Impact of foliar application of Indole aceticacid (IAA), boron and zinc on physiology
and sink capacity of pigeonpea[Caj'anus cajan (L.) Millsp.]
M.Sc.(Ag.) THESIS
by
Tekale Rameshwar Panditrao
DEPARTMENT OF PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE
INDIRA GANDHI AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITYRAIPUR (C.G.)
2003
Impact of foliar application of Indole aceticacid (IAA), boron and zinc on physiology
and sink capacity of pigeonpea[Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.]
Thesis
Submitted to the
Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur
by
Tekale Rameshwar Panditrao
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF
Master of Science
In
Agriculture(PLANT PHYSIOLOGY)
Roll No. 2267 ID No. PG/AG/2001/32
SEPTEMBER, 2003
CERTIFICATE - I
This is to certify that the thesis entitled "Impact of foliar
application of Indole acetic acid (IAA), boron and zinc on
physiology and sink capacity of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.)
Millsp.]" submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
"Master of Science in Agriculture" of the Indira Gandhi Agricultural
University, Raipur, is a record of the bonafide research work carried out by
Tekale Ratiiesliwar Panditrao under my guidance and supervision. The
subject of the thesis has been approved by 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 investigations have been duly acknowledged by him.
Date: 2,2.-°9 .2.0*;Advisory Committee
THESIS APPROVED BY THE STUDENT'SADVISORY COMMITTEE
Chairman : Dr. Arti Guhey
Member : Dr. M. I. Khan
Member : Dr. N. Pandey
Member : Dr. N. Khare
Member : Dr. Ravi R. Saxena
CERTIFICATE - II
This is to certify that the thesis entitled "Impact of foliar
application of Indole acetic acid (IAA), boron and zinc on
physiology and sink capacity of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.)
Millsp.]" submitted by Tekale RantesJiwar Panditrao to the Indira Gandhi
Agricultural University, Raipur in partial fulfilment of the requirements for
the degree of M.Sc. (Ag.) in the Department of Plant physiology has been
approved by the Student's Advisory Committee after an oral examination in
collaboration with the external examiner.
^XDate: )7- 10- ̂ oo3 EXTERNAL EXAMINER
Major Advisor
Head of the Department
Director of Instructions
Research is an evolving concept. Any endeavor, in this regard ischallenging as well as exhilarating. It implies the testing of our nerves.It brings to light our patience, vigour and dedication.
Every results arrived at is modest beginning for a higher goal. Mywork in the same sprite is just a step in the ladder. It is a drop in theocean. No work can be turned as a one-man show. It needs the closecooperation of friends and colleagues and the guidance of experts inthe field to achieve something worthwhile and substantial.
With the blessings of Almighty God, I could bring this piece ofwork into light. I shall like to pen down my gratitude for all those whodirectly or indirectly helped me in completion of this work. Formal anddead words can't carry the fragrance of emotions with them; still theyare the only available means of expressing emotions in such formalacknowledgment. With a sense of high resolve and reverence, I in adeep impact of gratefulness thank to my guide Dr. Art! Guhey, Sr.Scientist, Plant physiology for invaluable inspiring guidance withinterest, research insight, unique supervision, constructive criticism andscholarly advice throughout the investigation, despite of her heavyscheduled work and preparation of this manuscript.
I owe profound debt to members of my advisory committee Dr.M. I. Khan, Professor and Head, Plant physiology for his usefulsuggestions, thoughtful assistance, forbearance and encouragementduring the course of investigation. I express my sincere gratitude to Dr.N. Pandey, Sr. Scientist, Agronomy, and Dr, IM. Khare, Sr. ScientistPlant pathology for their critical suggestion and regular encouragementand consistent field visits whenever needed from the beginning of theexperiment. I am also thankful from the bottom of heart to Dr. R.Saxena, Asst. Prof. Statistics for their critical suggestions andinvaluable guidance during the course of investigation in statisticalanalysis part.
I extend my heartiest thanks to teachers Dr. Pratibha Katiyar,Scientist Plant physiology and Dr. Ravindra Kumar, Scientist Plantphysiology for their critical suggestion and regular encouragementduring the course of investigation.
I wish to record my sincere thanks to Shri R.P. Bagai, Hon'bleVice-Chancellor, Dr. M. N. Shrivastava, Director Research Services,and Dr. A. S. R. A. S. Sastri, Daan college of Agriculture and Directorof Instruction for their help, both administration and technical whichfacilitates my research work.
I am sincerely grateful to Anil Khillare, Sanjeev Maliya, VikashKumar, Sachin sawant, Dr. Sunil Umate, Dr. Pravin Patil, Dr. PravinBainade, Dr. Atul Zope, Dr. Nischal, Dr. Pravin mishra, Dr. Rambir
singh, Dr. Pravin Jadhav, Nitin Choudhary, Anil Pawar, Kailas Dakhore,Ashok Renge, Amit Solunke (Baccha), Abhay Jadhav, Abhi Bhosle,Krishna Bhosle, Nilesh Kadam, Ramesh Dhawle, Surendra Solunke andmy seniors Deokar, Sonwane, Yerne, Tikore, Sajjad, as being aconstant source of encouragement and inspiration for providinginvaluable guidance and comments for enriching productive scientificdiscussion and above all for being an excellent human being during themost trying times in this tenure of research work.
I am thankful to Field staff. Plant physiology especially toDukalaha Ram Vishwakarma, Dinesh Yadav Dilip Nishad & SukhiRamYadav for their helpful coordination during course of investigation.
The moral support and ever ready helping nature of my friendsKishor, Datta, Nilesh, Prahalad (Raje), Shrikant, Nilesh, Kuldeep,Sharad, Subodh, Lilieshwar, Shailesh, Amol, Vilas, Sudarshan,prashant, Anil, Sachin (Mama), Krishna, Neeraj, Kirtya, Ravindra,Rupesh, Katara and all other nearer and dearer friends. I take thisopportunity to thanks them providing friendly and constructiveenvironment.
I wish to express my appreciation and thanks to my colleges G.Ingle, V. Deshmukh, S. Netam, Harish Soni and juniors Tiwari, Sharma,Rakhelkar, Narayankar, Reyes and Rena Gupta for their help renderedthrough out my studies.
Diction is not enough to express my gratitude to my belovedparents Shri. Panditrao Tekale and Gangabai Panditrao who's selflesslove, filial affection, constant encouragement, obstinate sacrifice,sincere prayers expectation and blessings have always been most vitalsource of inspiration and motivation in my life. There is no substitutefor the love and affection bestowed on me by grandfather Shri BapuraoTekale, uncle Manikrao Tekale ante Janhavi Manikrao. I feel be fittinghere to mention the name of my younger brothers sushilkumar,pravinkumar and akshaykumar and sister vaishali and pallavi for theirloving memories, which often gave me sense of relief after hours oftedious work during my research work.
Lastly, I wish to express my grateful thanks to all the teachersfrom my schooling onwards and well wishers who have directly orindirectly helped me to reach up to this level in my life.
My cordial thanks also goes to Mr. Ajay Kaushik, 'UMAP'computers'', for suggestions in preparation to this manuscript within avery short period of time.
Above all my humble and whole prostration before Almighty,Panchmukhi Hanuman for sprinkling his unprecedented favours uponme.
College of AgricultureRaipur (C.G.)
Rameshwar P. Tekale
CHAPTER-I
INTRODUCTION
1
A glance at the history of agriculture reveals that man has always
depended on plants for his existence on this planet. The period in the
development of human role during which man began cultivation of plants
marks dawn of agriculture. Since, then man has been preoccupied with the
question of productivity efficiency of plants through materialistic
adjustments. This might be responsible for the gradual exploration of the
mystery behind the growth changes. The revelation of the existence,
actively benefits of the plant growth regulators and mineral nutrients is
indeed an important milestone towards modern agriculture, and has created
a subject of great interest to plant researchers.
Sustainability has to be a dynamic concept since human needs
change continuously both in qualitative and quantitative terms. We face
many challenges in our quest to achieve sustainable food security. As
suggested by Dr. M. S. Swaminathan, Plant physiologist should help in
designing land, water and plant physiological process use strategies for
each agro-ecological area, which can help to optimise production from
cubic volume of soil and air.
Pulses constitute an important ingredient in predominantly
vegetarian Indian diet, besides rich source of protein. Pulses are also
important for sustainable agriculture enriching the soil through biological
nitrogen fixation. Pulses have a major share in country's economy,
accounting for roughly one-fifth of the total area under food grain crops and
contribute about one twelfth total food production of the country. Pulses
occupy 68.32 m ha area and contribute 57.51 m tones in world's food
basket. India shares 35.2 percent area and 27.65 percent of global
production (Anonymous, 2002).
The decreasing per capita availability of pulses from 60.79 in 1951
and 35.9 g in 2000 is of great concern in the Indian context, where the most
of the people are vegetarian. It is estimated that on the basis of food
characteristics demand system, the demand production of pulses for the
year 2005, 2010, 2015 are 20.0, 23.3 and 27.0 m tones, respectively
(Anonymous, 2002).
Among the Kharif pulses, pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.) rank
first. The crop has great significance in Indian agriculture, because of its
multiple use as food, fodder, fuel and its role in sustaining agricultural
productivity. India is the single largest producer and contributes more than
90 per cent of the total world production. The national production of
pigeonpea during 1999-2000 was about 2.61 m tones, harvested from an
area of about 3.43 m ha with a meager productivity of only 760 kg ha"1.
(Anonymous, 2001). The number of pods and seeds, which develop to
maturity and average pod and seed mass, determines yield in pigeonpea.
In general possible factors which contribute to the high percentage of
abscission of flowers bonds and small pods in grain legumes include
(a) biotic and abiotic stress (b) vascular constrictions (c) deficiencies of
mineral nutrients and carbohydrate, hormone synthesis and translocation.
(Dhageefa/., 1988).
A number of worker have suggested that pigeonpea yield is limited
by assimilate supply (Thiraton er a/., 1987) while others have suggested
that inadequate size of the pod sink is the limiting factor (Toyo, 1980). A
general hypothesis of source limitation has also been reported in
mungbean, chickpea (Sinha, 1977). Factors other than source and sink
limitation also affect floral abscission and hence yield. For example
abscission of flower buds and young pods has been associated with
presence of more mature fruits of soybean and lack of fertilization does not
limit fruit set of bushbean and soybean. Increase in pod set or delay in
abscission has also reported in soybeans in response to treatment with
hormones (Carlson et a/., 1987).
Chhattisgarh, a newly born state of India having production 42.9
thousand tones with productivity 1121 kg ha"1 (Anonymous, 2003a). A
different paradigm is needed if we are to meet the emerging needs. Thus,
there is need to produce more pulses per unit area by exploiting potential
yield of pulses by manipulating/balancing source-sink relationship and all
agro-resources through skillfull development of physiological parameter
based agro technology.
Pigeonpea yield is hampered by excessive vegetative growth and
shedding of reproductive parts, poor sink potential and remobilization of
nutrients, more nutrients reserve for subsequent survivals and abscission
promoting factor (Anonymous, 2001). Its productivity is further limited due
to short phase of high crop growth rate, profuse flowering, low pod set and
leaf, flower and pod abscission followed by senescence in the post
reproductive phase (Saxena, 1984). Microclimate coupled with
physiological process may include internal hormonal imbalance and may
result in abscission of flowers and immature pods and drastic reduction in
yield. The internal hormonal imbalance can be corrected through the
exogenous application of suitable growth regulator at optimum
concentration.
Plant growth regulator can check the abscission of leaf, flower, pod
and excessive vegetative growth can be used to have a proper balance
between source and sink for increasing crop yield. It can alter its life
processes or structure in same beneficial way, so as to change yield,
quality and facilitating better harvesting. The response changes with
alterations in the environment and other physiological processes of the
plants and other growth factors. The farmers must be aware about
concentration and right stage of the crop for application of these growth
regulators to get desired results (Leopold and Kriedemann, 1975).
Boron nutrition point towards its greater requirement for seed and
grain production directly linked with process of fertilization. Apart from this
its basic physiological role in stabilizing certain constituents of cell wall and
plasma-membrane enhancement of cell division and tissue differentiation,
translocation of photoassimilates towards pod sink (Marschner, 1986).
Zinc plays an important role in the formation of tryptophan, precursor
of IAA. The micronutrients, which play an important role in plant metabolism
as well as biosynthesis of auxin that may also reduce the flower drop.
(Kocchar, 1976).
