effect of plant growth regulator on the growth and …€¦ · cv coefficient of variation kg...

EFFECT OF PLANT GROWTH REGULATOR ON THE

GROWTH AND YIELD OF HEAT TOLERANT TOMATO

(Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.)

SYED MOAZZEM HOSSAIN

DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE AND POSTHARVEST

TECHNOLOGY

SHER-E-BANGLA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY

DHAKA-1207

DECEMBER 2006

EFFECT OF PLANT GROWTH REGULATOR ON THE GROWTH AND YIELD

OF HEAT TOLERANT TOMATO (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.)

A thesis

Submitted to the Department of Horticulture and Postharvest Technology Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural

University, Dhaka - 1207 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Agriculture

MASTER OF SCIENCE (AGRICULTURE)

IN

HORTICULTURE

BY

SYED MOAZZEM HOSSAIN

REGISTRATION NO: 26289/00569

SESSION: JULY - DECEMBER 2005

Approved by

(Dr. Satya Ranjan Saha)

SSO, HRC, BARI

Signature of Co-supervisor

(Md. Hasanuzzaman Akand)

Assistant Professor, SAU

(Prof. Md. Ruhul Amin)

Chairman, Examination Committee

Department of Horticulture & Postharvest Technology

December 2006

Fax: 880-2-9261495 Tel. 9252529

E mail: [email protected]

[email protected]

Horticulture Research Centre Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute

Joydebpur, Gazipur-1701, Bangladesh

8

Certificate

This is to certify that the Thesis “Effect of Hormone on the growth and yield

of summer tomato” submitted to the Faculty of Agriculture, Department of

Horticulture and Postharvest Technology, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural

University, Sher-e-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka-1207 in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Masters of Science (MS) in Horticulture and

Postharvest Technology embodies the result of a price of bona fide research

work carried out by Syed Moazzem Hossain, registration no. is 26289/00569

under my supervision and guidance. No part of this thesis has been submitted

for any other degree or diploma.

I further certify that, such help or source of information, as has been availed

during the course of this investigation has duly been acknowledged by him.

Dated: Place: Joydebpur, Gazipur Senior Scientific Officer,

Plant Physiology Section, HRC

BARI

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

All praises are due to Allah who enabled to complete this work

SOME COMMONLY USED ABBREVIATION AND

ACRONYMS

Full Name Abbreviation

SAU Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University

BARI Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute

HRC Horticulture Research Center

BINA Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear Agriculture

TSS Total soluble solids

RH Relative Humidity

FAO Food and Agricultural Organization

AVRDC Asian Vegetables Research & Development Center

DMRT Duncan’s multiple range test

ha Hectare

4-CPA 4-Chlorophenoxy acetic acid

GA3 Gibberellic acid -3

NAA Naphthalene acetic acid

CAA Carmine acetic acid

2,4-D 2,4-dichlorophenoxy acetic acid

IBA Indole butyric acid

PGR Plant growth regulator

°C Centigrade

°F Fahrenheit

ppm Parts per million

Mg Micro gram

df Degree of freedom

TSP Triple superphosphate

MP Murate of potash

TSWV Tomato spotted wilt vims

OM Organic matter

RCBD Randomized Completely Block Design

CV Coefficient of variation

kg Kilogram

ml Millie liter

OP Open pollinated

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

All praises and thanks are due to the supreme ruler of the Universe (‘The Almighty for

the spiritual and moral gift bestowed upon me in the performance of this routine.

It’s my great pleasure and privilege to express deep sense of gratitude and sincere

regard toDr. Satya (Ranjan Saha, Senior Scientific Officer, Plant physiology Section,

Olericulture (Division, HRC, (Bangladesh Agricultural (Research Institute ((BARI), (Research

supervisor and member of advisory committee for his valuable guidance, suggestions and

constant encouragement during the whole period of this research and in preparing the

manuscript.

My sincere gratitude and appreciation are due to Md. Hasanuzzaman Akand, Assistant

professor, Department of Horticulture and Postharvest Technology, Sher-e-Bangla

Agricultural University, Dhaka, Research co-supervisor and member of advisory committee for

his dynamic, invaluable and immense guidance during the whole period of the research and in

preparing this thesis.

My deepest sense of gratitude and indebtness to the members of my advisory committee,

prof. Ruhul Amin, Chairman and Prof. Md Mahatab Uddin, Department of Horticulture and

(Postharvest Technology, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka for taking keen

interest in my thesis research, constant inspiration, valuable suggestions and critical review of

the manuscript.

Cordial thanks are due to Abdus Salam, SO., Olericulture (Division, HRC, (BARI- For

providing photographic facilities and Md. Siddiqul Alam for cooperation during the research

period.

My greatest debt, however, is firstly to my parents for their blessings and then to my

6rother and sister and other relatives who have made Cot of sacrifices in many ways for the

cause of my study and inspired me all the time.

I like to express my sincere thanks to Mr. Azmal Hossain, Scientific Assistant and Mr.

Mamun-ur-rahman for sincere cooperation in implementing the experiments.

The Author

THESIS ABSTRACT

EFFECT OF PLANT GROWTH REGULATOR ON THE GROWTH

AND YIELD OF HEAT TOLERANT TOMATO

(Lycopersicon esculentum)

By Syed Moazzem Hossain

Tomato is one of the most important fruit vegetables that are cultivated

throughout the year in Bangladesh. During warm seasons, tomatoes cultivated in high

raised land areas are often planted under rain shelter. High temper ature (both day and

night), humidity, rainfall and light intensity are the basic limiting factors of the tomato

production in summer season. High temperatures reduce fruit set and fruit production in

tomato. During the summer season tomato is available in urban market at an exorbitant

price. There is a great demand of tomato in summer -rainy season but there is no good

variety for this season. Recently BARI has released some heat tolerant open pollinated

and hybrid varieties with some limitations liking hormone application and smaller fruit

size. Considering the factors, the experiment was under taken to evaluate the two heat

tolerant varieties of tomato under polytunnel with and without plant growth regulator

application during summer-rainy season. The experiment was conducted at the Research

Farm of Olericulture Division under Horticulture Research Center of Bangladesh

Agricultural Research Institute (BARI), Joydebpur, Gazipur during May 2006 to August

2006. The experiment was laid out in a RCBD (factorial) with three replications. Two

heat tolerant tomato varieties BARI Toamto-4 and BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 with and

without plant growth regulator applications were included in this experiment. The

higher fruit set percentage (42.52%) was recorded from BARI Hybrid Tomato-4 which

was also higher in case of pollen viability (42.75%), number of fruits per cluster (3.01),

number of fruits per plant (12.70) and yield per plant (460 g). Better performance was

observed in spraying of 4- CPA at 40 ppm concentration in respect of percent fruit set

(45.38%), number of fruits per plant (16.45) and yield (39.39 t/ha) under high

temperature condition. In combined treatment, BARI Hybrid Tomato -4 with 40 ppm 4-

CPA performed a significant role in number of fruits per cluster (3.41) , number of fruits

per plant (22.48), number of fruits per plot (144.00), yield per plant (621.68 g), yield

per plot (15.23 kg) and above all fruit yield (50.57 t/ha).

