Kumar, B. Prasanna

Rao, K. Umamaheswara

Srihari, D.

English

Update Publishing (E-Journals)

133Journal of Plantation Crops, 2014, 42(1): 133-138Short Scientific Report*Corresponding Author: prasanna652002@yahoo.comEffect of time and level of pruning on flowering, fruit-set andnut yield in cashewB. Prasanna Kumar*, D. Srihari and K. Umamaheswara RaoHorticultural College Research Institute, Venkataramannagudem, West Godavari Dt., Andhra Pradesh, India(Manuscript Received: 26-06-13, Revised: 07-10-13, Accepted: 04-11-13)Keywords:  Cashew, fruits per panicle, nut yield, pruningCashew (Anacardium occidentale L.) isevergreen, hardy crop growing in the poor soils inthe coastal belt of Southern states of India.  Therehas been wide spread efforts to reduce tree size,increase tree density and improve growth and yield(Nalini, 2002).  The total yield of a crop is relatedto the total light interception (Jackson 1980).  Ithas been observed the real productive branches arethe 6th order branches in cashew.  Often, the 6th orderbranches that develop in the lower strata of thecanopy become unproductive due to poor lightpenetration.  Two approaches are possible toimprove light penetration and distribution incashew.  One approach is breeding relatively naturaltree which allows light penetration though thecanopy and secondly by providing a small openingin the tree canopy by manipulating the canopy(Nalini, 2002).  Pruning may be helpful in changingthe pattern of branching and flushing in cashew likeany other perennial crop. Khan et al. (1987) reportedthat the pruning dead wood alone in older treeshelped in increasing the nut yield by 32-40 per cent.The present study was taken up on pruning ofdifferent shoots in different months and observedfor flowering and nut yield characters in cashewunder local conditions of Bapatla in AndhraPradesh.A field trial was carried out on 5 year oldcashew trees (n= 48) in the scion block of CashewResearch Station, Bapatla, Guntur district, AndhraPradesh planted at 4 x 4 m spacing in sandy soil.Two varieties viz., BPP-4 and BPP-6 were subjectedto pruning treatments of leader shoot pruning, lateralshoot pruning and leader + lateral shoot pruningduring 3 different months mid-July, mid-August andmid-September, uniformly on the shoots measuring5 cm from apex of every shoot during the year ofstudy.  The observations in a square meter area inall four directions in each tree for the importantcharacters such as number of flowering shoots,number of non-flowering shoots, number of paniclesper unit area and the locations of flowering in days,number of hermaphrodite flowers per panicle, sexratio, percentage fruit set, number fruits per panicle,number of nuts reached maturity, nut weight andnut yield per tree were recorded and data wasstatistically analysed.Maximum number of flowering shoots (23.75)of surface canopy area was recorded by mid-Augustpruning and found to be significantly superior overother pruning time treatments. The least number offlowering shoots of 21.83 m² area of surface canopywas recorded by mid-September pruning indicatingthat the delay by a month may result in the reductionof number of flowering shoots m-² area of treesurface canopy.  Among the levels of pruning incashew with respect to number of flowering shootsper m-² area of the surface canopy, pruning of leadershoot showed better results producing a maximumof 27.59 m² registering 35.7 per cent increase overcontrol (20.33 m²) (Table-1). It indicated that underlocal agro-climatic conditions, irrespective of the134variety, pruning of leader shoot in mid-August isuseful to increase the productivity throughproduction of more number of flowering shoots(23.75 m²) as shown in Table 1 and 1a.  This couldbe attributed to more availability of nutrients andwater and a balanced vegetative and reproductivegrowth as stated by Nalini (2002) in cashew andSrihari and Rao (1998), Suresh Kumar et al. (2003)in mango.The mid-August pruning recorded maximumnumber of panicles per m² (28.63) area while thatof the BPP-6 produced more number of paniclesafter mid-July pruning of 28.50 m-². This could beprobably due to availability of sufficient foodmaterial for early panicle formation in the off-season flowering type of BPP-6. Irrespective ofvariety and time the level of pruning the leader shootpruning resulted maximum number of panicles perm2 of 18.81 was recorded and on par with the lateralshoot pruning of 18.91 m-² (Table-1).  