Lots of information are available on organic and inorganic nutrition of
pulses, but very scanty work has been done on foliar application of plant
growth regulators individually or combination with boron and zinc at specific
crop growth stages with respect to pigeonpea in Chhattisgarh plains.
In view of the above facts, a study entitled "Impact of foliar
application of Indole acetic acid (IAA), boron and zinc on physiology
and sink capacity of pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.)" was
undertaken during Kharif season 2002 with following objectives:
> To prevent the leaf, flower and pod abscission
> To improve the pod setting
> To accelerate the transportation of photo assimilates toward the pod
sink.
> To enhance the realisation of yield potential
CHAPTER-II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L) Millsp.] is one of the important food
crop and ranks fifth among edible legumes of the world (Salunkhe et a/.,
1986). It is having greater potentiality towards yield, but the whole potential
doesn't come into realisation. The reason of low productivity appears to be
primarily due to the poor pod setting irrespective of large number of flowers
and flower buds are produced.
During adaptation in harsh environmental condition this crop have
acquired primitive traits like excessive flower production followed by flower
drop resulting in poor pod setting and low yield. This unfortunate situation
does not allowing easy yield expansion (Anonymous, 2001).
The information available on application of growth hormone in
combination with micronutrient was very scanty. An attempt has been made
to review the available literature related to "Impact of foliar application of
Indole acetic acid (IAA), boron and zinc on physiology and sink
capacity of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L) Millsp.]" under the following
suitable sub-headings.
2.1 Impact of plant growth regulator on morpho-physiological and yield
attributes
2.2 Impact of boron on morpho-physiological and yield attributes
2.3 Impact of zinc on morpho-physiological and yield attributing
2.1 Impact of plant growth regulator on morpho-physiological and
yield attributes
Mote et al. (1975) reported the application of planofix (NAA) to
prevent the abscission of flowers or fruit. The micronutrients, play an
important role in plant metabolism as well as in biosynthesis of auxins may
also reduce the flower and fruit drop in chilli.
Pande (1975) observed the requirement of NAA (Napthyl Acetic
Acid) in pigeonpea and soybean, which was different for reducing flower
abscission and increasing biomass production and seed yield. NAA is
effective when applied by spraying at less than 10 ppm at two growth
stages and in high concentration at the first growth stages.
Kaul ef a/. (1976) reported that the significant increase in grain yield
of cowpea due to application of NAA and harvest index showed direct
relationship.
Warde and Singh (1978) noted earliest fruit harvest and increase in
fruit size was recorded by spraying of NAA 10 ppm at pre flowering stage
followed by ZnSo4 0.2 % as compared to control in tomato.
According to Nickell (1978) the plant growth regulators are expected
to play an important role in rectifying the hurdles in manifestation of
biological productivity even in pulse crop.
Sharma and Shah (1979) reported the foliar application of NAA
(6.25, 12.25, and 25 ppm) increased plant height in soybean. Grain yield
was also improved with NAA (6.25 ppm) by 40 per cent, appeared to be
associated with the increase in number of seed pod"1.
Patil and Ballal (1980) reported the foliar application of plant growth
regulators or micronutrients has been reported to increase fruit set and
yield in Chilli.
Singh and Jain (1982) noted, crop growth regulators have been
employed in exploitation of plant physiological potential to maximize crop
yield in chickpea.
Swami et al. (1983) reported GAa sprayed at pre-flowering stage on
pea at 40 ppm was best in increasing plant height, early flowering, number
of pods and yield of the pea crop.
Bangla et al. (1983) reported that the application of plant growth
regulators influenced the accumulation of dry matter in chickpea in general
and the allocation pattern in particular. The plant growth regulators
increased the allocation of dry matter to the pods thereby indicating their
influence in stimulating the plant reproductive potential. They further noted
that PGR have a potential role in increasing the productivity of chickpea by
enhancing partitioning to grain yield.
Vikhe et al. (1983) noticed that pigeonpea responded to
morphological and yield attributes significantly to NAA 100 ppm spray at
flowering and twice thereafter.
Gupta (1984) noticed, the yield in pigeonpea, like in other pulse crop
is as quantitative phenomena governed by the interplay of plant genetics,
environmental factors and crop management.
Shende and Berore (1985) noticed, maximum yield of pea due to
treatment GAa 10 ppm at pre-flowering stage. Further, they observed
significant differences in LAI (leaf area index), DMP (Dry matter production)
and test weight.
Singh (1986) reported auxin are chemical messenger influencing
pattern of plant development processes like cell elongation, cell
differentiation, abscission, flower initiation, fruit set, fruit growth and also
indicated it may enhance the fruit set by thinning of excessive number of
flower.
Sarmah and Dey (1986) noticed foliar application of some growth
promoter in combination with urea or potash at 50% flowering with or
without Urea/or K. Plant height and number of branches are not affected
while number of flowers and number of pods plant"1 and seed yield were
increased. The highest yield was obtained with NAA+ urea+ potash in
soybean.
Sharma (1986) reported that the mixatol 312 ml ha"1 applied at
preflowering and fruit set, yielded maximum LAI and similar trend was also
noted for CGR and RGR and yield attributing characters like number of
pods plant"1 and number of seeds pod"1 which were significantly improved.
Reddy et a/. (1987) reported that foliar application of 2% DAP + 10
ppm NAA, or individually at flowering and pod formation stages of the crop.
The results indicated that crop growth rate, pod number and seed yield
significantly increased in pigeonpea.
Dod et al. (1989) reported that the application of 50 ppm or 100 ppm
NAA at full blooii, otage resulted in significant morphological character viz.
plant height, number of branches and yield attributes over control. None of
the foliar sprays of micronutrient viz. ZnS04, MnS04, or CuSO4 at 0.2%
concentration significantly affected the chilli yield.
Singh (1989) observed, plant growth regulators could affect the
hormonal balance in chickpea thereby improving pod setting and grain
production.
Sengupta and Sen (1989) revealed that the application of 50 ppm
NAA significantly increased the grain yield of green gram by 13.78 per cent
and 38.02 per cent over control in respective season. The pods plant"1,
grains pod"1 and dry matter production also increased significantly.
Sharma ef al. (1989) reported the maximum enhancement in growth,
yield attributing characters and yield, which was obtained with mixatol (312
ml ha"1). Spayed at "pre flowering + fruit set stage" in soybean.
Singh (1989) reported that the certain growth regulators improved
the pod setting by decreasing flower and pod abscission as a result of
altering the hormonal balance of plant in chickpea.
Sharma et al. (1989) reported, foliar application of NAA at anthesis
and 10 days after anthesis in mung bean increased the number of pods
plant"1, seeds pod"1, 1000 seed weight and gave higher seed yield over
control.
Shinde ef al. (1991) reported foliar spray of growth regulators (NAA)
with KNOa application can enhanced biological yield, leaf weight, pod
plant"1, weight of individual pod and ultimately resulted in elevating the yield
by 33 per cent in cowpea.
Prasad, (1991) noted the plant growth regulators minimise the
morphological defects viz. excessive vegetative growth, unsynchronised
flower initiation, flower shedding, immature pod and seed shattering and
thereby resulted in higher yield of oilseed and pulses.
Bhattacharya (1992) reported that the application of IAA @ 10 ppm
at flowering, (5.96g ha'1) yielded significantly higher and 13.74% more yield
over control (5.24g ha"1) which was obtained in blackgram.
Wasnik and Bagga (1992) reported that application of cycocel @ 500
ppm at the beginning of flowering in mungbean significantly increased
number of pod, seed number and grain yield.
Upadhyay et al. (1993) noticed NAA (Naphthalene acetic acid) was
most effective in improving the sugar content and yields in chickpea.
Singh and Kakralya (1993) revealed that foliar spray of mixatol (2 mg
lit"1) along with foliar application of P (40 kg ha"1) at pre flowering stage
increased the seed yield and seed protein content and also improved seed
quality in terms of its storability, germinability and subsequent field
performance. The response of mixatol treatment was observed to be
modulated by better flower retention, higher seed filling setting indices and
improved dry matter accumulation in chickpea seeds.
Setia et al. (1993) reported that foliar application of NAA 50 and 100
jag ml"1 to lentil caused increase in number of branches and pods plant"1
with consequent enhancement in seed yield. It ultimately increased total dry
matter and harvest index.
Singh and Singh (1994) reported in chilli the treatments with growth
substances at vegetative and reproductive stages resulted in reduced
flower abscission percentage and yield were increased with under spray
treatments of benzyl-adenine and alpha-naphthalene acetic acid.
Gibberellic acid, etheophon, abscissic acid and ascorbic acid promoted the
flower abscission (drop) resulting in fruit yield reduction.
Upadhayay (1994) reported spraying of Kinetin at bud initiation and
pod formation stage in chickpea increased the seed yield by increasing
flower number and their retention.
Kene et al. (1995) recorded foliar application of ISA (Indole butyric
acid), GA and IAA @ 15 ppm significantly increased plant height, LAI and
seed yield in sunflower.
Rajput et al. (1996) noticed morpho-physiological attributes, which
differed significantly due to the rate and stage of plant growth promoter
application during both the years of experimentation. Cycocil @ 50 ml ha"1
and mapiquat chloride @ 1.25 lit ha"1 at flower initiation stage were
statistically at par with each other but significantly reduced plant height,
increased biomass and number of branches per plant in mustard.
Maske et al. (1998) observed in soybean GAa (Gibberellic acid) and
NAA (Naphthalene acetic acid) was found effective in increasing crop
growth rate (CGR). NAR (Net Assimilation Rate), which denotes increase in
plant dry weight per unit leaf area of assimilatory tissues unit"1 time. Highest
NAR recorded by 50 ppm NAA and GAs by 125 ppm.
d.3
Deotale et al. (1998) observed significant increase in morpho-
physiological parameters of soybean due to seed soaking treatment of GAs
and NAA recorded. Highest value for plant height, number of leaves,
number of branches, leaf area, dry matter and seed yield were obtained,
with GAa and NAA treatment @ 10 ppm and 100 ppm, respectively.
Barclay and Mcdavid (1998) observed in pigeonpea application of 6-
benzylaminopurine (BA) at 2, 20, and 200 ppm sprayed during early fruit
set resulted in longer racemes with thicker stems and more axillary
branches and had more, larger fruits and leaves than did control racemes.
Total seed mass (TSM) was greatest with 20 ppm while at higher
concentration it was declined to control level.
Kumar et al. (1999) observed foliar spraying of salicylic acid (SA)
sprayed at 12, 24 and 36 days after sowing accelerated Nitrate Reductase
Activity (NRA) and enhanced the content of total soluble proteins. Number
of flowers and pods plant"1, grain yield and other attributes were also
improved in soybean.
Thiyageshwari and Ramanathan (1999) reported in soybean that the
application of cytozyme at preflowering stage (45 DAS) and micronutrients
like boron and zinc resulted in increased grain yield and dry matter
production with stover yield significantly.
The seed yield in green gram was significantly higher with NAA (40
ppm) sprayed at twice 25 and 40 DAS (days after sowing) and the increase
in yield was due to maximum number of seeds plant"1, pod length, number
of pods plant"1, pod weight, test weight and harvest index (Anonymous,
2003b).
Upadhyay (2002) noted that foliar spraying of NAA @ 20 ppm affects
significantly higher number of buds plant"1, number of flowers plant"1, pod
length, circumference of pod, number of grains pod"1, number of pods
plant"1, biological weight and test weight in chickpea.
2.2. Impact of Boron on morpho-physiological and yield attributes
Pollard era/. (1977) reported that boron is responsible for absorption
of phosphate. Boron deficient roots of corn had a reduced ATPase activity.
They supported the view that boron plays an essential role in regulation of
the functions of higher plants with polyhydroxy components of the
membranes.
Agarwala and Sharma (1979) observed boron deficiency resulted in
a marked decrease in the number of flowers. The flowers of boron deficient
chickpea plants lack pigmentation and fail to fruit setting causing reductions
in pod and seed yield.
Agarwala et al. (1981) studied boron nutrition and pointed out its
greater requirement for seed production than for vegetative growth only.
Boron is directly linked with the process of fertilization, pollen producing
capacity of anther, viability of pollen grains, pollen germination and pollen
tube growth in maize.
Marschner (1986) reported that boron not only play role in stabilizing
certain constituents of cell wall and plasma membrane, but also
J// .
15-
enhancement of cell division, tissue differentiation and metabolism of
nucleic acid, carbohydrate, protein, auxin and phenols.