Dedicated to My Parents and

teacher those who laid the

foundation of my success

IV

CHAPTER

1.

2. 3.

TITLE PAGE

DECLARATION

SOME COMMONLY USED ABBREVIATION i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ii

ABSTRACT iii

LIST OF CONTENTS iv

LIST OF TABLES vi

LIST OF FIGURES vii

LIST OF PLATES viii

LIST OF APPENDICS ix

INTRODUCTION 1

REVIEW OF LITERATURE 4

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1. Climate and soil 23

3.2. Planting material 24

3.3. Growing of seedlings 25

3.4. Treatments 26

3.5. Transplanting 26

3.6. Polytunnel 26

3.7. Design and layout of the experiment 26

3.8. Manures and fertilizers 29

3.9. Intercultural operation 29

3.10. Gap filling 29

3.11. Plant protection 29

3.12. Plant growth regulators application 30

3.13. Collection of data 30

3.14. Statistical analysis 30

LIST OF CONTENTS (Cont’d)

CAHPTER TITLE PAGE NO.

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. Main effects of varieties on floral characteristics of 34 tomato

4.2. Main effects of varieties and hormone on plant 39

characteristics of tomato

4.3. Main effects of varieties and hormone on fruit 47


4.4. Main effects of varieties and hormone on the yield 54 contributing


4.5. Main effects of varieties and hormone on the yield 63 of tomato 5. ECONOMICAL ANALYSIS 75

6. SUMMERY AND CONCLUSION 76 7. LITERATURE CITED 80

8. APPENDICES 90

LIST OF TABLES

vi

NO. TITLE PAGE

1. Main effects of varieties and plant growth regulators on the floral 38


2. Main effects of tomato varieties and plant growth regulators on 44

the plant characteristics

3. Main effects of varieties and plant growth regulators on the fruit 52

characteristics

4. Combined effect of varieties and plant growth regulators on the 53

fruit characteristics

5. Main effect of varieties and plant growth regulators on the yield 55

contributing characteristics of tomato


yield contributing characteristics of tomato

7. Main effects of varieties and plant growth regulators on the yield 65

of tomato


yield of tomato

9. Economical analysis of different treatment combination between 75

their cost of production and benefits

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE NO.

NO.

1. Layout of the field experiment 27

2. Combined effect of varieties and plant growth regulators 41

3. on number of branches per tomato plant


5. on plant height at final harvest


7. on the time of first harvesting

8. Relationship between pollen viability percentage and 73

fruit set of two varieties

9. Comparison between the two varieties according to their 73

pollen viability percentage and fruit set percentage

10. Relationship between pollen viability percentage and 74

yield of two varieties

11. Comparison between the two varieties according to their 74

pollen viability percentage and yield per plant in gram

LIST OF PLATES

PLATE TITLE PAGE NO.

NO.

1. Field view of the experiment under polythene house 28

2. View of single polythene tunnel with growing plants at 35 50% flowering stage

of BARI Tomato-4 variety

3. View of single polythene tunnel with growing plants at 36 50% flowering stage

of BARI Hybrid Tomato-4 variety

4. Comparison between two varieties with same plant growth 42 regulator

application

5. Comparison between two varieties with same plant growth 46 regulator

application

6. BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 plants at fruit bearing stage 59

7. Fruits of BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 plants 71

LIST OF APPENDICES

9.

ix

APPENDIX

NO.

1.

2.

3.

A

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

TITLE PAGE NO.

Monthly mean temperature and relative humidity 90

during the crop period at BARI, Gazipur.

Analysis of variance for the selected heat tolerant 91

tomato varieties under different PGR concentration on floral

characteristics


tomato varieties under different PGR concentration on plant

characteristics


tomato varieties under different PGR concentration on fruit

characteristics


tomato varieties under different PGR concentration on yield

contributing characteristics


tomato varieties under different PGR concentration on yield

contributing characteristics

Labour requirements per hectare for various operations 94 to produce

summer tomato vegetables

Cost of fertilizer and manure per hectare 94

Total cost of tomato production per hectare in summer 94 as influence

by different PGR application

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1

INTRODUCTION

Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) is one of the popular vegetables in

Bangladesh which is receiving increased attention of the growers and consumers and

made its position within few of the highest cultivated vegetables.

November and February is the period when congenial atmosphere remains for tomato

cultivation in Bangladesh. Although tomato plants can grow under a wide range of

climatic conditions, they are extremely sensitive to hot and wet growing conditions, the

weather which prevails in the summer season in Bangladesh (Ahmed, 2002). Fruit

setting in tomato is reportedly interrupted at temperature above 26/20°C day/night,

respectively and is often completely arrested above 38/27°C (Stevens and Rudich, 1978;

El Ahmadi and Stevens, 1979; Kuo et al., 1979).

We have many winter tomato varieties developed locally and introduced from

abroad, because of favorable growing conditions and high demand in the season. But

limited efforts have been given so far to overcome the high temperature barrier

preventing fruit set in summer-rainy (hot-humid) season. Very recently Bangladesh

Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) has strengthened the program for year round

tomato variety development and already succeeded to develop some heat tolerant OP

and F| tomato varieties (Anon, 1998) with some limitation like lower fruit set or smaller

fruit size.

Hybrids bred for heat tolerance might have better performance over any open

pollinated varieties/lines but should be evaluated under particular situation i.e. hot -

humid conditions as the heat tolerant genes are easily influenced by environment

(Villareal and Lai, 1979).

