Effect of foliar application of urea on fruit drop, fruit retention and yield of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Dashehari
Hemant Kumar Panigrahi, Prabhakar Singh , Nasir Hamid Masoodi and Sailandra Agrawal
Abstract
The experiment was carried out at research field of Department of Horticulture, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur (C.G.) during the year 2005-06. Application of 4 per cent foliar spray of urea was found more effective to control the fruit drop and ultimately fruit retention was increased. Similarly number of fruits and weight of fruit were also found maximum under the same treatment. The yield of mango increased by 32.79 per cent over control with the use of 4 per cent foliar spray of urea.
Key word: Foliar application, urea, fruit drop, fruit retention.
Introduction
Mango (Mangifera indica L.) is one of the most important among the tropical fruits of India. It is known as king of fruits. It belongs to the family Anacardiaceae and originated in South-East Asia at an early date. Mango is being grown in more than 87 countries of the world but India ranks first in the world with respect to 1.60 million hectares area and 10.78 million tonnes production (Gandhi, 2005).
Fruit drop in mango is a serious problem causing heavy losses to the orchardists. About 99 per cent of the mango crop is lost due to drop of hermaphrodite flowers and immature fruits. The intensity of drop is maximum with 15 days after pollination/anthesis, in which about 60-70 per cent hermaphrodite flowers and immature fruit drops within short period of time. Foliar application of urea gives a better crop response than either band of broadcast application. Foliar application gives flexibility of fertilization, which enables the specific nutritional requirements of the crop, to be met at different stages of its growth. The present investigation was under taken for study of effect of foliar application of urea on fruit drop, fruit retention and yield of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Dashehari.
Materials and methods
The present investigation entitled “Effect of foliar application of urea on fruit drop, fruit retention and yield of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Dashehari” was carried out at he Research Farm, Department of Horticulture, College of Agriculture, IGAU, Raipur (C.G.) during the year 2005-06 using RBD with three replications. The treatment consisted seven different concentrations of urea as foliar spray viz., control, 1 per cent foliar application of urea, 2 per cent foliar application of urea, 3 per cent foliar application of urea, 4 per cent foliar application of urea, 5 per cent foliar application of urea and 6 per cent foliar application of urea.
The experimental was conducted on 10 years old trees of Dashehari mango with foliar spray of different concentrations of urea at pea stage of fruit growth and development. One plant was taken as experimental plant under each replication. The observations regarding fruit drop, fruit retention, number of fruits, weight of fruit and yield was recorded. The data obtained from various characters under study were analysed by the method of analysis of variance as described by Gomez and Gomez (1984).
Results and discussion
Data obtained on fruit retention percentage after spraying of different concentration of urea in March at pea stage of fruit growth were recorded at maturity. At maturity the minimum transformed fruit drop percentage 67.22 (inverse of transformed value 84.08) was recorded under the treatment T4, which was found at par with T5 and T3 with respective transformed fruit drop percentage 68.52 and 68.54 (inverse of transformed values 86.59 and 86.62). The treatments T6, T1 and T2 having respective transformed fruit drop percentage 75.47, 75.06 and 73.50 (inverse of transformed values 93.71, 93.37 and 91.94, respectively), showed significant difference from T4, T5 and T3. The maximum transformed fruit drop percentage 77.35 (inverse of transformed value 95.22) was recorded under T0 followed by T6 and T1 with respective transformed fruit drop percentage 75.47 and 75.06 (inverse of transformed values 93.71 and 93.37),
It is evident from Table 1 that foliar application of urea significantly reduced fruit drop. The maximum reduction in fruit drop was observed in 4% urea followed by 5% and 3% whereas maximum fruit drop was observed under control at all stages of observations. It indicates that the 4% foliar application of urea is best for reducing fruit drop. The beneficial effect of urea in reducing fruit drop may be due to its role in improving the plant vigour, there by increasing the food reserve, which serves the fruit till harvest. These results are accordance with the findings of Sharma et al. (1990) in Langra cultivar of mango.
At maturity the maximum transformed fruit retention percentage 22.74 (inverse of transformed value 14.96) was found under T4 followed by T5 and T3 with respective transformed fruit retention percentage 21.42 and 21.41 (inverse of transformed values 13.39 and 13.37, respectively). These treatments were statistically at par with each other while, the treatments T2, T1, T6 and T0 showed significant difference with T4, T5 and T3. The minimum transformed fruit retention per cent 12.61 (inverse of transformed value 4.76) was recorded under T0 (control).