Padma et al. (1989) reported that foliar application of boron and
molybdenum at 20 and 40 DAS increased plant height, number of leaves
plant"1, number of branches plant"1, tap root length, leaf area plant ~1, LAI
and dry matter production under frenchbean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)
cultivation.
Kalyani et al. (1993) noticed that the boron influenced significantly
the crop growth rate and yield. Boron as boric acid @ 200, 300 and 400
ppm resulted in significant increase in plant height, growth rates (CGR and
RGR), net assimilation rate, leaf area index, crop growth and yield of
pigeonpea at all concentration studied. Maximum seed yield was obtained
at 300 ppm concentration.
Bolanos et al. (1994) examined the effect of boron deficiency on
symbiotic nitrogen fixation in pea. The absence of boron in the culture
medium resulted in a decrease of the number of nodules and alteration of
nodule development leading to an inhibition of nitrogenase activity. These
results indicated that the boron is a requirement for normal nodule
development and functionality.
Kalita and Dey (1996) performed an experiment with three varieties
of black gram (Vigna mungo) and three levels of foliar spray of boron (0.0%
0.02% and 0.03%). The results clearly indicated that there was significant
effect on leaf area index (LAI), relative growth rate (RGR), pollen
germination, number of flowers plant"1, nitrate reductase activity (NRA),
i<number of pods plant"1, seed yield plant'1, seed yield ha"1 and harvest
index.
Bhuiyan ef a/. (1997) reported that the rhizobium inoculation in
presence of boron fertilizer significantly increased the nodulation, dry matter
and nut yield of the groundnut crop. The magnitude of increase in nut yield
over control was 47 per cent for three consecutive Rabi seasons.
Guhey (1999) noticed boron application significantly increased
morpho-physiological attributes associated with yield in chickpea. It was
clearly indicated that number of branches, pod bearing nodes, seed weight,
pod weight, seed index and harvest index were also improved in chickpea.
Hemantranjan ef a/. (2000) reported foliar application of boron as
boric acid @ 50 ppm showed an increase in morpho-physiological attributes
accompanied by total dry matter production and seed yield in soybean.
Dongre ef a/. (2000) found that foliar application of boron @ 0.1%,
0.25% and 0.50% sprayed at 30 and 60 DAS enhances the yield and
quality of Chilli over control.
Ali and Mishra (2001) from Kanpur reported that foliar application of
boron and molybdenum at 50 and 60 DAS brought about significant
improvement in plant height, branches plant'1 and pods plant""1 due to their
favourable effects on plant metabolism and nitrogen fixation in chickpea.
2.3 Impact of zinc on morpho-physiological and yield attributes
Hemantranjan and Garg (1984) reported that the zinc fertilization at
9 and 12 ppm delayed the senescence of wheat through an increase in the
level of IAA, Chlorophyll contents and net assimilation rate (NAR) in leaves
and increased the total dry matter content and grain yield in wheat.
Puste and Jana (1988) studied the effect of different levels of zinc (0,
10 and 20 kg ZnSCVha) on the crop growth pattern in pigeonpea. It was
found that application of zinc at 20 kg ZnSOVha greatly influenced the leaf
area index, dry matter accumulation in leaf, stem, pod and crop growth rate
of pigeonpea. Growth parameters were increased significantly by the
application of zinc with magnitude 20kg/ha.
Sarkar and Aery (1990) studied the effect of different concentrations
of zinc on various growth parameters of soybean. Lower concentrations
(<10ug~1) were found promoter whereas, the higher concentrations
(>10ug~1) were found inhibitory for growth and nodulation.
Ravichandran et a/. (1995) studied the effect of zinc on yield and
quality of brinjal. The results revealed that 0.05 % zinc foliar spray 30 days
after transplanting (DAT) recorded highest fruit yield, number of fruits
plant"1, dry matter production and plant height.
Rathinvel et a/. (1999) reported that foliar application of zinc sulphate
0.5 % at 90 and 110 days after sowing (DAS) resulted significantly higher
yield attributing characters in cotton. The number of sympodia plant'1,
number of bolls plant"1, boll weight, and seed weight and number of seeds
boll"1 was significantly higher as compared to control.
Umamaheshawari and Singh (2002) observed the application of
ZnSo4 @ 5 kg ha~1 increased the yield and yield attributes significantly over
control. Number of seeds pods"1 increased with the increase in 1000-grain
weight in frenchbean.
Pathak and Pal (2003) noticed that application of verifying levels of
zinc affects the growth and yield characters. Harvest index (HI), number of
seeds plant"1 and seed yield was improved by the application of zinc
particularly 20 kg ha ~1.
19
CHAPTER-III
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This chapter deals with the concise description of materials used and
methods adopted during the course of investigation entitled "Impact of
foliar application of Indole acetic acid (IAA), boron and zinc on
physiology and sink capacity of pigeonpea [Cajanus Cajan (L)
Millsp.]".
3.1 Experimental site
Field experiment was carried out during Kharif season 2002-03, at
the Instructional Farm, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur
(Chhattisgarh).
3.2 Geographical situation
Raipur is situated in the Southeastern part of Chhattisgarh and lies
at 21° 16° N latitude and 81° 36°' E longitude with an altitude of 298.6 m
above the mean sea level (MSL).
3.3 Climate
Raipur, the place of investigation comes under dry moist, sub humid
region. The region receives 1200-1400 mm rainfall annually, out of which
about 88 per cent was received during the rainy season (June to
September) and about 12 per cent during winter season (October to
February). May was the hottest and December was the coolest month of
the year. The rainfall pattern has greatest variations during rainy season
from year to year. The more temperature during the summer months
reaches as high as 44.6 °C and the mercury drops to as 6.6 °C during
December-January.
3.4 Weather Condition
Weather data recorded during the period of investigation were
shown in Table 3.1. The data revealed that total rainfall received during
crop growth period (15th July to 15th February) was 697.68 mm.
The mean maximum temperature for different months varied from
39.6 °C to 26.4 °C while monthly mean minimum temperature varied
between 27.2 °C to 6.6 °C.
The maximum relative humidity throughout the crop growth period
varied between 94 per cent. In the second week of August to 72 per cent in
the first week of July while, the minimum relative humidity varied between
89 per cent in the second week of August to 20 per cent in the third week of
January.
3.5 Physico-chemical Properties of Soil
The physico-chemical properties of the experimental soil are
presented in Table 3.1. The soil of the experimental field was clay in nature,
(vertisol) locally known as 'Kanhar" (Bharri) soil. The soil was neutral in
reaction. It had low nitrogen, medium phosphorus and high potash content.
Table 3.1: Physico-chemical properties of soil
ParticularsA] Physical Properties
1. MechanicalcompositionCoarse sand (%)
Fine sand (%)
Silt (%)
Clay (%)
Textural class
2. Field capacity (%)
3. Permanent wilting Point(%)
4. Water holding capacity(%)
5. Bulk density (mg m"3)
B] Chemical properties1. Available N (kgha'1)
2. Available P kgha"1
3. Available K kgha"1
4. pH (1:2.5 Soil: water)
5. EC (dsrrf1 at 25UC)
Values
5.31
14.93
35.43
43.12
32.15
16.38
37.57
1.42
218
12.55
365.33
7.10
0.15
Rating
Vertisol
Low
Med.
High
Neutral
Normal
Method usedInternationalPipette method,(Black, 1965)
"
. " .
Pressure plateapparatus method(Black, 1965)Pressure plateapparatus method(Black, 1965)Pressure plateapparatus method(Black, 1965)Soil core method(Bodman, 1942)Alkalinepermanent method(Subbaiah andAsija, 1956)Oslen's method(Oslen, 1954)Flame photometricmethod (Jackson,1967)Glass electrode pHmeter (Pipper,1967)Solubridge method(Black, 1965)
In order to evaluate the nutrient status of the soil, the samples were
taken randomly from the experimental field up to 30 cm depth with the help
of the soil augur and a composite sample was made for mechanical and
chemical analysis.
3.6 Cropping history of the field
The cropping history of the field for the past five year and during the
year of investigation is given in Table 3.2
It is obvious from the data experimental field consisted of pulse crop
in Kharif season followed by wheat in Rabi. The crops are grown with
uniform dose of fertilizers in the post years. Thus it could be said that the
fertility status of the experimental field was uniform during the present
investigation.
Table 3.2 : Cropping history of experimental field
Year
1996-1997
1997-1998
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
2001-2002
Kharif
Crop
B. Gram
Pigeonpea
Soybean
Pigeonpea
B. Gram
Pigeonpea
Fertilizer
N P K
20:50: 30
20:50: 30
20:50: 30
20:50: 30
20:50: 30
20:50: 30
Rabi
Crop
Wheat
Wheat
Wheat
Wheat
Wheat
Wheat
Fertilizer
N P K
120:60:60
-
120:60:60
120:60: 60
120:60: 60
120:60: 60
Zaid
Crop
-
-
-
-
-
-
Fertilizer
N PK
-
-
-
-
-
-
3.7 Chemicals, Treatment details and layout
3.7.1 Chemicals used
1] Indole acetic acid - 0.04 % (400ppm).
2] Boric acid - 0.03 % (300 ppm).
3] Zinc sulphate - 0.02 % (200 ppm).
These chemicals were used in the present investigation.
•j J
22-
3.7.2 Preparation of solution
For the preparation of 1 litre of concentration of IAA one litre of
0.04% weight of 4.0 gm of, IAA was taken and dissolved in some quantity of
alcohol and volume of that solution was made 1 litre. In the same way
solutions of boron and zinc was prepared by taking 3.0 and 2.0 gm of the
material and dissolved in distilled water and finally volume was made 1 litre
by required quantity of distilled water.
3.7.3 Treatment details
Table 3.3 Details of treatment combinations "••
Notation
TT
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
Treatment Detail
Control
lAA+boron+zinc
lAA+boron+zinc
lAA+boron+zinc
at Flower Initiation (Fl)
at Pod Initiation (PI)
at Fl and PI both stages
IAA only at Fl and PI stages
Boron+zinc at Fl and PI stages
IAA at flower initiation and boron+zinc at pod initiation
3.7.4 Layout
Design - Randomised Block Design (RED)
Date of Sowing - 15-07-2002.
Spacing - 50 x 15cm.
Date of Harvesting-10-02-2003.
Treatments - Seven
Replications - Three
Gross plot Size - 4.0 x 3.0m.
Crop- Pigeonpea
Variety-ICPL-87-119
(Asha)
2.3
3.8 Experimental techniques
3.8.1 Field preparation
The preparation of the field was done in such a way that the soil
must attain good tilth, until soil becomes loose, friable and have a good
aeration. The field was prepared with cross-wise ploughing followed by
harrowing and clod crushing. After the pulverisation of soil, finally field was
levelled with planker and experiment was marked out.
3.8.2 Seed material
The seeds of variety Asha (ICPL-87-119) were obtained from IIPR,
Kanpur.
3.8.3 Seed treatment and sowing
Seeds were sown at optimum moisture condition by seed drill
method, keeping row-to-row spacing 50 cm and plant-to-plant 10-15 cm.
Before sowing, seeds were treated with Thirum @ 2 g kg"1 of seed.
3.8.4 Fertilizer application
The fertilizers were applied at the rate of 20: 30: 50 NPK kg ha"1 in
the form of urea, SSP and murate of potash, as basal dose. The required
amount of fertilizers were weighed for each plot and drilled at the time of
sowing.
3.8.5 Gap filling and thinning
There was no gap in the field at all but to avoid overcrowding of
plants, thinning was done and distance 50 x 15 cm was maintained on 10th
day after sowing.
3.8.6 Plant protection measures
At the early crop growth stage, due to heavy rains there was attack
of fungus Phytopthora spp., copper-oxi-chloride (COC) was sprayed @
2.5gm/lit. For insect pest Thiodan and Endosulfon was sprayed as per
recommendations, whenever needed.
3.8.7 Harvesting
Harvesting of pigeonpea was done manually with the help of sickle.
Pigeonpea crop was harvested at physiological maturity as suggested by
Singh et a/., (1987). Crop was threshed after sun drying and m2 yield, and
plot basis was recorded on per.
3.8.8 Cultural Schedule
The details of the cultural operations adopted in the experimental
plot from preparatory tillage to harvesting are given in Table 3.4
3.9 Observation schedule
In the present investigation observations were taken at different crop
growth stages. In order to get representative sample, five plants were
tagged from each plot for the purpose of phenological observations and
three representative plants were selected for the purpose of growth
analysis at each stage of crop.