2

When tomatoes are grown during summer in tropical countries, the usual problem

is low fruit set. The problem is due to high night temperature (above 22°C) and high

humidity which result in poor pollination and followed by poor fertilization. Although

the problem is solved with the use of heat tolerant varieties, these are inadequate under

extreme conditions. Application of plant growth regulators has been shown to improve

fruit setting (AVRDC, 1990).

Tomatotone (4-chlorophenoxy acetic acid) has been found to be effective in

improving tomato fruit set under higher temperature conditions (Kuo et al., 1998).

Tomatotone (4-CPA) now used commercially in Korea, Japan and China to inc rease

fruit setting in tomatoes.

The growth regulator 4-chlorophenoxy acetic acid, (4-CPA) has an important

effect on the fruit retention of tomato as well as other horticultural crops and thus

increasing the yield substantially (Younis and Tigani, 1977; Naqvi et al., 1998). 4-

chlorophenoxy acetic acid is a growth regulator used in reducing pre -harvest fruit drop

and resulting in increased number of fruits and yield in tomato crop.

Gibberellic acid (GA3) is one of the most important growth stimulating

substances used in agriculture since long ago. It may promote cell elongation, cell

division and thus helps in the growth and development of tomato plant. Gibberellic acid

when applied to flowers controlled fruit drop in tomato (Feofanova, 1962).

Under Bangladesh conditions, tomato is available in urban market at an

exorbitant price (Tk. 40 to 60/kg) in summer season. These tomatoes are coming from

exotic sources mostly through unapproved channel. There is a great demand of tomato

in summer-rainy season. The Horticultural Research Center of the BARI has been taken

program for the development OP and F1 summer tomato varieties. Among these

varieties, BARI Toamto-4 and BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 are also common. But their

3

fruit set percentage and size of the fruits is not appreciable. Therefore, to improve the

yield per unit area and improve the size of fruit, an attempt was undertaken to study

the influence of 4-CPA and GA3 with the following categories;

i) To observe the yield potential of two varieties developed by BARI i n

summer-rainy season under field condition.

ii) To determine the performance of heat tolerant varieties with hormone

application

iii) To find out the economic feasibility of using growth regulator in

summer-rainy season.

4

C H A P T E R l l

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

RIVIEW OF LITERATURE

Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) is one of the major vegetables in

Bangladesh. It is a relatively cool temperature-loving crop, hence, grown in temperate

countries and in the dry winter months of tropical countries. The crop is extremely

sensitive to hot and wet growing conditions. Very little efforts have been given in other

part of the world to develop varieties adaptable to the tropics. Such effort is even meager

in Bangladesh. Information available in the literature pertaining to the evaluation of

hybrids for yield, floral and fruit characters with regards to tolerance to high temperature

stress are reviewed and presented in this chapter.

When tomatoes are grown under unfavorable conditions, such as during summer in

tropical countries, the usual problem is low fruit set. The problem is due to high night

temperature (above 22°C) and high humidity, which result in poor pollination and flower

fertilization. Although the problem is solved with the use of heat tolerant verities, these

are inadequate under extreme conditions. Application of plant growth regulators has been

shown to improve fruit setting particularly in verities that have low level of heat tolerance

(AVRDC, 1990).

Synthetic plant growth regulators (PGRs) such as 4 -chlorophenoxyacetic acid (4-

CPA) now used commercially in Korea, Japan and China are known to influence fruit

setting in tomatoes. These are applied at 50 mg/liter as a spray on flower cluster when they

are in bloom. Spraying is usually done on each cluster at 7 to 14 days interv al. It is

claimed that, the treatment increase fruit set and fruit size and induces early yield.

However, it may cause puffy fruits at high concentration or under high temperatures

(AVRDC, 1990).

6

Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) is seldom grown in summer season in

Bangladesh, because of high temperatures, high humidity and heavy rainfall. An attempt

was made in 1991 to grow a summer tomato crop by growing tomatoes on raised beds,

using heat-tolerant lines, chemical application for improving fruit set and wild species as

root stock to control diseases. Tomatoes transplanted in June on raised beds gave an

excellent crop stand and growth compared to transplanting into flat plots. Two lines, TM

0111 and TM 0367, from the Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center

(AVRDC) set some fruit in summer, but further increase fruit set were obtained by use of

the plant growth regulator “Tomatotone.” Plants sprayed at flowering stage with 2%

tomatotone resulted in an average 760-940g parthenocarpic fruits/plant (AVRDC, 1990).

No significant difference was observed between summer lines TM 0111 and TM

0367 in all the yield and yield parameters studied. TM 0111 produced 19.6 t/ha with

Tomatotone application under polytunnel wile TM 0367 yielded 20.5 t/ha under simil ar

condition (AVRDC, 1997).

Time required for fruit set, fruit maturity, mean fruit weight and fruit yield/plant

were affected by different tomatotone (4-CPA) concentrations. Both fruit set and maturity

were earlier at 2% concentration (AVRDC, 1997)

Jwahori (1967) stated that high temperature increased the probability of floral

abscission after anthesis in tomato. High nigh temperature reduced the size of tomato

flower with small anthesis and abortive pollens, as well as auxin content (Saito and Ito,

1967).

Abdullah and Verkerk (1968) reported that high temperature (both day and night);

rainfall, humidity and intensity are the basic limiting factors of tomato production.

Kuo et al. (1978) stated that high light intensity affects the internal temperature of

the reproductive organ of tomato. High temperature is known to limit fruit -set of tomato

due to simultaneously and/or sequentially impaired series of reproductive processes i.e.

pollen production and development, ovule development, pollination, germination of pollen

grains, pollen tube growth, fertilization and fruit initiation (Rudich et al., 1977 and

Stevens, 1979).

Shelby et al. (1978) compared two heat tolerant tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.)

breeding lines AVI65 and Nagcarlang, with the heat oens itive “Floradel” in fruit set,

pollen abortion and embryo sac abortion.

They found that two heat tolerant cultivars had a significantly higher percentage of

fruit set under both moderate and high temperature in spring and summer than “Floradel”

but fruit set of all three cultivars was significantly lower at high temperature. The poor

fruit-set at high temperature in the tomato, principally, might be a result of a reduction of

carbon export from the leaf (Dinar et al., 1982 and Ho, 1979).

In 1983, Dinar et al. stated that poor fruit set at high temperature in tomato due to

callose formation in the leaf petiole and an inability of reproductive organs to import

assimilates in the early stages of flower development.

