Study on growth, development and suitability of some improved Potato (Solanum tuberosum L

“Study on growth, development and

suitability of some improved Potato

(Solanum tuberosum L.) varieties for

processing. ”

THESIS

Submitted to the

Rajmata Vijyaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Gwalior

In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

In

HORTICULTURE

VEGETABLE SCIENCE

by

KAJAL RAJ

Department of Horticulture

Rajmata Vijyaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya College of Agriculture

Indore (M.P.) 2015

CERTIFICATE-I

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Study on growth, development and

suitability of some improved Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) varieties

for processing” submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE in HORTICULTURE of Rajmata Vijyaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa

Vidyalaya, Gwalior is a record of the bonafide research work carried out by Ms. KAJAL RAJ

under my guidance and supervision. The subject of the thesis has been approved by the

Student's Advisory Committee and the Director of Instructions.

No part of the thesis has been submitted for any other degree or diploma (Certificate

awarded etc.) or has been published/published part has been fully acknowledged. All the

assistance and help received during the course of the investigation has been acknowledged by

the scholar.

Place:

Date:

(Dr. R.K.Jaiswal)

Chairman of the Advisory Committee

MEMBER OF STUDENT'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Chairman (Dr R.K.Jaiswal)

…………….

Co-Chairman (Dr. K.P.Asati)

…………….

Member (Dr. V. K. Mishra) ……………..

CERTIFICATE-II

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Study on growth, development and

suitability of some improved Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) varieties

for processing” submitted by Ms. KAJAL RAJ to Rajmata Vijyaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa

Vidyalaya, Gwalior in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF

SCIENCE in HORTICULTURE in the Department of Horticulture, College of Agriculture,

Indore (M.P.) has been after evaluation, approved by the External Examiner and the Student's

Advisory Committee after an oral examination of the same.

Place:

date: (Dr. R.K. Jaiswal)

Chairman of the Advisory Committee

MEMBER OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Chairman (Dr. R.K. Jaiswal) ……….………………

Co-Chairman (Dr. K.P.Asati) …………………………

Member (Dr. V.K. Mishra) …………………………..

Head of Department …………………………..

Dean of the college ……………………………

Director Instruction ………………………………..

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all I thank the ‘Almighty God’ who has blessed me with the opportunity and strength to successfully complete this work.

It is a moment of great deep sense of indebtedness to my honorable major advisor Dr. R.K. Jaiswal (Associate Professor, Department of Horticulture) for his valuable guidance and constructive criticism, close supervision and constant moral support throughout the period of my study and in the thesis preparation which made the goal easy and to reach this stage.

I owe sincere regards and indebtedness to Dr. N.K. Gupta Professor, Head of Department of Horticulture, the members of the advisory committee Dr. K.P.Asati (Professor, Department of Horticulture) and Dr.V.K. Mishra (Professor, Department of Plant Physiology), RVSKVV, College of Agriculture, Indore, for their help and constant guidance during the course of investigation.

My sincere thanks also to Dr .A.M. Rajput, Dean, College of Agriculture, Indore for his exuberant interest for submission of this piece of research work.

I am also thankful to Dr. R.L. Rajput Director of Instruction, RVSKVV, Gwalior and Dr. Anil Kumar Singh Hon’ble Vice Chancellor, RVSKVV, Gwalior, for the help rendered during the period of research work.

It is my pleasant duty to extend my heartfelt gratitude to Shri B.L.Prajapati (SMS, Agronomy, KVK, Aron, Guna ) and Dr. Dipanita Gargava (Professor, English Literature) for their continuing inspiration and all possible help during the tenure of investigation.

I must place on record to mention my gratefulness to my friends namely Harshita Prajapati, Jay sankar Dhurvey, Anuseel Maheshwari and Lenin Khwoirappam whose help is thankfully acknowledge.

Last, but not least, I wish to express my deepest sense of veneration to my father Shri Raj Kumar Prasad and mother Smt. Raj Kumari Devi and my two elder brothers Mr. Vijay Kumar and Jai Kumar and my sister Pallavi Prasad

Place: Indore Date (Kajal Raj)

CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE NO.

I INTRODUCTION 1-3

II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 4-16

III MATERIAL AND METHODS 17-32

IV RESULTS 33-57

V DISCUSSION 58-63

VI SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS 64-67

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES

VITA

LIST OF TABLE

Table Number

Title Page Number

3.1 Meteorological data observed during period of investigation from October, 2014 to March, 2015

18

3.2 Physio-chemical properties of soil collected from the experimental field

19

3.3 Cropping history of experimental field 20

3.4 Details of genotypes 20

3.5 Experimental details 21

3.6 ANOVA for Randomized Block Design 31

4.1 Days to 50% germination and Number of sprouts per plant of different potato varieties

33

4.2 Plant height (cm) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages.

35

4.3 Diameter of stem (cm) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages.

36

4.4 Number of leaves per plant of potato varieties at different plant growth stages.

38

4.5 Leaf length (cm) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages

39

4.6 Leaf width (cm) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages.

40

4.7 Leaf area per plant (cm2) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages.

42

4.8 Dry weight per plant (g) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages

43

4.9 leaf area index of potato varieties at different plant growth stages.

44

4.10 Net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages

45

4.11 Crop growth rate (g/plant/day) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages

47

4.12 days to haulm cutting and days to maturity of different potato varieties

48

4.13 Number of tubers per plant of different varieties of potato.

49

4.14 Number and weight of rotted tubers of different varieties of potato

50

4.15 Total yield of tubers (kg/plot) and (q/plot) of different varieties of potato

51

4.16 Marketable yield of tubers (kg/plot) and q/ha of different varieties of potato

52

4.17 Harvest index of tubers of different varieties of potato 53

4.18 starch content (%) of different varieties of potato 54

4.19 potato flour and quality of chips of different varieties of potato

55

4.20 Incidence of insect-pest and disease occurrence among different varieties

56

4.21 Economics of different varietiesof potato 57

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Number

Title Page after

1. Meteorological data observed during period of investigation from October, 2014 to March, 2015

18

2. Plan of the layout of experimental plot. 22

3. Days to 50% germination and Number of sprouts per plant of different potato varieties

33

4. Plant height (cm) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages.

35

5. Diameter of stem (cm) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages.

36

6. Number of leaves per plant of potato varieties at different plant growth stages.

38

7. Leaf length (cm) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages

39

8. Leaf width (cm) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages.

40

9. Leaf area per plant (cm2) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages.

42

10. Dry weight per plant (g) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages

43

11. leaf area index of potato varieties at different plant growth stages.

44

12. Net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages

45

13. Crop growth rate (g/plant/day) of potato varieties at different plant growth stages

47

14. days to haulm cutting and days to maturity of different potato varieties

48

15. Number of tubers per plant of different varieties of potato.

49

16. Number and weight of rotted tubers of different varieties of potato

50

17. Total yield of tubers (kg/plot) and (q/plot) of different 51

varieties of potato

18. Marketable yield of tubers (kg/plot) and q/ha of different varieties of potato

52

19. Harvest index of tubers of different varieties of potato 53

20. starch content (%) of different varieties of potato 54

LIST OF PLATES

S.No. Tital Plate No.

1. Varieties of potato 1

2. Raw potato chips 2

3. Fried potato chips 3

4. Potato flour 4

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Words

Abbreviations

Benefit:Cost Ratio B:C Ratio

Centimetre Cm Co-workers et al. Critical difference C.D. Degree of Celsius oC Degree of Freedom d.f. Days after Sowing DAS Figure Fig. Fisher’s value “F” value Gram(s) G Hectare Ha Kilogram(s) Kg Mean sum of square M.S.S. Maximum Minimum

Max. Min.

Muriate of Potash MOP Nitrogen N Non-significant N.S. Number No. Per / Per cent % Phosphorus P2O5 Potash K Potential of hydrogen ions pH Quintal Q Rupees Rs Serial No. S.No. Significant at 5% level * Single Super phosphate SSP Source of variation S.V. Sum of square S.S. Square sq. Standard error of means S.Em+ Standard error of difference Temperature

S.Ed Temp.

Variety V

Chapter-1

INTRODUCTION

Chapter-2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

LITERATURE

Chapter-3

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Chapter-4

RESULT

Chapter-5

DISCUSSION

Chapter-6

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND

SUGGESTIONS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES

VITA

The author of this thesis, Kajal Raj D/o Shri Raj Kumar Prasad was

born on 20th June 1989 at Patna district of Bihar. She passed her Higher

Secondary Examination in the year 2007 from Science College Patna,

District Patna ( Bihar) with 71.44per cent marks.

In 2009 she joined the R.V.S.K.V.V, B.M. College of Agriculture,

Khandwa and successfully completed her B.Sc. (Ag.) degree in the year

2013 with 8.74 OGPA out of 10.00-point scale. She is gold medalist in B.

Sc. Agriculture. After graduation she joined M.Sc. (Ag.) to specialize in

Vegetable Science at College of Agriculture, Indore. She has completed

her course work with an OGPA 8.52 out of 10.00-point scale. For the

partial fulfillment of Master’s Degree she was allotted need based

research problem ,“ Study on growth, development and suitability of

some improved Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) varieties for processing”

which was duly completed by her and presented in this thesis form.

During her studies she actively participated in several social and

cultural activities at the school and college level.

(KAJAL RAJ)

******

1

Chapter-I

INTRODUCTION

Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) is an annual, herbaceous, tuber crop of

family Solanaceae that contains almost all the essential food ingredients

required for maintaining proper health. Potato is the world leading vegetable

crop and is grown in 79% of the world‟s countries. Potato is one of the most

important food crops both in developed as well as in developing countries.

Potato was generally regarded to be a crop suited for western world. The

origin of potato is in Peru/ South America. The widely grown cultivated potato

is tetraploid with 2n = 48. In one form or another, there can hardly be any

table in the world, where this vegetable is not served as a food item. Potato is

becoming an increasingly important crop, as it is a staple food in most of the

European countries and is a good and cheap source of food calories and its

high starch content can meet the energy requirements of the people living in

food deficit countries. Accredited to its short duration, nutritional superiority

and a high amount of food per unit area and time, potato production in

developing countries has been increased by about 25% over the last four

decades (Qasim et al., 2013).

Potato ranks second to maize in terms of the number of producing

countries and fourth after wheat, maize and rice in global tonnage. It is

produced in the world with an area of 19.26 million ha, production and

productivity of 320.71 million tonnes and 16.64 tonnes ha-1. The area,

production and productivity of potato in India are 1230.91 thousand ha,

42478.65 thousand metric tons and 34.50 metric tonnes ha-1. India is second

largest potato producer in the world. In M.P. total area under potato cultivation

is 96.77 thousand ha, with production 1998.35 thousand tonnes and

productivity 20.65 metric tonnes ha-1. Major potato growing districts are

Chhindwara, Shajapur, Dewas, Ujjain, Dhar, Sidhi, Satna, Sagar and Gwalior.

Indore district in Madhya Pradesh has maximum total area (22000 ha) and

production (440000 tonnes) of potato (Anon.2011).

2

Most European varieties, introduced earlier in India performed poorly

because conditions in India are entirely different than those prevalent in

temperate countries. A need was therefore, felt that potato cultivation in India

cannot depend on exotic varieties and technologies and the country must

have its own research and development programme for potato. As a result of

organized potato research on developing indigenous varieties and agro-

techniques, the increase in area, production and productivity during last 60

years has been almost phenomenal. This also resulted in development of 41

improved varieties that could give economical yield under different agro-

climatic regions of the country.

Potato is a nourishing and wholesome food. Its low energy density is

advantageous when eaten without much added fat. Potato protein is superior

to that of cereals and rich in essential amino acid „lysine‟. To a large portion of

our population to whom citrus fruits are out of reach, potato remains a cheap

and rich source of vitamin C. There is a misconception that potato causes

obesity. In fact, that it has a low energy and fat food and it cannot cause

fattening. Potato produces highest dry matter, carbohydrates, edible protein,

minerals and vitamin C and B per unit area and time among the major food

crops. Potato is a low calorie food and its protein has a biological value almost

equal to milk or egg. It is a wholesome, nutritious and versatile food which can

come to the rescue of the developing countries for alleviating hunger and

malnutrition especially in shrinking land resources. The average composition

of the potato is about 80% water, 2% protein and 18% starch. As a food, it is

one of the cheapest and easily available sources of carbohydrates and

proteins and contains appreciable amount of vitamin B and C as well as some

minerals. Moreover, protein of potato is of high biological value (Qasim et al.,

2013). The major portion of the dry matter is starch. Carbohydrates consisting

of starch and sugar constitute 18% on fresh weight basis. Crude protein

content is 2.0% and the fat content is very low 0.1%. The ash consisting of

minerals constitutes 1.0%. In addition potato tuber contains fiber, vitamins and

glycoalkaloids in small quantities.

Post harvest improvement such as fast and cheap transportation,

storage and processing will help to make potato production more profitable for

3

farmers by improving their access to markets, raising local value addition. It is

consumed in different forms such as boiled or fried and many different

processed products like chips, flakes, French fries, finger chips, powder,

potato papad etc. which are enjoyed across the generations and continents.

Quality attributes of potato tubers particularly size of tubers, dry matter, starch

and sugar contents are of prime concern of potato growers, in order to fetch

good prices for their produce from processors demanding potato for further

value addition (Panday et al., 2009).

Keeping this in view, the present experiment in potato entitled

“Study on Growth, Development and Suitability of Some Improved Potato

(Solanum tuberosum L.) Varieties for Processing” has been carried out with

the following objectives:

Objectives:

1. To select the suitable processing and improved varieties of potato for

commercial production in Malwa condition.

2. To determine the growth and yield characters of different varieties.

3. To determine the quality parameters of different varieties of potato.

4. To work out the economics of suitable variety.

4

Chapter-II

Review of Literature

Review of literature is a necessary step for any scientific study. It

provides a theoretical framework, previous work and the basic interpretation

of findings to the study. A brief summary of results of the studies carried out at

various places, more or less related to the present investigation. Since, the

literature on the varietal performance and economics is very meager. An

attempt has been made to review the literature, which is meaningful and had

direct relevance to this study. The available relevant references have been

reviewed under this chapter on following heads:

2.1 Morphological and growth parameters

2.2 Yield parameters

2.3 Quality parameters

2.4 Economics

2.1 Morphological and Growth parameters

Nandekar et al. (1995) reported that the highest average plant height

and number of branches were recorded in hybrids JI – 5857 followed by MS/

79-10; JI – 1857 and MS/ 78-46 were significantly superior over early

maturing check variety i.e. Kufri Chandramukhi.

Patel et al. (2000) found that the highest crop growth rate (CGR, 8.41 g

day-1), relative growth rate (RGR, 7.88 g day-1), net assimilation rate (NAR,

7.78 g cm2-1 day-1) and tuber yield (235.14 q ha-1) were also observed in 1.75

IW: CPE. Kufri Badshah recorded the highest LAI (0.98, 1.66 and 1.06 at 30,

60 and 90 DAP, respectively), CGR (7.89 g day-1) and tuber yield (219.72 q

ha-1).

Shivanandam and Shankaranarayana (2002) studied the

morphological and tuber quality characteristics of tubers obtained from true

potato seed (TPS) genotypes HPS-I-13, HPS-II-13, HPS-7-67, TPS-C-3 and

5

seed tuber cv. Kufri Jyothi. The highest tuber starch content was recorded

only in HPS-I-3. The TPS genotypes recorded maximum number of tubers per

hill. Kufri Jyothi recorded the highest percentage of large- and medium-sized

tubers resulting in the highest percentage of marketable yield.

Kumar et al. (2008) studied growth parameters viz. plant height,

compound leaves and stem number plant-1 in an experiment. Growth

parameters were recorded highest from cv. Kufri Sadabahar, statistically

these were at par with Kufri Chipsona-3 and Kufri Chipsona-1, while lowest

was observed in cv. Kufri Surya. Tuber number plant-1 as well as m-2 was

recorded highest in cv. Kufri Anand which were, however at par with cv. Kufri

Chipsona-1 and Kufri Chipsona-3, whereas the lowest were recorded in cv.

Kufri Sadabahar. As far as tubers yield is concern, highest tubers yield plant-1

was recorded in cv. Kufri Sadabahar which was at par with Kufri Surya and

Kufri Chipsoan-3 followed by Kufri Sutlej, Kufri Bahar and Kufri Chipsoan-1.

Lowest tubers yield plant-1 was recorded in cv. Kufri Badshah which was at

par with cv. Kufri Pukhraj. Tuber yield m-2 was also achieved significantly

highest from cv. Kufri Sadabahar, while lowest was achieved from cv. Kufri

Pukhraj. Significantly highest mean tuber weight of 15g was recorded in cv.

Kufri Sadabahar, while lowest (6.83g) was recorded in cv. Kufri Anand.

Kumar (2011) reported that the stability analysis of 18 potato

genotypes was made for six characters (plant height, tuber yield plant-1, total

tuber yield, dry matter per cent, total sugar and total starch) grown over four

environments. The G x E interaction, environment (linear) and environment

(non-linear) were significant for all the traits. Genotypes MS-89-1095, MS-86-

89, PC-605, 85P-718 and RA-I were found stable under varying environments

for most of the characters studied.

Zheng Xu et al. (2012) reported that significant differences occur

between genotypes with respect to the plant height, main stem diameter and

specific root length. The plant height and main stem diameter of 'Genyou No.

1' were the largest and its specific root length was the smallest, while the plant

height and main stem diameter of 'Konafubuki' were the smallest.

6

Ahmad et al. (2013) reported that the photosynthetic rate significantly

increased in both the cultivars under high CO2 and enhancement was greater

in K. Chipsona-3 than K. Surya. Potato plants grown under elevated CO2

exhibited increased tuber yield due to enhanced number of tubers plant-1. At

the final harvest, total tuber fresh weight was 36% greater under high CO2

treatments compared to ambient.

Patel et al. (2013) reported that the wide range of phenotypic variability

was recorded for reducing sugar, plant height, average weight of tubers,

number of tuber plant-1 and tuber dry matter content. The average weight of

tuber, number of tuber plant-1, number of stem plant-1 and marketable yield

exhibited significantly positive correlation with number of tuber plant-1 at both

genotypic and phenotypic levels.

2.2 Yield parameters

Cremaschi et al. (1991) studied data for all the 80 cultivars on the

following traits: mean growth period duration, number of tubers per plant, yield

of marketable tubers (35-55 mm and >55 mm), dry matter content and yield

index. Information is also presented on correlations between some yield traits

(dry matter percentage, tuber number and yield) and on regressions between

marketable tuber production and duration of the emergence to harvest period;

heat sum and tuber dry matter yield and available water and marketable tuber

production.

Kushwaha et al. (1994) evaluated seven potato varieties for several

morphological and quality traits including shoot emergence, plant height and

shoots pre plant. Number of tubers per plant was significantly higher in

MS/82-638 at both 75 (10.8) and 90 (12.6) days after planting

Roy et al. (1999) found that the Kurfi Chipsona -1 and Kurfi Chipsona -

2 and one Dutch cultivar were cardinal were promising in terms of yield , dry

matter content and chip quality in Bihar condition of India.

Kumar et al. (2001) carried out a field study at Patna showed that Kufri

Sindhuri was higher yielder than Kufri Ashoka and Kufri Jyoti.

7

Alam et al.(2003) reported characterization with fourteen exotic

varieties of Potato (Solanum tuberosum) namely Mondial, Granola, Cardinal,

Ailsa, Petronese, Morene, Diamant, Cleopetra, Binella, Dheera, Multa, Kufri

Sindhuri, Heera, Chamak and a local check(Lal Pakri) under Bangladesh

condition. The yield range of exotic varieties were 19.44 to 46.67 ton per

hectare. Variety Ailsa produced the maximum yield (46.67 t ha-1) which was

followed by Cardinal and Mondial.

Bhutani et al. (2003) registered that the harvesting at 105 days after

planting was optimum, as it resulted in the highest average tuber yield (282.3

q ha-1), dry matter content (17.5%), starch content (11.9 g) and protein

content (12.1% on dry weight basis), and lowest reducing sugar (218.9 mg)

and total sugar (520.3 mg) contents. JW-160 had the highest tuber yield

(308.1 q ha-1), whereas K. Chandramukhi had the highest starch content (13.3

g). K. Badshah had the highest protein content (12.5%). K. Chipsona-2

recorded the highest dry matter content (19.6%), and lowest reducing sugar

(153.1 mg) and total sugar (472.4 mg) contents.

Rahemi et al. (2005) found that potato cultivar affected yield

significantly. The cultivar Marfona showed 28.71% increased in yield over

Diamant.

Tajner et al. (2005) reported that total yield of potato tubers, seed

potatoes and commercial tubers depended on cultivar properties. The highest

yield was produced by cultivar Denar.

Kaushik et al. (2006) studied the stability of 9 potato genotypes (SM-

87-55, SM-87-185, SM-91-1515, SM-88-991, SM-90-45, SM-87-151, SM-88-

343, Kufri Jyoti and Kufri Giriraj) for yield, and keeping quality. In general,

differences due to genotypes, environment and genotype x environment

interaction were observed in all traits studied. SM-87-185 and SM-87-55

exhibited stable performance over a wide range of environmental conditions,

exhibiting high tuber yield, late blight resistance and good storage behavior.

Haase, et al. (2007) reported that cultivars belonging to very early and

early maturity type showed the largest relative increase in reducing sugars

concentrations due to storage. The medium-early cv. Agria and medium-late

8

cv. Marena proved to be best suited for processing into French fries under

conditions of organic farming, as only minor deviations from the highest

quality standards were established at harvest (quality index at 4.3 and 4.1,

respectively). A consistently high crisp quality was achieved by the medium-

early cv. Marlen, with L-values of 70.8 and 66.7 at harvest and after storage,

respectively. Overall, results show that the quality variables were mainly

affected by cultivar, season, storage and their interaction.

Kang et al. (2007) reported that the Kufri Pushkar (JW 160) is a high

yielding medium maturing white tuber variety which yielded higher than the

medium maturing cultivars. This cultivar produces large number of medium

size tubers which is a desired character.

Singh et al. (2007) carried out a study on Microtubers of five potato

cultivars for their growth and production of mini tubers. Higher germination,

number and yield of progeny tubers m-2 was recorded in Kufri Bahar.

Minimum mean tuber weight was recorded in Kufri Chipsona-2.

Basavaraja et al. (2008) reported that out of nine processing entries

evaluated for yield and adaptability, the introduced variety Atlantic was found

to be good adapter (2003-06), which recorded maximum total yield of 9.4 t/ha,

followed by MP/97-644 (8.64 t/ha), Kufri Chipsona-2 (7.82 t/ha) and MP/97-

583 (7.06 t/ha), being at par with each other. All the entries also produced at

par processing grade tuber yield of 3.92 to 7.11 t/ha. (The yield levels were

less, since 2003 & 2004 were drought years).

Mehdi et al. (2008) carried out experiment at Regional Agricultural Sub-

Station, SKUAST-K, and Kargil during 2004 and 05. The treatments consisted

of 4 different genotypes of potato (Kufri Chandramukhi, K. Jyoti, PP-48 and

PP-2500). Genotype PP-2500 recorded highest yield followed by Kufri

Chandramukhi, Kufri Jyoti and PP-48.

Rashid et al. (2008) studied the potato variety Provento from

Netherlands, and CIP (International Potato Center) clone 88.163 were

evaluated for commercial cultivation in Bangladesh. In respect of yield and

other qualities, both the genotypes were at par with the standard popular

Dutch varieties Diamant and Cardinal. The CIP clone 88.163 named as

9

“Saikat” (meaning sea shore) is recommended for cultivation in coastal areas

of the country.

Singh et al. (2008) reported that, the highest total tuber yield (48.1 tons

/ha) was obtained in MP/97-583, followed by MP/97-644 (46.4 tonnes/ha).

Processing- grade yield was also highest (42.3tonnes/ha) in MP/97-583. At

Indore, the highest total (29 tons/ha ) and processing grade yield (18.9

tons/ha) was obtained by MP/97-583. Kurfi Chipsona -3 can replace Kurfi

Chipsona -1 and Kurfi Chippsona-2 in the west central plain of India.

Ullah and Saikia (2008) examined seven potato varieties having

processing quality for two years (2004-05 and 2005-06) in a randomized block

design with three replications. They found that among all the varieties tested,

the yield performances of Kufri Chipsona-1, Kufri Chipsona-2, and Kufri

Chipsona-3 were superior over rest of the varieties, which produced higher

processing grade tuber during both the years.

Richardson (2009) conducted a variety trial on four sweet potato

varieties from April to October 2007 at the Gladstone Road Agricultural

Centre. The variety „Six Weeks‟, which is an early maturing variety with white

flesh and high dry matter content, produced the highest marketable yield at

9.4 t/ha. One other early maturing variety, „Antigua‟, yielded 7.3 t/ha and is

also suitable for local production. The other two varieties are late maturing

varieties and produced very low yields after six months of growth.

Ummyiah et al. (2010) reported that the genetic variability analysis of

twenty six genotypes of potato for seventeen yield and quality traits revealed

that the characters namely tuber yield plant-1, leaf area, average tuber weight,

stolon length, total soluble solids (TSS), yield plot-1 and yield ha-1, number of

stolons and number of tubers plant-1 exhibited high heritability with high

genetic gain indicating that these characters could be considered reliable

tools for selection as they indicate dominance of additive gene effect.

Egbe et al (2012) conducted a varietal trial of sweet potato to evaluate

performance of the cultivar on morphological (number of branches/plant,

internodes length, number of leaves per plant and vine length) and yield

characters (Root diameter and length, number of roots and weight saleable

10

roots). NARSP/05/022 gave the highest number of leaves, number of roots

(121817/ha) and weight (54151 kg/ha) at harvest. This variety was the only

one that had significantly higher saleable root weight than the check (TIS

87/0087).

Jatav et al. (2013) reported that Kufri Gaurav recorded maximum yield

and agronomic efficiency followed by Kufri Pushkar and Kufri Pukhraj.Kufri

Surya yielded minimum with least agronomic efficiencies.

Qasim et al. (2013) carried out an experiment at Himalayan Agricultural

Research Station (HARS), Kaghan during the summer season of 2005. The

results showed that maximum tuber growth(88.7%), number of stem per plant

(3.5), average number of tuber per plant (10.1) and yield per hectare (12.4

t/ha) were significantly different.

Wariboko et al. (2014) conducted an experiment using randomized

complete block design with three replications each in two locations

(Amassoma Wilberforce Island and Yenagoa, Bayelsa State) to evaluate the

performance of improved sweet potato varieties (Ex-Igbariam, TIS 8164,

199004-2 and TIS 87/0087 including Kukunduku local) from March to June

2010. There were significant differences among varieties. Ex-Igbariam and

TIS 87/0087 had higher fresh root yields of 7.39 and 4.17 t ha-1, respectively,

than others.

2.3 Quality parameters:

Singh et al. (2001) reported that in Malwa , Madhya Pradesh , India

.Kurfi chipsona -1 and kurfi chipsona -2 were found suitable for growing during

the main season. They are likely to provide a choice of potato cultivars to the

processor who was till now depending upon on Kurfi Jyoti and Kurfi Lauvakar

suitable for table consumption.

Zorzella et al. (2003) reported that the physical and chemical

characteristics of the genotypes significantly varied (5% level of significance)

between the spring and autumn crops. Nine or more genotypes registered

higher values for specific gravity, dry matter content, phenol content and

11

Phenol oxidase activity in the spring, and higher values for reducing sugar

content and poly phenolic oxidase activity in the autumn.

Kumar et al. (2004) conducted a field experiments to evaluate the

performance of two chipping cultivars Kufri Chipsona-1 and Kufri Chipsona-2.

They reported that total number of tubers (498.72 thousand /ha) and yield

(291.10 q/ha) were significantly low in cv. Kufri Chipsona-2. Tubers of cv.

Kufri Chipsona-2 had higher dry matter content than that of cv Kufri Chipsona-

1, while sugar content and chip colour score was low in cv Kufri Chipsona-1

as compared to cv. Kufri Chipsona-2.

Singh et al. (2005) reported that the light colour, good-quality French

fries was obtained in all the varieties or hybrid except 'Kufri Anand' at all the

locations in Gujarat, whereas 'Kufri Chipsona 1' and hybrid 'HT-92-621' gave

acceptable fries at Modipuram.

Singh et al. (2005a) reported that the physicochemical, rheological and

retrogradation properties of flours prepared from 6 Indian potato cultivars.

Flour from Kufri chandramukhi showed highest water absorption index,

consistency coefficients and lowest flow behavior indices. Kufri chandramukhi

potato flour exhibited the highest L value.

Kumar et al. (2007) reported that the between cultivars, the tuber and

biomass yield was higher in cv. Kufri Chipsona-1, whereas specific gravity,

tuber dry-matter percentage and crisp recovery were higher in cv. Kufri

Chipsona-2.

Kumar et al. (2007a) reported that Kufri Chipsona-1 produced a 23.6%

higher tuber yield plant-1 than Kufri Chipsona-2. Cultivar was the major factor

that influenced the tuber quality parameters (specific gravity, crisps colour).

Higher values of these quality traits were observed in Kufri Chipsona-2 as

compared to Kufri Chipsona1.

Shashi and Singh (2007) found that the tuber of Kufri Chipsona-2

exhibited maximum tuber dry matter and potassium content (23.54% and

270.17 mg 100-1 fresh wt., respectively). The genotypes Kufri Bahar showed

maximum ascorbic acid content (27.18 mg 100-1 fresh wt.) while J-93-86

showed highest vitamin A (48.69 I.U.).

12

Jaiswal et al. (2008) identified the processing varieties of potato for

Satpura plateau of Madhya Pradesh. Kurfi Chipsona -1, Kurfi Chipsona -2 and

Kurfi Surya had produced maximum dry matter as compared to Kurfi jyoti and

Kurfi Bahar.

Jaiswal et al. (2008) conducted a study for cultivars, three indigenously

developed Indian processing cultivars, i.e. Kufri Chipsona-1, Kufri Chipsona-2,

along with exotic cultivars Atlantic and check, cv. Kufri Surya, were evaluated

at JNKVV, Zonal Agricultural Research Station, Chhindwara over two years

(2006 and 2007) under satpura plateau zone of Madhya Pradesh condition.

Besides total and processing grade tuber yield, observation were recorded on

number of tubers per plant, average tuber with processing attributes, viz.

tuber dry matter, reducing sugar and chips colour. Kufri Chipsona-1 (376

q/ha) and Kufri Chipsona-2 (354.6 q/ha) were the top yielders and produced

the maximum processing grade tuber yield. Both the cultivers possessed high

tuber dry matter and low reducing sugar, and Kufri Chipsona-2 produced

acceptable light colour, chips were as, chip colour of Kufri Chipsona-1 was

nearer to acceptability limit. Exotic cultivar Atlantic, produced acceptable chip

colour, but its tuber yield was low. Both Kufri Chipsoan-1 and Kufri Chipsona-

2 recorded high field resistance to early blight and stem necrosis diseases

whereas, all other cultivars were found susceptible and low yielder.

Bhardwaj et al. (2008) studied the indigenous processing cultivars,

Kufri Chipsona-1, Kufri Chipsona-2, Kufri Chipsona-3, Kufri Himsona and Kufri

Jyoti and two exotic cultivars Atlantic and FL 1533, in ten field trials conducted

at two locations in Mandi district (Barot and janjehli), one in Kangra district

(Pander) and two locations in Shimla District (Shimla and Kufri) over two

years (2006 and 2007). Observations on total and processing grade tuber

yield, tuber dry matter (%) and chip colour were recorded at 120 days after

planting. The pooled analysis of variance showed significant differences

among the genotypes and environment for all the traits studied indicating the

variable response of genotypes and environment. Kufri Himsona recorded the

maximum total tuber yield in most of the trials as compared to other

indigenous and exotic processing cultivars along with highly desirable

13

processing attributes i.e. more dry matter (>22%) and acceptable chip colour

(<2.50).

Muller et al. (2009) reported that the tubers were produced during

spring 2006 and fall 2007 growth seasons and evaluated for dry mass,

reduced sugars, starch and amylase contents and chip color. Spring growth

conditions maximized the gain from selection for reduced sugars, chip color,

starch and amylase. Similar selection gain for dry mass was found in spring

and fall seasons. The clones SMA508-2, SMA508-4 and SMA519-1 showed

the best combination of processing quality traits in both growing conditions

and higher than the best check.

Ooko and Kabira (2011) reported the suitability of three newly released

Kenyan potato varieties for processing. The three new potato varieties (Purple

Gold, Kenya Mpya and Sherekea) and two established varieties (Tigoni and

Dutch Robjin) used in this study were grown under standard conditions at the

National Potato Research Centre, Kenya. All the cultivars had tuber sizes

within recommended range for crisps (40-60 mm) and French fries (≤ 45 mm).

Dry matter contents differed significantly (P ≤ 0.05) among the varieties

ranging from 20.81 % in Golden Purple to 25.77 % in Kenya Mpya. Varietal

differences in color and textural properties of crisps and French fries were

noted.

Vijaylakshman et al. (2008) reported the performance of ten processing

potato hybrids for yield and chip quality in southern transitional zone of

Karnataka was tested at Agriculture Research Station for two years during

2003-04 to 2004-05. They found that for processing grade tuber yield, cultivar

Atlantic recorded highest tuber dry matter followed by Kufri Chipsona-1.

Reducing sugars was lowest in MP/97-625, which determines the quality of

processed chips. In the organoleptic evaluation, the chips made out from Kufri

Chipsona-1 and Kufri Chipsona-2 was superior for the characters viz.,

appearance, taste, texture and aroma.

Kumar (2009) reported that the per cent loss due to rotting on weight

basis was high in K. Sadabahar (16.46%) followed by K. Khyati (15.96%) and

G-4 (11.69%). However, it was lowest in K. Surya (3.25%).

14

Ghulam Abbas et al. (2011) reported that the significant differences in

all the quality parameters were observed among the genotypes. The highest

dry matter was found in NARC 1-2006-1 (25.65%) while NARC 1-2006-2 had

the lowest dry matter (14.86%). The quality traits represented by specific

gravity, dry matter, sugars, starch, protein and ash are influenced by

genotype.

Rivera et al. (2011) reported that the cultivar Criolla Colombia and

clone 98-71.26 showed the best behavior for precooking processing. For

dehydrated flakes the tubers with 21-25% dry weight, large size and reducing

sugars below 0.1% exhibited the best processing behavior. In addition, it was

observed that the cultivar's environmental conditions affect tuber quality and

processing type to be performed.

Gautam et al. (2012) reported that the performance of seven potato

genotypes for good storability. The genotypes PRP 25861.1 and BSU-PO3

had higher dry matter percentage and were found superior for processing in to

chips.

Hafiz et al. (2012) reported that the significant differences in all the

quality parameters and various characteristics were found, while the

genotypes; 394021-120, 9625, Kiran, NARC 2002-1, NARC 1-2006-1 and VR

90-217 gave the highest results regarding yield and quality of potato tubers

except kiran, which has a high yield but low quality characters. Variations

existed among genotypes in tuber characteristics (skin color, tuber shape, eye

depth, flesh color and general appearance). The results regarding correlation

studies indicated that french fry color exhibited negative correlation with

reducing sugar (r=-0.7046), total sugars (r=-0.6659) and positive correlation

with dry matter (r=0.5013).

Kaur and Aggarwal (2014) reported fourteen potato cultivars including

11 Indian genotypes and 3 exotic genotypes were evaluated for processing

quality characteristics including specific gravity, dry matter, reducing sugars,

starch, protein and ash content. All the quality characteristics were affected by

cultivars.

15

2.4 Economics

Hosea et al. (2012) carried out a study which analyzed the profitability

of round potato and the implications for variety selections by using a sample

of 510 farmers drawn from three districts of the Southern Highlands of

Tanzania. The main question was whether smallholder round potato farmers

considered profit potentials or are there other factors in variety selections?

The results showed that Kagiri was the most profitable variety and there were

significant differences in profitability among varieties

Hamad et al. (2004) conducted an experiment to evaluate the main

factors affecting garlic productivity, to analyze the profitability of two varieties

of garlic (local and Chinese) and to draw some policy implications for

improving garlic productivity in the Northern State. The study used cross

sectional data in the agricultural season 2003/04. The survey results indicated

that farmers prefered growing the Chinese variety due to its high return but

still the number of farmers growing it was less compared to the local variety

(ratio 7:13) and the main reasons were the high price of Chinese variety

seeds and lack of knowledge about its cultural practices. The analysis of cost

of production showed that seeds cost amounted to 28.3% of the total cost of

production followed by land rent (17%), irrigation (16.3%), harvesting (11.7%),

weeding, (10.7%), fertilizer (5%), Zakat (4.7%), land preparation (3.3%) and

planting (3%).The results of the multiple regression analysis revealed that

fertilizers, seed rate and weeding were the most important factors affecting

garlic productivity in the study area. The budget analysis showed that the two

varieties of garlic grown were profitable and the Chinese variety was more

profitable than the local variety. For improving productivity, the study

recommended the supply of fertilizers, seeds and herbicides at the

appropriate time and reasonable prices in addition to the adoption of improved

cultural practices through extension services.

16

Chapter-III

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The present investigation entitled “Study on Growth, Development and

Suitability of Some Improved Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) Varieties for

Processing” was carried out in the experimental area of the Department of

Horticulture, College of Agriculture, Indore during the rabi season of 2014-15

under agro-climatic and soil conditions of Madhya Pradesh. The details of

methods and technique followed during the experiment are described below:

3.1 Experimental site

The present experiment was laid out in the field of the Research Farm

of Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Department of

Horticulture, College of Agriculture Indore, during (Rabi) 2014-2015. The

topography of the experimental site was almost uniform with an adequate

surface drainage.

3.2 Location and climate

Indore is situated in malwa plateau region in the western part of the

state of Madhya Pradesh at an altitude of 555.5 meters above mean sea level

(MSL). It is located at latitude 22.43o N and longitude of 75.66o E. It has

subtropical climate having a temperature range of 21o C to 45o C and 6o C to

31o C in summer and winter seasons, respectively. The rainfall in the region

has been mostly inadequate and erratic in most of the recent past seasons.

Late commencement, early withdrawal of monsoon and occurrence of two to

three dry spells during the rainy season are the common features. The mean

annual average rainfall is 964 mm. The meteorological data during crop

growth period from the 15th October, 2014 to 15th February, 2015 are given in

Table 3.1.

17

Table 3.1 Meteorological data observed during period of

investigation from October, 2014 to March, 2015

SMW Month and date RH (%) Temp (0C) Rainfall

(mm)

Wind speed

(km/hr) Max. Min.

42 Oct. 15 – Oct. 21 78.86 31.79 18.79 7.0 1.90

43 Oct. 22 – Oct. 28 81.71 31.21 15.71 0.0 1.74

44 Oct. 29 – Nov. 04 80.0 31.2 14.8 0.0 1.3

45 Nov. 05 –Nov.11 79.0 31.0 14.2 1.9 5.4

46 Nov.12 – Nov.18 81.0 30.2 17.7 0.0 2.01

47 Nov.19 – Nov.25 82.0 29.3 12.5 0.0 1.5

48 Nov.26 – Dec.02 80.0 29.8 11.7 0.0 1.3

49 Dec.03 – Dec.09 78.0 27.7 9.5 0.0 2.1

50 Dec.10 – Dec.16 82.0 25.7 8.5 5.8 3.1

51 Dec.17 – Dec.23 76.0 21.5 5.3 0.0 2.5

52 Dec. 24 – Dec.31 77.0 22.8 5.5 0.0 2.7

1 Jan. 01 - Jan.07 82.0 17.2 6.0 45.8 2.9

2 Jan. 08 – Jan. 14 77.0 23.6 6.7 0.0 1.7

3 Jan. 15 – Jan. 21 78.0 23.3 6.7 0.0 3.1

4 Jan. 22 – Jan.28 80.0 22.5 8.6 14.8 4.0

5 Jan. 29 – Feb.04 77.0 23.7 6.9 0.0 2.7

6 Feb. 05 – Feb.11 75.5 21.9 8.6 0.0 4.5

7 Feb.12 – Feb.18 70.85 29.0 9.9 0.0 2.5

Total - - - 75.3 -

Average 78.66 26.3 10.42 4.18 2.60

Source: AICRP for Dryland Agriculture; College of Agriculture, Indore

(M.P.)

The meteorological parameters during the crop season such as

minimum and maximum temperature, rainfall, wind speed and relative

humidity were recorded in AICRP for Dryland Agriculture; College of

Agriculture, Indore (M. P.) and are presented in Table 3.1. The data (Table

3.1 and Fig.1) indicate that the total rainfall received during crop growth period

was 75.3 mm. There were no rains during SMW 43-44, 46 to 49, 51-52, 2-3

and 05 to 07. The minimum and maximum temperature during crop growth

period varied 5.30C to 18.790C and from 17.20C to 31.790C, with season‟s

average values of 8.660C and 25.630 C respectively. The relative humidity and

wind speed ranged between 73.0 to 85.7 % and 1.4 to 4.6 km hrs-1 with

season‟s average of 78.60% and 2.76 km hrs-1.

18

3.3 Soil

The soil of the experimental field has been grouped under medium

black clay soil (Vertisols) belonging to Kamliakhedi series, which is a member

of fine, smectitic, hyperthermic family of Vertic, Ustochrepts. In order to

determine the textural class and fertility status of the experimental area, the

soil samples were collected randomly from each plot with the help of soil

auger before sowing from the experimental field. Sample from each

replication was drawn to study physio-chemical properties of the experimental

field. The data pertaining to various physio-chemical properties have been

presented in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2 Physio-chemical properties of soil collected from the

experimental field

S.No. Composition Content Category Method used

A. Mechanical composition

1 Sand (%) 10.4 - Bouyoucos Hydrometer method (Piper, 1967) 2 Silt (%) 35.5 -

3 Clay (%) 54.0 -

4 Textural class Clayey

B. Chemical composition

S.No. Analysis Values Category Method adopted

1. Soil pH 7.6 Slightly alkaline

Glass electrode method (pH meter) (Jackson, 1967)

2. Electrical conductivity (ds/m)

0.35 Normal Conductivity meter at 25ºC (Jackson, 1967)

3. Organic carbon (%)

0.72 Medium Wakley and Black rapid titration method (Wakley & Black 1934)

4. Available Nitrogen (kg N /ha)

216.0 Low Alkaline permanganate method (Jackson 1967)

5. Available phosphorus (kg P2O5 /ha)

12.2 Medium Olsen‟s method (Jackson, 1967)

6. Available potash (kg K2O /ha)

420 High Flame photometer (Jackson, 1967)

Source: - All India Co-ordinated Research Project on Salt Affected Soils and

Use of Saline Water in Agriculture, College of Agriculture, Indore.

19

The physio-chemical analysis of soil showed that the soil of

experimental site was predominantly clayey in texture. The organic carbon

content (0.26%) and available nitrogen (216.0 kg ha-1) were low. The

available phosphorus (12.2 kg ha-1) and potash (420 kg ha-1) were medium

and high respectively. The soil pH (7.6) was indicating slightly alkaline in

nature. Electrical conductivity (0.35 dS m-1) of soil was found normal (Table

3.2).

3.4 Cropping history of the experimental field

The knowledge about previous crops on experimental field is essential

to know its previous history. The experimental field was planted to different

crops during past 3 years. A brief history of crops sequence followed during

the last three years is shown in the Table 3.3.

Table 3.3 Cropping history of experimental field

Year Kharif Rabi Summer

2012-2013 Okra cabbage Fallow

2013- 2014 Fallow Potato Fallow

2014-2015 Cowpea Present experiment -

20

3.5 Experimental material

The experimental material for this study comprised of 10

varieties as treatment is presented in Table 3.4.

Table 3.4 Details of Varieties:

S. No. Treatment Varieties

1 T1 Kufri Chipsona-1




5 T5 Kufri Chandramukhi

6 T6 Kufri Arun

7 T7 Kufri Lauvkar

8 T8 Kufri Surya

9 T9 Kufri Jawahar

10 T10 Kufri Jyoti

21

3.6 Experimental details

Table 3.5: Experimental design

Crop : Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.)

Season : 2014-15

Design : Randomized Completely Block Design

Replication : Three

Treatment : Ten

Total number of plots : 30

Gross area of experimental field : 456.00 sq.m

Net area of experiment field : 270.00 sq.m

Gross plot size : 3.00 X 3.00 sq.m

Row to row distance : 60 cm

Plant to plant distance : 20 cm

Number of rows in each plot : 5

Number of plants for

observation per plot

: 5

Plot to plot distance : 1.0 m

Distance between replication : 1.5 m

Date of sowing : 18 – 10 – 2014

Manure and fertilizers applied : FYM 20tones, NPK 120:80:80 kg ha-1

22

Plan of layout

24.0 m

3.0m 1.5m

T5 T10 R

ep

lica

tio

n b

ord

er

T4 T9

Re

plica

tio

n b

ord

er

T3 T8

T4 T9 T3 T8 T1 T5

T3 T8 T2 T7 T2 T9

T2 T7 T1 T6 T6 T10

T1 T6 T10 T5 T7 T4

R-I R-II R-III

Fig:2 Plan of the layout of experimental plot

E

W

1.0m

3.0 m

19.0 m

N S

23

3.7 Agronomical Operations

3.7.1 Land preparation

The experimental plot was ploughed and harrowed in order to bring the

soil in well-pulverized condition. FYM was applied @ 20t ha-1. Plots were made

according to the layout plan after leveling.

3.7.2 Planting

Pre-planting seed treatment was done with Mancozeb 0.2% solution

for 10 minutes and spread at a cool and moist place to avoid fungal

infection. Healthy, uniform, medium sized tubers (35 – 45 mm or 45 – 50

g) at the rate of 30 - 35q ha-1 were used. Shallow furrows were opened 6

cm apart with the help of pickaxe manually and tubers were dibbled at a

spacing of 60 cm row to row and 20 cm plant to plant.

A week after transplanting, gap filling was done. All the other

recommended package of practices was followed to raise a healthy crop.

3.7.3 Irrigation

The first irrigation was given immediately after planting to ensure

proper establishment of sprout. Subsequent irrigation was given at 15

days interval up to month of January and at an interval of 10 days during

the month of February.

3.7.4 Intercultural operations

Earthing-up and weeding of potato are done as soon as weeds

emerge, but preferably when potato plants are about 8 – 10 cm high. The

first earthing up is done at 25 – 30 days after planting and second

earthing up at 55 – 60 days after planting.

3.7.5 Fertilizer Application

Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium were applied, through urea, single

super phosphate and muriate of potash respectively. A uniform dose of 120 kg N

ha-1, 80 kg P ha-1 and 80 kg K ha-1 was applied to all the plots. Full quantity of

24

phosphorus and potassium fertilizer along with half dose of nitrogen was applied

before planting. While, the rest nitrogen was applied during earthing up at 25-

30 DAP.

3.7.6 Plant protection measures:

The crop was sprayed with imidachlorprid 0.005% or thiomethoxan

0.025% for control of White fly and Jassid, to keep the crop free from pest

during crop growth period.

3.8 Sampling

Sampling was done at 30 days up to harvest for growth analysis.

Five plants were randomly selected from each varieties and replication for

the study.

3.9 Observation recorded

The data were recorded on various parameters during the period of

experimentation. The data were recorded as per standard procedure.

3.9.1 Morphological Parameters

3.9.1.1 Days to 50%germination

Number of days taken beginning from the planting to the initiation of

germination in each variety was recorded separately.

3.9.1.2 Number of sprouts per plant

The total number of sprouts per plant of the tagged plants were counted at

30 DAP and averaged to get the number of sprouts per plant.

3.9.1.3 Plant height (cm)

The height of the main stem from the ground level to the apical bud (leaf

apex) was measured with the meter scale at 30, 45, 60 and 75 days after

planting and at harvest.

25

3.9.1.4 Diameter of main stem (cm)

Diameter of stem of the all observational plants from each plot was

recorded by using the thread, this thread put on the scale to measure the

readings and it was considered as diameter of stem and expressed in centimeter.

3.9.1.5 Number of leaves per plant

The numbers of leaves of each tagged plant in all the varieties were

counted at 30, 45, 60 and 75 days after planting and at harvest.

3.9.1.6 Leaf area per plant (cm2)

At random three plants from each genotype and replication were

uprooted and cleaned. The assimilatory surface area (A) was recorded by

using electronic leaf area meter (Li Cor 3000) at 30, 45, 60 and 75 days

after transplanting.

3.9.1.7 Dry weight of the plant (g)

At random three plants of potato from each varieties and replication were

uprooted, cleaned and they were dried in the oven at 600C after sun drying up to

brittle and moisture free and then were weighted at 30, 45, 60 and 75 days after

planting and at harvest.

3.9.2 Growth analytical Parameters

3.9.2.1 Leaf area index (LAI)

The assimilatory surface area (A) was recorded at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP.

In this process three plants from each genotype and replications are selected at

random and its reading was taken by using electronic leaf area meter (Li Cor

3000). LAI is the leaf area (A) or the assimilatory surface area over a certain

ground area (P) and is calculated by the formula given by (Watson, 1952)

A

LAI=

P

26

where,

A= Leaf area

P= Ground area

3.9.2.2 NAR (Net assimilation rate)

It is the measurement of the rate of photosynthesis per unit time on the

basis of dry matter and is expressed as g/cm2/day. It was worked out as per the

following formula (Watson, 1952).

W2 - W1 log A2 – log A1

NAR = X

A2 – A1 (t2 – t1)

Where,

A1 and W1 are the leaf area and dry weight of the plant sample

respectively at time t1 and A2 and W2 are the leaf area and dry weight of

the plant sample respectively at time t2.

3.9.2.3 Crop growth rate

Crop growth rate is also called the rate of dry matter production

(Blackman and Black, 1968). The crop growth rate is expressed as

g/plant/day.

W2 - W1

CGR =

P (T2 – T1)

where,

P = Ground area on which W1 and W2 were estimated.

W1= Dry weight of plant at 1st observation.

W2= Dry weight of plant at 2nd observation.

T1 & T2 = interval between observation.

27

3.9.3 Yield Parameters

3.9.3.1 Days to haulm cutting

The haulm cutting was done 15 days before harvesting.

3.9.3.2 Days to maturity

Potato crops show signs of maturity (like leaves turn yellow, and are shed

in course of time and haulms dry up and die) which was taken to be an indication

of maturity and the time of maturity indications differs from early, medium and

late varieties.

3.9.3.3 Number of tubers per plant

The number of tubers harvested from five randomly selected plants

in each genotype was collected during harvesting counted and average

tubers per plant were calculated.

3.9.3.4 Number of rotted tubers per plant

The tagged plants were harvested and the number of rotted tubers per

plant was counted.

3.9.3.5 Weight of rotted tubers per plant

The tagged plants were harvested and the weight of rotted tubers per

plant was recorded separately with the help of electronic weighing balance

and average was worked out for each varieties.

3.9.3.6 Total tubers yield per plot

Tubers of all the plants in each plot including 5 observational plants were

harvested and weighted separately for total yield per plot and expressed in kg

per plot.