3.9.1. Plant population
To acquire the accuracy in plant stand, population was recorded in
field condition. Plant population was recorded on 6th, 8th and 10th day after
sowing, to ensure an optimum plant/crop stand.
Table 3.4: Cultural schedule
Sr.No.
Cultural ScheduleImplement used /
methodDate
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Cross wise ploughing
Cross wise Harrowing andlevelling
Soil sampling
Layout and field channelpreparation
Seed treatment and sowing
Thinning and gap filling
Weeding
Spraying of COC (Copper- oxi-chloride) @ 2.5g lit"1
Spraying of COC (Copper- oxiChloride) @ 2.5g lit'1
Dusting of 10% BHC
Irrigation
Spraying of Endosulfan 35EC31.5ml in 42 lit
Weeding
Spraying of Endosulfan 31.5mlin 42 lit
Irrigation
Spraying of Thiodan 31.5ml in42 lit
Harvesting
Threshing and winnowing
M. B. Plough
Disk harrowplanker
Soil auger
Steel tape manual
Drilling
Manual
Manual
Knapsack Sprayer
Knapsack Sprayer
Manual
Flood irrigation
Knapsack Sprayer
Manual
Knapsack Sprayer
Flood irrigation
Knapsack Sprayer
Manual
Manual
01-07-2002
04-07-2002
07-07-2002
12-07-2002
15-07-2002
25-07-2002
05-08-2002
29-08-2002
20-09-2002
28-09-2002
10-10-2002
15-10-2002
25-10-2002
10-11-2002
18-12-2002
15-01-2003
15-02-2003
25-02-2003
25*
3.9.2 Phenology
For keen observation from each plot five plants were tagged and
their phenological observations were recorded for
1] Days to flower initiation on whole plot basis
2] Days to pod initiation on whole plot basis
3] Days to 50 % flowering on whole plot basis
4] Days to 50 % Podding on whole plot basis
5] Days to maturity on whole plot basis
3.9.2.1 Days to flower initiation, pod initiation, 50 % flowering, and
50% podding, maturity
Days from sowing to first flower, first pod, 50% flowering, 50%
podding and 90 % physiologically matured pods were observed and noted.
3.9.3 Morphological parameter
3.9.3.1 Plant height
Mean plant height was recorded in (cm) from the base of the stem to
the apex of the main stem. Observations were recorded at vegetative, 50 %
flowering, 50 % podding and maturity.
3.9.3.2 Pod-bearing length
From the base of the stem, the length between first podding branch,
to the apex of the stem was known as pod bearing length and was
measured in (cm) at 50 % podding maturity.
3.9.3.3 Upper, middle, lower region of pod-bearing length
The pod-bearing length was measured and divided into three equal
parts. The length from apex towards base of upper division was known as
upper length and the length below the upper division was known as middle
length, the region below the middle region was referred, as lower length of
total pod bearing length.
This concept of pod bearing length can be well discussed with the
help of Fig. 3.3.
3.9.3.4 Dry weight of leaves, stem and root plant"1
Dry weight of different plant parts, it was kept in oven at 80°C for
complete drying then reading was taken with the help of electronic balance.
3.9.3.5 Number of branches in upper, middle and lower region of pod
bearing length plant"1 and total number of branches plant"1
After division of pod bearing length, branches were recorded in each
part of pod bearing length separately i.e. upper, middle and lower and total
number of branches was calculated by adding the branches present in
upper, middle and lower part of pod bearing length.
3.9.3.6 Number of pods in upper, middle and lower region of pod
bearing length plant"1 and total number of pods plant"1
After division of pod bearing length pods were recorded in each part
of pod bearing length separately viz., upper, middle and lower and total
numbers of pods were calculated by adding the pods present in upper,
middle and lower part of pod bearing length.
3.9.4 Growth Analysis
The data of growth characters viz. fresh and dry weight of different
plant parts were further analysed to work out CGR (Crop Growth Rate) and
RGR (Relative Growth Rate).
Fig: - 3.3 Division of Pod bearing length
pngth
Totalpodbearinglength
3.9.4.1 Crop growth rate (CGR)
Crop growth rate was the total gain in the weight by a plant within a
specific time interval. It is expressed in g plant"1 day""1. CGR was calculated
by following formula given by Richards (1969).
W2-WiCrop growth rate (g plant day ) =
t2-ti
Where,
Wi = Total dry weight of plant at time ti
W2 = Total dry weight of plant at time t2
T-I = Initial time of observation
T2 = Final time of observation
3.9.4.2 Relative Growth Rate (RGR)
Relative growth rate was the increase in plant material unit~1 of time
in relation to initial weight. It was calculated by the formula given by Fisher
(1921) and expressed in g g ~1 plant"1 day"1.
In w2 - In wiRelative growth rate (g g ~1 plant 1 day 1) =
Where,
Wi = Total dry weight of plant at time ti
w2 = Total dry weight of plant at time {
ti = Initial time of observation
t2 = Final time of observation
•t2-ti
3.9.5 Yield attributes
3.9.5.1 Number of pods in upper, middle and lower length and total
number of pods plant"1
The number of pods present in upper, middle and lower length were
detached separately and recorded by adding these, total number of pods
were calculated.
3.9.5.2 Pod length plant'1
Pod length of each five representative pods was measured and
recorded.
3.9.5.3 Pod weight plant"1
Pods of an individual plant were detached separately and pod weight
was recorded.
3.9.5.4 Number of seeds Pod"1
The number of seeds per pod was noted by referring five
representative pods.
3.9.5.5 Number of seeds plant"1
Each representative plants were harvested and threshed separately
and the total number of seeds were recorded.
3.9.5.6 Seed yield per plant"1
The representative samples harvested and threshed separately and
their seed weight was measured and recorded.
3.9.5.7 Seed yield hectare"1
Each individual plot was harvested separately and threshed; from
the seed yield of plot the seed yield ha"1 was calculated.
3.9.5.8 Seed Index
Seed index was calculated by weighing 100 seed weight (gm).
3.9.5.9 Harvest index
The harvest index was determined from the mean value of seed
yield and biological yield per plant of representative samples using formula
given by Donald (1962).
Harvest index (%) =Economical yield
X100Biological yield
3.9.6 Statistical Analysis
Experimental data were analysed statistically adopting the technique
of variance (ANOVA) for a randomised block design (RBD). The level of the
significance of the treatment mean square at 5% probability was tested with
'F' test value, using the significant differences of the treatment means.
(Gomez and Gomez, 1976).
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
The experiment entitled "Impact of foliar application of Indole
acetic acid (IAA), boron and zinc on physiology and sink capacity of
pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (I.) Millsp.]" was conducted during Kharif
2002. With a view to study the effectiveness of foliar application of IAA,
boron and zinc on realization of potential yield in pigeonpea.
Data recorded on various aspects during the investigations are
briefly described in this chapter. The results are given in appropriate tables
and figures for the reference. Significant as well as non-significant findings
have been interpreted and presented to clarify the effect of IAA, boron and
zinc on pigeonpea.
4.1 Morphological studies
4.1.1 Plant population
The data on plant population are presented in Table 4.1.
The plant population of pigeonpea was noticed at 6th, 8th and 10th
DAS was statistically similar as well as homogenous in all the observations.
As the all treatment were given after attaining the flowering stage, therefore
it was found non-significant.
Table 4.1: Plant population in different treatments
Treatments
T-i: Control
T2: IAA + B+Zn at Fl
T3: IAA + B+Zn at PI
T4: IAA +B+ Zn at both stages
T5: IAA at both stages
Te: B+Zn at both stages
T7: IAA at Fl & B+Zn at PI
SEm+
CD at 5%
Plant population
6th day55.87
54.76
52.92
55.53
56.95
56.5
53.5
1.55
NS
8th day73.70
73.02
74.97
74.69
73.15
76.24
76.93
1.01
NS
10th day91.05
91.18
91.22
91.82
91.99
89.33
91.29
1.64
NS
4.1.2 Phenological Parameter
The data on phenological parameters are presented in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2 : Impact of IAA, boron and zinc on phenological parameters
Treatment
T-i: Control
T2: IAA + B+ZnatFI
T3: IAA + B+Znat PI
T4: lAA+B+Znat both stages
T5: IAA at bothstages
T6: B+Zn at bothstages
T7: IAA at Fl &B+Zn at PI
SEm+
CD at 5%
Flowerinitiation(Days)
83
82
82
82
82
82
83
0.74
NS
PodInitiation
(Days)94
95
94
95
98
97.66
95
2.02
NS
50%Flowering
(Days)95
98
95
100
99
95
94.33
1.49
4.56
50%podding(Days)
111
116
108
111
109
119
110.67
1.153.54
Matu-rity
(Days)180
182
181
185
183
182
182
1.19
3.67
It was clearly indicated from the data, there was no significant impact
of treatment on days to flower and pod initiation. While 50% flowering, pod
filling and final maturity was significantly delayed in all the treatments over
the control. The maximum postponement in 50% flowering, pod filling and
maturity were noticed in T5, T6 and T4 treatments respectively.
4.1.3 Plant height (cm)
The data on plant height was recorded at 45th, 90th, 125th and 180th
days after sowing (DAS) and shown in table 4.3 and illustrated in fig. 4 A.
Table 4.3 : Impact of IAA, boron and zinc on plant height at variouscrop growth stages
Treatment
TI: Control
T2: IAA + B+ZnatFI
T3: IAA + B+Znat PI
T4: lAA+B+Znat both stage
T5: IAA at bothstages
T6: B+Zn at bothstages
T7: IAA at Fl &B+Zn at PI
SEm+
CD at 5%
StagesVegetative
stage(45 Days)
73.89
75.00
75.67
74.19
75.47
75.47
74.29
0.69
NS
50%flowering(90 Days)
113.33
122.66
129.11
128.27
128.66
123.33
125.22
5.57
12.13
50%podding
(125 Days)118.44
138.67
136.22
139.05
135.33
128.43
131.99
3.27
10.10
Maturity(180 Days)
121.77
144.83
136.37
149.37
140.98
134.12
135.04
5.39
16.63
Data presented in Table 4.3 revealed that plant height was increased
vigorously up to 90 days and there after some what slow up to maturity.
The differences amongst treatment were significant at all the stages except
45 DAS stage.
The treatment ~T4 (lAA+boron+zinc at both stages) recorded the
highest value for plant height and it was at par with other treatments except
control.
4.1.4 Pod bearing length (cm)
The data on pod bearing length are presented in Table 4.4 and
illustrated in Fig. 4 B.
Table 4.4 : Impact of IAA, boron and zinc on Pod bearing length atvarious crop growth stages (cm)
Treatment
T-i: Control
T2: IAA + B+Zn at Fl
J3: IAA + B+Zn at PI
T4: IAA +B+ Zn at both stages
T5: IAA at both stages
T6: B+Zn at both stages
T7: IAA at Fl & B+Zn at PI
SEm+
CD at 5%
Stages
50 % podding
54.24
76.66
76.10
79.74
75.23
75.79
75.88
1.07
3.30
Maturity
71.55
77.71
75.05
83.62
76.63
82.88
77.33
2.19
6.76
Regarding this trait significant differences were existed in all
treatments applied over the control. At maturity and 50% pod filling stage
treatment T4 (lAA+boron+zinc at both stages) exhibited the highest value
for pod bearing length as compared to control and it was at par to that of
Fig 4.1: Control treatment (T,) at 50 % podding
Fig 4.2: T2 - (lAA+boron+zinc at FI) Fig 4.3: T3 - (lAA+boron+zinc at PI)at 50 % podding at 50 % podding
Fig 4.4: T4 - (I AA+boron+zinc at both stages)at 50% podding
Fig 4.5: T5 - (IAA at both stages) at 50 % podding
Fig 4.6: T6 - (Boron+zinc at both stages) at 50 % podding
Fig 4.7: T7 - (IAA at FI and Boron+zinc at PI) at 50 % podding
treatment T2 (IAA+ boron + zinc at Fl), T6 (Boron + zinc at both stages) and
~[j (IAA at flower initiation and boron + zinc at Pod initiation).
4.1.5 Number of branches in upper, middle and lower region of pod
bearing length and total number of branches plant"1
Data on number of branches in each pod bearing length and total
number of branches is given in Table 4.5 and illustrated in Fig. 4 C and 4 D.
Data presented in Table 4.6 indicated that the total number of
branches plant"1 varied significantly at 135 and 180 DAS. The maximum
total numbers of branches were in treatment T4 (lAA+boron+zinc at both
stages) and showed the highest value as compared to control and it was at
par with treatment T2 (lAA+boron+zinc at Fl) and T6 (Boron+zinc at both
stages).