High day (above 32°C) and night (above 21°C) temperature were reported as limiting

fruit-set due to an impaired complex of physiological process in the pistil, which results in

floral or fruit abscission (Picken, 1984).

8

Difference existed among the cultivars in their ability to transmit their fruit se tting

ability under high temperature to their hybrid progenies. Hybrid progenies appeared to

have better consistency of performance especially under less than optimal growing

conditions (Yordanov, 1983).

Dane et al. (1991) reported that selected tomato genotypes were evaluated for fruit-

setting ability under high temperature field and greenhouse conditions. Most of the Asian

Vegetable Research and Development Center (AVRDC) selections could be considered

heat-tolerant. Small-fruited, abundantly flowering genotypes were less affected by heat

stress than larger-fruited cultivars. Prolonged periods of high temperature caused drastic

reductions in pollen fertility in most genotypes.

Seven hybrids obtained from heat-tolerant varieties and lines were evaluated in

Thailand in three different seasons: cool (October -February), hot (March-July) and rainy

(July-October). The local cv. Seeda gave the lowest yield, while the new, and heat tolerant

varieties Seedathip II yielded 3-4 times higher. All F[ hybrids with either of these two new

varieties, as one of the parents, set more fruit than those with Seeda as a parent. Hybrids

111 (B| X Seedathip II) and 115 (B2 X Seedathip II) were more acceptable to consumers

because of their better color and larger fruits (AVRDC, 1990).

Lin and Hong (1986) selected a hybrid among breeding lines from the Asian

Vegetable Research and Development Center, this intermediate Fi hybrid variety gave a

mean fruit set of 84% for the summer crop and 28% and 80-90% in lowland and highland

areas, respectively for the summer crop, the variety is heat tolerant, giving a good fruit set

at high temperatures, and highly resistant to tomato mosaic virus.

9

Cheema et al. (1993) worked to extend the growing period and availability of tomato

in northwest India. A study was carried out in the field during 1989-90 to identify

genotypes having extended fruit setting ability at high temperature (40°C day/25°C

nights). Nine genotypes were rated as heat tolerant, having an average of 60 -83% fruit set.

Individual fruit weighed 20-40g. Marketable yield was low (110- 1040 g/plant) due to

disease pressures.

Scott et al. (1995) reported that Equinox, a determinate, heat -tolerant, fresh- market

tomato hybrid that sets a high percentage of marketable fruit in spring and autu mn in

Florida. Under 30-33°C/21-25°C day/night temperatures, fruit set is superior to that of the

most large-fruited cultivars, but flowers abort in the early trusses.

Xu et al. (1994) developed a new virus-resistant, heat-tolerant, high-yielding cultivar

in the Henan province of China in 1991. It was bred by crossing the early line 81 -1-1 with

the large-fruited, high-quality line 79-2-3; it gives large, good-quality fruit. This cultivar

out yielded Henan by 3 times 20.06% with summer cultivation.

Sanitipracha (1994) evaluated eight varieties to identify heat -tolerant types suitable

for commercial production in Southern Thailand. All the varieties proved well adapted to

the summer climate of Songkhla, but the highest yielding were 3 -31A- B1-2B, SI 11 and

B200 (about 12-14 tons/ha).

Henna et al. (1994) conducted an experiment in 1992 and 1993 under optimal and

sub-optimal field temperatures fruit set with some heat -tolerant and less heat- tolerant

tomato cultivars. Sub-optimal temperatures during fruit set reduced the yield of all tomato

cultivars, but yield reduction was less in heat-tolerant cultivars. At minimum/maximum

temperatures above 73/95°F, the heat-tolerant and less heat- tolerant cultivars produced

very little yield.

Rahman et al. (1998) conducted an experiment to evaluate the effects of temperature

and water stress on agronomic and physiological characteristics in heat tolerant tomato

cultivar TM 0126. Plants were grown in a “Phytotron” at day/night temperatures of

23718°C (moderate temperature regime, MT) or 30°/25°C (high temperature regime, HT).

HT significantly reduced yield, pollen germination percentage, shoot and weight.

Khalid (1999) conducted an experiment with two winter (Ratan and Bahar) and

three summer (BINA Tomato-2, BINA Tomato-3 and E-6) varieties of tomato during the

winter season of 1998-99 at the Horticulture Farm, BAU, Mymensingh. He observed that,

the highest yield/plant was obtained from BINA Tomato-2 (1.77 kg), followed by BINA

Tomato-3 (1.67 kg). But the yields of these varieties were statistically similar to reach

other.

In Nepal, an experiment was conducted by Lohar and Peat (1998) to study the floral

characteristics of heat-tolerant and sensitive tomato cultivars at high temperature. They

observed that flowering was the earliest in Pusa Ruby at 28723°C (day/night) and the

latest in CL-1131 at 15710°C. They also indicated that cv. CL- 1131 was suitable for

cultivating at high temperature and as an earlier crop. Cultivar Pusa Ruby produced fewer

flowers and high temperature than CL-1131, but not in 15°/10°C.

An experiment was conducted with two summer varieties (BINA Tomato -2 and

BINA Tomato-3) to study the yield performance at three locations (Magura, Comilla and

Khulna) during the summer season in 1997 (BINA, 1998). It was

observed that, BINA Tomato-2 produced higher fruit yield at Magura (38 t/ha) and Khulna

(17 t/ha), while BINA Tomato-3 gave higher yield (29 t/ha) at Comilla.

11

However, mean fruit yield from three locations showed that, the variety BINA Toamto -2

produced higher fruit yield than BINA Toamto-3.

A field trial was conducted in Jordan 1993 to study the yield of 13 local and

introduced open pollinated cultivars, and to compare the yields to that of three common

hybrids (Maisara F|, 898 F] and GS 12 F t) in relation to seasonal distribution of

marketable and unmarketable yield and fruit number. The cultivars varied in their

marketable yield during the harvesting period (10 weeks from 22 June 1993). The results

indicated the cultivars Rio Grande, Nagina and T 2 improved were superior to the hybrids

(Ajlouni et al., 1996).

While working with some tomato varieties (Pusa Early Dwarf, HS 102, Hisar Arun

(Sel 7) and Punjab Clihuhara) in northern India, Kalloo (1998) reported that, HS 102 and

Punjab Chhuhara were fit for summer cultivation and Pusa Early Dwarf and Hisar Arun

were suitable for getting early fruits.