Among the foliar applications of urea, the maximum fruit retention percentage was observed under 4 per cent urea spray and minimum fruit retention percentage was recorded under control at all stages of observations. All the levels of urea significantly increased the fruit retention as compared to control. The increase in fruit retention as a result of nitrogen application might be due to the reduced abscission as its application increase auxin synthesis. Similar effects of urea were reported by Rajput and Tiwari (1977), Sharma et al. (1977), Baghel et al. (1987) and Gupta and Brahmachari (2004) in mango. This result is also in close confirmed with the findings reported by Singh et al. (1991) in Amrapali and Tripathi (2002) in Dashehari variety of mango.
Number of fruit per plant was significantly influenced by different treatments. The results are presented in Table 2 and it ranged from 120.33 to 173.66 fruits per plant under different treatments. The maximum number of fruits (173.66) was recorded under T4 (4% foliar application of urea), which was found at par with T5 (5% foliar application of urea) having 172.00 and T3 (3% foliar application of urea) having 170.33 average number of fruits. However, T4, T5 and T3 were found significant difference on the average number of fruits compared to all other treatments. The minimum number of fruits 120.33 was observed under T0 (control). The treatment T2 (2% foliar application of urea) with 154.66, average number of fruit was significantly superior to T1 (1% foliar application of urea) having 138.33 and T6 (6% foliar application of urea) recorded 134.66, average number of fruit whereas treatment T1 and T6 showed non-significant difference.
Among the different concentrations of urea, the maximum number of fruits per plant was recorded under 4 per cent urea spray followed by 5 per cent and 3 per cent, but when the concentration of urea was increased to 6 per cent the total number of fruits per plant were decreased. 4 per cent level of urea significantly increased the total number of fruits per plant than control. This may be due to higher number of healthy panicles and maximum fruit retention per panicle. The result corroborates the findings of Sonkar (1989) and Baghel and Tiwari (2003) in mango.
The average fruit weight ranged from 147.55 to 177.22 g under different treatments. The maximum fruit weight (177.22 g) was recorded under T4 (4% foliar application of urea) followed by T5, T3, T2, T1 and T6 with average fruit weight of 176.29, 175.35, 174.51, 168.81 and 167.11 g, respectively. However the treatments T6, T5, T4, T3, T2 and T1 showed non-significant difference. The minimum fruit weight (147.55 g) was observed under T0 (control).
Fruits treated with various concentrations of urea acquired more weight as compare to control. The significantly maximum fruit weight (177.22 g) was recorded with urea 4 per cent, while minimum (147.55 g) was under control. The increase in fruit weight could be due to rapid multiplication and enlargement of cells and greater accumulation of sugars and water in expanded cells. The results are in conformity with those reported by Sonkar (1989), Singh et al. (1994) and Gupta and Brahmachari (2004) in mango.
The total yield ranged from 19.23 to 28.61 kg per plant under different treatments. The maximum total yield per plant was harvested under T4 (4% foliar application of urea) having 28.61 kg, which was statistically at par with T5 (5% foliar application of urea) having 28.18 kg yield and T3 (3% foliar application of urea) having 26.20 kg yield. However these treatments were found to be statistically superior to remaining treatments T2, T1, T6 and T0 (with yields 24.32, 23.30, 23.11 and 19.23 kg/plant, respectively). Treatments T2, T1 and T6 showed statistically at par. The minimum total yield per plant was recorded under T0 (control having yield 19.23 kg, which was significantly inferior to all other treatments.
Yield of fruits per plant was appreciably increased by various treatments applied. The maximum yield (28.61 kg/tree) of fruit was recorded by spraying of urea 4 per cent, whereas, the minimum yield (19.23 kg/tree) was observed under control. The positive effect on yield was due to their favourable influence on yield attributing characters like increase in fruit retention, size and weight of individual fruit. These results are ion conformity with those of Singh et al. (1991) in Amrapali. Similar results have been also reported by Sharma et al. (1977), Singh et al. (1994), Ghosh and Cattopadhyay (1999) and Gupta and Brahmachari (2004) in mango.
References
Baghel, B.S. and Tiwari, R. 2003. Individual and integrated effect of urea and NAA on flowering and fruiting of mango (Mangifera indica L.) South Indian Horticulture, 51 (1-6) : 1-6.
Baghel, B.S., Sharma, R.K. and Nair, P.K.R. 1987. Influence of pre-flowering spray of urea and NAA on fruit retention of mango (Mangifera indica L.) Progressive Horticulture, 19 (3-4) : 200-202.
