil
Science. 37: 29-38.
v
Wani, M. A. (2004). Correlation and regression studies in garlic (Allium sativum L.). Horiculture Journal., 17
(2):155-159
Watson, D. J. (1952). The physiological basis of variation in yield. Adv. Agron., 4: 101-146.
52
APPENDICES
Appendix- I: Plant height at 30 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 5.16 2.58 1.95 3.55
Treatment 9 44.60 4.95 3.74* 2.45
Error 18 23.82 1.32
Total 29 73.59
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- II: Plant height at 60 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 5.45 2.72 1.61 3.55
Treatment 9 44.55 4.95 2.92* 2.45
Error 18 30.47 1.69
Total 29 80.47
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- III: Plant height at 90 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 18.10 9.05 0.83 3.55
Treatment 9 241.35 26.81 2.459* 2.456
Error 18 196.23 10.90
Total 29 455.69
* Significant at 5 % level
53
Appendix- IV: Plant height at 120 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 25.12 12.56 4.05 3.55
Treatment 9 529.59 58.84 18.97* 2.45
Error 18 55.81 3.10
Total 29 610.53
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- V: Number of leaves per plant at 30 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 1.55 0.77 2.59 3.55
Treatment 9 9.28 1.03 3.44* 2.45
Error 18 5.38 0.29
Total 29 16.22
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- VI: Number of leaves per plant at 60 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.10 0.05 0.28 3.55
Treatment 9 4.63 0.51 2.76* 2.45
Error 18 3.34 0.18
Total 29 8.08
* Significant at 5 % level
54
Appendix- VII: Number of leaves per plant at 90 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 1.45 0.74 2.02 3.55
Treatment 9 9.10 1.01 2.81* 2.45
Error 18 6.46 0.35
Total 29 17.01
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- VIII: Number of leaves per plant at 120 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.03 0.01 0.08 3.55
Treatment 9 4.67 0.51 2.67* 2.45
Error 18 3.49 0.19
Total 29 8.20
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- IX: Dry weight per plant (g) at 30 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 1.006 0.50 0.51 3.55
Treatment 9 32.84 3.64 3.76* 2.45
Error 18 17.44 0.96
Total 29 51.29
* Significant at 5 % level
55
Appendix- X: Dry weight per plant (g) at 60 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.0022 0.0011 0.53 3.55
Treatment 9 52.0531 5.7837 2856.92* 2.45
Error 18 0.0364 0.0020
Total 29 52.0917
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XI Dry weight per plant (g) at 90 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.41 0.20 0.97 3.55
Treatment 9 91.82 10.20 48.47* 2.46
Error 18 3.79 0.21
Total 29 96.02
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XII: Dry weight per plant (g) at 120 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.01688 0.00844 3.427798 3.554557
Treatment 9 147.4535 16.38372 6654.038* 2.456281
Error 18 0.04432 0.002462
Total 29 147.5147
* Significant at 5 % level
56
Appendix- XIII: Leaf area per plant (g) at 30 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.02066 0.01033 1.180272 3.554557
Treatment 9 1066.609 118.5121 13540.81* 2.456281
Error 18 0.15754 0.008752
Total 29 1066.787
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XIV: Leaf area per plant (g) at 60 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.00098 0.00049 0.085781 3.55
Treatment 9 1895.818 210.6465 36876.45* 2.45
Error 18 0.10282 0.005712
Total 29 1895.922
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XV: Leaf area per plant (g) at 90 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2
0.002 0.001 0.401 3.55
Treatment 9 1433.84 159.31 57607.11* 2.45
Error 18
0.050
0.003
Total 29 1433.893
* Significant at 5 % level
57
Appendix- XVI: Leaf area per plant (g) at 120 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.06 0.03 3.32 3.55
Treatment 9 1616.17 179.57 18781.75* 2.46
Error 18 0.17 0.01
Total 29 1616.41