An experiment was carried out under a BARC financed project BVRD, at its

Jodebpur sub-center, Gazipur during the summer season of 1976 with three tomato

varieties. It was found that, the variety Hope-1 was more adapted to our summer climate

than the other two. Although Hope-1 produced smaller fruits, it produced the highest

number of fruits (16) per plant, as well as the highest yield (9.24 t/ha), indicating that the

variety could tolerate heat and high humidity of Bangladesh better than the other two

varieties (Hossain and Hoque, 184).

Pereira and Reisser (1998) found in a trial in Pelotas, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, the

hybrid tomato Empire was sown in a plastic greenhouse on 15 or 30 December 1994 and

16 January 1995. The earliest sowing date resulted in the highest early (end of May) yield

(113.9 t/ha) and the highest total yield (163.0 t/ha).

Less than 1% (38 of 4050 accessions) of the world collection of the garden to mato

(Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) and related Lycopersicon species displayed a high level of

heat tolerance based on fruit setting ability at high temperature. Villareal et al. (1978),

Lohas and Peat (1998) investigated the responses of a heat -sensitive (Pusa Ruby) and heat-

tolerant (CL-1131) tomato cultivar to four different temperature regimes to identify floral

characteristics affected by high temperatures. Therefore, these characters should not be

used for selecting for heat tolerance in tomato.

Baki and Stomuel (1993) studied levels of heat tolerance in the genotypes of tomato

by determining percent fruit set under the high temperature regimes. They found that,

under optimum temperature 27°/23°C (day/night), fruit set in the heat sensitive genotypes

ranged from 41 to 84% and in the tolerant genotypes from 45 to 91%. Under high

temperature 35°/23°C (day/night), no fruit set was observed in the heat sensitive

genotypes, where as fruit set in the heat-tolerant genotypes ranged from 45% to 64%.

Reduced fruit set at high temperatures is attributed to flower drop (Abdullah and

Verkerk, 1968; Iwahori, 1965; Sugiyama et al., 1966 and Charles and Harris, 1972).

Increased flower abscission was observed at the time of flower dehiscence (Johansen and

Hall, 1953), which was a result of the failure of fruit set rather than direct effect of high

temperature (Levy et al., 1978).

The number and viability of pollen grains are important for successful fertilization

(Abdullah and Verkerk, 1968). Pollen is formed tetrads seven days before anthesis and

reaches maturity within four days (Sugiyma et al., 1966). Reduced pollen production was

caused by low assimilate supply (Howlett, 1936), high temperature (40°C) at meiosis stage

(Iwahori, 1965) or low temperature (10°C) (Charles and Harris, 1972). However, reduction

in pollen production and viability (Abdullah and

13

Verkerk, 1968), and pollen germination and pollen tube growth in the style (Iwahori and

Tokalashi, 1964; Iwahori, 1967) are mainly caused by heat damage.

Flower buds at five to nine days before anthesis and one to three days after

anthesis were highly sensitive to high temperature (Iwahori et al., 1963). Both macro and

micro spore mother cells at meiosis and nine to eight days before anthesis were especially

sensitive to high temperature (Iwahori, 1965). El-Ahmadi and Stevens (1979a) also

observed reduction in pollen viability and anther dehiscence when flower exposed to 40°C

for 4 hours. Optimum temperature for pollen germination was found to be near 27°C

(Abdullah and Verkerk, 1968). At high temperatures, pollen germination and pollen tube

growth were retarded (Abdullah and Verkerk, 1968; Charles and Harris, 1972).

Heat tolerance is often characterized by sustained pollen viability and favored

anther dehiscence (El-Ahmadi and Stevens, 1979a; Rick and Dempsey, 1969; Rudich et al.,

1977). However, for certain genotypes fruit set does not appear to depend on reduced

pollen germination or fertilization at high temperature (Charles and Harris, 1972). This

implies the involvement of parthenocarpic fruit set in the improvement of heat tolerance

(El-Ahmadi and Stevens, 1979b; Stevens and Rudich, 1978).

Chen et al. (1982) reported that genotypic differences for their performance in the

field were more related to their adaptability to high temperature. They conclude that,

selection in a breeding program should be based on selecting those genotypes with higher

heat adaptability rather than those with high pre-acclimation levels of heat hardiness,

which was found to decline within a narrow temperature range and becomes less efficient

at temperature above 30°C.

14

Hanna and Hernandez (1980) compared several characters related to heat tolerance

in tomatoes in five varieties under summer and spring seasons. In summer, average

minimum temperature was 24°C and maximum was 34.3°C. In spring, average minimum

temperature was 15.3°C and maximum was 25.1°C. The genotype BL 6807 was the least

affected by high temperature; whereas, L 401 and Chico III were the most affected. The

fruit set for L 401 dropped from 78.1% in spring to 1.2% in summer. BL 6877 had less

flower drop and the highest percentage of stained pollen in summer.

Baki and Stomuel (1993b) conducted an experiment on heat tolerant tomato

(Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) breeding lines, four heat tolerant and heat sensitive

cultivars in the green house under high temperature (39°C day/28°C night) and in the

field. Under high temperature conditions, the heat tolerant lines, heat tolerant cultivars and

the heat sensitive cultivars produced 168, 94 and 55 flower/plants; 70%, 52% and 30%

fruit set; 410, 173 and 11 g yield/plant and 72%, 37% and 7% normal mature fruit

respectively. High temperature induced flower abscission, reduced fruit set and yield, and

increased the incidence of abnormalities.

Hanna and Hernandez (1979) tested 23 tomato lines and varieties under high day

(above 32.3°C) and night (above 23.9°C) temperature conditions for fruit set, flower drop

and blind using the three base flowers on each of six clusters per plant. They found t hat

BL 6807 had a mean fruit set of 48.5%, CL 9-0-0-1 (33.6%) whereas, L 401 had 1.2%

only. The heat tolerant lines have small fruits except CL 9 -0-0-1, which was larger.

Rana and Kalloo (1989) evaluated 156 genotypes of tomato for number of flower per

cluster, percent fruit set, percent fruit drop, number of fruits per truss, number of fruits per

plant, size of fruit, yield/plant and stigma position in antheridial

15

cone at high temperature (38-40°C day and 20-25°C night). Out of that 138 genotypes

could not set even single fruit and flower drop was 100%. The rest of 18 genotypes have

fruit setting rate 46.7% to as low as 1.9%.

