Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-23T08:18:24.503Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of growth regulators and nitrogen on the growth, number and size of seed tubers and yield of potatoes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

H. S. Sekhon  and
M. Singh
M. Singh
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana-141004:, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Field investigations conducted at Ludhiana (India) showed that the foliar application of 2-chloroethyltrimethyl-ammonium chloride (CCC) (50% a.i.) at 300,600 and 900 ml/ha about 5 weeks after planting did not depress plant height. The dose of 600 ml CCC/ha was most effective and increased seed yield by 1·31 and 0·74 t/ha over the control (water spray) in 1978–9 and 1979–80, respectively. The corresponding increases in total yield were 1·37 and 0·86 t/ha. However, in 1980–1 when CCC was applied 3 weeks after planting even the lower dose of 300 ml/ha depressed the plant height. Then the treatment of CCC increased significantly the number of tubers of seed size and seed yield by decreasing the ‘ware’ yield but did not influence the total yield. The yields of potatoes were not affected signifioantly by the application of N-dimethyl amino succinamic acid (B 9) and succinic acid (SA).

In an experiment where the interaction of nitrogen and CCC was studied both factors not only increased the seed yield but also increased the total yield. However, there was no interaction between nitrogen and CCC.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 104 , Issue 1 , February 1985 , pp. 99 - 106
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

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

Anderson, J. M. & Boardman, N. K. (1964). Studies on greening of dark grown bean plants. VI. Development of photo chemical activity. Australian Journal of Biological Science 17, 93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bodlaender, K. B. A. & Algra, S. (1963). Influence of the growth retardant B 995 on the growth and yield of potatoes. European Potato Journal 9, 258–262.Google Scholar
Digby, J. & Dyson, P. W. (1973). A comparison of the effects of photoperiod and of a growth retardant (CCC) on the control of stem extension in potato (Scotland). Potato Research 16, 159–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyson, P. W. (1965). Effects of gibberellic acid and 2-(chloroethyl) trimethylammonium chloride on potato growth and development. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 16, 542–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyson, P. W. & Humphries, E. C. (1966). Modification of growth habit of majestic potato by growth regulators applied at different times. Annals of Applied Biology 58, 171–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunasena, H. P. M. & Harris, P. M. (1969). The effect of CCC and nitrogen on the growth and yield of the second early potato variety Craigs Royal. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 71, 283–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonasena, H. P. M. & Harris, P. M. (1971). The effect of CCC, nitrogen and potassium on the growth and yield of two varieties of potatoes. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 76, 35–52.Google Scholar
Humphries, E. C. & Dyson, P. W. (1967). Effect of growth regulators, CCC and B 9 on some potato varieties. Annals of Applied Biology 60, 333–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laycock, D. (1971). Modification of potato tuber size by N-dimethylamino succinamic acid. Potato Research 14, 234–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menzel, C. M. (1980). Tuberization in potato at high temperatures: responses to gibberellin and growth inhibitors. Annals of Botany 46, 259–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sekhon, H. S. & Singh, M. (1984). Effect of mechanical and chemical seed treatments on the number and size of seed tubers and yield of potatoes. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 103, 487–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar