10.07.2015 Views

Scientific Papers Series B Horticulture

Scientific Papers Series B Horticulture

Scientific Papers Series B Horticulture

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

MATERIALS AND METHODSMaterials used in this experiment were nineyam bean genotypes collection of AgungKaruniawan (Plant Breeding Laboratory,Universitas Padjadjaran ). It consisted of threeP. erosus, one P. ahipa, two intraspecificcrossing of P. erosus and three interspecificcrossing of P. erosus and P. ahipa.The field trial was conducted at experimentalfield of Faculty of Agriculture, UniversitasPadjadjaran Jatinangor located at an altitude of753 m above sea level with Inceptisols soil typeand type C rainfall according to Schmidt-Fergusson. The experiment was conductedfrom August 2009 until March 2010.The experiment was arranged in split plotdesign repeated twice. The main plot consistedof two treatments: without sink-reproductivepruning and with sink-reproductive pruning.The main plot was divided into nine subplotsbased on genotypes. Each subplot size was 2 mx 3 m with spacing 50 cm x 50 cm betweenplants and 100 cm between subplots. Fertilizerrecommendation given referred to the sweetpotato cultivation in dry land.Sink-reproductive application treatment wascarried out after 50% of plants per plot hadentered the flowering phase (R5) (Zanklan,2003), it was done once a week until the harvesttime. Harvesting of tuber was approximately180 days (six months) after planting.Characters observed were tuber fresh weight(g), tuber dry matter content (%) and tuberstarch content (% WB). Yam bean tuber starchcontent was analyzed using Luff Schoorlmethod conducted at Yield Physiology Laboratory,Vegetable Research Institute, LembangWest Bandung.Data were analyzed using statistical analysis ofvariance (anova) using Statistix 8 program.Comparison of the mean value was done usingthe least significant difference test (LSD) onthe real level 5%.RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONSBased on analysis of variance (Table 1),pruning and genotype treatments independentlygave significant different on tuber fresh weightcharacter. Genotypes as the subplot factor, gavesignificant different on all tuber traits observed.Sink-reproductive pruning and genotypes446interacted on tuber dry matter trait in highlysignificant difference.Table 1. Analysis of Variance for Tuber Fresh Weight,Tuber Dry Matter, Tuber Starch Content of NineGenotypes Yam BeanFVariablesInteractionPruning GenotypePxGTFW (g) 2.51 * 11.7 ** 1.9TDM (%) 1.15 4.90 * 18.05 **TSC (%) 0.01 20.30 ** 2.02TFW=Tuber Fresh Weight; TDM=Tuber Dry Matter;TSC= Tuber Starch Content; *=significant on 0,05; **= significant on 0,01Table 2 shows least significant difference(LSD) test on tuber fresh weight affected bypruning and genotype In this study, sinkreproductivepruning generated higher tuberfresh weight trait. Non pruning treatment onlyresulted 122.35 g, whereas, sink-reproductivepruning 371.61 g. Sink-reproductive pruning offlower bud removal diverts assimilate distributioninto tuber storage sinks. The increasedflow of assimilate to the tuber, consequentialon the change in dimensions. In addition, theincreased of assimilate flow also affect tuberfresh weight.The smallest yield result for genotype showedby P. ahipa AC 216-139 d that was 86,45 g pertuber, however the other genotypes were insame group ranged from 205,76 g- 342,95 g pertuber. It is mean that even the elder was P.ahipa but the crossing with P. erosus willincrease the yield.Table 2. Analysis of Variance for Tuber Fresh Weight,Tuber Dry Matter, Tuber Starch Content of NineGenotypes Yam BeanTreatmentsTuber fresh weight (g)Sink-reproductive pruningWithoutWithGenotypesB-10 / EC 550B-1 / EC 033B-56 / CJAC 216-139 dB-10 / EC 550 x AC 216-139 dB-1 / EC 033 x B-56 / CJAC 216-139 d x B-56 / CJB-10 / EC 550 x B-56 / CJB-10 / EC 550 x AC 208-72h122,35 b371,61 a254,32 a342,95 a297,88 a86,45 b205,76 a184,99 a308,46 a308,27 a233,76 aNumbers followed by the same letters are notsignificantly different on alpha 0.05 LSD test

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!