Banner
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive

volume 45 issue 1 (march 2011) : 38- 44

A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON FRUIT CHARACTERS, GERMINATION AND SEEDLING GROWTH IN SOME MONOEMBRYONIC AND POLYEMBRYONIC MANGO GENOTYPES

K
K. Abirami1
R
Room Singh
S
S.K. Singh
V
V. Baskaran1
1Department of Fruits and Horticultural Technology, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi - 110 012, India.

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Abirami1 K., Singh Room, Singh S.K., Baskaran1 V. (2025). A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON FRUIT CHARACTERS, GERMINATION AND SEEDLING GROWTH IN SOME MONOEMBRYONIC AND POLYEMBRYONIC MANGO GENOTYPES. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 45(1): 38- 44. doi: .

ABSTRACT

The investigations were carried out to compare the fruit characters, germination behaviour and nursery performance of twelve polyembryonic and ten monoembryonic genotypes. Wide variation was observed in fruit and stone characters like weight, volume, length, breadth and circumference in polyembryonic genotypes. The monoembryonic genotypes had higher pulp content whereas polyembryonic genotypes had more thick peel and less pulp percentage which reflects on the poor acceptability of polyembryonic genotypes. Based on the nursery performance, the genotypes were classified with respect to their vigour for being tried as rootstocks. Among the polyembryonic genotypes, Starch, Peach and Kurukkan were classified as less vigorous genotypes. In monoembryonic genotypes, Amrapali, Langra and Chausa were grouped as less vigorous genotypes.

REFERENCES

  1. Bavappa, K.V.A. et al. (1964). Arecanut Journal, 15:62-66.
  2. Bewley, J.D. and Black, B.M. (1982). Physiology and Biochemistry of Seed Germination, Part II, Springer Verlag, New York.
  3. Ghosh, S.K., et al. (1985). Indian Food Packer, 39(1): 46-50.
  4. Heydecker, V. (1969). Proceedings of International Seed Test Association. 34: 201-219.
  5. Khobragade, H.M. et al. (1999). J. Soils Crops, 9(2): 244-246.
  6. Naik, K.C. (1947). Indian Frmg. 8: 22.
  7. Negi, S. S. (2000). Acta Hort. 509: 69-77.
  8. Panse, V.G. and Sukhatme, P.V. (1985). Statistical Methods for Agricultural Workers 4th ed. ICAR, New Delhi, pp. 131-143.
  9. Patil, R. (1990). MSc. Thesis, Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli, Ratnagiri (M.S.).
  10. Reddy, Y. T. N. et al. (2003). Sci Hort..97: 95-108.
  11. Reddy, Y.T.N. and Singh, G. (1989). Indian Food Packer, 6(4): 34-37.
  12. Singh, L.B. (1960). The mango. Leonard Hill Books Ltd., London, pp 11-35.
  13. Sturrock, T.T. (1968). Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Societies. 81: 311-314.
  14. Yadaw, S.S. et al. (1984). Prog. Hort. 16(3/4): 166-168.
Published In
Indian Journal of Agricultural Research
Article Metrics
Metrics Icon
0
Views
0
Citations
Reviewed By
Share Article
Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    volume 45 issue 1 (march 2011) : 38- 44

    A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON FRUIT CHARACTERS, GERMINATION AND SEEDLING GROWTH IN SOME MONOEMBRYONIC AND POLYEMBRYONIC MANGO GENOTYPES

    K
    K. Abirami1
    R
    Room Singh
    S
    S.K. Singh
    V
    V. Baskaran1
    1Department of Fruits and Horticultural Technology, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi - 110 012, India.

    • Submitted|

    • First Online |

    • doi

    Cite article:- Abirami1 K., Singh Room, Singh S.K., Baskaran1 V. (2025). A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON FRUIT CHARACTERS, GERMINATION AND SEEDLING GROWTH IN SOME MONOEMBRYONIC AND POLYEMBRYONIC MANGO GENOTYPES. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 45(1): 38- 44. doi: .

    ABSTRACT

    The investigations were carried out to compare the fruit characters, germination behaviour and nursery performance of twelve polyembryonic and ten monoembryonic genotypes. Wide variation was observed in fruit and stone characters like weight, volume, length, breadth and circumference in polyembryonic genotypes. The monoembryonic genotypes had higher pulp content whereas polyembryonic genotypes had more thick peel and less pulp percentage which reflects on the poor acceptability of polyembryonic genotypes. Based on the nursery performance, the genotypes were classified with respect to their vigour for being tried as rootstocks. Among the polyembryonic genotypes, Starch, Peach and Kurukkan were classified as less vigorous genotypes. In monoembryonic genotypes, Amrapali, Langra and Chausa were grouped as less vigorous genotypes.

    REFERENCES

    1. Bavappa, K.V.A. et al. (1964). Arecanut Journal, 15:62-66.
    2. Bewley, J.D. and Black, B.M. (1982). Physiology and Biochemistry of Seed Germination, Part II, Springer Verlag, New York.
    3. Ghosh, S.K., et al. (1985). Indian Food Packer, 39(1): 46-50.
    4. Heydecker, V. (1969). Proceedings of International Seed Test Association. 34: 201-219.
    5. Khobragade, H.M. et al. (1999). J. Soils Crops, 9(2): 244-246.
    6. Naik, K.C. (1947). Indian Frmg. 8: 22.
    7. Negi, S. S. (2000). Acta Hort. 509: 69-77.
    8. Panse, V.G. and Sukhatme, P.V. (1985). Statistical Methods for Agricultural Workers 4th ed. ICAR, New Delhi, pp. 131-143.
    9. Patil, R. (1990). MSc. Thesis, Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli, Ratnagiri (M.S.).
    10. Reddy, Y. T. N. et al. (2003). Sci Hort..97: 95-108.
    11. Reddy, Y.T.N. and Singh, G. (1989). Indian Food Packer, 6(4): 34-37.
    12. Singh, L.B. (1960). The mango. Leonard Hill Books Ltd., London, pp 11-35.
    13. Sturrock, T.T. (1968). Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Societies. 81: 311-314.
    14. Yadaw, S.S. et al. (1984). Prog. Hort. 16(3/4): 166-168.
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us
      Published In
      Indian Journal of Agricultural Research

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)