Effect of Mulching, Shading, Spacing and Cutting Thickness on Propagation of Seabuckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides L.) by Cuttings

The effect of plastic mulching, coloured shade netting, spacing and cutting thickness on rooting success and growth of Seabuckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides L.) through hard wood cuttings is addressed. Use of silver black plastic mulching film resulted in 10 per cent higher rooting success and significant plant growth. Suppression of weed emergence by the plastic mulch resulted in 75.8 per cent time saving in manual weeding by farm workers. No significant gender difference in rooting success was observed. Reduction in light intensity by 66 per cent using green shade net resulted in significant reduction in rooting and growth of nursery plants. Three different spacing between cuttings did not show significant difference in rooting and growth related parameters suggesting that cuttings can be planted denser (3"×3") under mulching to get higher number of nursery stock per unit area. Cutting thickness showed significant effect on rooting success. Highest rooting percentage was observed in pencil thickness cuttings (7.5 ± 1.6 mm dia) followed by cuttings with 2.9 ± 0.8 mm and 11.3 ± 1.7 mm basal diameter. The result of the present study could facilitate establishment of a vegetative propagation method wherein faster growth and larger number of cuttings can be propagated with higher rooting success rate

Charting the Tibet issue in the Sino-Indian border dispute

In official quarters in Beijing and New Delhi, the Tibet issue figures only as a bargaining chip to 'regulate' their bilateral relations, not as an issue that has an independent bearing on the intractability or resolution of the Sino-Indian border dispute. Scholars of the Sino-Indian border dispute either dismiss the relevance of the Tibet issue or treat it as only a prop in their framing of the dispute in terms of security, nationalism and great power rivalry. This article argues that the Tibet issue is more central to the border dispute than official and scholarly circles have recognised so far. The article demonstrates this through an examination of the historical roots of the border row, the centrality of Tibet and Tibetans in the boundary claims of both Beijing and New Delhi and the revelation of concurrent historical developments in the border dispute and the Sino-Tibetan conflict. On the place of Tibet in broader Sino-Indian relations, the article posits that while Tibet was a victim of India's moralistic-idealist policies toward China in the 1950s, it has now become a victim of the new realism pervading India's policy of engaging and emulating China in the post-Cold War era