Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-2tv5m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-19T04:12:26.387Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EFFECTS OF CUTTING LENGTH AND BUD REMOVAL ON ROOT YIELD AND STARCH CONTENT OF CASSAVA UNDER RAINFED CONDITIONS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2017

MAPITA PRASITSARN ,
ANAN POLTHANEE ,
VIDHAYA TRELO-GES  and
ROBERT W. SIMMONS
MAPITA PRASITSARN
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science and Agricultural Resources, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand
ANAN POLTHANEE*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science and Agricultural Resources, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand
VIDHAYA TRELO-GES
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Science and Agricultural Resources, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand
ROBERT W. SIMMONS
Affiliation:
School of Water Energy and Environment, Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedfordshire, MK43 0AL, UK
*
§Corresponding author. Email: panan@kku.ac.th
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Bud removal of the cuttings at underground level has been claimed by cassava growers in Thailand as a method to increase cassava yield. This practise should be tested experimentally to explain the reason for yield increase. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of bud removal and cutting length on storage root yield and starch content of three cassava varieties. Field experiment was conducted in a split–split plot design with four replications in 2010 and 2011, under rainfed conditions. Three cassava varieties (KU50, RY9 and HB60) were assigned as main plot. Two cutting lengths (15 cm and 30 cm) were assigned as sub plots, and two treatments of buds (buds cut and not cut) were assigned as sub–sub plots. The buds on the cuttings that were inserted into the soil were removed. In 2010, the plants from 15-cm long cuttings subjected to bud removal had higher fresh storage root yield (88.4 Mg ha−1) than did plants from 30-cm long cuttings subjected to bud removal (75.8 Mg ha−1). Cutting of buds also had higher fresh storage root yield (89.1 Mg ha−1) than did non bud-cutting (75.0 Mg ha−1). KU50 had the highest fresh storage root yield (91.4 Mg ha−1), dry root yield (48.4 Mg ha−1) and starch yield (20.1 Mg ha−1). Cutting length of 15 cm had higher starch concentration in storage roots (25.6%) than did cutting length of 30 cm (24.2%). HB60 had the highest starch concentration (27.0%) among cassava varieties tested. The data in 2011 were similar to the data in 2010. The responses of varieties to bud removal and cutting length are discussed.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 54 , Issue 3 , June 2018 , pp. 336 - 348
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Alves, A. A. C. (2002). Cassava botany and physiology. In Cassava: Biology, Production and Utilization, 67–90 (Eds Hillocks, R. J., Thresh, J. M. and Bellotti, A.). Wallingford, UK: Centre for Agriculture and Biosciences International.Google Scholar
Bainbridge, Z., Tomlins, K., Wellings, K. and Westby, A. (1996). Methods for Assessing Quality Characteristics of Non-Grain Starch Staples. (Part 2. Field Methods.). Chatham, UK: Natural Resources Institute.Google Scholar
Bouyoucos, G. J. (1962). Hydrometer method improved for making particle size analysis of soils. Agronomy Journal 54:464–465.Google Scholar
Bray, R. H. and Kurtz, L. T. (1945). Determination of total, organic and available forms of phosphorus in soils. Soil Science 59:39–45.Google Scholar
Bremner, J. M. (1965). Total nitrogen. In Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties, 1149–1178 (Ed Black, C. A.). Wisconsin, USA: Madison.Google Scholar