28

3.9.3.7 Total tubers yield per hectare (q ha-1)

Total tuber yield (kg) per plot was converted in quintals per hectare by

multiplying with factor.

3.9.3.8 Marketable yield per plot

The total tubers obtained from each plot were sorted out into different

grades according to weight i.e. small size < 50 g, medium 50 – 100g and big

sized > 100g. The total weight of medium and big size tubers were recorded

separately for marketable tuber yield per plot.

3.9.3.9 Marketable yield per hectare (q ha-1)

Marketable tuber yield per plot was converted in quintals per hectare by

multiplying with factor.

3.9.3.10 Harvest index

Harvest index is expressed as the ratio of economical yield and

biological yield.

Economical yield (gm)

Harvest index =

Biological yield (gm)

3.9.4 Quality Parameters

3.9.4.1 Making of flour

The potato flour was made from whole potato (including potato skin) they

were cooked, dried and then grinds to make the flour. The quality of flour was

measured according to its colour.

3.9.4.2 Quality of chips

The chips were prepared from tubers of tagged plants by chips making

machine. The sensory observations were recorded for color and taste of chips.

29

3.9.4.3 Starch content

To extract the starch, the tubers of the tagged plants are crushed; the

starch grains are released from the destroyed cells. The starch is then washed

out and dried to powder.

3.9.5 Incidence of insect-pest and disease occurrence

The numbers of insect-pest were counted manually in three leaves

selected randomly from each tagged plant in all the varieties at 30, 45, 60 and 75

days after planting.

3.9.6 Computation of Economics of treatments

Several economic indices are available to evaluate the profitability of

cropping systems. No single index is capable of giving good comparison of

different varieties/hybrids and so a number of indices are used together to

assess the economic viability of the system. Since the price of farm products

changes from year to year and season to season and also place to place, the

profitability of the system also changes accordingly. The procedure used for

working out economics of different treatments under consideration was as

suggested by Yang et al. (1989).

3.9.5.1 Gross Monetary Returns (Rs/ha)

Gross returns are the total monetary value of economic produce and

byproducts obtained from the crop raised in the different treatments and is

calculated based on the local market prices.

3.9.5.2 Cost of Cultivation (Rs/ha)

Cost of cultivation is the total expenditure incurred for raising crop in a

treatment. The cost included for this purpose consists of own or hired human

labour, owned or hired bullock labour, value of seed, manures, fertilizers,

pesticides and herbicides and irrigation charges etc.

30

3.9.5.3 Net monetary returns (Rs/ha)

It is computed by subtracting cost of cultivation from gross returns. It is

good indicator of suitability of a cropping system since this represents the actual

income of the farmer. Monetary returns from different treatments were calculated

with the help of prevailing market rates of produce and different inputs used in

the experiments.

Net monetary returns (Rs/ha) = Gross return (Rs/ha) – Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha)

3.9.5.4 Benefit cost ratio

It is the ratio of gross returns to cost of cultivation. It is expressed as

returns per rupee invested. This index provides an estimate of the benefit to the

farmer derived from the expenditure he incurs in adopting a particular cropping

system. Any value above 2.0 is considered safe as the farmer gets Rs. 2 for

every rupee invested.

Benefit cost ratio = Gross return (Rs/ha)/ Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha)

3.10 Statistical analysis

The data obtained with respect to all the characters has been

subjected to the following statistical analysis.

3.10.1 Mean: It was calculated by using following formula.

Mean = =

Where,

Σx = Sum of all the observation

n = Number of observation

∑x

n

31

3.10.2 Analysis of variance

The observation recorded for the different characters were

statistically analyzed by the methods of analysis of variance as described

by Fisher (1938). The significance of different treatments were judged at

5% level of “F” test. The skeleton of analysis of variance used was as

follows:

Table 3.5 ANOVA for Randomized Completely Block Design

Source of variation

D.F. SS MSS F Calculated

F value at 5%

Replication r-1

Varieties v-1

Error (r-1)(v-1)

Total rv-1

A significant value of F test indicates that the test entries differ

significantly among themselves, which requires computing.

CD at 5% prob. Level = SE diff x t5% table value

Where

MSE = Mean square error (Error variance)

r = Number of replication

C VEMS

GMx. . 100

r

EMS m ± S E

diff SE 2

r

EMS

32

, C.V. = Coefficient of variation

SEm ± = Standard error of means

S E diff = Standard error of difference

C.D. = Critical difference

t 5% = t, table value 5% probability level at error d.f.

33

Chapter-IV

RESULT

Various growth parameters, yield parameters, yield, quality and

economics of potato obtained under the study entitled “Study on Growth,

Development and Suitability of Some Improved Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.)

Varieties for Processing”are analyzed statistically and presented here as under:

4.1 Qualitative traits/characters

4.1.1 Days to 50% germination

The data on days to 50% germination as influence by different varieties

are given in Table 4.1, presented in Fig. 3 and depicted in Appendix – I clearly

indicated that the days to 50% germination responded significantly due to

different varieties.

Table 4.1 Days to 50% germination and Number of sprouts per plant

of different potato varieties.

S. No. Varieties Days to 50% germination

Number of sprouts per plant

1. Kufri Chipsona-1 22.33 3.9

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 22.22 3.2



5. Kufri Chandramukhi 20.20 3.83

6. Kufri Arun 19.00 4.14

7. Kufri Lauvkar 21.59 3.40

8. Kufri Surya 21.49 3.46

9. Kufri Jawahar 22.15 3.27

10. Kufri Jyoti 20.60 3.74

SEm± 0.44 0.16

C.D. at 5% level 1.31 0.50

34

Significantly minimum days required for 50 % germination was recorded

in variety Kufri Arun (19.00) which was at par with Kufri Chandramukhi (20.20

days) and followed by Kufri Jyoti (20.60 days) as compared to other varieties.

While, maximum (23.16) days was recorded in Kufri Chipsona- 4.

4.1.2 Number of sprouts per plant

The data for different varieties with respect to the number of sprouts per

plant is summarized in Table 4.1 and illustrated in Fig. 3 and depicted in

Appendix –II.

At 30 DAP significantly maximum number of sprouts per plant was

recorded in the Variety Kufri arun (4.14) followed by and at par with Kufri

chipsona-3 (4.01), Kufri chipsona-1 (3.9), Kufri chandramukhi (3.83) and Kufri

jyoti (3.74). While, minimum number of sprouts per plant was observed in Kufri

Chipsona-4 (2.93).

4.1.3 Plant height (cm)

The plant height of potato plant as influenced by different varieties is given

in Table 4.2 graphically presented in Fig. 4 and depicted in Appendix – III to VI.

The data clearly indicated that the plant height of potato responded significantly

due to different varieties at all the growth stages under present studies.

Plant height was recorded at 30, 45, 60 and 75 days after planting. At 30

days after planting, significantly maximum plant height was recorded in variety

Kufri Arun (30.42 cm) which was followed by all other varieties except Kufri

Jawahar(27.08 cm) and Kufri Chipsona- 2 (26.00 cm).

At 45 days after planting, the significantly maximum (46.51 cm) plant

height was recorded in variety Kufri Arun followed by Kufri Chandramukhi (45.41

cm), Kufri jyoti (43.12 cm) and Kufri Lavkar (42.31 cm) as compared to other

varieties. While, the minimum plant height (32.45 cm) was recorded in variety

Kufri Chipsona- 2.

With regards to 60 DAP, the significantly maximum plant height was

recorded in variety Kufri Arun (62.95 cm), followed by and at par with Kufri

35

Chandramukhi (60.38 cm) over all other varieties. However, the minimum value

of plant height was observed in variety Kufri Chipsona- 2 (42.37 cm).

At 75 days after planting, significantly the maximum (63.92 cm) plant

height was recorded in variety Kufri Arun followed by and at par with Kufri

Chandramukhi (62.18 cm), Kufri jyoti (61.45 cm), Kufri Lavkar (59.91 cm) Kufri

surya (58.91 cm) and Kufri chipsona -1 (58.46 cm) as compared to other

varieties. While, the minimum plant height (43.50 cm) was recorded in variety

Kufri Chipsona- 2.

Table 4.2 Plant height (cm) of potato varieties at different plant growth

stages.

S.No. Varieties Plant height (cm)

30 DAP 45 DAP 60 DAP 75DAP

1. Kufri Chipsona-1 27.76 41.15 56.00 58.46

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 26.00 32.45 42.37 43.50

3. Kufri Chipsona-3 28.29 33.68 42.81 56.51

4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 28.20 37.28 43.77 45.10

5. Kufri Chandramukhi 29.5 45.41 60.38 62.18

6. Kufri Arun 30.42 46.51 62.95 63.92

7. Kufri Lauvkar 27.3 43.31 54.18 59.12

8. Kufri Surya 27.88 42.29 57.62 58.91

9. Kufri Jawahar 27.08 40.54 47.43 53.53

10. Kufri Jyoti 28.44 43.47 59.68 61.45

SEm± 1.07 1.16 0.90 2.40

C.D. at 5% level 3.18 3.46 2.67 7.15

4.1.4 Diameter of stem (cm)

The diameter of stem of different varieties is given in Table 4.3, presented

in Fig. 5 and depicted in Appendix-VII to X.

36

Diameter of stem was recorded at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP. At 30 DAP,

the significantly maximum diameter of stem was recorded in Kufri Arun (3.03 cm)

followed by all other varieties and were at par with each other as compared to

Kufri Chipsona-3 (2.40cm) and Kufri Chipsona-4 (2.70 cm). However, minimum

diameter of stem was recorded in variety Kufri Chipsona-3 (2.40 cm) and Kufri

Chipsona- 4(2.70 cm).

Table 4.3 Diameter of stem (cm) of potato varieties at different plant growth

stages.

S.

No.

Varieties Diameter of stem (cm)

30 DAP 45 DAP 60 DAP 75 DAP

1. Kufri Chipsona-1 2.82 3.11 3.41 3.82

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 2.76 2.99 3.33 3.90

3. Kufri Chipsona-3 2.40 3.02 3.41 3.92

4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 2.70 2.94 3.00 3.05


6. Kufri Arun 3.03 3.28 3.88 4.09

7. Kufri Lauvkar 2.85 3.16 3.65 3.96

8. Kufri Surya 2.77 3.06 3.60 3.86

9. Kufri Jawahar 2.79 3.02 3.27 3.78

10. Kufri Jyoti 2.95 3.14 3.76 4.01

SEm± 0.10 0.05 0.12 0.05

C.D. at 5% level 0.32 0.17 0.38 0.16

At 45 DAP, the significantly maximum diameter of stem was recorded in

Kufri Arun (3.28 cm) followed by all other varieties and were at par with each

other as compared to Kufri Chipsona-3 (3.02 cm) and Kufri Chipsona-4 (2.94

cm). However, minimum diameter of stem was recorded in variety Kufri

Chipsona-3 (3.02 cm) and Kufri Chipsona- 4(2.94 cm).

In case of 60 days after planting, the significantly maximum diameter of

stem was recorded in variety Kufri Arun (3.88 cm) which was followed by and at

37

par with Kufri Chandramukhi (3.80 cm), Kufri Jyoti (3.76 cm), Kufri Lauvkar (3.65

cm) and Kufri Surya (3.60 cm) over other varieties. However, minimum diameter

of stem was observed in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4 (3.00 cm).

Similar trend was recorded at 75 days after planting the significantly

maximum diameter of stem was recorded in variety Kufri Arun (4.09cm) which

was followed by and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi (4.03 cm), Kufri Jyoti

(4.01cm) and Kufri Lauvkar (3.96 cm) over all other varieties. However, minimum

diameter of stem was observed in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4 (3.05 cm).

4.1.5 Number of leaves per plant

The number of leaves per plant of different varieties is given in Table 4.4.

The results were graphically presented in Fig. 6 and depicted in Appendix-XI to

XIV.

Number of leaves per plant was recorded at 30, 45, 60 and 75 days

after planting. At 30 days after planting, the significantly the maximum 11.14

leaves per plant were recorded in variety Kufri Arun followed by Kufri

Chandramukhi (10.74), Kufri Jyoti (10.12) and Kufri Lavkar (9.83) as compared to

other varieties. However, Kufri chandramukhi was found at par with variety Kufri

Arun. While, the minimum leaves per plant (7.56) were recorded in variety Kufri

Chipsona- 4.

The variety Kufri Arun was recorded significantly maximum 17.35 leaves

per plant followed by and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi (16.29 leaves) and Kufri

Jyoti (15.57 leaves) as compared to other varieties. However, the minimum

number of leaves per plant (11.92) were recorded in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4 at

45 days after planting.

In case of 60 days after planting, the significantly the maximum 19.76

leaves per plant was recorded in variety Kufri Arun followed byand at par with

Kufri Chandramukhi (18.35) and Kufri Jyoti (17.59) as compared to other

varieties. While, minimum number of leaves per plant was observed in variety

Kufri Chipsona- 4 (14.00) at this stage of crop growth.

38

The similar trend was observed at 75 days after planting, the significantly

maximum 20.11 leaves per plant were recorded in variety Kufri Arun followed by

and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi (19.13), Kufri Jyoti (18.37) and Kufri

chipsona-2 (18.82) as compared to other varieties. While, it was observed that

the minimum number of leaves were attained by variety Kufri Chipsona- 4

(15.06).

Table 4.4 Number of leaves per plant of potato varieties at different plant

growth stages.

S. No. Varieties No. of leaves per plant


1. Kufri Chipsona-1 9.12 14.15 16.68 17.72

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 9.25 13.92 16.85 18.28

3. Kufri Chipsona- 3 8.35 13.37 15.68 16.52

4. Kufri Chipsona-4 7.56 11.92 14.00 15.06


6. Kufri Arun 11.14 17.35 19.76 20.11

7. Kufri Lauvkar 9.83 14.62 16.86 17.99

8. Kufri Surya 8.57 12.78 15.93 16.82

9. Kufri Jawahar 9.37 14.34 16.56 17.41

10. Kufri Jyoti 7.12 15.57 17.59 18.37

SEm± 0.19 0.68 0.82 0.63

C.D. at 5% level 0.59 2.02 2.45 1.89

4.1.6 Leaf length (cm)

The leaf length was recorded and has been presented in Table 4.5,

illustrated through Fig. 7 and depicted in Appendix-XV to XVIII.

At 30 days after planting, the significantly maximum leaf length 5.23 cm

was recorded under the varieties Kufri Arun followed by and at par with Kufri

Chandramukhi (5.12 cm), Kufri Jyoti (5.08 cm), Kufri chipsona-1 (4.82 cm) and

39

kufri Lauvkar (4.73) over other varieties. While, the minimum leaf length (3.97

cm) was recorded in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4.

At 45 days after planting, the significantly maximum leaf length 5.79 cm

was recorded under the variety Kufri Arun followed by and at par with Kufri

Chandramukhi (5.69 cm) and Kufri Jyoti (5.43 cm) as compared to other

varieties. However, Kufri Arun, Kufri Chandramukhi and Kufri Jyoti were found at

par with each other. While, the minimum leaf length (4.67 cm) was recorded in

variety Kufri Chipsona- 4.

Table 4.5 Leaf length (cm) of potato varieties at different plant growth

stages.

S.

No.

Varieties Leaf length (cm)


1. Kufri Chipsona-1 4.82 5.36 5.42 5.48

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 4.52 5.12 5.31 5.42

3. Kufri Chipsona- 3 4.68 5.26 5.35 5.44

4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 3.97 4.67 4.97 5.06


6. Kufri Arun 5.23 5.79 5.85 5.96

7. Kufri Lauvkar 4.73 5.27 5.40 5.47

8. Kufri Surya 4.61 5.17 5.30 5.37

9. Kufri Jawahar 4.50 5.11 5.33 5.39

10. Kufri Jyoti 5.08 5.43 5.47 5.85

SEm± 0.17 0.12 0.11 0.13

C.D. at 5% level 0.50 0.37 0.35 0.40

In case of 60 days after planting, the significantly maximum leaf length

5.85 cm was recorded under the variety Kufri Arun followed by and at par with

Kufri Chandramukhi (5.73 cm) as compared to other varieties. While, the

minimum leaf length was recorded in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4 (4.97 cm).

40

In case of 75 days after planting, the significantly maximum leaf length

5.96 cm was recorded under the variety Kufri Arun followed by and at par with

Kufri Chandramukhi (5.88 cm) and Kufri Jyoti (5.85 cm) as compared to other

varieties. Whereas, leaf length was observed minimum in variety Kufri Chipsona-

4 (5.06 cm).

4.1.7 Leaf width (cm)

The leaf width was recorded and has been presented in Table 4.6, Fig. 8

and depicted in Appendix-XIX to XXII.

At 30 days after planting, the significantly maximum leaf width 3.85 cm

was recorded under the variety Kufri Arun which was followed by and at par with

Kufri Chandramukhi (3.80 cm), Kufri jyoti (3.72 cm) and Kufri Lauvkar (3.65 cm)

over all other varieties. While, the minimum leaf width (3.46 cm) was recorded in

variety Kufri Chipsona- 4.

Table 4.6: Leaf width (cm) of potato varieties at different plant growth

stages.

S.

No.