It is probablydue to early activation of buds and early productionof large number of reproductive shoots and theopportunity of accumulating adequatephotosynthates in the leaf which might beresponsible for higher production of panicles withmaximum number of panicles per square meter areaas reported by Mohan and Singh (1988).The time of flowering, non-significantdifferences among the treatments for time ofpruning was recorded which the flowering incashew is mainly seasonal, the flowering durationis not much important as the flower buddifferentiation and development normally takesplace in a short spell of one month during Octoberto November. However, the significant differenceamong the varieties for level of pruning and lowesttime of flowering in leader shoot pruning (92.58)in mid-August when compared to no pruning (90.5)(Table-1) was recorded.  Therefore, irrespective ofvariety, the influence of level of pruning and timeTable 1. Effect of variety, time of pruning and levels of pruning on number of flowering shoots m-2, number of non-floweringshoots m-2, number of  panicles m-2 , time of flowering, number of hermaphrodite flowers panicle-1 and sex ratio(male to hermaphrodite flowers) in cashewNumber of Number of Number of Time of Number of Sex ratioflowering non-flowering panicles flowering hermaphrodite (male to her-shoots shoots  m-2 (days)  flowers panicle-1 maphroditem-2 m-2  flowers)Varieties:BPP-4  (V1) 24.40 9.62 20.57 91.29 133.60 4.87BPP-6  (V2) 20.79 9.29 17.98 94.04 126.70 7.67Time of pruning:Mid-July            (T1) 22.21 9.25 18.13 92.81 128.49 5.89Mid-August       (T2) 23.75 8.68 20.33 92.81 135.34 6.56Mid-September  (T3) 21.83 10.44 19.29 93.50 126.73 6.35Level of pruning:Control (No pruning) (L0) 20.33 10.42 17.56 90.17 118.30 5.72Leader shoot pruning  (L1) 27.59 8.92 18.81 92.58 145.60 7.39Lateral shoot pruning  (L2) 21.87 10.25 18.91 93.25 116.20 6.33Leader +Lateral shoot pruning (L3) 25.58 8.25 17.71 96.16 140.70 5.64S Em CD S Em CD S Em CD S Em CD S Em CD S Em CDVarieties 0.29 0.59 0.34 NS 0.29 0.59 0.25 0.51 0.74 1.54 0.09 0.20Time of pruning 0.35 0.73 0.42 0.86 0.35 0.73 0.30 NS 0.91 1.88 0.12 0.25Levels of pruning 0.41 0.84 0.48 0.99 0.41 0.84 0.35 0.73 1.05 2.17 0.14 0.28Kumar et al.135Table 1a. Effect of variety, time of pruning and levels of pruning on Number of flowering shoots m-2, number of non-flowering shoots m-2, number of  panicles m-2 , time of flowering ,number of hermaphrodite flowers panicle-1 andsex ratio (male to hermaphrodite flowers) in  cashewNumber of Number of Number of Time of Number of Sex ratioflowering non-flowering panicles flowering hermaphrodite (male toshoots m-2   shoots m-2 (duration in flowers  hermaphroditem-2 days) panicle-1   flowers)INTERACTION:V1L0T1 18.50 13.00 12.13 90.5 96.9 8.04V1L1T1 28.50 5.50 29.63 88.0 124.5 4.14V1L2T1 24.50 8.50 20.63 87.5 97.5 3.35V1L3T1 24.90 6.50 19.25 90.0 112.8 5.10V1L0T2 20.50 16.50 16.00 90.5 97.9 8.27V1L1T2 30.65 4.00 28.63 92.5 203.3 7.20V1L2T2 26.25 6.50 23.62 89.5 168.0 3.12V1L3T2 26.50 4.50 19.75 91.5 112.5 7.72V1L0T3 19.50 24.50 16.12 90.5 97.5 5.77V1L1T3 27.00 4.00 26.00 93.5 163.0 5.06V1L2T3 27.50 7.50 21.00 95.0 169.5 3.15V1L3T3 18.50 14.50 13.50 96.5 161.0 3.53V2L0T1 11.00 26.50 8.50 92.5 98.0 8.96V2L1T1 22.50 5.00 28.50 90.5 181.5 6.75V2L2T1 17.00 4.00 18.00 92.0 111.3 9.10V2L3T1 15.00 6.50 15.50 93.5 98.0 10.74V2L0T2 13.00 14.50 10.00 94.5 107.5 9.00V2L1T2 31.50 5.50 23.50 94.5 154.3 4.08V2L2T2 25.00 5.00 17.00 95.5 163.0 4.03V2L3T2 22.50 7.50 19.00 96.0 66.5 7.44V2L0T3 11.50 13.50 18.00 96.5 89.5 9.79V2L1T3 30.00 6.00 23.00 97.5 128.3 7.95V2L2T3 29.00 8.50 18.75 96.5 122.7 6.05V2L3T3 21.50 9.00 16.00 98.0 99.6 8.08SEm 0.99 1.17 0.99 0.86 2.58 0.28CD (0.05) 2.07 2.43 2.06 NS 5.33 0.58of pruning on the character duration of floweringwill remain same and negligible.The percentage of fruit set of 5.01 in BPP-6and 4.33 in BPP-4 were recorded. As it is