Gandhi, G.P. 2005. Export prospects of mangoes and mango based products from India. Plant Horti Tech, 5 (2) : 37.
Ghosh, S.N. and Chattopadhyay, N. 1999. Foliar application of urea on yield and physico-chemical composition of mango cv. Himsagar under rainfed condition. Horticulture Journal, 12 (1) : 21-24.
Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. 1984. Statistical procedures for agricultural Research 2nd ed. John Willey and Sons, New York.
Gupta, R.K. and Brahmachari, V.S. 2004. Effect of foliar application of urea, potassium nitrate and NAA on fruit retention, yield and quality of mango cv. Bombai. Orissa Journal of Horticulture, 32 (2) : 7-9.
Rajput, C.B.S. and Tiwari, J.P. 1977. Effect of foliar spray of urea on flowering and fruiting characters of three cultivars of mango. Bangladesh Horticulture, 3 (2) : 1-5.
Sharma, J.S., Thakur, R.S. and Chadha, K.L. 1977. Effect of foliar application of urea on yield and yield parameters of mango. Indian J. Hort., 34 (1) 26-29.
Sharma, T.R., Nair, P.K. and Nema, M.K. 1990. Effect of foliar spray of urea, KNo3 and NAA on fruiting behaviour of mango cv. ‘Langra’. Orissa Journal of Horticulture, 18 (1-2) : 42-47.
Singh, J.N., Rajput, C.B.S. and Shiv Prakash 1991. Effect of urea spray on fruit retention and physico-chemical composition of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. ‘Amrapali’. Haryana Journal of Horticlture Science, 20 (1-2) : 35-38.
Singh, J.N., Singh, D.K. and Chakravarty, D. 1994. Effect of urea and NAA on fruit retention and physico-chemical composition of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Langra. Orissa Journal of Horticulture, 22 (1/2) : 26-30.
Sonkar, R.K. 1989. Effect of foliar application of urea on growth yield and quality of mango (Mangifera indica L.) var. Langra. M.Sc. (Ag.) thesis submitted to Uday Pratap Mahavidyalaya, Varanasi.
Tripathi, P.C. 2002. Effect of thiourea, potassium nitrate and urea on new shoot production and fruiting in Dashehari mango. Progressive Horticulture, 34 (2) : 268-270.
Table 1: Fruit drop and fruit retention per cent as influenced by foliar application of urea at maturity.
Treatments
At maturity
Fruit drop (%)
Fruit retention (%)
T0 : Without application of urea (control)
77.35d
(95.22)
12.61a
(4.76)
T1 : 1% foliar application of urea
75.06cd
(93.37)
14.89b
(6.61)
T2 : 2% foliar application of urea
73.50c
(91.94)
16.45b
(8.09)
T3 : 3% foliar application of urea
68.54a
(86.62)
21.41c
(13.37)
T4 : 4% foliar application of urea
67.22a
(85.04)
22.74c
(14.96)
T5 : 5% foliar application of urea
68.52a
(86.59)
21.42c
(13.39)
T6 : 6% foliar application of urea
75.47cd
(93.71)
14.49ab
(6.28)
SEm±
0.69
0.69
CD at 5%
2.14
2.14
The symbol * indicates the mean arcsine transformed values.
Figures in parenthesis () are inverse transformed values, in per cent unit, corresponding to the mean arcsine transformed values.
The superscript letter indicates that the treatment means with same letters are at par at 5% level of significance, while the means with different letters are significantly different at 5% level. These letters have been affixed based on CD-value comparison of treatment means.
Table 2: Effect of foliar application of urea on number of frits per plant, weight of fruit and yield per plant.
Treatments
Number of fruits plant-1
Average fruit weight (g)
Total yield (kg plant-1)
T0 : Without application of urea (control)
120.33a
147.55a
19.23a
T1 : 1% foliar application of urea
138.33b
168.81b
23.30b
T2 : 2% foliar application of urea
154.66c
174.51b
24.32bc
T3 : 3% foliar application of urea
170.33d
175.35b
26.20cd
T4 : 4% foliar application of urea
173.66d
177.22b
28.61d
T5 : 5% foliar application of urea
172.00d
176.29b
28.18d
T6 : 6% foliar application of urea
134.66b
167.11b
23.11b
SE±
1.59
3.61
0.81
CD at 5%
4.90
11.13
2.50
The superscript letter indicates that the treatment means with same letters are at par at 5% level of significance, while the means with different letters are significantly different at 5% level. These letters have been affixed based on CD-value comparison of treatment means.