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XVII: Neck thickness of the stem (cm) at 30DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.002 0.0013 0.17 3.55
Treatment 9 0.17 0.019 2.47* 2.45
Error 18 0.14 0.0078
Total 29 0.31
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XVIII: Neck thickness of the bulb (cm) at 60 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.0018 0.00093 0.53 3.55
Treatment 9 0.103 0.011 6.61* 2.45
Error 18 0.031 0.0017
Total 29 0.137
* Significant at 5 % level
58
Appendix- XIX: Neck thickness of the bulb (cm) at 90 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.00039 0.000197 0.192 3.55
Treatment 9 0.143 0.015 15.62* 2.45
Error 18 0.018 0.0010
Total 29 0.162
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XX Neck thickness of the bulb (cm) at 120 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.00045 0.00022 0.057 3.55
Treatment 9 0.104 0.011 2.940* 2.45
Error 18 0.070 0.0039
Total 29 0.175
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXI: Leaf area Index at 30 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.0051 0.0025 2.25 3.55
Treatment 9 0.202 0.0224 19.77* 2.45
Error 18 0.0204 0.0011
Total 29 0.228
* Significant at 5 % level
59
Appendix- XXII: Leaf area Index at 60 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.00098 0.00049 0.254 3.55
Treatment 9 0.171 0.019 9.87* 2.45
Error 18 0.034 0.00192
Total 29 0.206
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXIII: Leaf area Index at 90 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.00614 0.0037 2.89 3.55
Treatment 9 0.225 0.025 23.60* 2.45
Error 18 0.019 0.00105
Total 29 0.250
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXIV: Leaf area Index at 120 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.00074 0.00037 0.218 3.55
Treatment 9 0.5629 0.0625 36.96* 2.45
Error 18 0.0304 0.00169
Total 29 0.594
* Significant at 5 % level
60
Appendix- XXV: Net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day) at 30-60 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 3.62E-07 1.81E-07 3.54902 3.55
Treatment 9 0.00018 2E-05 392.0523* 2.45
Error 18 9.18E-07 5.1E-08
Total 29 0.000181
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXVI: Net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day) at 60-90 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 2.88E-07 1.44E-07 0.698276 3.55
Treatment 9 0.021717 0.002413 11700.83* 2.45
Error 18 3.71E-06 2.06E-07
Total 29 0.021721
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXVII: Net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day) at 90-120 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 1.8E-08 9E-09 0.074 3.5545
Treatment 9 0.000207 2.3E-05 189.69* 2.4562
Error 18 2.18E-06 1.21E-07
Total 29 0.000209
* Significant at 5 % level
61
Appendix- XXVIII: Crop growth rate (g/day) at 30- 60 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 2.22E-05 1.11E-05 1.07535 3.554557
Treatment 9 0.002747 0.000305 29.56728* 2.456281
Error 18 0.000186 1.03E-05
Total 29 0.002955
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXIX: Crop growth rate (g/day) at 60-90 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 5.6E-06 2.8E-06 0.557522 3.554557
Treatment 9 0.007347 0.000816 162.5376* 2.456281
Error 18 9.04E-05 5.02E-06
Total 29 0.007443
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXX: Crop growth rate (g/day) at 90-120 DAP
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 3.21E-05 1.6E-05 1.995851 3.554557
Treatment 9 0.007675 0.000853 106.1521* 2.456281
Error 18 0.000145 8.03E-06
Total 29 0.007851
* Significant at 5 % level
62
Appendix- XXXI: Fresh weight of bulb (g)
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 2.408 1.204 0.250 3.55
Treatment 9 290.433 32.270 6.707* 2.45
Error 18 86.601 4.811
Total 29 379.443
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXXII: Diameter of bulb (cm)
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.132 0.066 0.589 3.55
Treatment 9 6.427 0.714 6.336* 2.45
Error 18 2.028 0.112
Total 29 8.588