Varieties Leaf width (cm)


1. Kufri Chipsona-1 3.55 3.65 3.76 3.82

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 3.50 3.62 3.83 3.93

3. Kufri Chipsona- 3 3.52 3.55 3.72 3.80

4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 3.46 3.50 3.68 3.75


6. Kufri Arun 3.85 4.46 4.59 4.70

7. Kufri Lauvkar 3.65 4.18 4.32 4.45

8. Kufri Surya 3.53 4.12 4.23 4.48

9. Kufri Jawahar 3.59 4.07 4.10 4.21

10. Kufri Jyoti 3.72 4.22 4.42 4.52

SEm± 0.06 0.18 0.17 0.22

C.D. at 5% level 0.20 0.55 0.50 0.68

41


was recorded under the variety Kufri Arun followed by Kufri Chandramukhi (4.25

cm), Kufri Jyoti (4.22 cm) and Kufri Lauvkar (4.18 cm) as compared to other

varieties. However, variety Kufri Arun was found at par with Kufri Chandramukhi,

Kufri Jyoti, Kufri Lavkar, Kufri Surya and Kufri Jawahar. While, minimum leaf

width (3.50 cm) was recorded in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4.


was recorded under the variety Kufri Arun followed by Kufri Chandramukhi (4.45

cm) and Kufri Jyoti (4.42 cm) and at par with all other varieties over Chipsona

varieties. While, the minimum leaf width (3.68 cm) was recorded in variety Kufri

Chipsona- 4.

The similar trend was recorded at 75 days after planting, the significantly

maximum leaf width 4.70 cm was recorded under the variety Kufri Arun which

was followed by Kufri Chandramukhi (4.62 cm), Kufri Jyoti (4.52 cm) and at par

with all other varieties over Chipsona varieties. While, the minimum leaf width

(3.75 cm) was recorded in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4.

4.1.8 Leaf area per plant (cm 2)

The leaf area per plant (cm2) of different varieties is given in Table 4.7

illustrated in Fig. 9 and depicted in Appendix-XXIII to XXVI. The observation for

Leaf area per plant (cm2) was recorded at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP.

The leaf area per plant (cm2) of potato increased significantly with the

different varieties. Kufri Arun (208.30 cm2) recorded significantly maximum

leaf area per plant followed by Kufri Chandramukhi (205.51 cm2). While,

minimum leaf area per plant (cm2) was observed in Kufri Chipsona- 4 (142.82

cm2) at 30 DAP.

At 45 DAP, variety Kufri Arun recorded the significantly maximum

(396.92 cm2) leaf area per plant followed by and at par with Kufri

Chandramukhi (355.41 cm2) as compared to all other varieties. However, the

42

minimum value of leaf area per plant (cm2) was recorded in variety Kufri

Chipsona- 4 (244.07 cm2).

Table 4.7 Leaf area per plant (cm2) of potato varieties at different plant

growth stages.

S. No. Varieties Leaf area plant (cm2)


1. Kufri Chipsona-1 152.20 267.62 364.88 410.82

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 149.98 252.71 370.06 397.93

3. Kufri Chipsona- 3 148.91 276.71 324.08 382.75

4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 142.82 244.07 298.76 378.78


6. Kufri Arun 208.30 396.92 482.13 497.23

7. Kufri Lauvkar 186.82 298.24 379.89 430.12

8. Kufri Surya 146.47 267.89 342.41 386.82

9. Kufri Jawahar 151.78 322.26 362.74 394.31

10. Kufri Jyoti 155.26 322.52 418.39 430.42

SEm± 4.07 16.45 13.18 10.84

C.D. at 5% level 12.09 48.88 39.18 32.23

In case of 60 DAP, variety Kufri Arun (482.13cm2 recorded the

significantly maximum leaf area per plant as compared to all other varieties.

while, the minimum value of leaf area per plant (cm2) was observed in Kufri

Chipsona- 4 (298.76 cm2).

At 75 DAP, variety Kufri Arun recorded the significantly maximum

(497.23cm2) leaf area per plant followed by and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi

(482.73 cm2) as compared to all other varieties. However, Kufri Chipsona- 4

(378.78 cm2) records the minimum value for leaf area per plant (cm2).

4.1.9. Dry weight per plant (g)

The dry weight per plant (g) of different varieties is given in Table 4.8,

graphically presented in Fig. 10 and depicted in Appendix XXVII to XXX.

43

Dry weight per plant (g) was recorded at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP. At

30 DAP, significantly the maximum dry weight per plant (g) was recorded in Kufri

Arun (22.32 g) followed by and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi (21.42 g), Kufri

Jyoti (20.31 g), Kufri Lauvkar (19.87 g), Kufri Jawahar (19.67 g) and Kufri

Chipsona- 1 as compared to other varieties. Minimum dry weight per plant (g)

was recorded in variety Kufri Chipsona-4 (15.02 g).

At 45 DAP; the significantly maximum dry weight per plant (g) was

recorded in Kufri Arun (24.37 g) over all other varieties. Minimum dry weight per

plant (g) was recorded in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4(15.46 g).

In case of 60 days after planting, the significantly maximum dry weight per

plant (g) was recorded in variety Kufri Arun (42.97 g) over all other varieties.

Minimum dry weight per plant (g) was recorded in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4

(17.17 g).

Table 4.8 Dry weight per plant (g) of potato varieties at different plant

growth stages.

S. No. Varieties Dry weight per plant (g)


1. Kufri Chipsona-1 19.32 20.44 29.90 30.84

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 15.85 16.38 20.71 21.33

3. Kufri Chipsona-3 15.75 16.20 19.66 20.42

4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 15.02 15.46 17.17 17.65


6. Kufri Arun 22.32 24.37 42.97 44.96

7. Kufri Lauvkar 19.87 21.19 32.30 33.78

8. Kufri Surya 16.52 17.55 26.42 27.67

9. Kufri Jawahar 19.67 20.75 30.15 31.52

10. Kufri Jyoti 20.31 22.05 38.67 40.36

SEm± 1.04 0.036 0.102 0.033

C.D. at 5% level 3.10 0.109 0.303 0.099

44

Similar trend was recorded at 75 days after planting and the significantly

maximum dry weight per plant (g) was recorded in variety Kufri Arun (44.96 g)

over all other varieties. However, the minimum dry weight per plant (g) was

recorded in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4(17.65 g).

4.2 Growth analytical traits

4.2.1 Leaf area index

The leaf area index of different varieties is given in Table 4.8 at 30, 45, 60

and 75 DAP, graphical presented in Fig. 11 and depicted in Appendix- XXXI to

XXXIV.

In case of 30 DAP, Kufri Arun recorded significantly maximum (0.176) leaf

area index followed by and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi (0.168), as compared

to all other varieties. While, the minimum leaf area index was recorded in variety

Kufri Chipsona- 4 (0.114).

Table 4.9: Leaf area index of potato varieties at different plant growth

stages.

S. No. Varieties Leaf area index


1. Kufri Chipsona-1 0.124 0.209 0.311 0.325

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 0.121 0.207 0.301 0.344

3. Kufri Chipsona- 3 0.122 0.232 0.274 0.299

4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 0.114 0.182 0.248 0.289


6. Kufri Arun 0.176 0.335 0.408 0.435

7. Kufri Lauvkar 0.130 0.269 0.320 0.351

8. Kufri Surya 0.120 0.219 0.308 0.340

9. Kufri Jawahar 0.125 0.252 0.312 0.336

10. Kufri Jyoti 0.150 0.310 0.334 0.358

SEm± 0.007 0.012 0.016 0.017

C.D. at 5% level 0.023 0.037 0.049 0.052

45

At 45 DAP, variety Kufri Arun (0.335) recorded significantly maximum

leaf area index followed by and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi (0.302) and Kufri

Jyoti (0.310) as compared to all other varieties. However, minimum leaf area

index was observed in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4 (0.182).

At 60 DAP, variety Kufri Arun (0.408) recorded significantly maximum

leaf area index as compared to other varieties. However, minimum leaf area

index was recorded in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4(0.248).

In case of 75 DAP, variety Kufri Arun (0.435) recorded significantly

maximum leaf area index as compared to all other varieties. However,

minimum leaf area index was observed in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4(0.289).

4.2.2 Net assimilation rate (g/cm2 /day)

The data of net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day) of different varieties is given

in Table 4.10 at 45, 60 and 75 DAP, graphically presented in Fig. 12 and

illustrated in Appendix-XXXV to XXXVII.

Table 4.10 Net assimilation rate (g/cm2/day) of potato varieties at different

plant growth stages.

S. No. Varieties NAR (g/cm2 /day)

30-45 DAP 45-60 DAP 60-75 DAP

1. Kufri Chipsona-1 0.0016 0.0318 0.0052

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 0.0014 0.0156 0.0039

3. Kufri Chipsona- 3 0.0019 0.0168 0.0045

4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 0.0007 0.0054 0.0019

5. Kufri Chandramukhi 0.0040 0.0550 0.0078

6. Kufri Arun 0.0048 0.0754 0.0088

7. Kufri Lauvkar 0.0020 0.0339 0.0062

8. Kufri Surya 0.0017 0.0325 0.0058

9. Kufri Jawahar 0.0011 0.0221 0.0048

10. Kufri Jyoti 0.0038 0.0412 0.0069

SEm± 0.00025 0.0013 0.00065

C.D. at 5% level 0.00076 0.0041 0.0019

The data presented in Table 4.11 clearly showed that there was significant

difference amongst the varieties at all stages of observations. The NAR in

46

general increased at 60 DAP in all the varieties. At 45 DAP, the maximum

(0.0048 g/cm2/day) net assimilation rate was observed under the variety Kufri

Arun and was followed by and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi (0.0040

g/cm2/day).The lowest value of NAR was recorded in Kufri Chipsona-

4(0.0007 g/cm2/day).

At 60 DAP, the highest NAR was found in Kufri Arun (0.0754

g/cm2/day) as compared to all other varieties. The lowest value of NAR was

observed in Kufri Chipsona- 4 (0.0054 g/cm2/day).

At 75 DAP, the highest NAR was found in Kufri Arun (0.0088

g/cm2/day) followed by and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi (0.0078 g/cm2/day)

and Kufri Jyoti (0.0069 g/cm2/day) as compared to all other varieties. The lowest

value of NAR was observed in Kufri Chipsona- 4 (0.0019 g/cm2/day).

4.2.3 Crop growth rate (g/plant/day)

The crop growth rate of different varieties are given in Table 4.11,

graphically presented in Figure 13 and illustrated in Appendix-XXXVIII to XL.

It is obvious from the Table 4.12 that there was significant difference

amongst the varieties at all the stages of observations. In general CGR increased

with increase in crop growth stages. At 45 DAP, the maximum crop growth rate

was observed under the variety Kufri Arun (0.1372 g/plant/day) and followed by

and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi (0.1288 g/plant/day), Kufri Jyoti (0.1162

g/plant/day), Kufri lauvkar (0.0884 g/plant/day), Kufri Jawahar (0.0722

g/plant/day) and Kufri Surya (0.0692 g/plant/day) as compared to Chipsona

variet ies. However, the lowest value of CGR was observed in Kufri

Chipsona- 4 (0.0298 g/plant/day).

At 60 DAP, the significantly highest CGR were observed in the variety

Kufri Arun (1.2400 g/plant/day) followed by and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi

(1.1269 g/plant/day) and Kufri Jyoti (1.1082 g/plant/day) as compared to

other varieties. However, the lowest value of CGR was found in Kufri

Chipsona- 4 (0.1144 g/plant/day)

47

Table 4.11 Crop growth rate (g/plant/day) of potato varieties at different

plant growth stages

S. No. Varieties CGR (g/plant/day)

30-45 DAP 45-60 DAP 60-75 DAP

1. Kufri Chipsona-1 0.0752 0.6310 0.0628

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 0.0358 0.2889 0.0416

3. Kufri Chipsona- 3 0.0304 0.2312 0.0509

4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 0.0298 0.1144 0.0318

5. Kufri Chandramukhi 0.1288 1.1269 0.1300

6. Kufri Arun 0.1372 1.2400 0.1324

7. Kufri Lauvkar 0.0884 0.7412 0.0987

8. Kufri Surya 0.0692 0.5912 0.0836

9. Kufri Jawahar 0.0722 0.6270 0.0915

10. Kufri Jyoti 0.1162 1.1082 0.1128

SEm± 0.0023 0.0641 0.006

C.D. at 5% level 0.070 0.190 0.018

At 75 DAP, the significantly highest CGR was observed in the variety

Kufri Arun 0.1324 g/plant/day followed by and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi

(0.1300 g/plant/day) as compared to all other varieties. However, the lowest

value of CGR was found in Kufri Chipsona- 4 (0.0318 g/plant/day).

4.3 Yield parameter

4.3.1 Days to haulm cutting

The average days to haulm cutting of different varieties is given in Table

4.12. Its graphical presentation has been shown in Fig.14 and the analysis of

variance is given in Appendix –XLI.

The days to haulm cutting increased signif icantly in the dif ferent

variet ies. The signif icantly early 60 days for haulm cutting was

recorded in the variety Kufri Chandramukhi followed by Kufri Lauvkar (65

48

days) and Kufri Arun (75 days) as compared to other varieties. However, the

variety Kufri Chipsona- 2 and Kufri Jyoti exhibited the maximum 105

days for haulm cutting.

4.3.2 Days to maturity

Days to maturity of different potato varieties is given in Table 4.12. Its

graphical presentation has been shown in Fig. 14 and illustrated in Appendix –

XLII.

The minimum days for maturity (75.0 days) were observed for Kufri

Chandramukhi followed by Kufri Lauvkar (80 days) and Kufri Arun (90 days) as

compared to other varieties. However, the varieties Kufri Chipsona- 2 and Kufri

Jyoti required maximum 120 days for maturity.

Table 4.12 Days to haulm cutting and days to maturity of different potato

varieties

S. No. Varieties Days to haulm cutting

Days to maturity


2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 105.00 120.00 3. Kufri Chipsona- 3 85.00 100.00 4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 95.00 110.00 5. Kufri Chandramukhi 60.00 75.00 6. Kufri Arun 75.00 90.00 7. Kufri Lauvkar 65.00 80.00 8. Kufri Surya 85.00 100.00


10. Kufri Jyoti 105.00 120.00

SEm± 1.066 2.00

C.D. at 5% level 3.16 5.96

4.3.3 Number of tubers per plant

The number of tubers per plant was recorded variety wise and their values

were subjected to statistical analysis (Appendix – XLIII). The data have been

depicted in Table 4.13 and diagrammatically exhibited in Fig. 15.

49

During harvesting, significantly maximum number of tubers per plant was

recorded in the variety Kufri Arun (12.67) followed by Kufri Chandamukhi (12.60),

Kufri Jyoti (12.40) and Kufri Lauvkar (11.86) and were at par with each other.

While, the minimum number of tubers per plant was observed in Kufri Chipsona-

4 (8.69).

Table 4.13 Number of tubers per plant of different varieties of potato.

S. No. Varieties Number of tubers per plant

1. Kufri Chipsona-1 10.33

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 9.86



5. Kufri Chandramukhi 12.60

6. Kufri Arun 12.67

7. Kufri Lauvkar 11.86

8. Kufri Surya 9.88

9. Kufri Jawahar 9.87

10. Kufri Jyoti 12.40

S Em ±

0.41

C.D. at 5% level 1.22

4.3.4 Number of rotted tubers per plant

The number of rotted tubers per plant of different varieties is given in

Table 4.14. Its graphical presentation has been shown in Fig. 16 and depicted in

Appendix-XLIV.

Significantly minimum number of rotted tubers per plant were recorded in

the varieties Kufri Arun(1.0) followed by and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi

(1.23), Kufri Jyoti (1.29), Kufri Lauvkar (1.58), Kufri Chipsona-1 (1.60) and Kufri

Jawahar (1.63), as compared to all other varieties. Therefore, number of rotted

tubers per plant was observed to be maximum in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4(2.56).

50

4.3.5 Weight of rotted tubers (g/plot)

The weight of rotted tubers per plant of different varieties is given in Table

4.14, graphically presented in Fig. 16 and depicted in Appendix-XLV.

Variety Kufri Arun (41.09 g) noted significantly minimum weight of rotted

tubers followed by and was at par with Kufri Chandramukhi (45.10), as compared

to all other varieties. While weight of rotted tubers per plant was found maximum

in Kufri Chipsona- 4 (105.59 g per plant).

Table 4.14 Number and weight of rotted tubers of different varieties of

potato

S. No. Varieties Number of rotted

tubers/plant

Weight of rotted

tubers (g/plot)






6. Kufri Arun 1.08 41.09




10. Kufri Jyoti 1.29 49.10

SEm± 0.25 2.63

C.D. at 5% level 0.76 7.84

4.3.6 Total yield of tubers (kg/plot)

The total yield of tubers per plot was recorded variety wise and their

values are depicted in Table 4.15, diagrammatically exhibited in Fig. 17 and

depicted in Appendix XLVI.

Variety Kufri Arun was recorded significantly superior and gave maximum

(26.33 kg) total yield of tubers per plot followed by Kufri Chandramukhi (25.92

51

kg), Kufri Jyoti (25.62kg), Kufri Lauvkar (25.14kg) and Kufri Chipsona-1(24.81kg)

which were at par with each other. While, the lowest total yield of tubers per plot

was noted in variety Kufri Chipsona- 4 (20.11 kg).