Carvalho, L. J. C. B., Cascardo, J. C. M., Ferreria, M. A. and Loureiro, M. E. (1993). Studies on proteins and enzymes related to tuberization and starch biosynthesis in cassava roots. In International Scientific Meeting of the Cassava Biotechnology Network, 234–238 (Eds Roca, W. and Thro, A.). Proc. 1st, held in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, January 1992. Cali, Colombia: CIAT.Google Scholar
Cline, M. N. and Neely, D. (1983). The histology and histochemistry of the wound healing process in geranium cuttings. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 108:450–496.Google Scholar
Davies, F. T., Lazarte, J. E. and Joiner, J. N. (1982). Initiation and development of roots in juvenile and mature leaf bud cuttings of Ficus pumila L. American Journal of Botany 69:804–811.Google Scholar
Didier, P. and El-Sharkawy, M. A. (1994). Sink-source relations in cassava effects of reciprocal grafting on yield and leaf photosynthesis. Experimental Agriculture 30:359–367.Google Scholar
Ekanayake, I. J. (1994). Terminology for growth analysis of cassava. Tropical Root and Tuber Crops Bulletin 8:2–3.Google Scholar
Enyi, B. A. C. (1973). Growth rates of three cassava varieties (Manihot esculenta Crantz) under varying population densities. The Journal of Agricultural Science 81:15–28.Google Scholar
FAO. (2014a). Food and agriculture organization. Corporate Document Repository. Available at: http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx, verified 19 November, 2014.Google Scholar
FAO. (2014b). Food and agriculture organization. FAO 2014 Database. Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y2413e/y2413e0i.htm., verified 20 November, 2014.Google Scholar
Ganado, Z. S. (1956). The Effect of Length of Cassava Cutting on Yield. B.Sc. Thesis, Central Philippine University (CPU), Iloilo City.Google Scholar
Hahn, S. K. and Hozyo, Y. (1984). Sweet potato. In The Physiology of Tropical Field Crops, 551–576 (Eds Goldsworthy, P. R. and Fisher, N. M.). New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Jackson, M. B. (ed.) (1986). New Root Formation in Plants and Cuttings. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
Jones, S., Robin, G., Garry, J., Johnson, L. and Benn, A. (2013). Production, productivity, quality standards and product mixes of roots and tubers crops in the CFC-funded project. Publication DO/029/12. Available at: http://www.cardi.org/cfc-rt/files/downloads/2013/09/Publ-9-Production-Productivity-RT-Jones-et-al.pdf. verified 19 February, 2016.Google Scholar
Knoth, J. (1993). Traditional storage of yams and cassava and its improvement. Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH, Postfach 5180, D-65726 Federal Republic of Germany. Available at: http://www.fastonline.org/CD3WD_40/INPHO/VLIBRARY/GTZHTML/X0066E/EN/X0066E00.HTM, verified 19 February, 2016.Google Scholar
Knutsson, J. (2012). Long-term storage of starch potato and its effect on starch yield. MSc. thesis. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Available at: http://stud.epsilon.slu.se/4996/1/knutsson_j_121023.pdf, verified 19 February, 2016.Google Scholar
Kramer, P. J. and Boyer, J. S. (1995). Roots and root systems. In Water Relations of Plants and Soil, 115–166 (Eds Kramer, P. J. and Boyer, J. S.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press, Inc.Google Scholar
Lahai, M. T., George, J. B. and Ekanayake, I. J. (1999). Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) growth indices, root yield and its components in upland and inland valley ecologies of Sierra Leone. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 182:239–248.Google Scholar
Lahai, M. T., Ekanayake, I. J. and Koroma, J. P. C. (2013). Influence of canopy structure on yield of cassava cultivars at various toposequences of an inland valley agro ecosystem. Journal of Agricultural Biotechnology and Sustainable Development 5:36–47.Google Scholar
Lebot, V. (2009). Tropical Root and Tuber Crops: Cassava, Sweet Potato, Yam and Aroids, Wallingford, UK: Centre for Agriculture and Biosciences International publication. Available at: http://Amazon.com.Google Scholar