It was interesting to note that out of the total branches, lower part of
pod bearing length beard more number productive branches as compared
to upper and middle.
4.1.6 leaf dry weight plant"1
The data on leaf dry matter plant"1 are presented in Table 4.6 and
illustrated in Fig. 4 E.
From the data it has been clarified that there is increase in total leaf
dry weight plant"1 at 50% flowering and later phases it started to decline. At
vegetative and 50% flowering there was non-significant difference, during
later stages it exhibited significant differences. The highest leaf dry matter
was observed at both stages in T4 (lAA+boron+zinc at both stages) 6.34 g
plant"1 at 50% podding and 4.36 g plant"1 at maturity followed by T2 at both
stages 5.58 g plant"1 and 3.47 gplant"1.
Least effect on dry matter accumulation in leaf had been seen in Ti•
(control) 3.89 g plant"1 at 50% podding and 1.07 g plant"1 at maturity.
Table 4.6 : Impact of IAA, boron and zinc on leaf dry weight plant"1 atdifferent crop growth stages
Treatment
T-I: Control
T2: IAA + B+Zn atFl
T3: IAA + B+Zn atPI
T4: IAA +B+ Zn atboth stages
T5: IAA at bothstages
T6: B+Zn at bothstages
T7: IAA at Fl &B+Zn at PI
SEm+
CD at 5%
StagesVegetative
stage(45 Days)
2.79
2.67
2.75
2.61
2.72
2.66
2.75
0.06
NS
50%flowering(90 Days)
6.16
6.62
6.22
8.54
6.73
6.86
7.69
0.82
NS
50%podding
(125 Days)
3.89
5.58
4.74
6.80
4.91
4.60
5.37
0.49
1.51
Maturity(180 Days)
1.07
3.47
2.59
4.36
3.19
1.82
2.19
0.20
0.63
4.1.7 Stem dry weight plant"1
The data on stem dry matter plant"1 are presented in Table 4.7 and
illustrated in Fig. 4 F.
Significant increment in stem dry matter was observed only after
50% flowering stage of the crop in all the treatments and maximum stem
dry matter was accumulated in T4 (24.14 g plant"1) followed by T2 (22.58
plant"1) at 50% podding.
At maturity, maximum stem dry matter was accumulated in T4 (IAA +
boron + zinc at both stage (40.07 g plant"1) followed by T2 (37.34 g plant"1).
Minimum stem dry matter was accumulated in T-i at 50% podding
(20.01 g plant"1) as well as at maturity (31.54 g plant"1).
Table 4.7 : Impact of IAA, boron and zinc on total dry matter (g plant"1)at different crop growth stages
Treatment
T-i: Control
T2: IAA + B+Zn atFl
T3: IAA + B+Zn atPI
T4: IAA +B+ Zn atboth stages
T5: IAA at bothstages
T6: B+Zn at bothstages
T7: IAA at Fl &B+Zn at PI
SEm+CD at 5%
Stage
Vegetativestage
(45 Days)3.53
3.83
3.88
3.83
3.86
3.89
3.84
0.13NS
50%flowering(90 Days)
14.73
15.87
14.44
18.33
17.65
14.83
15.65
2.11NS
50%podding
(125 Days)20.01
22.58
20.53
24.12
22.23
21.26
21.61
0.682.11
Maturity(180 Days)
31.54
37.34
35.09
40.07
35.76
33.10
34.47
0.341.05
4.1.8: Root dry matter plant"1
The data on root dry matter plant"1 are presented in Table 4.8 and
illustrated in Fig. G.
The root dry matter accumulation showed that consistent increase
upto maturity. Data showed non-significant findings at vegetative and 50%
flowering stage of crop.
At 50% podding and at maturity T4 showed maximum dry matter
accumulation (3.64 g plant"1 at 50% podding and 4.89 g plant"1 at maturity).
Least impact was noted in control as compared to other treatments
at 50% podding (2.57 g plant"1) and (2.99 g plant"1) at maturity.
Table 4.8: Impact of IAA, boron and zinc on root dry matter (g plant"1) atdifferent crop growth stages
Treatment
T-i: Control
T2: IAA + B+Zn at Fl
T3: IAA + B+Zn at PI
T4: IAA +B+ Zn atboth stages
T5: IAA at bothstages
T6: B+Zn at bothstages
T7: IAA at Fl & B+Znat PI
SEm+
CD at 5%
Stage
Vegetativestage
(45 Days)
1.24
1.15
1.15
1.21
1.23
1.16
1.19
0.02
NS
50%flowering(90 Days)
2.34
2.76
2.08
2.44
2.64
2.81
2.41
0.29
NS
50%podding
(125 Days)
2.57
3.67
2.43
3.64
2.86
2.44
2.73
0.13
0.40
Maturity(180 Days)
2.99
4.52
4.68
4.89
3.71
3.56
3.57
0.09
0.28
4.1.9 Total dry matter plant"1
The effects of various treatments on the total dry matter content of
plant are presented in Table 4.9 and illustrated in Fig. 4 H.
Table 4.9 : Impact of IAA, boron and zinc on total dry matter content(g plant"1) at different crop growth stages
Treatment
TI: Control
T2: IAA + B+ZnatFI
T3: IAA + B+Znat PI
T4: IAA +B+ Zn atboth stages
T5: IAA at bothstages
T6: B+Zn at bothstages
T7: IAA at Fl & B+Znat PI
SEm+
CD at 5%
Stage
Vegetativestage
(45 Days)
7.61
7.64
7.70
7.71
7.63
7.74
7.78
0.14
NS
50%flowering(90 Days)
23.22
25.25
28.83
22.74
29.27
24.37
24.93
3.05
NS
50%podding
(125 Days)
49.49
59.14
55.26
63.58
51.46
53.32
54.38
2.67
8.22
Maturity(180 Days)
54.76
74.23
66.93
80.53
71.01
58.57
58.65
2.68
8.27
It was clear from the data that total dry matter was increased up to
the maturity of the crop.
It has been showed that all treatment had no significant effect on
vegetative and 50% flowering stage, while during later phases it turned $o
show significant impact.
Dry matter was increased in all the treatments during vegetative to
50% flowering stage although it was non-significant while significant impact
on total dry matter accumulation has been observed at 50% podding and
maturity. The maximum dry matter accumulation had been observed in
(T4- IAA + boron + zinc at both stages) (63.58 g plant"1) at PF and (80.53 g
plant"1) maturity and it was at par with treatment T2 (IAA + boron + zinc at
flower initiation) (59.14 g plant'1) at 50% podding and (74.23 g plant'1) at
maturity.
Least impact was observed at 50% podding (49.49 g plant"1) and
maturity (54.76 g plant"1) in (T-i) control.
4.2 Physiological observations
4.2.1 Crop growth rate (CGR) (g plant'1 day'1)
The data on crop growth rate are presented in Table 4.10 and
illustrated in Fig. 4 I.
Table 4.10: Impact of IAA, boron and zinc on crop growth rate (CGR) (gplant"1 day"1)
Treatment
TI: Control
T2: IAA + B+ZnatFI
T3: IAA + B+Znat PI
T4: lAA+B+Znat bothstages
T5: IAA at bothstages
T6: B+Zn at bothstages
T7: IAA at Fl &B+Zrrat PI
SEm+
CD at 5%
Days interval
(0-45 Days)
0.170
0.172
0.172
0.172
0.173
0.174
0.170
0.019
NS
(45-90 Days)
0.315
0.322
0.298
0.319
0.320
0.313
0.315
0.014
NS
(90-125Days)
1.347
1.861
1.395
2.451
1.687
1.489
1.597
0.150
0.470
(125-180Days)
0.128
0.439
0.359
0.465
0.215
0.196
0.160
0.032
0.100
The data on crop growth rate showed significant impact during later
phases. Differences in CGR were significant in 110-125 & 125 - 180 days
interval. Highest value for CGR had been observed in T4 (at 50% Flowering
to 50 % podding (2.451 g plant'1 day"1) and marking at Maturity (0.465 g
plant'1 day"1).
Least impact was noted in T-i (1.347 g plant"1 day"1) in 90-125 and
0.128 (g plant"1 day"1) in 125-180 days interval.
4.2.2 Relative Growth rate
The data on relative growth rate are presented in Table 4.11 and
illustrated in Fig. 4 J.
Table 4.11 : Impact of IAA, boron and zinc on Relative Growth Rate(RGR) (g g"1 plant"1 day"1)
Treatment
TI: Control
T2: IAA + B+Zn at Fl
T3: IAA + B+Zn at PI
T4: IAA +B+ Zn at both stages
T5: IAA at both stages
Te: B+Zn at both stages
T7: IAA at Fl & B+Zn at PI
SEm+
CD at 5%
Days interval
(45-90)
0.0168
0.0173
0.0164
0.0143
0.0166
0.0139
0.0137
0.0024
NS
(90-125)
0.044
0.045
0.044
0.070
0.051
0.051
0.049
0.006
0.0013
(125-180)
0.0036
0.0047
0.0044
0.0061
0.0043
0.0049
0.0039
0.0014
0.0031
The data revealed that a non-significant trend at 45-110 days
interval. But it increased during 110-125 and 125-180 days interval. During
42.
the crop period (T4) showed the highest value(0.070 in 110-125 and
0.0061 g g"1 plant"1 day"1. Among all the treatments RGR has not showed
any consistent trend during the crop growth stages.
4.3 Yield attributes
Data on yield attributes viz. number of pods plant"1, Pod length
plant"1, Pod weight plant"1, number of seeds pod"1, number of seeds plant"1,
seed index, seed yield plant"1, seed yield ha"1, and harvest index are
presented in Table 4.12 and able 4.13.
4.3.1 Number of pods in upper, middle and lower pods and total
number of pods in pod bearing length plant"1
The data on number of pods and pods in upper, middle and lower
portion of pod bearing length plant'1 are presented in Table 4.12.
Data showed among the treatments, all the treatments differed and
significantly in pods at 50% podding and maturity. T4 (lAA+boron+zinc at
both stages) favoured the highest number of pods at 50% podding and
maturity (84.36 and 106.73). Treatment T2 and T5 was at par with each
other. Least impact was of treatment plant was noted in Ty IAA at Fl and
boron+zinc at PI (79.55).
It was interesting to note that middle and lower part of pod bearing
length bearded maximum number of pods as compared to upper part.
4.3.2 Pod length plant'1*-».
Data on pod length are presented in Table 4.13. Data exhibited
treatments varied significantly. Regarding this trait with the maximum value
was obtained in T4and T3 (5.40 cm and 5.30 cm) respectively.
Among treatments least impact was seen in T6 (Boron+zinc at both
stages) with value (5.10 cm).
4.3.3 Number of seed pod"1
The data on number of seed pod~1 are presented in Table 4.13
Regarding this trait, all the treatments applied were differed
significantly. Highest impact was noted in treatment T4 (3.30).
Least impact was noted in T3 (3.02).
4.3.4 Number of seed plant'1
The data on number of seed plant"1 are presented in Table 4.13.
Data revealed that all treatments differed significantly. Highest value
for this trait was noted in T4 (250) that was at par with T2 (240) effect was
observed in T4 and ~T2 treatment.
Least effect was observed in treatment T6 (lAA+boron+zinc at both
stages) (206.33).
4.3.5 Pod weight plant"1
The data on pod weight plapt~1 are presented in Table 4.13.
Data showed that all the treatments differed significantly. Its highest
value was noted in T4 (41.21 g plant"1) and was at par with T2, T3, Is.
Least impact was found in T6 (20.09 g plant"1) and it was at par with
control (18.17 g plant'1).
4.3.6 Seed yield plant"1 and Seed yield ha"1
The data on seed yield plant""1 are presented in Table 4.13.
Data exhibited in both the characters the treatments differed
significantly. Highest value was noted in T4 (lAA+boron+zinc at both
Fig 4.8: Effect of treatment T4 - (1A A+boron+zinc at both stages)on pod length
Fig 4.9: Effect of treatment T4 - (I AA+boron+zinc at both stages)on grain size
stages) 24.52 g plant"1 and 31.87 q ha"1 respectively. T6 treatment
(Boron+Zinc at both stages) was less effective with value 19.49 g plant"1
and 25.33 q/ha.
4.3.8 Harvest index (HI)
The data on harvest index are presented in table 4.13.
Data exhibited that all the treatments were differed statistically. The
highest value for harvest index was obtained T4 with the value 35.78)
respectively.