influencedby different time of pruning the mid-August pruningrecorded a maximum of 5.14 over other times ofpruning. However, for the interaction effect thepercentage of fruit set the pruning of leader shootof the variety BPP-4 in mid-August (7.50) and thevariety BPP-6 in mid-July (9.21) recordedmaximum percentage of fruit set. Theseobservations are further confirming that pruning ofleader shoot in mid-August for BPP-4 and in mid-July for BPP-6 are better for incrementalproductivity in a flowering shoots of cashew. Thismight be due to the remaining flowers beingdropped at various stages of development asreported by Nair et al.(1979) (Table 2 & 2a).The Number of fruits per panicle recorded non-significant difference in the variety, time of pruningbut significant difference for their level of pruningand recorded highest of 5.53 (Table 2) for theEffect of pruning in cashew136treatment leader + lateral shoot pruning. However,for these interaction effects the number of fruits perpanicle was found in the treatment of pruning ofleader shoot in the month of August in case of BPP-4(7.25) and in mid-July in case of BPP-6 varieties ofcashew (7.50) (Table 2).  The late season varietyBPP-6 needs pruning in the early of July monthwhich produce more of product shoot and panicleswith more hermaphrodite flowers increased thenumber of fruits per panicle when compared to BPP-4variety needs mid-August pruning.The number of nut reached maturity m-2 asinfluenced by pruning showed significant differenceamong the varieties in the highest of 48.55 in BPP-4,for the time of pruning mid-August 50.83 andamong the different levels of pruning the leader +lateral shoot pruning recorded maximum of 54.23(Table 2).  However, for their interaction effects ifthe fruit drop per m² of tree canopy and percentageof drop were observed, maximum drop was foundto be recorded by the same treatments of pruningof leader shoot pruning in mid-August (26.00) asin the case of BPP-4 and mid-July in the case ofBPP-6 (23.38) (Table 2a).  These results are clearlydemonstrating that a pruned plant requires adequatenutrient supply immediately after pruning, failingwhich there is a probability of low yield throughlarger fruit drop at various stages.The nut weight was obtained in the treatment ofpruning the leader shoot in mid-August to mid-September months in both the varieties in the year ofstudy.  The variety BPP-6 recorded a better nut weightof 5.31 g and found significantly superior whereasthe variety BPP-4 recorded 4.43 g (Table 2). Amongthe levels of pruning, leader as well as lateral shootpruning during both the varieties in both the yearsof study was found to be significantly superior overother levels of pruning registering 5.04 g (Table 2)of over other levels of pruning.In several crops viz., citrus (Moore,1959),Guava (Sundarajan and Muthuswamy, 1964) andmango (Rao and Shanmugavelu,1975), Srihari andTable 2. Effect of variety, time of pruning and levels of pruning on Percentage of fruit set, number of fruits panicle-1,number of fruits panicle-1, nut weight and nut yield per tree in cashewPercentage Number of Number of nuts Nut weight Nut yieldof fruit set fruits  reached maturity  (g) tree-1panicle-1 m-2  (kg)Varieties:BPP-4 (V1) 4.33 5.31 48.58 4.43 2.602BPP-6 (V2) 5.01 5.32 46.01 5.31 2.777Time of Pruning:Mid-July           (T1) 3.92 5.22 44.91 4.96 2.853Mid-August      (T2) 5.14 5.43 50.83 4.77 2.628Mid-September (T3) 4.93 5.30 46.16 4.87 2.587Level of Pruning:Control (No pruning (L0) 5.63 4.67 43.42 4.68 2.383Leader shoot pruning (L1) 4.63 5.03 45.98 4.87 2.945Lateral shoot pruning (L2) 4.39 5.02 45.56 4.89 2.688Leader +  Lateral shootpruning (L3) 4.02 5.53 54.23 5.04 2.741S Em CD S Em CD S Em CD S Em CD S Em CDVarieties 0.08 0.17 0.09 NS 0.61 1.27 0.04 0.09 0.026 0.054Time of pruning 0.09 0.20 0.11 NS 0.75 1.55 0.05 0.11 0.032 0.065Levels of pruning 0.12 N.S. 0.13 0.26 0.86 1.79 0.06 0.13 0.037 0.076Kumar et al.137Rao (1998) it was reported that pruning wasbeneficial in increasing the per tree yield.  But,similarly in the present study of cashew, asignificant difference due to varieties, kind ofpruning and time of pruning were observed for thecharacter nut yield per tree.  