4.3.7 Total yield of tubers (q/plot)

The yield of any crop is the final index of the experiment which indicates

the success or failure of any treatment. With this view the tuber yield of potato

was recorded. The data for the total yield of tubers per plot under different

varieties were recorded and converted into total yield of tubers hectare-1

(quintals).

The data was analyzed statistically and depicted in Appendix-XLVII. The

total yield of tubers hectare-1 as affected by different varieties is presented in

Table 4.15 and Figure 17.

Table 4.15 Total yield of tubers (kg/plot) and (q/plot) of different varieties of

potato

S. No. Varieties Total yield of tubers

(kg/plot)

Total yield of tubers

(q/plot)


2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 22.28 247.55

3. Kufri Chipsona- 3 24.11 267.88

4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 20.11 223.44

5. Kufri Chandramukhi 25.92 288

6. Kufri Arun 26.33 292.55


8. Kufri Surya 23.79 264.33


10. Kufri Jyoti 25.62 284.66

SEm± 0.51 5.68

C.D. at 5% level 1.52 16.90

52

Variety Kufri Arun was recorded significantly superior and gave maximum

(292.55 q) total yield of tubers hectare-1 and which was at par with Kufri

Chandramukhi (288 q), Kufri Jyoti (284.66q), Kufri Lauvkar (279.33 q) and Kufri

Chipsona-1 (275.66q) as compared to all other varieties . While, the lowest total

yield hectare-1 was noted in Kufri Chipsona- 4 (223.44 q).

4.3.8 Marketable yield of tubers (kg/plot and q/ha)

The data was analyzed statistically and is depicted in Appendix-XLVIII and

XLIX. The marketable tuber yield per plot and per hectare as affected by different

treatment is presented in Table 4.16 and Fig. 18.

Table 4.16 Marketable yield of tubers (kg/plot) and q/ha of different varieties

of potato

S. No. Varieties Marketable yield of

tubers (kg/plot)

Marketable yield of

tubers (q/ha)


2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 17.72 196.88

3. Kufri Chipsona- 3 20.12 223.55

4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 16.92 188


6. Kufri Arun 24.78 275.33


8. Kufri Surya 19.53 217


10. Kufri Jyoti 23.53 261.44

SEm± 0.38 4.24

C.D. at 5% level 1.13 12.62

Significantly maximum 24.78, kg per plot and 2735.33, q/ha marketable

tuber yield were recorded under the varieties Kufri Arun followed by and was at

par with Kufri Chandramukhi (24.00 kg per plot, 266.66 q/ha) as compared to all

53

other varieties. However, the lowest marketable tuber yield was observed in Kufri

Chipsona- 4 (916.92 kg per plot and 188 q per ha)

4.3.9 Harvest index

The data was analyzed statistically and is depicted in Appendix-L. The

harvest index as affected by different treatment is presented in Table 4.17 and

Fig. 19.

Significantly maximum Harvest index (0.76) was recorded under the

variety Kufri Arun followed by and at par with Kufri Chandramukhi (0.74), Kufri

Jyoti (0.72), Kufri Lauvkar(0.70), Kufri Chipsona-1(0.69)and Kufri Surya (0.67)as

compared to all other varieties . However, the lowest Harvest index was

observed in Kufri Chipsona- 4 (0.58).

Table 4.17 Harvest index of tubers of different varieties of potato

S. No. Varieties Harvest index






6. Kufri Arun 0.76


8. Kufri Surya 0.67



SEm± 0.029


54

4.4 Quality parameter

4.4.1 Starch content

The Starch content per cent of different varieties is given in Table 4.18

graphically presented in Fig. 20 and depicted in Appendix- LI.

The significantly, the maximum starch content (18.72 %) was observed in

the variety Kufri Arun followed by and at par with Kufri Chipsona-2 (18.60%),

Kufri Chipsona- 1 (18.55 %) and Kufri Chandramukhi (18.09%) as compared to

other varieties. Whereas, the lowest starch content was noted in Kufri Lauvkar

(14.18 %).

Table 4.18 Starch content (%) of different varieties of potato

S. No. Varieties Starch content %






6. Kufri Arun 18.72


8. Kufri Surya 15.32



SEm± 0.208


4.4.2 Potato flour

The quality characters of potato products like potato flour and chips of

different varieties are given in Table 4.19.

Variation was observed in colour of potato flour. Varieties Kufri Chipsona-

1, Kufri Chipsona-2, Kufri Chipsona-3, Kufri Chipsona-4 and Kufri Surya

55

exhibited light golden color flour whereas in the remaining varieties golden color

flour was observed

Table 4.19 Potato flour and quality of chips of different varieties of potato

S. No. Varieties Potato flour Quality of chips

1. Kufri Chipsona-1 Light golden colour Good

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 Light golden colour Good 3. Kufri Chipsona- 3 Light golden colour Good 4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 Light golden colour Good 5. Kufri Chandramukhi Golden colour Good 6. Kufri Arun Golden colour Good 7. Kufri Lauvkar Golden colour Fair 8. Kufri Surya Light golden colour Fair

9. Kufri Jawahar Golden colour Fair

10. Kufri Jyoti Golden colour Fair

4.4.3 Quality of chips

Quality of chips was determined on its taste and colour. Generally good

taste and light coloured chips are preferable. Results revealed that the chips

produced from Kufri Chipsona-1, Kufri Chipsona-2, Kufri Chipsona-3, Kufri

Chipsona-4, Kufri Chandramukhi and Kufri Arun were found superior in term of

taste, texture and color as compared to Kufri Lauvkar, Kufri Surya, Kufri Jawahar

and Kufri Jyoti.

4.5 Incidence of insect-pest and disease occurrence

The succession and incidence of whitefly and leafhopper did not vary

significantly among the treatments i.e. negligible incidence of insect-pest and

disease has occurred. Minimum Whitefly per leaf (0.98) and Jassids per leaf

(1.00) were recorded in variety Kufri Arun and Kufri Chandramukhi.

56

Table 4.20 Incidence of insect-pest and disease occurrence among

different varieties

S. No. Varieties Whitefly/leaf Jassids/leaf






6. Kufri Arun 0.98 1.00




10. Kufri Jyoti 1.05 1.08

4.6 Economics

Higher money value and less cost of cultivation are desirable traits for

getting higher returns. Hence economics of the treatments was worked out. The

data pertaining to economics of different treatments are depicted in Table 4.20

and cost of cultivation incurred in various treatments is presented in Appendix-

LII.

57

Table 4.20: Economics of different varieties of potato

S.No. Varieties

Tuber

yield

(q ha)

Gross

income

(Rs ha)*

Cost of

cultivati

on (Rs

ha)

Net

income

(Rs ha)

B:C

ratio

1. Kufri Chipsona-1 242.55 242550 82840 159710 1:2.92

2. Kufri Chipsona- 2 196.88 196880 82840 114040 1:2.37

3. Kufri Chipsona- 3 223.55 223550 82840 140710 1:2.69

4. Kufri Chipsona- 4 188 188000 82840 105160 1:2.26

5. Kufri

Chandramukhi 266.66 266660 82840 183820 1:3.21

6. Kufri Arun 275.33 275330 82840 192490 1:3.32

7. Kufri Lauvkar 255.22 255220 82840 172380 1:3.08

8. Kufri Surya 217 217000 82840 134160 1:2.62

9. Kufri Jawahar 202.44 202440 82840 119600 1:2.44

10. Kufri Jyoti 261.44 261440 82840 178600 1:3.15

*Sale rate of produce was Rs 1000 q-1

It is revealed from the data obtained that a significantly maximum

marketable tuber yield of 275.33 per ha was obtained in potato variety Kufri Arun

with net return of Rs 192490 per ha and cost benefit ratio 1: 3.32 followed by

Kufri Chandramukhi that recorded 266.66 q per ha tuber yield along with net

return of Rs 183820 per ha and cost benefit ratio 1: 3.21. Whereas, the lowest

tuber yield 223.44 q per ha was recorded in Kufri Chipsona- 4 with net return of

Rs 105160 per ha and cost benefit ratio 1: 2.92.

58

Chapter-V

DISCUSSION

The production or yield is an ultimate result of the plants which depends

on the genetic constitution of the plant and environmental factors which consists

of different weather components and soil characteristics. Varieties play an

important role in increasing the productivity of crops. Improvement in crop

varieties and suitability according to climatic conditions for high yield is essential

to increase the productivity of crop at sufficient level.

Keeping this in view, the present investigation was carried out to evaluate

the comparative performance of different varieties. Various observations were

recorded periodically on morphological parameters, yield and qualities. The

inferences obtained from these observations were critically described in the

previous chapter. Some of the findings have been focused on the most valuable

information of basic and applied importance. These findings are being discussed

in this chapter with the support of the data, scientific facts and views of other

researchers. The discussion is centered around the effect of potato cultivars on

the various characters.

5.1 Morphological characters

The significant varietal differences of potato were noticed with respect to

days required for 50 % germination, number of sprouts per plant, plant height,

diameter of the stem, number of leaves per plant, leaf length, leaf width, leaf area

per plant as well as dry weight of the plant at most of the plant growth intervals

viz., 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP and at maturity stages. Amongst the varieties, Kufri

Arun resulted in higher values of all these characters, followed by and at par with

Kufri Chandramukhi, Kufri Jyoti and Kufri Lauvkar at almost all the crop growth

stage.

59

The differential behavior of potato varieties with respect to morphological

characters could be explained solely by the variation in their genetic makeup and

adaptability to soil and climatic conditions i.e. (G×E) interaction. Similar findings

were reported by Kumar et al. in (2011), who reported that the G x E interaction,

environment (linear) and environment (non-linear) were significant for all the

traits and the predictable component was predominant, indicating the prediction

of performance of genotypes for these traits. The results are also in close

conformity with the findings of Nandekar (1995) who reported that the plant

height and number of branches significantly varies with the varieties. Kumar et al.

in (2008) observed that potato varieties Kufri sadabahar recorded maximum plant

height, compound leaves and stem number / plant as compared to other

varieties. Zheng et al. (2012) and Patel et al. (2013) also reported the significant

differences in the morphological traits that were positively correlated with the

genotypes.

5.7 Growth analysis parameters

Growth analysis technique has made substantial contribution to the

current understanding of the physiological basis of yield variation in different

crops.

Efforts to relate crop yields to canopy architecture began in the early 20th

century with the development of “growth analysis” by British plant physiologists.

They recorded total plant dry weight (W) and leaf area (L) in the growing season.

In fact leaf is the factory for the conversion of solar energy into the

chemical energy for the growth and development of plants. Leaf area or

photosynthetic area fairly gives a good idea of the photosynthetic capacity of the

plant. The LAI, NAR and CGR are the important growth parameters influencing

yield which are dependent not only on the genotype but also on the

environmental and different horticultural practices.

In the present study, the leaf area index (LAI), net assimilation rate (NAR)

and crop growth rate (CGR) increased up to 60 DAP and decreased thereafter

due to senescence and aging of leaves as well as complicated physiological

60

functions in the plant. The varieties in general showed a profound effect over

these growth analysis parameters and significant differences were noticed

among the varieties at almost all the growth stages. Amongst the varieties, Kufri

Arun recorded almost significantly higher growth analysis parameters at most of

the stages of observations.

The varietal differences amongst these growth analysis parameters

attributed to the variability in the genetic inheritance among the varieties. This

has been supported by Patel et al. (2000). The average daily increment of stand

biomass is an important characteristic and is called either the rate of dry matter

production or crop growth rate i.e. CGR (Watson, 1952). It is a widely used

character for estimating production efficiency of the crop stand and enables to

make comparisons between the aspects of study. Net assimilation rate (NAR),

synonymously called as “unit leaf rate”, expresses the rate of dry weight increase

at any instant on a leaf area basis with leaf representing an estimate of the size

of the assimilatory surface area.

The maximum NAR values were recorded in Kufri Arun variety. Watson

(1952) suggested that NAR does not measure real photosynthesis product but

represents net result of photosynthetic gain over respiratory loss and it gives no

direct indications of respiratory losses. Further the NAR was maximum at early

stages and decreased with advancement in crop growth and development. Since

leaf area is taken into account while computing NAR, the leaf area steadily

increased with crop growth and at later stages a mutual shading of leaves in the

canopy occurs leading to lower NAR values.

Leaf area fairly gives a good idea of the photosynthetic capacity of the

plant. In the present study, the leaf area and leaf area index (LAI) increased up to

75 DAP and decreased thereafter due to senescence and ageing of leaves. In

general, the varieties showed a profound effect over these parameters and

significant differences were noticed among the varieties at all the growth stages.

However, Kufri Arun recorded significantly higher leaf area and LAI as compared

61

to other cultivars at all the growth stages. These results are confirmed with the

findings of Ahmed et al. (2013).

5.8 Yield attributing characters

The factors which are directly responsible for ultimate tuber production

viz., days to haulm cutting, days for maturity, number of tubers per plant,

number of rotted tubers per plant, weight of rotted tubers per plant, total yield of

tubers plot -1, total yield of tubers hectare-1, marketable tuber yield per plot,

marketable tuber yield per hectare and harvest index were augmented almost

significantly due to Kufri Arun variety over the other nine potato varieties.

The days to haulm cutting varies significantly with the varieties. The

significantly early 60 days for haulm cutting was recorded in the variety Kufri


compared to other varieties. However, the variety Kufri Chipsona- 2 and Kufri

Jyoti exhibited maximum 105 days for haulm cutting. The practice of haulm

cutting is adopted as precautionary measures to avoid chances of viral disease

transmission through the vectors like aphids. Haulms should be removed close to

the ground level and regrowth of stumps checked. These finding are in

agreement with the findings reported by Suhag et al. (2006).



compared to other varieties. However, the varieties Kufri Chipsona- 2 and Kufri

Jyoti required maximum 75 days for maturity, respectively. Variation in days to

maturity was due to the inherent genetic makeup of the variety. These finding are

in agreement with the findings reported by Bhutani et al. (2003) and Suhag et al.

(2006).

The maximum number of tubers (12.67), minimum number of rotted tubers

(1.0), minimum weight of rotted tubers (41.09 g), maximum total yield of tubers

plot-1 (26.33 kg plot-1), maximum total yield of tubers hectare-1(292.55 q),

maximum marketable tuber yield (24.78 kg plot-1, 275.33q/ha ), maximum

62

harvest index (0.76) was recorded in the variety Kufri Arun. The higher yield

attributes in Kufri Arun may be owing to maximum increase in growth parameters

as well as growth analysis parameters. The present findings on varietal

differences are in consequence with those of other research workers (Cremaschi

et al.(1991), Kushwah et al. (1994), Roy et al. (1999), Kumar et al. (2001),

Mehari et al. (2002), Alam et al.(2003), Bhutani et al. (2003), Rahemi et al.

(2005), Tajner et al. (2005), Kaushik et al. (2006), Haase et al.(2007 ), Kang et

al. (2007), Singh et al. (2008), Basavaraja et al. (2008), Ullah and Saikia (2008),

Mohd Mehdi et al. (2008), Rashid et al. (2008), Richardson (2009), Ummyiah et

al. (2010), Egbe et al. (2012) and Wariboko et al. (2014).

5.10 Qualitative parameters

Among quality parameters, the starch content per cent, potato flour and

chips were studies in potato.

Amongst the potato varieties, Kufri Arun recorded significantly higher,

percentage of starch 18.72% followed by Kufri Chipsona-2, Kufri Chipsona- 1

and Kufri Chandramukhi as compared to other varieties.

The lowest starch contents 14.18% were obtained from Kufri Lauvkar

variety. The significant variations in starch contents in different varieties of potato

might be owing to differences in their genetic inheritence which is ultimately also

responsible to such qualitative variations. These findings are in close

approximate with Jaiswal et al. (2008), Muller et al. (2009), Ghulam Abbas et al.

(2011), Kaur and Aggarwal (2014).

Variation was observed in colour of potato flour. Varieties Kufri Chipsona-

1, Kufri Chipsona-2, Kufri Chipsona-3, Kufri Chipsona-4 and Kufri Surya

exhibited light golden colour flour and in the remaining varieties golden colour

flour was observed. This may be due to inherent genetic makeup of the variety.

These finding are observed in agreement with the findings reported by

Singh et al. (2005a).

63

Quality of chips was determined on the basis of its taste and colour.

Generally good taste and light coloured chips are preferable. Results revealed

that the chips produced from Kufri Chipsona-1, Kufri Chipsona-2, Kufri Chipsona-

3, Kufri Chipsona-4, Kufri Chandramukhi and Kufri Arun were found superior to

Kufri Jawahar, Kufri Lauvkar, Kufri Jyoti and Kufri Surya. This may be due to the

different physical and chemical characteristics among the genotypes. These

finding are in agreement with the findings reported by Zorzella et al. (2003),

Similar findings were reported by Kumar et al. (2004), Singh et al. (2005),

Suhag et al. (2006), Kumar et al. (2007), Kumar et al. (2007a), Shashi and Singh

(2007), Bhardwaj et al. (2008), Jaiswal et al. (2008), Muller et al. (2009), Rivera et

al. (2011) , Ooko and Kabira (2011), Abbas Hafiz et al. (2012), Gautam et al.