Fruit set in tomato reportedly is interrupted at temperatures above 27°/20°C

day/night, respectively; and is often completely arrested above 38°/27°C day/night (El-

Ahmadi and Stevens, 1979; Kuo et al., 1978 and Stevens and Rudich, 1978). High

temperature also causes many other impacts other than fruit set like fruit size and quality

(Opena etal., 1987).

High temperature drastically reduces the fruit setting ability of tomatoes (Abdullah

and Verkerk, 1968; Charles and Harris, 1972, El -Ahmadi and Stevens, 1979a; Kuo et al.,

1978 and Rudich ci al., 1977). The tomato improvement programme at AVRDC accorded

high priority to the incorporation of genes for heat tolerance to tropical lines (Opena, 1985

and Villereal et al., 1987).

Pollen viability test was based on the idea that carmine acetic acid (CAA)

effectively stains only the cytoplasm of intact cells with functioning membranes.

Although, this technique dose not evaluates the actual pollen germination, nonetheless, it

gives an indication of apparent viability and is much in use (Bodo, 1991; Carrol and Low,

1976; Marcade et al., 1997 and Polowick and Sawhney, 1985).

Temperature determines the fruit size in various crops (Rylski, 1973). At night

temperature of 14°C (Went, 1957) obtained tomato fruit’s are three times larger than the

size as obtained at 26°C.

Dane et al. (1991) performed a field evaluation of selected genotypes of tomato for

their fruit setting ability under high temperature condition. Diallel analysis

indicated that pollen fertility and fruit set under high field temperatures were

primarily under additive gene control.

Shashi and Satyanarayana (1986) reported in a paper entitled “Breeding tomato for

heat tolerance” that fruit yield during summer is hardly 100 -150g per plant, but in the

crosses he made, the average yield ranged from 450g to 800g.

Plantlets (21 days old) of Nagcarlang and Campbell 28, tomato cultivars showed

differing in heat tolerance. The best temperature (40°C) and method were than selected in

order to screen 20 germplasm accessions, Nagcarlang, Mex-12, P 1410 and L 10-3 were

the most heat tolerant on the basis and are recommended for use in breeding programmes

(Florido et al. 1999).

Baki and Stomuel (1995) studied in an experiment that under optimum temperature,

fruit set ranged from 41 to 84% and form 45 to 91% in the heat sensitive and heat tolerant

genotypes, respectively. Under high temperature, no fruit set in the most heat sensitive

genotypes. Fruit set in the heat tolerant genotypes ranged from 45 to 65%.The response of

pollen to heat was genotype dependent and not a general predictor of fruit set high

temperature stress.

Santipracha (1994) found in a trial of eight varieties to identify heat-tolerant types

suitable foe commercial production in Southern Thailand, all the varieties proved well

adapted to the summer climate of Songkhla, but the highest yielding were 3 -31A-B-2B,

S i l l and B200 (approx. 12-14 tons/ha).

Baki (1991) conducted an experiment under greenhouse with nine (9) heat - tolerant

tomato breeding lines and four (4) heat-sensitive cultivars under high temperature (39°C

day/28°C night) and in the field in 19S9. Under high temperature conditions, the heat-

tolerant lines, heat-tolerant cultivars and heat-sensitive cultivars

1

17

produced, respectively, the following per plants: flowers, 186, 94 and 55; fruit set,

70%, 52% and 30%; yield, 410, 173 and 1 lg; and normal mature fruit, 72%, 37% and

7%.

Hanna et al. (1991) showed that LHT 24 is primarily a source of heat -tolerant

germplasm but can be used as a summer tomato for home garden production.

Hassan (1991) reported the stock plants of the determinate field tomato hybrid

Elan, grown under plastic in summer, were trained with 1, 2 or 3 stems. Plants with 2

stems produced the greatest number of fruits, fruit weight and seed yield.

Opena et al, (1989) stated that AVRDC scientist from planting during hot, wet

summer season in Taiwan selects tropical breeding lines. During this period, day time

temperature (maximum) could go as high as 34°C or so while night temperature would

be not lower than 21°C.

Berry and Uddin (1988) reported that high fruit set in this particular study was

not associated with high seed number in the majority of tolerant cultivars evaluated.

Bar-Tsur et al. (1985) found that high temperature reduce the leaf photosynthesis.

They also reported that high humidity and rainfall decreased the survival rate of tomato

plant by encouraging wilt incidence.

Hanna et al. (1983) in a study on tomato flower structure and fruit set under heat

growth and also under ideal temperature during growth reported that both traits are

genetically controlled, with partial dominance for high expression.

S. M. Alam et al. (2002) reported that the spray application of NAA at variable

concentration significantly increased the fruit yield of tomato, when compared to

control. The nutrient contents were also increased in majority of cases.

I The tomato plants were sprayed with aqueous solution of 0, 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 mg

NAA/L at flowering time. A 0.01 % Tween-80 as wetting agent was also used along

with the NAA solution. The spray application of naphthalene acetic acid (NAA) had

significant effects on increasing number of tomato/plant, weight of tomato per fruit and

fruit yield/plant compared with control. The yield increase was due to retention of

flower in the plants due to the application of different concentrations of NAA

treatments.

Gowda et al. (1977) found in an experiment that the yield increases have been

reported. It would suggest that spraying on various vegetable and horticultural crops

have been reported of naphthalene acetic acid at the time of flowering, which prevents

pre-harvest flower abscission by increasing the available plant hormone (auxin)

concentration at this critical phase of reproductive development in tomatc plants. The

spray application of NAA increased the nutrient contents by tomato leaves at both the

harvest occasions. The entire nutrients were sufficiently adequate for the normal growth

of tomato plants. This situation has also resulted in the increased fruit yield of tomato.

It would suggest that spraying of naphthalene acetic acid at the time of flowering

prevents pre-harvest flower abscission by increasing the available auxin concentration

at this critical phase of reproductive development.

Valdosta et al. (1999) have been reported that early harvest is a plant growth

regulator that has shown promise by increasing yields in local grower tria ls of tomatoes.

It consists of cytokines as Kinetin 0.0900%; 26.8 mg/fl. oz.), gibberellic acid (0.0300%;

8.9 mg/fl. oz.), and indole butyric acid (0.0450%; 13.4 mg/fl. oz.).