Hemant Kumar Panigrahi, Prabhakar Singh , Nasir Hamid Masoodi and Sailandra Agrawal
Abstract
The experiment was carried out at research field of Department of Horticulture, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur (C.G.) during the year 2005-06. Application of 4 per cent foliar spray of urea was found more effective to control the fruit drop and ultimately fruit retention was increased. Similarly number of fruits and weight of fruit were also found maximum under the same treatment. The yield of mango increased by 32.79 per cent over control with the use of 4 per cent foliar spray of urea.
Key word: Foliar application, urea, fruit drop, fruit retention.
Introduction
Mango (Mangifera indica L.) is one of the most important among the tropical fruits of India. It is known as king of fruits. It belongs to the family Anacardiaceae and originated in South-East Asia at an early date. Mango is being grown in more than 87 countries of the world but India ranks first in the world with respect to 1.60 million hectares area and 10.78 million tonnes production (Gandhi, 2005).
Fruit drop in mango is a serious problem causing heavy losses to the orchardists. About 99 per cent of the mango crop is lost due to drop of hermaphrodite flowers and immature fruits. The intensity of drop is maximum with 15 days after pollination/anthesis, in which about 60-70 per cent hermaphrodite flowers and immature fruit drops within short period of time. Foliar application of urea gives a better crop response than either band of broadcast application. Foliar application gives flexibility of fertilization, which enables the specific nutritional requirements of the crop, to be met at different stages of its growth. The present investigation was under taken for study of effect of foliar application of urea on fruit drop, fruit retention and yield of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Dashehari.
Materials and methods
The present investigation entitled “Effect of foliar application of urea on fruit drop, fruit retention and yield of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Dashehari” was carried out at he Research Farm, Department of Horticulture, College of Agriculture, IGAU, Raipur (C.G.) during the year 2005-06 using RBD with three replications. The treatment consisted seven different concentrations of urea as foliar spray viz., control, 1 per cent foliar application of urea, 2 per cent foliar application of urea, 3 per cent foliar application of urea, 4 per cent foliar application of urea, 5 per cent foliar application of urea and 6 per cent foliar application of urea.
The experimental was conducted on 10 years old trees of Dashehari mango with foliar spray of different concentrations of urea at pea stage of fruit growth and development. One plant was taken as experimental plant under each replication. The observations regarding fruit drop, fruit retention, number of fruits, weight of fruit and yield was recorded. The data obtained from various characters under study were analysed by the method of analysis of variance as described by Gomez and Gomez (1984).
Results and discussion
Data obtained on fruit retention percentage after spraying of different concentration of urea in March at pea stage of fruit growth were recorded at maturity. At maturity the minimum transformed fruit drop percentage 67.22 (inverse of transformed value 84.08) was recorded under the treatment T4, which was found at par with T5 and T3 with respective transformed fruit drop percentage 68.52 and 68.54 (inverse of transformed values 86.59 and 86.62). The treatments T6, T1 and T2 having respective transformed fruit drop percentage 75.47, 75.06 and 73.50 (inverse of transformed values 93.71, 93.37 and 91.94, respectively), showed significant difference from T4, T5 and T3. The maximum transformed fruit drop percentage 77.35 (inverse of transformed value 95.22) was recorded under T0 followed by T6 and T1 with respective transformed fruit drop percentage 75.47 and 75.06 (inverse of transformed values 93.71 and 93.37),
It is evident from Table 1 that foliar application of urea significantly reduced fruit drop. The maximum reduction in fruit drop was observed in 4% urea followed by 5% and 3% whereas maximum fruit drop was observed under control at all stages of observations. It indicates that the 4% foliar application of urea is best for reducing fruit drop. The beneficial effect of urea in reducing fruit drop may be due to its role in improving the plant vigour, there by increasing the food reserve, which serves the fruit till harvest. These results are accordance with the findings of Sharma et al. (1990) in Langra cultivar of mango.
At maturity the maximum transformed fruit retention percentage 22.74 (inverse of transformed value 14.96) was found under T4 followed by T5 and T3 with respective transformed fruit retention percentage 21.42 and 21.41 (inverse of transformed values 13.39 and 13.37, respectively). These treatments were statistically at par with each other while, the treatments T2, T1, T6 and T0 showed significant difference with T4, T5 and T3. The minimum transformed fruit retention per cent 12.61 (inverse of transformed value 4.76) was recorded under T0 (control).