(2012) and Patel et al. (2013).

5.11 Incidence of insect-pest and disease occurrence

The incidence of insect-pest and disease occurrence was found negligible

in the experimental plot i.e the incidence of white fly and jassids occurrence in

the potato field were below the ETL level. This is basically because no

solanaceous crops were grown in the surrounding area of the experimental plot.

The other reason may include climatic conditions which were favorable for potato

crop making them healthy and tolerable to the insect-pest.

5.12 Economical gain

The maximum net income per hectare after deduction of cost of cultivation

is the ultimate goal of any farm owner or grain producer. Amongst the potato

varieties, Kufri Arun brought about the maximum net income (Rs.1,92,490/ha)

with B:C ratio 1:3.32 This was equally followed by Kufri Chandramukhi and then

Kufri Jyoti. The lowest net income (Rs. 1,05,160/ha and B:C ratio 1:2.26) were

obtained from Kufri Chipsona- 4 variety. The net economical gain was secured in

accordance with the per hectare yield of the varieties and thereby gross income.

Similar findings were reported by Hosea et al. (2012).

64

Chapter-VI

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND SUGESTIONS FOR FURTHUR WORK

The present investigation entitled “Study on growth, development and

suitability of some improved Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) Varieties for

processing.” was carried out during the year 2014-2015 at the Research

Farm of Department of Horticulture, Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa

Vidyalaya, College of Agriculture Indore, (M.P.). The experimental material for

the present investigation was comprised of ten varieties of potato. These

varieties were sown in Randomized Complete Block Design with three

replications, to observed morphological, growth analytical, yield and quality

parameters. Observations were recorded on the basis of five random

competitive plants selected from each genotype separately for

morphological, growth analytical, yield and quality parameters were

evaluated as per standard procedure and also estimate the economics of

different varieties.

The present investigation is summarized in this chapter.

The significant varietal differences of potato were noticed with respect to days

required for 50 % germination, number of sprouts per plant, plant height,

diameter of the stem number of leaves per plant, leaf length, leaf width, leaf

area as well as dry weight of the plant at most of the plant growth intervals

viz., 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP and at maturity stages. Amongst the varieties,

Kufri Arun resulted in higher values of all these characters, followed by and at

par with Kufri Chandramukhi, Kufri Jyoti and Kufri Lauvkar at almost all the

crop growth stage.

In the present study, thereby leaf area index (LAI), net assimilation rate (NAR)

and crop growth rate (CGR) increased up to 60 DAP and thereafter

decreased. The varieties in general showed a profound effect over these

65

growth analysis parameters and significant differences were noticed among

the varieties at almost all the growth stages. Amongst the varieties, Kufri Arun

recorded almost significantly higher growth analysis parameters at most of

the stages of observations. However, Chipsona-4 was recorded lowest values

of all these parameters.

The days to haulm cutting increased significantly by the different varieties.

The significantly early 60 days for haulm cutting was recorded in the variety

Kufri Chandramukhi followed by Kufri Lauvkar (65 days) and Kufri Arun (75

days) as compared to other varieties. However, the variety Kufri Chipsona- 2

and Kufri Jyoti were exhibited maximum 105 days for haulm cutting.


Chandramukhi followed by Kufri Lauvkar (80 days) and Kufri Arun (90 days)

as compared to other varieties. However, the varieties Kufri Chipsona- 2 and

Kufri Jyoti were required maximum 75 days for maturity, respectively.

Variation in days to maturity was due to the inherent genetic makeup of the

variety.

The maximum number of tubers (12.67), minimum number of rotted tubers

(1.0), minimum weight of rotted tubers (41.09 g), maximum total yield of

tubers plot-1 (26.33 kg plot-1), maximum total yield of tubers hectare-

1(292.55 q), maximum marketable tuber yield (24.78 kg plot-1, 275.33q/ha ),

maximum harvest index (0.76) were recorded in the varieties Kufri Arun. The

variety Kufri Chandramukhi was noted as the second best in respect to yield

attributing as well as yields. The minimum values of these parameters were

recorded with Chipsona-4.

The incidence of insect-pest and disease occurrence was found negligible in

the experimental plot i.e the incidence of white fly and jassids occurrence in

the potato field were below the ETL level.

Amongst the potato varieties, Kufri Arun recorded significantly higher,

percentage of starch 18.72% followed by Kufri Chipsona-2, Kufri Chipsona-

1 and Kufri Chandramukhi as compared to other varieties. The lowest starch

contents 14.18% were obtained from Kufri Lauvkar variety.

66

Variation was observed in colour of potato flour. Varieties Kufri Chipsona-1,

Kufri Chipsona-2, Kufri Chipsona-3, Kufri Chipsona-4 and Kufri Surya

exhibited light golden colour flour and remaining varieties was observed

golden colour flour.

Quality of chips was determined on its taste and colour. Generally good taste

and light coloured chips are preferable. Results revealed that the chips

produced from Kufri Chipsona-1, Kufri Chipsona-2, Kufri Chipsona-3, Kufri

Chipsona-4, Kufri Chandramukhi and were superior than Kufri Jawahar, Kufri

Lauvkar, Kufri Jyoti and Kufri Surya.

Amongst the potato varieties, Kufri Arun obtained the maximum net income

(Rs.1,92,490/ha) with B:C ratio 1:3.32 which was followed by Kufri

Chandramukhi and Kufri Jyoti. The lowest net income (Rs. 1,05,160/ha and

B:C ratio 1:2.26) were obtained from Kufri Chipsona- 4 variety. The net

economical gain was secured in accordance with the per hectare yield of the

varieties and there by gross income.

Conclusion

Among the different varieties of potato Kufri Arun recorded the

maximum growth, yield attributing, quality as well as yield over other

varieties. The Kufri Chandramukhi and Kufri Jyoti were also performed

almost equally as Kufri Arun. The variety Kufri Arun obtained the maximum

net income (Rs.1,92,490/ha) with B:C ratio 1:3.32 which was followed by

Kufri Chandramukhi and Kufri Jyoti. The lowest net income (Rs. 1,05,160/ha

and B:C ratio 1:2.26) were obtained from Kufri Chipsona- 4 variety. Thus, it

can be concluded that Kufri Arun, Kufri Chandramukhi as well as Kufri Jyoti

are the most suitable varieties of potato under Malwa agro-climatic

conditions.

Suggestions for future works

1. The findings of the present experiments should be tested in different

locations to identify the suitability of varieties in different areas.

67

2. The identified suitable varieties for processing should be tested separately

to refine the processing findings of present experiment.

3. The results of present experiment on quality parameters should be tested

with including more quality parameters.

i

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ahmad, A.; Pal, M; Khetarpal, S. and Pandey, S. K. (2013). Impact of elevated atmospheric CO2

concentration on growth and yield of potato cultivars. World Applied Sciences Journal. 24 (4):

429-435.

Alam, M.K.,; Zaman, M.M.; Nazrul, M.I.; Alam, M.S. and Hossain, M.M.(2003) Performance of Some Exotic

Potato Varieties under Bangladesh Condition. Asian Journal of Plant Science. 2 (1): 108-112.

Anonymous (2011): Horticulture status report, Directorate of Horticulture, Vindhyachal Bhawan, Bhopal

(M.P.)

Basavaraja, N.; Naik, K. S.; Naik, K. R. and Karadi, R. (2008). Evaluation of processing potato genotypes for

warmer regions of India. In: Global Potato Conference, 9-12 December. New Delhi 25p.

Bhardwaj,V.; Pandey, S.K.; Manivel, P.; Singh, S.V. and Dinesh kumar (2008). Stability of indigenous and

exotic potato processing cultivars in Himachal Pradesh hills. In: Global Potato Conference, 9-12

December. New Delhi 22p.

Bhutani, R.D.; Sanwal, S K. and Khurana, S. C. (2003). Variation in the quality of potato (Solanum

tuberosum L.) tubers with crop maturity. Haryana Journal of Horticultural Sciences. 32 (1/2):

110-113.

Blackman, G.E. and Black, J.N. (1968). Physiological and ecological studies in analysis of plant

environment. Ann. Bot. 23 (89): 51-63.

Cremaschi, D.; Matranga, G.; Vender, C.; Finelli, D.; Salmi, A.; Regoli, J. and Govoni, F. (1991). Potato:

synthesis of 15 years of varietal trials in the plain of Bologna. [Italian] Sementi Elette. 37 (3-4):

3-14.

Egbe O. M.; Afuape S. O. and Idoko, J. A. (2012).Performance of Improved Sweet Potato (Ipomea batatas

L.) Varieties in Makurdi, Southern Guinea Savanna of Nigeria. American Journal of

Experimental Agriculture 2(4): 573-586.

Gautam, I.P.; Khatri, B.B.; Sharma, M.D.; Thapa, R.B.; Shrestha,K. and Chaudhary,D. (2012). Evaluation of

potato genotypes for keeping quality under ambient conditions in Nepal. Potato Journal. 39 (2):

128-132.

Ghulam, A.; Hafiz, I.A.; Abbasi, N.A. and Hussain, A. (2012). Determination of processing and nutritional

quality atributes of potato genotypes in Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany. 44 (1): 201-208.

http://ovidsp.tx.ovid.com/sp-3.12.0b/ovidweb.cgi?&S=EDCBFPCNIBDDMJHFNCMKEGMCEENLAA00&Complete+Reference=S.sh.18%7c64%7c1

http://ovidsp.tx.ovid.com/sp-3.12.0b/ovidweb.cgi?&S=EDCBFPCNIBDDMJHFNCMKEGMCEENLAA00&Complete+Reference=S.sh.18%7c64%7c1

ii

Ghulam A.; Khalid Frooq; Hafiz, I A.; Azhar Hussain; Abbasi, N.A. and Ghulam Shabbir (2011). Assessment

of processing and nutritional quality of potato genotypes in Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of

Agricultural Sciences. 48 (3): 169-175.

Hamad, A. H.; Mohamed, El Ameen and Emad El Deen, M. Ali (2004). Economics of garlic production in the

Northern State. Gezira Journal of Agricultural Science. ISSN 9556-1728 Vol 7 No 2.

Hosea, M. and Reuben M. J. Kadigi (2012) Round potato (Solanum tuberosum) profitability and

implications for variety selections in the Southern Highlands of Tanzania. Journal of

Development and Agricultural Economics Vol. 4 (9), pp. 258-267,

Haase, T.; Schuler, C. ; Haase, N. U. and He, J. (2007). Suitability of Organic Potatoes for Industrial

Processing: Effect of Agronomical Measures on Selected Quality Parameters at Harvest and

after Storage. Journals Potato Research. 50 (2):115-141.

Jackson, M. L. (1967). Soil chemical analysis, Pub. Prentice Hall India, New Delhi, pp. 87-93.

Jaiswal, R.K.; Nandekar, D.N. and Rajni Nikum (2008). Performance of processing cultivars of potato in

Satpura zone of Madhya Pradesh. In: Global Potato Conference. New Delhi 23p.

Jatav, M.K.; Kumar,M. ; Trehan, S.P.; Dua, V.K. and Kumar, S. (2013). Effect of Nitrogen and Varieties of Potatoes on Yield and Argronomic use efficiency in North- Western Plains of India. Potato J 40 (1): 55-59

Kang, G. S.; Kumar R.; Gopal, J.; Pandey, S. K. and Khurana, S. M. P. (2007). Kufri Pushkar - a main crop

potato variety with good keeping quality for Indian plains. Potato Journal. 34 (3/4): 147-152.

Kaur, S. and Aggarwal, P. (2014) Studies on Indian Potato Genotypes for their Processing and Nutritional

Quality Attributes. International journal of current microbiology and applied science ISSN:

2319-7706 Volume 3 Number 8 pp. 172-177 .

Kaushik, S. K.; Bhardwaj V.; Joseph, T. A.; Gupta, V. K.; Singh, P. H.; Khurana, S. M. P.; Singh, B. P.;

Singh, S. V.; Pandey, S. K.; Brajesh Singh and Sharma, Y. K. (2006). Stability of potato

genotypes for yield, late blight resistance and their storage behaviour. Indian Journal of

Agricultural Sciences. 76 (1): 26-28.

Kumar, D.; Singh, V.; Singh, B. P. and R. P. Singh (2008). Growth and yield of potato (Solanum tuberosum

L.) Plants grown from in Vitro plantlets in net-house. In: Global Potato Conference, 9-12

December. New Delhi 61p.

Kumar, D.; Singh, S.V.; Pandey, S.K.; Singh, B.P. and Sanjay, Rawal (2007). Effect of growing season on

chipping quality of potatoes under sub-tropical climates. Potato J. 34 (3-4): 180-186.

https://ovidsp.tx.ovid.com/sp-3.15.1b/ovidweb.cgi?&S=IDBLFPKBOADDMMPHNCKKGAJCINKFAA00&Complete+Reference=S.sh.23%7c11%7c1



iii

Kumar, P.; Pandey, S.K.; Singh, B.P.; Rawal, S.; Singh, S.V. and Dinesh Kumar (2004). Fertilizer

requirements of chipping potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) cultivars in West Bengal plains. Potato

J. 31 (3-4): 177-181.

Kumar, S. (2009). Performance study of indigenous potato hybrids K-22 and G-4 in eastern plains. Haryana

Journal of Horticultural Sciences. 38 (1/2): 154-155.

Kumar, S. (2011). Stability analysis in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) for yield and quality traits. Annals of

Biology. 27 (2): 147-151.

Kushwah, M.L.; Singh, N.P. and Singh B.R. (1994). Studies on growth, tuberization and quality of potato

cultures. Journal of the Indian Potato Association. 20(3/4):210-215

Mehdi, Md.; Saleem, T.; Rai, H.K.; Mir, M.S. and Gyanendra, Rai. (2008). Effect of nitrogen and FYM

interactrion on yield and yield traits of potato (Solanum tuberosum L) genotypes under Ladakh

condition. Potato J. 35 (3-4): 126-129.

Muller, D. R.; Bisognin, D. A.; Andriolo, J. L.; Morin Junior, G. R. and Gnocato, F. S. (2009). Trait expression

and selection of potato clones in the spring and autumn growth conditions. Ciencia Rural. 39

(5): 1327-1334.

Nandekar, D. N.; Sharma, R. C. and Sharma, T. R. (1995). Yield potential of potato hybribs in Madhya

Pradesh. Journal of the Indian Potato Association. 22 (1-2): 13-16.

Ooko, G.A. and Kabira, J.N. (2011). Suitability of three newly released Kenyan potato varieties for

processing into crisps and french fries African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and

Development, Vol. 11, No. 6.

Pandey, S.K.; Marwaha, R.S.; Kymar D.and S.V. Singh,2009. Indian potato processing story: Industrial

limitation,challenges ahead and vision for the future. Potato J., 36: 1-13.

Panse, V. C. and P. V. Sukhatme (1985). Statistical methods for agricultural workers. ICAR Publications,

New Delhi. pp 155.

Patel, A. K.; Patel, N. H.; Gami, R. A.; Patel, C. R. and Chauhan, R. M. (2013). Assessment of potato

(Solanum tuberosum L) hybrids-varieties for table purpose among yield and quality traits.

Trends in Biosciences. 6 (5): 669-673.

Patel, J. C.; Patel, L. R.; Amin, A. U. and Patel, J. K. (2000). Effect of irrigation and nitrogen levels on

growth and yield of potato. Journal of the Indian Potato Association. 27 (1/2): 51-53.

Piper, C S. (1967). Soil and plant analysis. Uni.of Adelaide, Australia. Hans Publishers, Bombay.

iv

Qasim, M.; Khalid, S.; Naz, A.; Khan, M. Z. and Khan, S. A. (2013). Effect of different planting system on

yield of potato crop in Kaghan Valley: A mountainous region of Pakistan. Agricultural Science.

Vol. 4, No. 4, 175-179.

Rahemi, A.; Hasanpour, A.; Mansoori, B.; Zakerin, A. and T.S. Taghavi. (2005). The effect of Intra Row

Spacing and N fertilizer on the yield of two Foreign Potato Cultivars in Iran. International

Journal of Agriculture & Biology 1560-8530/07- 5 705-707.

Rashid M.H.; Hossain M.M.; Hossain M.; Mahmud A.A.; Akhtar M.I.; Kadian, M.S.; Chujoy E.; Bonierbale M.

and Ilangantileke S. Saikat: A new potato variety for coastal areas of Bangladesh. Potato J. 35

(1 - 2): 9-11, 2008.

Richardson, K.V.A. (2009) Tuber quality and yield of four sweet potato varieties evaluated during 2007 crop

research report no. 1

Rivera, J. E.; Herrera, A. O. and Rodriguez, L. E. (2011). Assessment of the processing profile of six "creole

potato" genotypes (Solanum tuberosum Phureja Group). Agronomia Colombiana. 29 (1): 73-81.

Roy, S.K.B.; Chakraborty, A.K.; Kumar, D. and Gaur, P.C. (1999). Evaluation of potato varieties for

processing in West Bengal. Potato, global research and development. Proceedings of the

Global Conference on Potato, New Delhi, India, 6-11 December 1999: Volume 2,2002. 1160-

1162.