Nisar Naeem et al. (2001) has been conducted an experiment that, both time and

different concentrations of gibberellic acid (GA3) had affected significantly the growth

parameters of tomato plants. Maximum days to flowering (42.67), fruit per plant

(77.69), plant height (77.78 cm), fruit weight (71.15 grn), number of branches

1

19

(12.33) per plant and total yield (26840 kg/ ha) were recorded in the plants sprayed with

60 mg/lit of gibberellic acid 10 days before transplantation, while minimum

values were noted in controlled treatment. Maximum fruit drop per plant was found tor

control treatment and minimum for the plants treated with gibberellic acid at 6U mg/lit. It

is suggested that tomato should be supplied with gibberellic acid at 60 mg/lit. 10 days

before transplantation under the agro-climatic conditions of Peshawar.

Masroor et al. (2006) performed a pot experiment according to a factorial

randomized design at Aligarh to study the effect of 4 levels of gibberellic acid spray (0,

10-8, 10-6 and 10-4 M GA3) on the growth, leaf-NPK content, yield and quality

parameters of 2 tomato cultivars {Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.), namely Hyb-SC-3 and

Hyb-Himalata. Irrespective of its concentration, spray of gibberellic acid proved

beneficial for most parameters, especially in the case of Hyb -SC-3.

Monteiro (1998) has performed an experiment that auxin, gibberellin and an electric

vibrator were applied to the flowers of tomato plants (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., cv.

Montecarlo) grown in a polyethylene greenhouse without heating in spring, with minimum

temperatures ranging from 9.0 to 15.4° C. The vibrator produced high number of normal

seeds per fruit, while auxin treated plants had mainly big fruits with aborted seeds, and

the control plants had small fruits some of them seedless. Every growth curve of fruit

diameter had a sigmoid form, with big fruits growing faster than small ones. The higher

the number of seeds the faster w'as the growth. Growth rate rather than the final diameter

was influenced by number of seeds. For the same growth rate the auxin treated fruits were

bigger than those treated with the vibrator.

Fluid drilling (gel-seeding) has helped to decrease the time from planting to

emergence of many small-seeded vegetables and improved the final plant stand of many

crops (M.D. Orzolek, R.C. Kaplan, 2001). Unfortunately, 100 percent final

20

stands, as well as uniform seed emergence (synchrony) within 72 hours, have not

yet been achieved consistently in the field. Incorporation of GA 3 and Nutra Phos 3-15

(foliar fertilizer) in the gel prior to the addition of germinated tomato seeds significa ntly

reduced time to final emergence by 3.2 days. Incorporation of Enersol, Amplifly, Nutra -

Phos 24 and the combination of Enersol plus Nutra-Phos 3-15 in gel significantly

increased the total useable fruit yield by 30% compared to the control. The combina tion

treatment of GA3 and Nutra-Phos 3-15 appeared antagonistic and resulted in significantly

lower fruit yield and delayed maturity. However, GA 3 and Nutra-Phos 3-15 treatments

alone produced higher fruit yields than the combination with no effect on frui t maturity

compared to the control.

Carbonell et al. (1996) conducted an experiment and the aim of this study was to

know the earliness and yield of different cultivar of tomato after GA 3 application as a

substitute of vernalization, as soon as planting di stance answer. The possible infection

with tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV) also was considered. Two seed propagated cultivar

(Lorca, A-106) and another one of vegetative propagation “Blanca de Tudela” was tried.

The results show that GA3 treatments, especially 25 ppm dose, are very effective to

promote earliness in “Blanca de Tudela” cultivar, whereas the action was smaller in seed

propagated cultivars. The increase of planting distance raised earliness of cv. Blanca de

Tudela, whereas the effect was smaller in Lorca and A-106 cultivars. In the trial

conditions cv. A-106 was the most sensible to TSWV disease.

In this study, 0, 15, 30, 60 and 90 ppm doses 4 -CPA were applied by one or twice on

opened flowers of F-144 (Fantastic) tomato variety grown under greenhouse (Ozgtiven,

2000). At the end of experiment, the yield per plant, fruit shape, and quality were

investigated. In addition to these, amounts of 4 -CPA residue into ripened fruits were

analyzed by using densitometric TLC method. According to the result s, the highest yield

per plant and good quality fruits was obtained 60-ppm doses of 4-

21

CPA applied twice. 4-CPA analyses determined by densitometric method after TLC has

shown that 4-CPA in the ripened fruits were not detectable at ng level.

Ramin (1998) carried out the experiments on fall 1998 to test the effectiveness of

plant growth regulator, auxin (4-Chlorophenoxy acetic acid), on fruit set in field grown

tomato under unfavorable temperatures. The commercial auxin (4 -CPA) was sprayed

during early flowering with 20, 50, and 100 ppm followed by two additional application at

3 days intervals on tomato racemes cv. Early Urbana. The control plants treated with

distilled water. At harvest, treated racemes with CPA were longer, with thicker stems, and

had more, large fruits than did control racemes.

Application of plant growth regulator (CPA at 20 ppm concentration) has a

suppressive effect on vegetative growth as a whole. The ratio of fruit/flower in all treated

racemes increased significantly (p<0 01) compared to the control plants. But, treatment

did not affect number of flower per raceme compared to the control. Treated with 4 -CPA

produced the highest yield of marketable fruit. The greatest increase in total yield and

parthenocarpic fruit occurred with 100 ppm 4-CPA treatments. Seed number per fruit, the

ratio of juice/pericarp, also decreased significantly with 50 ppm.

Hidekazu Sasaki and Takayoshi Yano (2005) studied the effects of plant growth

regulators on fruit set of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) under high temperature

were examined in a controlled environment and a field under rain shelter. Tomato plants

exposed to high temperature (34/20°C) had reduced fruit set. Treatments of plant growth

regulators reduced the fruit set inhibition by high temperature to some extent, especially

treatment with mixtures of 4- chlorophenoxyacetic acid (4-CPA) and gibberellins (GAs).

In the field experiment, tomatoes treated with a mixture of 4 -CPA and GAs showed

increased fruit set and the numbers of normal fruit s (excluding abnormal types such as

puffy fruit) were more than the plants treated with 4 -CPA alone during summer.

