Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T22:54:47.682Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth and yield of irrigated groundnuts (Arachis hypogaea L.) grown at different spacings in the Sudan Gezira. I. Flowering, yield and yield component

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

Hassan M. Ishag
Hassan M. Ishag
Affiliation:
Gezira Agricultural Research Station, Wad Medani, Sudan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The effect of different spacings between and within rows on the pod yield of Ashford (semi-spreading, alternately branched type) and Barberton (upright, sequentially branched type) were studied.

The largest yield of Ashford was obtained at 60 cm x 15 cm spacing, while in Barberton the largest yield was obtained at 40 cm x 15 cm. It is suggested that the optimum spacing for these varieties varied because of differences in their growth habits.

Differences in yield were generally associated with differences in the number of pods and weight of pods per plant. An inverse relation between number of pods per plant and number of seeds per pod suggested internal competition between alternative sinks.

The number of flowers per plant decreased with closer spacing. The percentage of flowers which set pods ranged from 14 to 21%. Wider spacing increased the number of branches, total number of pods and the proportion of pods which matured, but did not affect the mean individual kernel weight.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 74 , Issue 3 , June 1970 , pp. 533 - 537
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1970

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

REFERENCES

Bolhuis, G. G. (1958). Observations on the flowering and fructification of the groundnuts, Arachis hypogaea L. II. Nelh. J. agric. Sci. 6, 245–8.Google Scholar
Bunting, A. H. (1955). A classification of cultivated groundnuts. Emp. J. exp. Agric. 23, 158–70.Google Scholar
Bunting, A. H. (1958). A further note on the classification of cultivated groundnuts. Emp. J. exp. Agric. 26, 254–8.Google Scholar
Ewino, E. C.(1918). A study of certain environmental factors and varietal differences influencing the fruiting of cotton. Tech. Bull, agric. Exp. Stn Miss. 8, 1–95.Google Scholar
Fortanieb, E. J. (1957). De beinvloeding van de bloei by Arachis hypogaea L. Thesis, Wageningen.Google Scholar
Ishag, H. M. (1965). The effect of sowing date on growth and yield of groundnuts in the Gezira. Afr. Soils, 10, 509–20.Google Scholar
Leonabd, E. R. (1962). Inter-relations of vegetative and reproductive growth, with special reference to indeterminate plants. Bot. Rev. 28, 353–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oram, P. A. (1958). Recent development in groundnuts, with special reference to Africa. Part 2, Fld Crop Abstr. 11, 75–84.Google Scholar
Smith, B. W. (1954). Arachis hypogaea, reproductive efficiency. Am. J. Bot. 41, 607–16.Google Scholar