Shashi K. and Singh, N. P. (2007). Assessment of potato genotypes for quality traits under tarai conditions

of Uttarakhand. Pantnagar Journal of Research. 5 (1): 99-103.

Shivanandam, V. N. and Shankaranarayana, V. (2002). Morphological and tuber quality attributes in tubers

obtained from TPS genotypes in southern dry zone of Karnataka. Mysore Journal of Agricultural

Sciences. 36 (1): 8-11.

Singh, N.; Kaur, S. P.; Kaur, L. and Sodhi, N. S. (2005a). Physicochemical, rheological and chapatti making

properties of flour from some Indian potato cultivars. Journal of Food Science and Technology

(Mysore). 42 (4): 344-348.

Singh, S. V.; Pandey, S. K.; Patel, D. K.; N. H.; Khurana, S. M. P.; Kumar, P. and Manivel, P. (2005). Scope

and suitability of potato (Solanum tuberosum) genotypes for industrial processing for French

fries in Gujarat and western Uttar Pradesh. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 75 (12):

781-785.

Singh, V.; Kumar, D.; Singh, R.P.; Singh, B.P. and Singh, S. (2007). Performance of microtubers of various

potato cultivars in net house. Potato J. 34 (1-2): 133-134.

v

Suhag, M.; Nehra, B. K.; Singh, N. and Khurana, S.C. (2006). Storage behavior of potato under ambient

condition affected by curing and crop duration. Haryana Journal of Horticultural Sciences. 35

(3&4): 357-360.

Tajner C. A.; Pytlarz Kozicka, M.; Lisinska, G. and Jarych, M. (2005). Effects of nitrogen fertilization on

potato yield and quality. Sodininkyste ir Darzininkyste. 24 (4): 231-243.

Ullah, Z. and M. Saikia. (2008). Yield performance of processing potato varieties in the plains of Assam.

Global Potato Conference, 9-12 Des, 2008, New Delhi, pp.- 22.

Ummyiah, H. M.; Khan, S. H.; Wani, K. P.; Hussain, K. and Junaif, N. (2010). Genetic variability in potato

(Solanum tuberosum L.). Asian Journal of Horticulture. 5 (1): 61-63.

Vijaylakshman, M.; Indiresh, K.M. and Siddagangaiah (2008). Performance of processing potato hybrids in

southern transitional zone of Karnataka. In: Global Potato Conference. New Delhi 24p.

Walkley, A. J. and Black, J. A. (1934). Estimation of organic carbon by chromic acid titration method. Soil

Science, 37: 29-38.

Wariboko C. and Ogidi I. A. (2014) Evaluation of the performance of improved sweet potato (Ipomoea

batatas L. LAM) varieties in Bayelsa State, Nigeria African journal of Environmental Science

and Technology Vol.8(1),pp. 48-53

Watson, D. J. (1952). The physiological basis of variation in yield. Adv. Agron., 4: 101-146.

Yang, W.M.; Chung, S.J. and Yang, S.Y. (1989). Abstracts of Communications Papers. Korean Soc. Hort.

Sci. 7: 54-55.

Zheng Xu, Deng; YingYi; Kazuoto, I. and Yutaka, J. (2012). Genotype differences of spatial distribution

between potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) root and leaf and their effects on potato yield. China

Vegetables. (6): 48-52.

Zorzella, C. A.; Vendruscolo, J. L. and Treptow, R. O. (2003). Sensory quality of potato chips (Solanum

tuberosum L.) from different genotypes in southern Brazil spring and autumn harvests. Revista

Brasileira de Agrociencia. 9 (1): 57-63.

APPENDICES

Appendix- I: Days to 50% germination

S.V. d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F cal. F tab.

Replication 2 0.266 0.133 0.227 3.55

Treatment 9 39.148 4.349 7.426* 2.45

Error 18 10.542 0.585

Total 29 49.957

* Significant at 5 % level

Appendix- II: Number of sprouts per plant


Replication 2 0.443 0.221 2.606 3.55

Treatment 9 4.393 0.488 5.735* 2.45

Error 18 1.532 0.085

Total 29 6.369


Appendix- III: Plant height at 30 DAP


Replication 2 0.827 0.413 0.240 3.554

Treatment 9 42.035 4.670 2.710* 2.456

Error 18 31.016 1.723

Total 29 73.879


Appendix- IV: Plant height at 45 DAP


Replication 2 6.453 3.2265 0.7888 3.55

Treatment 9 592.907 65.878 16.1058* 2.45

Error 18 73.626 4.0903

Total 29 672.987


Appendix- V: Plant height at 60 DAP


Replication 2 1.018 0.509 0.209 3.55

Treatment 9 1686.260 187.362 76.933* 2.45

Error 18 43.836 2.435

Total 29 1731.120


Appendix- VI: Plant height at 75 DAP


Replication 2 22.009 11.004 0.632 3.55

Treatment 9 1306.730 145.193 8.342* 2.45

Error 18 313.259 17.403

Total 29 1642


Appendix- VII: Diameter of stem (cm) at 30 DAP


Replication 2 0.039 0.019 0.551 3.555

Treatment 9 0.818 0.091 2.571* 2.456

Error 18 0.636 0.035

Total 29 1.494


Appendix- VIII: Diameter of stem (cm) at 45 DAP


Replication 2 0.018 0.009 0.920 3.555

Treatment 9 0.286 0.032 3.203* 2.456

Error 18 0.178 0.010

Total 29 0.482


Appendix- IX: Diameter of stem (cm) at 60 DAP


Replication 2 0.232 0.116 2.330 3.555

Treatment 9 2.044 0.227 4.567* 2.456

Error 18 0.895 0.050

Total 29 3.171


Appendix- X: Diameter of stem (cm) at 75 DAP


Replication 2 0.042 0.021 2.257 3.555

Treatment 9 2.341 0.260 28.264* 2.456

Error 18 0.166 0.009

Total 29 2.548


Appendix- XI: Number of leaves per plant at 30 DAP


Replication 2 0.772 0.386 3.242 3.55

Treatment 9 32.415 3.601 30.238* 2.45

Error 18 2.143 0.119

Total 29 35.331


Appendix- XII: Number of leaves per plant at 45 DAP


Replication 2 2.562 1.281 0.916 3.55

Treatment 9 71.542

7.949 5.683* 2.45

Error 18 25.173 1.398

Total 29 99.278


Appendix- XIII: Number of leaves per plant at 60 DAP


Replication 2 10.984 5.492 2.689 3.55

Treatment 9 65.132 7.236 3.544* 2.45

Error 18 36.754 2.041

Total 29 112.871


Appendix- XIV: Number of leaves per plant at 75 DAP


Replication 2 3.445 1.722 1.414 3.55

Treatment 9 53.779 5.975 4.907* 2.45

Error 18 21.919 1.217

Total 29 79.143


Appendix- XV Leaf length (cm) at 30 DAP


Replication 2 0.356 0.178 2.043 3.555

Treatment 9 3.672 0.408 4.681* 2.456

Error 18 1.569 0.087

Total 29 5.597


Appendix- XVI: Leaf length (cm) at 45 DAP


Replication 2 0.028 0.014 0.300 3.555

Treatment 9 2.687 0.299 6.362* 2.456

Error 18 0.845 0.047

Total 29 3.560


Appendix- XVII: Leaf length (cm) at 60 DAP


Replication 2 0.128 0.064 1.531 3.555

Treatment 9 1.576 0.175 4.195* 2.456

Error 18 0.752 0.042

Total 29 2.456


Appendix- XVIII: Leaf length (cm) at 75 DAP


Replication 2 0.425 0.212 3.868 3.555

Treatment 9 2.106 0.234 4.262* 2.456

Error 18 0.989 0.055

Total 29 3.520


Appendix- XIX: Leaf width (cm) at 30 DAP


Replication 2 0.047 0.023 1.719 3.555

Treatment 9 0.480 0.053 3.916* 2.456

Error 18 0.245 0.014

Total 29 0.772


Appendix- XX Leaf width (cm) at 45 DAP


Replication 2 0.530 0.265 2.517 3.555

Treatment 9 3.237 0.360 3.419* 2.456

Error 18 1.894 0.105

Total 29 5.661


Appendix- XXI: Leaf width (cm) at 60 DAP


Replication 2 0.118 0.059 0.677 3.555

Treatment 9 3.116 0.346 3.983* 2.456

Error 18 1.565 0.087

Total 29 4.798


Appendix- XXII: Leaf width (cm) at 75 DAP


Replication 2 0.192 0.096 0.605 3.555

Treatment 9 3.725 0.414 2.610* 2.456

Error 18 2.854 0.159

Total 29 6.772


Appendix- XXIII: Leaf area per plant (cm 2) at 30 DAP


Replication 2 102.583 51.291 1.032 3.555

Treatment 9 17242.815 1915.868 38.547* 2.456

Error 18 894.637 49.702

Total 29 18240.035


Appendix- XXIV: Leaf area per plant (cm 2) at 45 DAP


Replication 2 1717.93 858.96 1.06 3.55

Treatment 9 64405.15 7156.13 8.81* 2.46

Error 18 14619.60 812.20

Total 29 80742.68


Appendix- XXV: Leaf area per plant (cm 2) at 60 DAP


Replication 2 163.071 81.535 0.156 3.55

Treatment 9 81325.622 9036.180 17.318* 2.45

Error 18 9392.001 521.778

Total 29 90880.694


Appendix- XXVI: Leaf area per plant (cm 2) at 75 DAP


Replication 2 5094.266 2547.133 7.213 3.555

Treatment 9 46568.605 5174.289 14.653* 2.456

Error 18 6356.305 353.128

Total 29 58019.176


Appendix- XXVII: Dry weight per plant at 30 DAP


Replication 2 7.03084667 3.5154233 1.0752865 3.554557

Treatment 9 191.15595 21.23955 6.4966858* 2.456281

Error 18 58.84722 3.26929

Total 29 257.034017


Appendix- XXVIII: Dry weight per plant at 45 DAP


Replication 2 0.01736 0.00868 2.139102 3.554557

Treatment 9 271.0255 30.11395 7421.29* 2.456281

Error 18 0.07304 0.004058

Total 29 271.1159


Appendix- XXIX: Dry weight per plant at 60 DAP


Replication 2 0.024047 0.012023 0.383302 3.554557

Treatment 9 2198.887 244.3208 7788.911* 2.456281

Error 18 0.56462 0.031368

Total 29 2199.476


Appendix- XXX: Dry weight per plant at 75 DAP


Replication 2 0.00182 0.00091 0.272183 3.554557

Treatment 9 2431.97 270.219 80823.43* 2.456281

Error 18 0.06018 0.00334

Total 29 2432.03903


Appendix- XXXI: Leaf area index at 30 DAP


Replication 2 0.0001 0.0001 0.3998 3.5546

Treatment 9 0.0128 0.0014 7.8970* 2.4563

Error 18 0.0032 0.0002

Total 29 0.0162


Appendix- XXXII: Leaf area index at 45 DAP


Replication 2 0.0001 0.0001 0.3998 3.5546

Treatment 9 0.0128 0.0014 7.8970* 2.4563

Error 18 0.0032 0.0002

Total 29 0.0162


Appendix- XXXIII: Leaf area index at 60 DAP


Replication 2 0.002 0.001 1.317 3.555

Treatment 9 0.050 0.006 6.700* 2.456

Error 18 0.015 0.001

Total 29 0.068


Appendix- XXXIV: Leaf area index at 75 DAP


Replication 2 0.0027 0.0013 1.4160 3.5546

Treatment 9 0.0463 0.0051 5.4058* 2.4563

Error 18 0.0171 0.0010

Total 29 0.0661


Appendix- XXXV: Net assimilation rate (g/cm2 /day) at 45 DAP


Replication 2 8.06E-07 4.03E-07 2.04E+00 3.55E+00

Treatment 9 5.19E-05 5.77E-06 2.92E+01* 2.46E+00

Error 18 3.55E-06 1.97E-07

Total 29 5.63E-05


Appendix- XXXVI: Net assimilation rate (g/cm2 /day) at 60 DAP



Treatment 9 1.14E-02 1.27E-03 2.16E+02* 2.46E+00

Error 18 1.05E-04 5.86E-06

Total 29 1.16E-02


Appendix- XXXVII: Net assimilation rate (g/cm2 /day) at 75 DAP


Replication 2 7.58E-07 3.79E-07 0.293773 3.554557

Treatment 9 0.000107 1.19E-05 9.238481* 2.456281

Error 18 2.32E-05 1.29E-06

Total 29 0.000131


Appendix- XXXVIII: Crop growth rate (g/plant/day) at 45 DAP



Treatment 9 4.24E-02 4.71E-03 2.80E+02* 2.46E+00

Error 18 3.03E-04 1.68E-05

Total 29 4.28E-02


Appendix- XXXIX: Crop growth rate (g/plant/day) at 60 DAP


Replication 2 0.049 0.025 2.002 3.555

Treatment 9 4.160 0.462 37.437* 2.456

Error 18 0.222 0.012

Total 29 4.432


Appendix- XL: Crop growth rate (g/plant/day) at 75 DAP


Replication 2 0.0005 0.0003 2.1439 3.5546

Treatment 9 0.0349 0.0039 32.0436* 2.4563

Error 18 0.0022 0.0001

Total 29 0.0376


Appendix- XLI: Days to haulm cutting


Replication 2 38.6 19.3 5.65798 3.554557

Treatment 9 6067.5 674.1667 197.6384* 2.456281

Error 18 61.4 3.411111

Total 29 6167.5


Appendix- XLII: Days to maturity


Replication 2 10.4 5.2 0.4 3.6

Treatment 9 6082.8 675.9 55.9* 2.5

Error 18 217.6 12.1

Total 29 6310.8


Appendix- XLIII: Number of tubers per plant


Replication 2 2.060 1.030 2.027 3.555

Treatment 9 54.387 6.043 11.894* 2.456

Error 18 9.145 0.508

Total 29 65.591


Appendix- XLIV: Number of rotted tubers per plant


Replication 2 0.391 0.196 0.984 3.555

Treatment 9 5.889 0.654 3.294* 2.456

Error 18 3.575 0.199

Total 29 9.855


Appendix- XLV: Weight of rotted tubers per plant (g)


Replication 2 1.871 0.936 0.045 3.555

Treatment 9 13821.024 1535.669 73.501* 2.456

Error 18 376.078 20.893

Total 29 14198.973


Appendix- XLVI: Total yield of tubers per plot (kg)


Replication 2 0.030 0.015 0.019 3.555

Treatment 9 99.521 11.058 14.053* 2.456

Error 18 14.163 0.787

Total 29 113.714


Appendix- XLVII: Total yield of tubers per ha (q)


Replication 2 3.683 1.841 0.019 3.555

Treatment 9 12285.877 1365.097 14.057* 2.456

Error 18 1748.018 97.112

Total 29 14037.577


Appendix- XLVIII: Marketable yield of tubers per plot (kg)


Replication 2 1.430 0.715 1.625 3.555

Treatment 9 216.939 24.104 54.805* 2.456

Error 18 7.917 0.440

Total 29 226.286


Appendix- XLIX: Marketable yield of tubers per ha (q)


Replication 2 3.683 1.841 0.019 3.555

Treatment 9 12285.877 1365.097 14.057* 2.456

Error 18 1748.018 97.112

Total 29 14037.577


Appendix- L: Harvest index


Replication 2 0.001 0.001 0.198 3.555

Treatment 9 0.075 0.008 3.201* 2.456

Error 18 0.047 0.003

Total 29 0.124


Appendix- LI: Starch content (%)


Replication 2 0.090 0.045 0.347 3.555

Treatment 9 109.440 12.160 93.354* 2.456

Error 18 2.345 0.130

Total 29 111.875


Appendix- LII: Economics

Cost of Cultivation of Potato/ha

S. No. Particulars Unit Qty. Rate / unit (Rs.)

Cost (Rs. /ha.)

A. Land preparation

1. Ploughing with M. B. Plough @

0.4 ha hr-1

Hrs. 3 675 2025

2. Disc harrow Hrs. 5 528 2640

3. Planking and leveling Hrs. 1 500 500

4. Layout of the field Labour 10 150 1500

B. Sowing and planting

1. Cost of seed and seed treatment Q 20q 1800 36000

2. Labour for planting and fertilizer

application

Labour 25 150 3750

C. Cost of manure and fertilizers

1. 20t FYM 4trally 850 3400

2. Urea 261kg @Rs.6/kg 1566

3. SSP 500kg @Rs.7.5/kg 3750

4. MOP 134kg @Rs.17/kg 2278

D. After care

1. Gap filing Labour 4 150 600

2. Two weeding and earthing up Labour 60 150 9000

E. Irrigation

1. Tube well charges for irrigation 5 500 2500

2. Labour for irrigation Labour 5 150 750

F. Plant protection measure 2831

G. Dehaulming Labour 5 150 750

Harvesting, transporting and

marketing

Labour 50 150 9000

Total (Rs.) 82840

Study on growth, development and suitability of some improved Potato (Solanum tuberosum L

Documents

Transcript of Study on growth, development and suitability of some improved Potato (Solanum tuberosum L