Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T13:21:36.954Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experiments on cutting potato tubers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

G. D. H. Bell ,
M. R. Gilson  and
W. A. R. Dillon Weston
G. D. H. Bell
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Cambridge,
M. R. Gilson
Affiliation:
Botany School, Cambridge,
W. A. R. Dillon Weston
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Cambridge,
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. Field experiments on the use of cut ware setts with the potato varieties Arran Banner, King Edward and Majestic have shown that with proper handling no loss in plant establishment need result. When the cut setts are planted at the same distances as whole setts, there is liable to be a reduction in the yield per acre because of the lower yield per plant, but the actual rate of increase may be increased considerably by cutting because of the larger number of plants obtainable.

2. No benefit has been found from the practice of dusting the cut surfaces of tubers of Majestic with slag, lime or ashes, while adverse effects resulted from the use of a fungicide and alum.

3. The exposure of cut setts to drying conditions lowers their resistance to attacks by micro-organisms, and encourages the breakdown of the tuber flesh by bacteria of the carotovorum group.

4. In general, the use of certain fungicides, either directly on the cut surface, or as a means of moistening sack coverings, is not to be recommended because of the adverse effects of the fungicide on the natural resistance of the live tissue of the tuber flesh.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , April 1942 , pp. 255 - 273
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1942

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Brandreth, B. & Bryan, H. (1937). J. Nat. Inst. Agric. Bot. 6, 183.Google Scholar
Bushnell, John (1935). Amer. Potato J. 12, 19–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham, H. S. (1936). Bull. N.Y. St. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 668.Google Scholar
Lombard, P. M. (1937). Amer. Potato J. 14, 311–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutman, B. F. (1937). Bull. Vt Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 418.Google Scholar
MacLeod, H. S. (1935). Amer. Potato J. 12, 113–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Megaw, W. J. & Bankhead, J. (1938). J. Minist. Agric. N. Ire. 6, 22–31.Google Scholar
Priestley, J. H. & Woffenden, Lettice M. (1923). Ann. Appl. Biol. 10, 96–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Ora (1940). Amer. Potato J. 17, 27–37.Google Scholar
Tinley, N. L. & Bryant, D. M. (1939). J. S.-E. Agric. Coll., Wye, 44, 120–33.Google Scholar