Least effect was seen in T6 (boron+zinc at both stages).
4.3.9 Seed index
The data on seed index are presented in table 4.13.
Data revealed that all the treatments varied significantly. Highest
value for seed index was noted in T4 (10.49 g) followed by T3 (10.03 g
plant"1) which was at par with each other.
Least impact of treatment on seed index was noticed in T? (9.38 g
plant"1) while in control it was (9.19 g plant"1).
CHAPTER-V
DISCUSSION
It has been observed that temperature and humidity coupled with
physiological justifications, favours the abscission of leaves, flowers and
pods in pulses. It is known that in pulses temperature and humidity is
responsible for promoting flower and pod abscission, which ultimately
resulted towards the significant shrinkage in yield (Saxena and Johnson,
1990).
In pigeonpea it has been observed that inspite of production of large
number of flowers at different time interval, ratio of pod setting is very less.
The available information revealed plant growth regulators and
micronutrients individually or in combination certainly has their promotory
impact on various morpho-physiological and yield attributes.
In view of this the present investigation entitled "Impact of foliar
application of Indole acetic acid (IAA), boron and zinc on physiology
and sink capacity of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.]" was
carried out during Kharif 2002-03 to assess the effect of IAA (0.04%), boron
(0.03%) and zinc (0.02%) individually and in combination on pigeonpea at
specific crop growth stages [flower initiation and pod initiation].
The results of the present investigation are briefly discussed in this
chapter with the views of earlier researches under following headings.
5.1 Seasonal effects
5.2 Morpho-physiological effects associated with yield
5.1 Seasonal effects
All the requirements being adequate for crop growth and
development are the function of climatic parameters. Among the weather
elements rainfall and the temperature are the most important factors
affecting the growth and yield of crop. It is therefore, essential to discuss
the results obtained during the present investigation in the light of rainfall,
temperature and other weather parameters prevailed during the crop
growth period. Variation of climatic parameter from optimal crop
requirements may lead crop growth and development and yields to greater
enhancement or reduction. (Singh, 1988a) reported that pigeonpea needs
moist and warm weather during germination (30-35°C), slightly lower
temperature during active vegetative growth (20-25°C), but about 15-18°C
during flowering and pod setting. However at maturity, it needs higher
temperature at around (35-40°C). Being a pulse crop with deep root
system, pigeonpea is capable to exploring moisture from soil profile.
However a minimum of 250-350 mm rainfall is required for successful
completion of its life cycle (Singh, 1988b).
During the growing period the crop experienced a maximum
temperature range of 26.4 °C to 36.3 °C and a minimum range of 6.6 °C to
25.8 °C (Appendix-1). As regard to rainfall, the crop received 539.4 mm
rains during its growth period. The open pan evaporation noticed over the
growing period ranged between 2.9 mm to 7.3 mm and total evaporation
was 123.7 mm.
A weather parameter revealed that the crop experienced more or
less similar temperature range (23.9 °C to 32 °C) coinciding with the
germination period as against ideal requirement of 30 to 35 °C. A rainfall
159.0 mm at third week of June also favoured the better germination,
growth and flowering were congenial, except at maturity, where it
encountered a range of 6.6 °C to 30.7 °C in comparison to the ideal
requirement of 35 °C to 40 °C. This might have helped favourably in better
grain filling of the crop. A rainfall 23.2 mm occurred during of third week of
October at the time of pod development was helpful for significant
increment in yield. Karle and Pawar, (1998) noted that frequent rains during
flowering and pod development stages and optimurrt plant stand were
responsible for boosting the yield of pigeonpea.
5.2 Morpho-physiological effects associated with yield
Regarding the phenology of pigeonpea crop, IAA alone itself induced
the postponement in flowering of the crop. Significant delay was observed
in 50% flowering, podding and days to maturity by all the treatments except
in T-i and Ta. Which might be due to the fact that IAA interferes with the
photoperiodic reactions which occurs in the leaves and hinders the
synthesis of flowering and resulted the delay in flower induction in the shoot
apex. However boron and zinc didn't reflect any significant impact on
preponding or postponing the phenology but upto certain extent these could
have induced the cell wall plasticity to some extent. On the other hand,
these micronutrients are also responsible for resulting the metabolic
activities specifically the formation and maintenance of chlorophyll thus
delaying the maturity of crop. These results were corroborated with findings
of Swami et ai, (1983) and Singh, (1986).
In pigeonpea, plant height is the most influencive determining
morphological trait. Results clearly highlighted that increased trend in plant
height and pod bearing length due to application of auxin along with
micronutrients. Application of IAA along with boron and zinc at flower
initiation and pod initiation stage contributed maximum for plant height as
compare to other treatments. Further it emphasized that the importance of
appropriate time of application of IAA, boron and zinc which can alter the
physiology when given at proper stage of crop. Increase in plant height and
pod bearing length was mainly attributed due to higher shoot growth
through cell elongation, cell differentiation and apical dominance promoted
by the IAA. Boron and zinc are also suppose to be involved in the hormone
synthesis hence indirectly related to translocation and metabolism of
carbohydrates finally contributing to additional growth compared to control
treatment. The significant differences in plant height were also noted by
Sharma and Shah, (1979), Sharma, (1986), Dod et ai, (1989), Padma et
ai, (1989) and Deotale et ai, (1998).
Application of IAA, boron and zinc enhanced plant height and pod
bearing length hence provided space for development of more number of
branches at different parts of pod bearing length. Significant differences do
exist in number of branches due to application of bioregulators along with
boron and zinc. Application of IAA with boron and zinc reflected synergistic
impact and resulted higher and consistent value for total number of
branches as well as individually as upper, middle and lower branches in
pod bearing length. These might be-due to promotion of bud and branch
development by the auxins. Boron and zinc application also induced the
maximum number of branches because of the ultimate increase in the
availability of other nutrients and also due to accelerated the translocation
of photoassimilates as well. The results are in conformity with those
obtained by Padma et al., (1980), Barclay and Mcdevid (1998), Setia et a/.,
(1993) and Guhey, (1999).
Dry matter accumulation in the plant at progressive stages is a
justified assessment of growth, which gives cumulative expression of
different growth parameters. Further it has been observed that productivity
of pigeonpea is not only dependent on accumulation of total amount of dry
matter but its effective partitioning into economic sink seems to be a key to
increase the yield.
The leaf, stem, root and total dry weight plant"1 varied significantly at
125 and 180 DAS. Dry matter accumulation in leaf, stem, root and total dry
matter was maximum in treatment T4 followed by T2 at all crop growth
stages (Fig. 4 E, 4 F.). Dry matter accumulation in pods was highest in T4
(46%) (Fig. 4 K) as compared to TI (34%) (Fig. 4 K). Where boron and zinc
applied alone it again drive the attention for specific need of IAA with these
micronutrients. Auxin is known to maintain the ability of plant to continue
relatively higher rate of photosynthesis rate, which, contributed to higher dry
matter during the later phases which, is an indicator of current
photosynthesis. Prevention of leaf and pod abscission by IAA coupled with
boron and zinc at both stages simultaneously affects the improvement in
carbohydrate activity. Zinc might have also been involved in nitrogen and
protein metabolism by controlling the RNAase activity and carbohydrate
metabolism. These results are confirmatory to Bangla et a/., (1983), Puste
and Jana, (1988), Sharma et a/., (1989), Shinde et a/., (1991),
Hemantranjan et a/., (2000) and Upadhyay (2002).
Data exhibited that crop growth rate varies at 90-125 and 125-180
DAS. Regarding the RGR values are also statistically significant at 90-125
and 125-180 DAS. Significant increment in total dry matter by IAA with
boron and zinc might ultimately yielded the higher values of crop growth
rate and relative growth rate which was also contributed to the maintenance
of leaf area of the plant, which allows the higher interception of length and
more absorption from the soil. These results are confirmatory to the findings
of Reddy et a/., (1987), Puste and Jana, (1988), Maske, (1998),
Hemantranjan et a/., (2000), Kalyani et a/., (1993) and Kalita and Dey,
(1996).
Findings of the experiments clearly inferred that bioregulator (IAA)
and micronutrients (B+Zn) at flower initiation and pod initiation can altered
the yield attributes resulting remarkable increase in seed yield. Among
these yield traits increase in number of pod of the plant shared maximum
towards the visible jump in other related components of the yield (pod
length, seed number plant"1, pod weight, seed weight). Interestingly seed
yield and harvest index experienced the significant impact due to th)e
application (74) lAA+boron+zinc at flower initiation and pod initiation of the
crop phase. These might be due to the fact that IAA promotes th)e
prevention of pod abscission and cell elongation at suppression of
abscission of pod is the major determining the factor of the seed yield. On
the other hand auxin indirectly controls the ethylene activity, which
accelerates the abscission. It also suppresses the activity of cellulase, cell-
degrading enzyme which favours abscission process. Boron and zinc also
contributes significantly in reducing the abscission of pod by preventing
abscission layer formation when applied at podding stage. At the same time
it also increases the sink demand as well as the translocation of
photosynthates from source to sink. This may be due to unloading of the
current photosynthates being accumulated in the leaf and stem.
It was interesting to notice that application of T4 (IAA + boron + zinc
at flower initiation and pod initiation stage) showed remarkable
improvement in yield attributing traits as compared to the Tz
(lAA+boron+zinc at flower initiation) where it was applied at flower initiation
stage only. Further suggesting that there are proper specifications at
podding these specifically accelerating the translocation of photoassimilates
from stem to economic sink. T6 (Boron and zinc at both the stages) favored
the maximum retention of leaf and flower thus can be further promoted the
yield associates (Fig.4 K.).
It can also be inferred that application of auxin with boron and zinc at
both stages (T4) favored the higher net photosynthetic area (Fig. 4 E.),
chlorophyll content, carbohydrate activities and protein synthesis. These
activities might have contributed to nitrate reductase activity via nucleic acid
and protein metabolism. Boron also seems to improve the translocation of
photosynthates, root growth, higher rate of pollination might be resulted
towards the higher sink potential.
Again it was interesting to note that least impact on seed yield
attributes was observed in T-i, T6 and Ty where individually auxin or boron
+zinc were applied at specific growth stages. Suggesting the importance of
application of these growth substances at proper critical growth phase of
the crop. Lowering of seed yield might be resulted due to higher dry matter
accumulation in stem at maturity stage of crop (58%, 57%, 51%), (Fig. 4 K)
and least partitioning to pod sink (34%, 34%, 41%) respectively. Boron and
zinc interaction resulted to some extent. As boron application decreases the
zinc content and zinc application decreases the boron content.
(Hemantranjan, 2000). The increment in yield and its yield attributes by |AA,
boron and zinc is confirmatory to earlier researchers by Sharma and Shah
(1979), Sharma (1988), Sengupta and Sen (1989), Sharma et a/., (1989)
and Guhey (1999).
CHAPTER VI
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS FOR
FUTURE WORK
An investigation entitled "Impact of foliar application of Indole
acetic acid (IAA), boron and zinc on physiology and sink capacity of
pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.]" was carried out during Kharif
2002-03 at Instructional Farm, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur
(C.G.).
Experiment was laid out in Randomized Block Design (RED) with
seven treatments and three replication. Pigeonpea seeds of Asha (ICPL-
87-119) are used for evaluating the performance, which has to be
recommended for Chhattisgarh region. Crop was protected in whole crop
growth period from insect pests and diseases. By timely spraying of
insecticides and pesticides, Irrigation are given whenever necessary.
Treatments are applied at flower initiation and pod initiation stages of
crop. Seven combinations of IAA, boron and zinc are made such as T-i
(control), T2 (lAA+boron+Zinc at Fl), T3 (lAA+boron+Zinc at PI), T4
(lAA+boron+Zinc at both stages), T5 (IAA at both stages) T6(Boron+zinc at
both stages) T/ (IAA at Fl and boron+zinc at PI).
While going through the results of this experiment, interesting results
are emerged out which are as described. IAA along with Boron+zinc at
flowering and podding stage can alter phenology of crop. Among
phenological parameters 50% flowering, podding and maturity was delayed
in T4, TS and T6 treatments.
Plant height was elevated by the application of treatments and
highest value was observed in T4 with applied IAA in combination with
micronutrients at both stages individually.
Regarding pod bearing length which had also elevated by applying
treatments. Highest investment was noted in T4 (IAA + boron + zinc at both
stages).
Middle and lower most part of pod bearing length bearded maximum
pods by the application of IAA, boron and zinc. Branches are also differed
significantly and out of total branches, middle and lower part of pod bearing
length are having the maximum number of branches at both stages.