Among the foliar applications of urea, the maximum fruit retention percentage was observed under 4 per cent urea spray and minimum fruit retention percentage was recorded under control at all stages of observations. All the levels of urea significantly increased the fruit retention as compared to control. The increase in fruit retention as a result of nitrogen application might be due to the reduced abscission as its application increase auxin synthesis. Similar effects of urea were reported by Rajput and Tiwari (1977), Sharma et al. (1977), Baghel et al. (1987) and Gupta and Brahmachari (2004) in mango. This result is also in close confirmed with the findings reported by Singh et al. (1991) in Amrapali and Tripathi (2002) in Dashehari variety of mango.
Number of fruit per plant was significantly influenced by different treatments. The results are presented in Table 2 and it ranged from 120.33 to 173.66 fruits per plant under different treatments. The maximum number of fruits (173.66) was recorded under T4 (4% foliar application of urea), which was found at par with T5 (5% foliar application of urea) having 172.00 and T3 (3% foliar application of urea) having 170.33 average number of fruits. However, T4, T5 and T3 were found significant difference on the average number of fruits compared to all other treatments. The minimum number of fruits 120.33 was observed under T0 (control). The treatment T2 (2% foliar application of urea) with 154.66, average number of fruit was significantly superior to T1 (1% foliar application of urea) having 138.33 and T6 (6% foliar application of urea) recorded 134.66, average number of fruit whereas treatment T1 and T6 showed non-significant difference.
Among the different concentrations of urea, the maximum number of fruits per plant was recorded under 4 per cent urea spray followed by 5 per cent and 3 per cent, but when the concentration of urea was increased to 6 per cent the total number of fruits per plant were decreased. 4 per cent level of urea significantly increased the total number of fruits per plant than control. This may be due to higher number of healthy panicles and maximum fruit retention per panicle. The result corroborates the findings of Sonkar (1989) and Baghel and Tiwari (2003) in mango.
The average fruit weight ranged from 147.55 to 177.22 g under different treatments. The maximum fruit weight (177.22 g) was recorded under T4 (4% foliar application of urea) followed by T5, T3, T2, T1 and T6 with average fruit weight of 176.29, 175.35, 174.51, 168.81 and 167.11 g, respectively. However the treatments T6, T5, T4, T3, T2 and T1 showed non-significant difference. The minimum fruit weight (147.55 g) was observed under T0 (control).
Fruits treated with various concentrations of urea acquired more weight as compare to control. The significantly maximum fruit weight (177.22 g) was recorded with urea 4 per cent, while minimum (147.55 g) was under control. The increase in fruit weight could be due to rapid multiplication and enlargement of cells and greater accumulation of sugars and water in expanded cells. The results are in conformity with those reported by Sonkar (1989), Singh et al. (1994) and Gupta and Brahmachari (2004) in mango.
The total yield ranged from 19.23 to 28.61 kg per plant under different treatments. The maximum total yield per plant was harvested under T4 (4% foliar application of urea) having 28.61 kg, which was statistically at par with T5 (5% foliar application of urea) having 28.18 kg yield and T3 (3% foliar application of urea) having 26.20 kg yield. However these treatments were found to be statistically superior to remaining treatments T2, T1, T6 and T0 (with yields 24.32, 23.30, 23.11 and 19.23 kg/plant, respectively). Treatments T2, T1 and T6 showed statistically at par. The minimum total yield per plant was recorded under T0 (control having yield 19.23 kg, which was significantly inferior to all other treatments.
Yield of fruits per plant was appreciably increased by various treatments applied. The maximum yield (28.61 kg/tree) of fruit was recorded by spraying of urea 4 per cent, whereas, the minimum yield (19.23 kg/tree) was observed under control. The positive effect on yield was due to their favourable influence on yield attributing characters like increase in fruit retention, size and weight of individual fruit. These results are ion conformity with those of Singh et al. (1991) in Amrapali. Similar results have been also reported by Sharma et al. (1977), Singh et al. (1994), Ghosh and Cattopadhyay (1999) and Gupta and Brahmachari (2004) in mango.
References
Baghel, B.S. and Tiwari, R. 2003. Individual and integrated effect of urea and NAA on flowering and fruiting of mango (Mangifera indica L.) South Indian Horticulture, 51 (1-6) : 1-6.
Baghel, B.S., Sharma, R.K. and Nair, P.K.R. 1987. Influence of pre-flowering spray of urea and NAA on fruit retention of mango (Mangifera indica L.) Progressive Horticulture, 19 (3-4) : 200-202.