The variety BPP-6with a nut yield of 2.777 kg tree-1 was found to besignificantly superior over other variety BPP-4(2.602 kg tree-1) under sandy soil situation Bapatla.Among the pruning techniques pruning of leadershoots in mid-July was found to be beneficialduring the study to produce higher per tree yieldof nuts (2.945 kg tree-1) with a percentage increaseof 23.6 per cent over control (2.383 kg tree-1)(Table-2). The production of flowering shoots,number of panicles m-2, percentage of fruit set,number of fruits panicle-1, number of nuts reachedmaturity m-2, nut weight and nut yield of cashew asinfluenced by the variety, level of pruning and timeof pruning it is observed that a moderate increasein number of flowering shoots could be obtained bypruning the leader shoot in mid-August, the vigorousvariety BPP-4 and late season variety BPP-6responded for pruning to increase productivityunder local agro-climatic condition of Bapatla.Table 2a. Effect of variety, time of pruning and levels of pruning on Percentage of fruit set, Number of fruits panicle-1,Number of nuts reached maturity m-2, nut weight and nut yield ree-1 in cashewPercentage of Number of Number of nuts Nut weight Nut yield tree-1fruit set  fruits panicle-1  reached maturity  (g)  (kg)per m2INTERACTION:V1L0T1 3.61 3.75 28.00 4.11 1.350V1L1T1 5.13 6.38 52.63 4.10 3.900V1L2T1 6.16 5.90 60.00 4.3 3.775V1L3T1 3.62 3.90 39.00 4.09 2.875V1L0T2 3.96 3.90 26.00 3.94 1.300V1L1T2 7.50 7.25 72.00 4.72 3.700V1L2T2 2.07 5.65 54.00 5.00 3.325V1L3T2 4.88 5.55 55.88 4.49 2.700V1L0T3 4.73 4.40 35.00 3.91 1.300V1L1T3 4.06 6.03 71.88 4.96 2.450V1L2T3 3.68 6.25 64.63 5.10 2.400V1L3T3 2.49 4.15 28.00 4.45 2.150V2L0T1 5.22 5.40 23.38 4.36 1.400V2L1T1 9.21 7.50 56.75 5.27 3.800V2L2T1 4.46 5.15 44.75 5.95 3.450V2L3T1 5.08 5.25 44.00 4.95 3.250V2L0T2 3.96 4.25 30.13 5.68 1.250V2L1T2 3.64 5.65 64.75 5.84 3.750V2L2T2 3.61 5.90 47.00 6.12 3.550V2L3T2 5.45 3.60 54.38 5.07 3.225V2L0T3 5.59 5.00 27.13 4.77 2.350V2L1T3 4.09 5.25 56.00 6.14 2.500V2L2T3 4.89 6.00 66.25 4.53 2.450V2L3T3 4.89 4.90 37.62 5.03 2.350SEm 0.34 0.31 2.12 0.20 0.089CD (0.05) 0.69 0.63 4.39 0.30 0.186Effect of pruning in cashew138ReferencesKhan, M. M.  Kumar, D. P. and Hiremath, I. G. 1987  Pruningstudies in cashew. The Cashew 1(1):11-12.Mohan, E. 1983.  Studies on the effect of pruning and growthregulators on vegetative growth and flowering in cashew(Anacardium occidentale L.). M.Sc.,(Agri.) Thesis,University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore, pp. 108.Mohan, E. and Singh, R. 1988.  Effect of time and severity ofpruning in cashew (Anacardium occidentale L.) Journalof Plantation Crops 18 (supplement): 7-10.Nair, M. K. Bhaskara Rao, E.V.V. Nambiar, K.K.N andNambiar, M.C. 1979. Cashew (Anacardium occidentaleL.) Central Plantation Crops Research Institute,Kasargod, India. pp. 1-169.Nalini, P.V. 2002. Canopy architecture and management incashew: Recent trends in cashew nut production andprocessing. pp. 34-38.Rao,V.N.M. and Shanmugavelu, K. G. 1975. Mango respondsto pruning. Indian Horticulture 20(3): 5-6.Rathi, D.S. Dimri, D.C.  Nautiyal, M.C. and Kumar, A. 2003.Pruning response to shoot growth, fruit set and yield inpeach.  Indian Journal of  Horticulture  60: 25-30.Srihari, D. and Rao, M.M. 1998. Induction of flowering andcropping in ‘off ’phase Alphonso mango trees by pruningof fruited shoots. Karnataka Journal AgriculturalScience 11(1): 260-62.Sundararaj, J.S.  Muthuswamy, S. and Shanmugavelu, K.G.and Sundarajan, S. 1969.  Effect of notching of budsand pruning of shoots on growth and productivity inFicus carica, Indian Journal of Horticulture 26: 27-31.Suresh Kumar, P. and Reddy, Y.N.  and Srihari, D. 2003. Effectof pruning on production of new shoots, subsequentgrowth and flowering of mango cv. Baneshan. Journalof  Research ANGRAU 31(1): 26-30.Kumar et al.

Effect of time and level of pruning on flowering, fruit-set and nut yield in cashew

https://updatepublishing.com/journal/index.php/JPC/article/download/5575/4919/

Effect of time and level of pruning on flowering, fruit-set and nut yield in cashew

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Update Publishing (E-Journals)