Regarding biometrical observation leaf, stem, root, and total dry
matter also had increased by the application. Consistent trend was noted in
T4 treatment. Acceleration of photoassimilates as well as partitioning of
assimilates from stem to sink in later phase was favoured by T4 (46%).
CGR and RGR are differed significantly at later phases of crop 90-
125 and 125-180 days interval. Treatment T4 showed the highest values for
CGR and RGR.
Yield attributes like number of pods plant"1, number of seed pod"1,
pod length, seed yield plant"1, harvest index and seed index were differed
significantly by the application of treatment. Significant higher yield ha"1 was
noted in treatment T4 (lAA+boron+zinc at both stages).
Conclusions
From the above study, it could be concluded that
1. Application of lAA+boron+zinc at flower and pod initiation was most
effective in elevating the yield.
2. It also might concluded that (74) treatment was effective in
preventing the flower and premature pod abscission and accelerating
translocation of photoassimilates
3. Seed yield ha"1 was also improved in T4, it might be concluded that
?4 achieved the goal of potential yield realization.
4. For achieving the best results of above treatment, treatment 14
followed by T2 and T3 can be recommendable.
Suggestions for future work
1. The experiment should be conducted for few more years to reach
some confirmed conclusions regarding the results obtained.
2. By keeping the same trend, the combination of plant growth
regulator with micronutrients other than this could be made an have
to test according to burning problem of pigeonpea or any other crop.
3. Investigations are also necessary to identify recent active ingredients
of combinations of growth regulators and their concentration, which
are promotery effect on prevention of abscission o plant organs.
4. For tapping the higher yields, study should be conducted with
combinations with other micronutrients.
5. At molecular level, to work for control of genetic expression by these
bioregulators there may be some changes which are caused to
suppress the abscission factor. Those changes have to find out,
characterize and efforts should be made to delete or minimize the
effect of abscission promoting factor so as to have bright future in
potential yield realization pulses.
6. To understand biochemistry of these PGR an their interrelations with
micronutrients this treatment combination should be tested for other
varieties in different agro-climatic conditions.
Impact of foliar application of Indole acetic acid (IAA), boron andzinc on physiology and sink capacity of pigeonpea
[Cajanus cajan (L.)Millsp.]
by
Tekale Rameshwar Panditrao
Abstract
The present investigation entitled "Impact of foliar application of
Indole acetic acid (IAA), boron and zinc on physiology and sink capacity of
pigeonpea [ Cajanus cajan (L)Millsp.]" was carried out at Instructional farm,
IGAU, Raipur (C. G.) during Kharif2QQ2 with the objectives to prevent the
leaf, flower and premature pod abscission, to improve pod setting,
simultaneously to accelerate the transportation of photoassimilates towards
the enhancement of sink capacity of pigeonpea. The experiment was laid
down in Randomized Block Design (RED) with seven treatments consisted
of TI (Control), T2 (lAA+boron+zinc at Fl), T3 (lAA+boron+zinc at PI), T4
(lAA+boron+zinc at both stages), T5 (IAA at both stages), T6 (boron+zinc at
both stages) and T? (IAA at Fl and boron+zinc at PI) with three replication.
Results indicated that various morphophysiological as well as yield
attributing parameters were differed significantly in all the treatments like
plant height, pod bearing length, number of branches in upper, middle,
lower and total branches in pod bearing length, total dry weight plant"1, crop
growth rate, relative growth rate, number of pods in upper, middle, lower
and total pods plant"1, pod length plant"1, seed yield plant"1, seed yield ha"1,
harvest index and seed index.
In yield attributing characters treatment T4 (lAA+boron+zinc at both
the stages) exhibited most pronounced effect in terms of highest number of
pods plant"1, seed yield plant"1, harvest index and seed, index followed by
treatment T2 (lAA+boron+zinc at Fl) while, least impact was observed in TS
and Te.
Department of Plant physiologyCollege of AgricultureRaipur (C.G.)
ley(Major Advisor)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Agarwala, S. C. and Sharma, C. P. 1979. Recognising micronutrient
disorders of crop plants on the basis of visible symptoms and
plant analysis. Prem printing press, Lucknow India, pp. 55-
85.
Agarwala, S. C., Sharma, P. N., Chaterjee, C. and Sharma, C. P. 1981.
Development and enzymatic changes during pollen
development in boron deficient maize plants. J. Plant Nutri. 3:
229-236.
AN, M. and Mishra, J. P. 2001. Effect of foliar nutrition of boron and
molybdenum on chickpea. Indian J. Pulses Res. 14:41-43.
Alieve, D. A. 1971. The effect of combination of micronutrients and N and P
on the yield and quality of tomatoes. Horti. Abstr. 4220.
Anonymous, 2000. Agricultural statistics at a glance. Directorate of
Economics and Statistics, Dept. of Agriculture and
Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India, New Delhi.
Anonymous, 2001. Annual Report. All India Co-ordinated Research project
on Pigeonpea, IIPR, Kanpur. pp. 4-11.
Anonymous, 2002. 'Poor man's meat' needs fresh fillip. The Hindu survey
of Indian Agriculture. Kasturi and sons Ltd. Chennai. pp. 63-
69.
f o
Anonymous, 2003a. Status Report. Indira Gandhi Agriculture University,
Raipur. pp. 60-70.
Anonymous, 2003b. Annual Report. 2001-02, University of Agricultural
Sciences. Dharwad 580005. pp 45-48.
Bangla, D. B., Deshmukh, S. N. and Patil, V. A. 1983. Contribution of pod
wall in grain development of Chickpea (Cicer arientanum L.)
as influenced by growth promoter. Indian J. plant physiol.
26:292-295.
Barclay, G. F. and Mcdavid, C. R. 1998. Effect of benzylaminopurine on
fruit set and seed development in pigeonpea. Scientia
Horticulturae. 72 (2): 81-86.
Bhattacharya, S. 1992. Productivity of blackgram (Vigna mungo L.) as
influenced by different levels of phosphorus and row spacing.
M. Sc. (Ag.) Thesis submitted to IGAU, Raipur.
Bhuiyan, M. A. H., Rahman, M. H. H. and Khatun, M. R. 1997. Effect of
micronutrients (Mo and rhizobial inoculums) on nodulation
and yield of groundnut. Legume Research. 203 (3/4): 155-
159.
Black, C. A. 1965. Methods of soil analysis. American Soc. Agron. Medison
Wis USA.
Bodman, G. B. 1942. Nomegrams for rapid calculation of soil density, water
contents and total porosity relationship. J. Amer. Soc. Agron.
34: 883 - 893.
Bolanos. L, Esteban, E., Cristina A. L, Mercedes F. P., Maria R. A. P.,
Austin G. and Indefonso, B. 1994. Essentiality of boron for
symbiotic nitrogen fixation in pea (Pisum sativa) rhizobium
nodules. Plant Physiol. 104:81-90.
Brar, Z. S., Deol, J. S. and Kaul, J. N. 1992. Influence of plant growth
regulators on grain production and dry matter partitioning in
chickpea International chickpea Newsletter. 27:25-27.
Carlson, D. R., Dyer, D. I., Cotterman, C. D. and Durley, R. C. 1987. The
physiological basis for cytokinin induced increase in pod set in
IX 93-100 soybeans. Plant physiol. 84:233-239.
Deotale, R. D. Maske, V. G., Sorte, N. V., Chimurkar, B. S. and Yerne, A. Z.
1998. Effect of GAaand NAA on morphological parameters of
soybean. J. So/As and crops. 8(1): 91-94.
Dickinson, D. B., 1978. Influence of borate and pentoerythiol concentration
of germination and tube growth of Lilium lofiflorum pollen. J.
Amer. Soc. Horti. Sci. 103:413-446.
Dod, V. N., Kale, P. B. and Ratonkar, R. S. 1989. Effect of foliar application
of auxin and micronutrients on growth and yield of chilli. PKV
Res.J. 13(1): 29-33.
Dongre, S. M., Mahorkar, V. K., Joshi, P. S. and Deo, D. P. 2000. Effect of
micronutrient spray on yield and quality of Chilli [Capsicum
annum L.) Var. Jayanti. Agric. Sci. Digest. 20 (2): 106-107.
r ••
Fisher, 1921. Laboratory manual of physiological studies of Rice. IRRI. pp
so-48. : ;
Gomez, A. W. and Gomez, A. A., 1976. Statistical procedure for agricultural
research (2nd ed.) An Inter. Rice Research Insti. Phill. John
Waley and Sons. pp. 70-90.
Guhey, A. 1999. Physiological studies on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in
relation to drought tolerance. Ph.D. Thesis Submitted to Dept.
of plant physiology, Institute of Agriculture Sciences, BHU,
Varanasi.
Gupta, U. S. 1984. Production potential of grain legumes in U. S. Crop
physiology. Advancing frontiers. Oxford and IBM publication
Co. New Delhi, pp. 284-297.
Hemantranjan, A. 2000. Physiological significance of boron in plant
nutrition. Advances in Plant physiology. Scientific publishers,
Jodhpur. pp. 497-513.
Hemantranjan, A. and Garg, 0. K. 1984. Effect of zinc fertilization on the
senescence of wheat varieties. Indian J. Plant Physiol. 27(3):
239-246.
Hemantranjan, A., Trivedi, A. K. and Maniram. 2000. Effect of foliar applied
boron and soil applied iron and sulphur on growth and yield of
soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merrill.). Indian J. Plant Physiol.,
5(2): 142-144.
Jackson, 1967. Soil Chemical analysis practises Hall of India ltd. New
Delhi.
Kalita P. and Dey S. C. 1996. Physiological efficiency and yield
performance of some black gram (Vigna mungo) varieties as
influenced by foliar application of boron. Plant Physiol. and
Biochem. 24 (1): 22-25.
Kalyani, R., Sreedevi, V., Satyanarayana, N. V. and Madhavarao, K. V.
1993. Effect of foliar application of boron on crop growth and
yield of pigeonpea (Cajanus Cajan (L.) Millsp.) Indian J. Plant
Physiol. 36(4): 223-226.
Karle, A. S. and Pawar, G. G., 1998. Seed yield of pigeonpea genotypes
under varying planting geometry during Rabi season Indian J.
Pulses Research. 11 (1): 98-99.
Kaul, T. N., Sekhon, N. S. and Brar, J. S. 1976. Effect of hormones on the
grain yield of cowpea. Tropical grain legumes bulletin. 6:3-4.
Kene, H. K., Sontakey, P. Y. and Kale, M. R. 1995. Effect of foliar
application of growth regulators on growth yield and oil
contents of sunflower. PKV. Res. J. 19 (2): 29-33.
Kocchar, P. L. 1976. A textbook of Plant Physiology. Atmaram and Sons,
Delhi, pp. 158-169.
Kumar, P., Dube, S. D. and Chauhan, V. S. 1999. Effect of salicylic acid on
growth, development and some biochemical aspects of
soybean (Glycine max (L) Merrill.). Indian J. of Plant Physiol.
4(4): 4 327-330.
Leopold, A. C. and Kriedmann, P. E., (1975). The dynamics of growth in
plant growth and development 2nd Ed. The Tata Me. Grow Hill
Pub. Co. Ltd. New Delhi, pp. 77-105.
Marschner, H. 1986. Mineral nutrition of higher plants. Academic press,
London, pp. 40-75.
Maske, V. G., Deotale, R. D., Sorte, N. V., Goramnager, H. G. and Chore,
C. N. 1998. Influence of GAs and NAA on growth and yield
contributing parameters of soybean. J. so/7s and crops 8 (1):
20-22.
Mote, U. N., Patil, A.V. and Wavhal, K. N. 1975. Effect of NAA (Planofix)
sprays on flower drop and yield in important varieties of
chillies. Res. J. Mahatma PhuleAgric. Univ. 6 (1): 57-66.
Nickell. 1978. Plant growth regulators controlling Biological behaviour with
chemicals. Chem. Engg. News. 56:18-34.
Olsen, S. R., Cole, C. V., Watanable, F. S. and Dean L A., 1954.
Estimation of Available P in soils by extraction with Na2Co3
United State. Deptt. Of Agri. CIRC Washington.
Padma, M., Reddy, S. A. and Babu, R. S., (1989). Effect of foliar sprays of
molybdenum (Mo) and boron (B) on the vegetative growth
and dry matter production of Frenchbean (Phaseolus vulgaris
L.) J. Res. APAU. 17(1): 87-89.
