Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:17:49.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Physiology of bunch groundnuts (Arachis hypogaeaL.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

S. D. Choudhari ,
M. Udaykumar  and
K. S. K. Sastry
S. D. Choudhari
Affiliation:
University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
M. Udaykumar
Affiliation:
University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
K. S. K. Sastry
Affiliation:
University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Twenty-nine bunch groundnut genotypes were grown in the Kharifseason 1980 and the summer season 1981 at Bangalore. Growth and yield analysis showed that the total dry-matter accumulation was low up to 30 days after sowing and increased linearly up to the 86th day in the Kharifand up to harvest in the summer season. There were significant differences between genotypes in leaf area indices (LAI), the leaf area duration (LAD) and LAD between pod initiation and harvest (LADP) in both the seasons. The mean LAI of genotypes did not vary much between the Kharifand the summer seasons up to the 66th day. However, during the later stages of growth the LAD was higher in the summer. The higher biological yield and productivity in the summer was attributed to the high LAD and LADP during the later stages of crop growth. LAD and total dry-matter accumulation at harvest were significantly correlated both in the Kharif(r = 0–75) and the summer (r= 0–81). The mean total number of flowers over all 29 genotypes did not vary, but total number of pegs formed per plant differed significantly between genotypes in both the Kharifand summer seasons. The percentage of flowers which produced pegs was 72–2 in summer as against 51–2 in Kharif. The primary branches contributed 86'7 and 90–1 %to the total number of pods per plant in the Kharifand summer seasons respectively. The contribution of the first four nodes of primary branches was 85 %in both seasons. The number of fruiting points (nodes having mature pods) per plant, found to be the most important yield-determining component, showed significant variation amongst the genotypes in both the Kharifand summer seasons. In summer, length of mature-pod-bearing zone (MPBZ), number of nodes in MPBZ and number of kernels per plant were higher than in the Kharifseason. It is suggested that selection and breeding should concentrate on improving LAD and LADP, total dry matter per plant, more primary branches per plant, more pods in the distal nodes of primary branches and more fruiting points (nodes in MPBZ) per plant.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 104 , Issue 2 , April 1985 , pp. 309 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

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

References

Bolhuis, G. G. (1958). Observations of the flowering and fructification of the groundnut, Arachis hypogaea L. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Sciences 6, 18–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bunting, A. H. (1955). A classification of cultivated groundnuts. Empire Journal of Experimental Agriculture 23 (91–2), 158–170.Google Scholar
Chandola, R. P., Dixxt, P. K. & Saxena, D. K. (1973). Note on the path-coefficient analysis of yield components in groundnut. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 43, 497–498.Google Scholar
Dobairaj, M. S. (1962). Preliminary steps for the formulation of selection of index for yield in groundnut. Madras Agriculture Journal 49, 12–27.Google Scholar
Enyi, B. A. C. (1975). Physiology of grain yield in groundnut. Experimental Agriculture 13, 101–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forestier, J. (1973). Vegetative characters, growth and yield of early groundnuts in forest region. Gahiers Orstrom Biologie 19, 43–62.Google Scholar
Janamatti, V. S. (1979). Physiological aspects of growth and yield under non-stressed and stressed conditions in four genotypes of groundnut (Arachis hypogaeaL.) M.Sc. (Agri.), thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore.Google Scholar
Khanotjra, B. S. & Sandhtj, R. S. (1972). Path analysis in groundnut (Arachis hypogaeaL.). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 42 (9), 792–795.Google Scholar
Khushwaha, J. S. & Tawar, M. L. (1973). Estimates of genotypic and phenotypic variability in groundnut (Arachis hypogaeaL.). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 43 (12), 1049–1054.Google Scholar
Mccloud, D. E. (1974). Growth analysis of high yielding peanuts. Proceedings of Soil Crop Science Society of Florida 33, 24–26.Google Scholar
Patra, G. J. (1973). Association of internode length and fertility coefficient with yields in groundnut hybrids. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 43, 809–812.Google Scholar
Power, J. F., Willis, W. O., Grunes, D. L. & Reichman, G. A. (1967). Effect of soil temperature, phosphorus and plant age on growth analysis of barley. Agronomy Journal 59, 231–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanoha, S. A. & Sandht;, R. S. (1974). Genetic variability and correlation studies in bunch groundnut. Oilseed Journal 4 (4), 22–30.Google Scholar
Sastry, K. S. K., Shashidhar, V. R., Mekhri, A. A. & Parameshwar, C. (1980). Final report of the scheme for drought tolerance studies on groundnut, castor and safflower, 1974–1979, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore.Google Scholar
Sheshadri, C. R. (1962). Groundnut, a monograph. Indian Central Oilseed Committee, Hyderabad.Google Scholar
Smith, B. W. (1954). Arachis hypogaea.Reproductive efficiency. American Journal of Botany 41 (8), 607–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundararaj, N., Naoaraju, S., Venxata, Ramxt M. N. & Jagannath, M. K. (1972). Design and analysis of field experiments. University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore.Google Scholar
Tripathi, H. P. (1974). Correlation studies in spreading groundnut. Oilseed Journal 4, 28–32.Google Scholar
Williams, J. H. (1979). The physiology of groundnuts (Arachis hypogaeaL. cv. Egret). I. General growth and development. Rhodesian Journal of Agricultural Research 17, 41–48.Google Scholar
Williams, J. H., Wilson, J. H. H. & Bate, G. C. (1975a). The growth of groundnuts (Arachis hypogaea L. cv. Makulu Red) at three altitudes in Rhodesia. Rhodesian Journal of Agricultural Research 13, 33–43.Google Scholar
Williams, J. H., Wilson, J. H. H. & Bate, G. C. (1975b). The growth and development of four groundnut (Arachia hypogaeaL.) cultivars in Rhodesia. Rhodesian Journal of Agricultura IResearch 13, 131–144.Google Scholar