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXXIII: Length of bulb (cm)
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.051 0.025 0.224 3.55
Treatment 9 4.185 0.465 4.056* 2.45
Error 18 2.063 0.114
Total 29 6.300
* Significant at 5 % level
63
Appendix- XXXIV: Number of cloves per bulb
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 10.248 5.124 1.359 3.55
Treatment 9 347.089 38.565 10.232* 2.45
Error 18 67.89 3.768
Total 29 425.177
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXXV: Length of clove (cm)
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.0666 0.0333 0.210 3.55
Treatment 9 3.840 0.426 2.699* 2.45
Error 18 2.844 0.158
Total 29 6.752
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXXVI: Neck and bulb thickness ratio (fresh basis)
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.000103 0.0000516 0.915 3.55
Treatment 9 0.002424 0.000269 4.777* 2.45
Error 18 0.001015 0.0000564
Total 29 0.003542
* Significant at 5 % level
64
Appendix- XXXVII: Neck and bulb thickness ratio (dry basis)
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.000867 0.000433 0.713 3.55
Treatment 9 0.0955 0.0106 17.488* 2.45
Error 18 0.0109 0.000607
Total 29 0.1073
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXXVIII: Root length (cm)
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.346 0.173 0.145 3.55
Treatment 9 28.081 3.120 2.612* 2.45
Error 18 21.498 1.194
Total 29 49.927
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XXXIX: Date of Maturity
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 5.6 2.8 0.55 3.55
Treatment 9 4668.3 518.7 103.28* 2.45
Error 18 90.4 5.02
Total 29 4764.3
* Significant at 5 % level
65
Appendix- XL: Bulb yield/plot (kg)
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.294 0.147 0.436 3.55
Treatment 9 11.483 0.275 3.789* 2.45
Error 18 6.061 0.336
Total 29 17.839
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XLI: Bulb yield/ha (q)
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 161.049 80.524 0.426 3.55
Treatment 9 6486.541 720.726 3.81* 2.45
Error 18 3401.069 188.948
Total 29 10048.66
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XLII: Sulphur content of bulb (%)
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.00002 0.00001 0.629 3.55
Treatment 9 0.0562 0.00625 393.568* 2.45
Error 18 0.000286 0.0000159
Total 29 0.0565
* Significant at 5 % level
66
Appendix- XLIII: Protein content of bulb (%)
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.00314 0.00157 0.434 3.55
Treatment 9 11.827 1.314 363.578* 2.45
Error 18 0.065 0.00361
Total 29 11.895
* Significant at 5 % level
Appendix- XLIV: Ash content of bulb (%)
S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.
Replication 2 0.00062 0.00031 0.0419 3.55
Treatment 9 3.628 0.403 54.569* 2.45
Error 18 0.132 0.0073
Total 29 3.761
* Significant at 5 % level
67
Appendix- XLV: Economics
S. No. Particulars Unit Qty. Rate / unit (Rs.)
Cost (Rs./ha.)
A. Land preparation
1. Ploughing with M. B. Plough
@ 0.4 ha hr-1
Hrs. 2.5 410 1025
2. Disc harrow Hrs. 2 410 820
3. Planking and leveling Hrs. 1 410 410
4. Layout of the field Labour 10 150 1500
B. Sowing
1. Cost of seed Kg 600 80 48000
2. Labour for sowing and
fertilizer application
Labour 56 150 8400
C. After care
1. Gap filing Labour 5 150 750
2. Two hand weeding by
weedicide
3251
D. Cost of manure and fertilizers
1. 20t FYM 4trally 850 3400
2. Urea 218kg @Rs.6/kg 1308
3. SSP 313kg @Rs.7.5/kg 2348
4. MOP 84kg @Rs.17/kg 1428
E. Irrigation
1. Tube well charges -6
irrigation(2 hrs./ irrigation)
Hrs. 12 500 6000
2. Labour for irrigation Labour 6 150 900
F. Plant protection measure 2500
G. Harvesting, transporting
and marketing
Labour 40 150 6000
Total 88040
68
![Anti-Parasitic Activities of Allium sativum and Allium ... · Trypanosomiasis (HAT) [15]. Leishmaniasis is a disease caused by the protozoan parasite Leishmania, which results in](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/5f9e9234ee0f1e0741090a0d/anti-parasitic-activities-of-allium-sativum-and-allium-trypanosomiasis-hat.jpg)