Leihner, D. (2002). Agronomy and cropping systems. In Cassava: Biology, Production and Utilization, 91–112 (Eds Hillocks, R. J., Thresh, J. M. and Bellotti, A.). Wallingford, UK: Centre for Agriculture and Biosciences International.Google Scholar
Lenis, J. I., Cali, F., Jaramillo, G., Perez, J. C., Ceballos, H. and Cock, J. H. (2005). Leaf retention and cassava productivity. Field Crops Research 95:126–134.Google Scholar
Malpighi, M. (1686). Opera Omnia, London: Royal Society of London.Google Scholar
McKeague, J. A. (1978). Manual on Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis, 2nd edn. Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Society of Soil Science, Suite 907, 151 Slater St.Google Scholar
Nassar, N. M. A. and Teixeira, R. P. (1983). Seed germination of wild cassava species (Manihot spp.). Ciencia e Cultura 35:630–632.Google Scholar
OAE. (2014). Office of agricultural economics. Thai Economics Database 2014. Available at: http://www.oae.go.th/download/prcai/DryCrop/amphoe/casava-amphoe57.pdf, verified 16 November, 2014.Google Scholar
Onwueme, I. C. (1978). The Tropical Tuber Crops: Yam, Cassava, Sweet Potato and Cocoyam, New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Osiru, D. S. O., Porto, M. C. M. and Ekanayake, I. J. (1997). Physiology of cassava. IITA Research Guide 55. Training Program, IITA, Ibadan, Nigeria.Google Scholar
Rojanaridpiched, C., Limsila, A., Supraharn, D., Boonseng, O., Poolsanguan, P., Tiraporn, C. and Kawano, K. (1995). Recent progress in cassava varietal improvement in Thailand. In Cassava Breeding, Agronomy Research and Technology Transfer in Asia, 124–134 (Ed Howeler, R. H.). Proc. 4th Regional Workshop, held in Trivandrum, Kerala, India. 2-6 November 1993. Cali, Colombia: CIAT.Google Scholar
Scott, G. J., Rosegrant, M. W. and Ringler, M. W. (2000). Roots and Tubers for the 21st Century: Trends, projections and policy options. Food, Agriculture and the environment discussion paper 31. International Food Policy Research Institute. Available at: http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/Pnach747.pdf, verified 19 February, 2016.Google Scholar
Tongglum, A., Vichukit, V., Jantawat, S., Sittibusaya, C., Tiraporn, C., Sinthuprama, S. and Howeler, R. H. (1992). Recent progress in cassava agronomy research in Thailand. In Cassava Breeding, Agronomy and Utilization Research in Asia, 199–223 (Ed Howeler, R. H.). Proc. 3rd Regional Workshop, held in Malang, Indonesia. Oct 22–27, 1990.Google Scholar
Velasco, O. L. (1982). The effects of different lengths of cutting on the growth and yield of cassava. B.Sc. thesis. WLAC, San Marcelino, Zambales.Google Scholar
Vichukit, V., Rodjanaridpiched, C., Poonsaguan, P., Sarobol, E., Cheamchamnuncha, C., Changlek, P., Piyachomkwan, K. and Sriroth, K. (2004). Huay Bong 60: New developed Thai cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) variety with improved starch yield and quality. In The 6th International Scientific Meeting of the Cassava Biotechnology Network (CBN). March 8–14, 2004. Cali, Colombia.Google Scholar
Villamayor, F. G., Dingal, A. G., Evangelio, F. A., Ladera, J. C., Medellin, A. C., Sajise, G. E. and Burgos, G. B. (1992). Recent progress in cassava agronomy research in the Philippines. In Cassava Breeding, Agronomy and Utilization Research in Asia, 245–259 (Ed Howeler, R. H.). Proc. 3rd Regional Workshop, held in Malang, Indonesia.Google Scholar
Walkley, A. and Black, I. A. (1934). An examination of Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 37:29–37.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Image

Prasitsarn supplementary material

Figure Image 1

Download Prasitsarn supplementary material(Image)
Image 4 MB
Supplementary material: File

Prasitsarn supplementary material

Table S1

Download Prasitsarn supplementary material(File)
File 704.1 KB