Pande, S. N. 1975. Effect of NAA on flower abscission and productivity of
Arhar (Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.) and soybean (Glycine max
(L.) Merrill.) J. Pesticides Bombay. 9 (9) 42-44.
Pathak, J. and Pal S. K., (2003). Effect of zinc and molybdenum on growth
yield and quality of blackgram. 2nd International congress on
Plant physiology. 8-12 Jan. New Delhi, India pp. 376-377.
Patil, P. K. and Ballal, A. L 1980. Effect of seed and foliar sprays of various
plant growth regulators on flower drop and yield of green chilli.
J. o/:A/XlL/5(3):195-197.
Pipper, C. S. 1967. Soil and plant analysis. Hans Pub. Bombay.
Pollard, A. S., Dari, A. J., and Lenghmen, B. C. (1977). J. Exp. Bot. 28:831-
841
Prasad, M. 1991. Effect of plant growth regulators on Mustard (Brassica
Juncea.). Indian J. Agron. 36 (4): 612-614.
Puste, A. N. and Jana, P. K. 1988. Effect of phosphorus and zinc on growth
patterns of pigeonpea (Cajans Cajan (L.) Millsp.) growth
during winter season. Indian J. Plant Physiol. 31(3): 243-247.
Rajput, R. C., Shrivastava, V. K. and Verma, 0. P. 1996. Effect of growth
regulators on growth and yield of Indian mustard (Brassica
Juncea L) Agric. Sci. Digest. 16 (2): 111-124.
Randhwa, K. S. and Singh, K. 1970. Effect of maleic hydrazide (MH), NAA
and GAs application on vegetative growth and yield of
muskmelon. Indian J. Horti. 27: 195-199.
Rathinvel, K., Dharmalingam, C. and Paneerselvam, S. 1999. Effect of
micronutrient on the productivity and quality of cotton seed
Cv. TCB 209. Madras Agricultural journal, 86(4-6): 313-316.
Ravichandran, M., Jaison, J. J. and SriramchandraSekharan, M. V. 1995.
Effect of zinc and copper on yield and quality of brinjal. Ann.
Agric. Res. 16(3): 282-285.
Reddy, Y., Reddy, B. T. and Reddy S. G. H. 1987. Effect of DAP; NAA and
topping on yield attributes and yield of pigeonpea. The Andra
Agric. J. 34(1): 85-87.
Richards, F.J. 1969. The quantative analysis of growth in Plant physiology.
SA'(Ed.) F.J. steward, Academic press, New York.
Salunkhe, D. K., Chavan, J. K. and Kadam, S. S. 1986. Pigeonpea is
important food source. Critical Review in Food Sci. and
Nutrition. 23(2): 103-141.
Sarkar S. and Aery, N. C. 1990. Effect of zinc on growth of soybean. Indian
J. Plant Physiol. 33(3): 239-241.
Sarmah, S. C. and Dey, S. C. 1986. Response of soybean to foliar
application of some growth regulators and in combination with
urea and potash. Soybean Genetics Newsletter: 13:71-74.
Saxena, N. P. 1984. Pigeonpea. In: Goldsworthy, P. K. and Fisher, N. M.,
Ed. The physiology of tropical field crops, New York, John
Willey and Sons. pp. 319-353.
Saxena, N. P. and Johansen, C. 1990. Realised yield potential in chickpea
and physiological considerations for further genetic
improvement. Society for plant physiology and biochemistry.
In proceeding of International congress of plant physiology,
New Delhi.
Selim, M. M. 1972. Egyptian J. Agron. 17:141-154.
Sengupta, B. C. and Sen, K.N. 1989. Effect of P20s and NAA on grain yield,
pods per plant and dry matter yield of green gram. Indian J.
Agron. 34 (2): 237-240.
Setia, N., Setia S. R. C. and Malik, C. P. 1993. Alterations in growth and
yield components of lentil in response to foliar application of
Napthyl Acetic Acid (NAA). Indian J. of Plant physiol. 36 (1):
47-52.
Sharma, P. S. and Shah, C. B. 1979. Effect of seed soaking and foliar
spray with GA and NAA on growth and yield of soybean. The
Andhra Agric. J. 26 (1&2): 24-27.
Sharma, R., Singh. G. and Sharma, K. 1989. Effect of Triacontanal, Minatol
and NAA on yield and its components in mung bean. Indian
Agriculturist 33 (1): 59-60.
Sharma, S. R. (1986) Effect of Growth stimulators on productivity of
soybean. Proceeding of the workshop on increasing crop
productivity, 20-21 June 1986 Bombay, pp. 79-185.
Sharma, S. R., Verma, V. P., Rathore, R. S., Khandwe, R. K., Sharma, 0.
P. and Shrivastava, R. K. 1990. Effect of growth stimulator on
yield and oil content of soybean. J. Oilseed Res. 6:26-31.
Shende, V. D. and Berore, B. P. 1985. Effect of foliar sprays of growth
substances on the yield attributes on pea (Pisum sativum) Cv.
Bonneville M.Sc. Thesis, MPK Rahuri.
Shinde, A. K., Jamadagni, B. M. and Birari, S. P. 1991. Effect of foliar spray
of growth regulators and KNO3 on growth and yield of cowpea
(Vigna unguiculata L.) Var. VCM-8. Indian J. Plant physiology.
34(4): 392-395.
Singh, Amar. 1986. Fruit physiology and production (2nd ed.) Kalyani Pub.
Delhi, pp. 105-118
Singh, G. and Jain, S. 1982. Effect of some growth regulators on certain
biochemical parameters during seed development in chickpea
under salinity. Indian J. Plant Physiol. 25:169-179.
Singh, K. 1989. Hormonal regulation of reproductive phenomena and yield
of chickpea. Ann. Plant Physiology. 3: 108-115.
I
Singh, K. and Kakralya, B. L. 1993. Seed yield and quality responses of
Chickpea to mixatol treatments. Acta Botanica indica. 21:202-
207.
Singh, K. and Rathore, S. 1988. Seed protein yield of mung in response to
treatment with growth regulators under field condition. Indian
Agriculturist. 32 (2): 133-137.
Singh, K. and Singh, B. 1994. Flower abscission and fruit yield of capsicum
cultivars in response to hormonal treatments. Acta Botanica
indica 22:266-71.
Singh, K., 1989 Hormonal regulation of reproductive phenomenon and yield
of Chickpea. Ann. Plant Physiol. B: 108-115.
Singh, S. S., 1988a. Crop management under irrigated and rainfed
conditions. Kalyani Publishers, Ludhiana. pp. 132-136.
Singh, S., Singh, G. and Singh H. 1987. Assessing the physiological
maturity of Pigeonpea [Cajanus Cajan (L) Millsp.] Seeds.
Indian J. Plant Physiol. 30(4): 404-407.
Singh, V., (1998). Fundamentals of irrigation of fertilizers. Agricultural
Research Information center, Hissar, pp. 19-25.
Sinha, S. K. 1977. Food legumes: Distribution, Adaptability and biology of
yield. Plant population paper No. 3 F. A. 0., Rome.
Subbiah, B. V. and Asija, G. L. 1956. A rapid method for estimation of
nitrogen in soil. Curr. Sci. 26:259-260.
Swami, T. N., Singh, N., Verma, Y. K. and Chaudhary, B. 1983. Growth and
yield of pea as influenced by growth regulator. Madras agric.
J. 20 (8): 525-528.
Tayo, T. 0. 1980. Compensatory growth and yield of pigeonpea (Cajans
cajan (L) Millisp.) following pod removed at different stages of
reproductive growth. J. Agric. Sci. Camb. A5: 487-491.
Thiraton, A., Byth, D. E., Fischer, K. S. and Whitman, P. C. 1987. Effect of
sink development of changes in assimilates supply during
different growth stages of short duration pigeonpea. In : food
legume improvement for Asian Farming system. Proc. Intl.
Workshop, eds. Es. Wahis and D. E. Byth, Khon Khaen,
Thailand, 1-5 Sept. 1988, ACAIR Proc. 18 Canberra, pp. 248-
252.
Thiyageshwari, S. and Ramanathan, G. 1999. Micronutrient and cytozyme
on grain yield and dry matter production of soybean. Madras
agric. J. 86 (7-9): 496-498.
Umamaheshwari, P. and Singh, C. P. 2002. Influence of irrigation levels
and micronutrients (Fe and Zn) on yield attributes of rajmash
(Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Legume Res. 25 (2): 121-123.
Upadhayay, R. G. 1994. Effect of bio-regulators on growth development,
flowering behaviour and yield of chickpea. Legume Res. 17
(1): 60-62.
Upadhayay, R. G. 2002. Response of growth regulators on flower drop, fruit
setting, biochemical constituents and yield of chickpea (Cicer
aretinum L.) under mid hill conditions of H. P. Legume Res.
25 (3): 211-214
Upadhyay, R. G., Singh, B. B. and Yadav, D. N. 1993. Effect of Bio-
regulators on biochemical constituents and yield of Chickpea.
Indian J. Plant Physiol. 3: 195-196.
Vaushan, A. K. F. 1977. The relation between the concentration of boron in
the reproductive and vegetative organs of maize plants and
their development. J. Agric. Res. 15: 163-170.
Veliath, J. A. and Ferguson, A. C. 1973. A comparison of ethephon, SADH
and DPA for abscission of fruits, flowers and flower buds in
determinate tomatoes. J. Amer. Soc. Horti. Sci. 98:124-127.
Vikhe, S. V., Bengal, D. B. and Patil, V. P. 1983. Effect of growth regulators
and urea on the pod number of pigeonpea. Cv.108.
International pigeonpea Newsletter, pp. 39-40.
Warde, S. D. and Singh, K. 1978. Effect of Planofix (NAA) on control of
flower drop and fruit set in Chillies. Abstr. Trop. Agric.
3:16529.
Wasnik, K. G. and Bagga, K. K. 1992. Effect of cycocel on Nitrate
Reductase Activity (NRA) and grain yield in mungbean.
(Vigna radiata L. Wilzeck) Indian J. of Plant Physiol. 35 (1):
104-107.
Appendix I: Weekly meteorological obsevations recorded during the crop season(July 15, 2002 to February 15, 2003)
Month/
Year
July, 02
Aug., 02
Sept., 02
Oct., 02
Nov., 02
Dec., 02
Jan., 03
Feb., 03
Date
09-15
16-22
23-29
30-05
06-12
13-19
20-26
27-02
03-09
10-16
17-23
24-30
01-07
08-14
15-21
22-28
29-04
05-11
12-18
19-25
26-02
03-09
10-16
17-23
24-31
01-07
08-14
15-21
22-28
29-04
05-11
12-18
Week
No.
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Temperature (°C)
Max.
36.30
31.10
33.40
33.00
31.00
27.00
28.90
30.00
29.80
30.50
31.90
32.10
33.60
32.20
30.90
31.50
31.90
30.10
29.80
29.80
30.00
29.80
29.70
30.90
28.30
26.40
27.70
26.50
30.70
30.80
29.20
29.10
Min.
25.80
24.60
25.60
24.70
24.50
23.10
23.90
24.40
24.10
24.10
23.80
23.20
21.90
23.10
21.30
18.40
15.90
16.20
14.40
11.90
10.90
12.90
12.40
12.40
11.90
10.20
11.20
6.60
12.00
15.50
15.20
16.50
Rainfall
(mm)
8.00
42.60
0.00
75.80
51.50
165.60
43.30
51.00
40.00
20.60
0.00
6.00
0.00
0.00
23.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
11.80
1.80
Relativehumidity (%)I
75
90
82
90
92
94
91
93
91
92
91
89
90
86
93
92
90
90
89
89
87
90
89
85
82
87
84
80
80
82
90
81
II
53
72
55
71
76
89
78
75
77
69
59
60
48
60
60
42
36
41
36
30
25
34
31
26
36
37
32
20
27
41
44
51
Windvelocity(km/hr)
9.30
10.20
11.50
5.90
10.20
14.70
8.90
5.90
8.00
5.90
2.60
3.00
1.60
3.90
3.20
2.00
1.70
2.70
2.80
1.70
2.00
1.40
1.70
2.50
2.70
3.00
2.10
2.30
1.80
4.00
4.80
3.70
Evaporation
(mm/day)
7.30
4.80
7.10
4.70
4.30
3.10
3.00
3.30
4.10
3.60
4.40
4.30
4.30
4.50
3.90
3.80
3.50
3.40
3.70
3.40
3.50
3.10
3.10
3.80
3.40
2.90
3.50
3.80
3.60
4.40
4.10
4.10