Gandhi, G.P. 2005. Export prospects of mangoes and mango based products from India. Plant Horti Tech, 5 (2) : 37.
Ghosh, S.N. and Chattopadhyay, N. 1999. Foliar application of urea on yield and physico-chemical composition of mango cv. Himsagar under rainfed condition. Horticulture Journal, 12 (1) : 21-24.
Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. 1984. Statistical procedures for agricultural Research 2nd ed. John Willey and Sons, New York.
Gupta, R.K. and Brahmachari, V.S. 2004. Effect of foliar application of urea, potassium nitrate and NAA on fruit retention, yield and quality of mango cv. Bombai. Orissa Journal of Horticulture, 32 (2) : 7-9.
Rajput, C.B.S. and Tiwari, J.P. 1977. Effect of foliar spray of urea on flowering and fruiting characters of three cultivars of mango. Bangladesh Horticulture, 3 (2) : 1-5.
Sharma, J.S., Thakur, R.S. and Chadha, K.L. 1977. Effect of foliar application of urea on yield and yield parameters of mango. Indian J. Hort., 34 (1) 26-29.
Sharma, T.R., Nair, P.K. and Nema, M.K. 1990. Effect of foliar spray of urea, KNo3 and NAA on fruiting behaviour of mango cv. ‘Langra’. Orissa Journal of Horticulture, 18 (1-2) : 42-47.
Singh, J.N., Rajput, C.B.S. and Shiv Prakash 1991. Effect of urea spray on fruit retention and physico-chemical composition of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. ‘Amrapali’. Haryana Journal of Horticlture Science, 20 (1-2) : 35-38.
Singh, J.N., Singh, D.K. and Chakravarty, D. 1994. Effect of urea and NAA on fruit retention and physico-chemical composition of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Langra. Orissa Journal of Horticulture, 22 (1/2) : 26-30.
Sonkar, R.K. 1989. Effect of foliar application of urea on growth yield and quality of mango (Mangifera indica L.) var. Langra. M.Sc. (Ag.) thesis submitted to Uday Pratap Mahavidyalaya, Varanasi.
Tripathi, P.C. 2002. Effect of thiourea, potassium nitrate and urea on new shoot production and fruiting in Dashehari mango. Progressive Horticulture, 34 (2) : 268-270.
Table 1: Fruit drop and fruit retention per cent as influenced by foliar application of urea at maturity.
Treatments
At maturity
Fruit drop (%)
Fruit retention (%)
T0 : Without application of urea (control)
77.35d
(95.22)
12.61a
(4.76)
T1 : 1% foliar application of urea
75.06cd
(93.37)
14.89b
(6.61)
T2 : 2% foliar application of urea
73.50c
(91.94)
16.45b
(8.09)
T3 : 3% foliar application of urea
68.54a
(86.62)
21.41c
(13.37)
T4 : 4% foliar application of urea
67.22a
(85.04)
22.74c
(14.96)
T5 : 5% foliar application of urea
68.52a
(86.59)
21.42c
(13.39)
T6 : 6% foliar application of urea
75.47cd
(93.71)
14.49ab
(6.28)
SEm±
0.69
0.69
CD at 5%
2.14
2.14
The symbol * indicates the mean arcsine transformed values.
Figures in parenthesis () are inverse transformed values, in per cent unit, corresponding to the mean arcsine transformed values.
The superscript letter indicates that the treatment means with same letters are at par at 5% level of significance, while the means with different letters are significantly different at 5% level. These letters have been affixed based on CD-value comparison of treatment means.
Table 2: Effect of foliar application of urea on number of frits per plant, weight of fruit and yield per plant.
Treatments
Number of fruits plant-1
Average fruit weight (g)
Total yield (kg plant-1)
T0 : Without application of urea (control)
120.33a
147.55a
19.23a
T1 : 1% foliar application of urea
138.33b
168.81b
23.30b
T2 : 2% foliar application of urea
154.66c
174.51b
24.32bc
T3 : 3% foliar application of urea
170.33d
175.35b
26.20cd
T4 : 4% foliar application of urea
173.66d
177.22b
28.61d
T5 : 5% foliar application of urea
172.00d
176.29b
28.18d
T6 : 6% foliar application of urea
134.66b
167.11b
23.11b
SE±
1.59
3.61
0.81
CD at 5%
4.90
11.13
2.50
The superscript letter indicates that the treatment means with same letters are at par at 5% level of significance, while the means with different letters are significantly different at 5% level. These letters have been affixed based on CD-value comparison of treatment means.