22

Borkowski et al. (1999) conducted an experiment that, Tomato plant cv. Eurocross

was treated with 0.2% of Ethrel in a greenhouse experiment. Treatments consisted of

spraying leaves, spraying fruits and drenching only. Ripening of fruits was hastened by

spraying of leaves or fruits. Leaves treatment increased the number of ripe fruits from each

cluster and these were harvested earlier. In the case of leaves treatment, the etephon

content in the ripe fruits increased slowly up to 12 days after spraying, then increased

rapidly in next 2 days, and then sharp decline was observed. Residues of etephon in tomato

fruits resulting from leaves treatment were 1.7 times higher, than those from fruit

spraying, and about 10 times higher than in the case of drenching. Etephon residues

reached maximum level 4 days earlier when fruits were sprayed, as compared with leaves

spraying.

Nothmann (2002) found that Growth regulator treatments (2,4-D, 2.5 ppm) were

given to winter tomato cultivars with different growth and flowering characteristics. The

plants were grown in the cool season when flower drop is frequent and fruit development

is slow and sometimes stops very early. All cultivars tested reacted favorably to 2,4 -D

applications, each in its own distinct way. Fruit set and development were much improved,

especially in cultivars whose development was more affected by the unfavorable growing

conditions of the cool season. Differential responses in fruit set and in fruit growth were

recorded, but fruit growth was improved very much even when the effect on fruit set was

restricted. Only on 2,4-D treated plants did all or most of the fruits reach adequate size.

CHAPTER lll

MATERIALS AND METHODS

22

MATERIALS AND METHOD

The field experiment was carried on at the Horticultural farm of Bangladesh

Agricultural Research Institute (BARI), Joydebpur, Gazipur during the month from

May to August 2006. The location of the site is at 24.00°N latitude and 90.25°E

longitude at an elevation of 8.4 meters from the sea level (Anon., 1995).

Climate and Soil

The experimental site was situated on the sub-tropical climate zone and

characterized by heavy rainfall during the months of May to August and s canty rainfall

during the rest of the year. The average minimum and maximum temperature during the

crop period was 25.71°C and 32.55°C, respectively. The mean minimum and maximum

relative humidity was 79.44% and 86.36%, respectively. The weather data (air

temperature and humidity) during the study period are presented in Appendix 1. The

soil of the experimental field was sandy clay loam in texture having a pH around 6.0.

The soil belongs to the Chita soil series of red brown terrace (Anon., 1988; Brammer,

1971 and Shaheed, 1984). The soil vegetable research purpose was later developed by

riverbed silt. The chemical analysis of the soil was performed and its characteristics

has given below-

Planting materials

Two varieties of tomato, BARI Tomato-4 and BARI Hybrid Tomato-4, mostly

with different degree of heat tolerance made by the Olericulture Division of HRC,

Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI), Bangladesh were collected for the

study during 2006. The two heat tolerant tomato BARI Tomato-4 and BARI Hybrid

Tomato-4 were grown in summer season of 2006.

Soil property Analytical data Critical point

pH 6.0

Organic matter 1.76

Ca 4.7 meq/100 ml 2.0

Mg 1.6 meq/100 ml 0.8

K 0.11 meq/ 100 ml 0.2

Total N % 0.080 0.12

P 13 pg/ml 14

S 17 |ig/ml 14

B 0.36 pg/ml 0.2

Cu 1.3 pg/ml 1.0

Fe 114 |ig/ml 10.0

Mn 13 (.tg/ml 5.0

Zn 1.6 pg/ml 2.0

24

Treatments

The experiment will be laid out in two factorial Randomize Completely Block

Design (RCBD) with 3 replications.

Factor A: Variety (2)

i. BARI Tomato-4 (V])

ii. BARI Hybrid Tomato- 4 (V2)

Factor B: Hormone Concentration (5)

Treatment Combinations are as follows:

i. Treatment (T0): Control/ no PGR

ii. Treatment (T]): 4-CPA 20 ppm

iii. Treatment (T2): 4-CPA 40 ppm

iv. Treatment (T3): GA3 10 ppm

V. Treatment (T4): GA3 20 ppm

1. 1

o

H

> Control/No PGR used in BARI Tomato - 4

2. V2T0 - Control/No PGR used in BARI Hybrid Tomato - 4

3. V,T, - 20 ppm 4-CPA used in BARI Tomato - 4

4. V2T, - 20 ppm 4-CPA used in BARI Hybrid Tomato - 4

5. v,T 2 - 40 ppm 4-CPA used in BARI Tomato - 4

6. V2T2 - 40 ppm 4-CPA used in BARI Hybrid Tomato - 4

7. v,T 3 - 10 ppm GA3 used in BARI Tomato - 4

8. v 2T 3 - 10 ppm GA3 used in BARI Hybrid Tomato - 4

9. v,t4 - 20 ppm GA3 used in BARI Tomato - 4

10. v2T4 - 20 ppm GA3 used in BARI Hybrid Tomato -4

25

Growing of seedlings

Seeds of the two collected varieties were sown densely in the primary seedbed [

lV on 31 May 2006. Nine days after sowing, the young seedlings at the cotyledonary [ \

stage were transplanted in the secondary seedbed at a spacing of 5 cm x 5 cm.

Transplanting

The seedlings were transplanted in the main experimental field at 25 days after sowing. Plants were given support by bamboo sticks.

Polytunnel

The crop was grown under transparent polytunnels. The polytunnels were 2.3

meter wide having two 1.0 meter wide bed with 30 cm. drain in between which serves

as irrigation channel. The polythene used for making tunnel was transparent and non

ultra-violet ray resistant.

Design and layout of the experiment

The experiment was laid out in a two factor randomized complete block design

(RCBD Factorial) with three replications. Two varieties of tomato were randomly

allotted in each block. The unit plot size was 3.0 m X 1.0 m and the plants were spaced

60 X 40 cm on beds. Each unit plot contains double rows accommodating 12 plants of

each variety. There were five tunnels in that experiment where each tunnel contained

three plots.

REPLICATION-2 REPLICATION- 3

V2T4

REPLICATION - 1

South

North

Drain

VIT3

Figure 1. Layout of the field Experiment

V2T4

VIT3

VIT3

V2T4

Legend:

V** BARI Toamto-4

Vj- BARI Hybrid

Toamto-4

T«r* Control (no ti-

eatment)

Ti- 20 ppm CPA

TjT 40 ppm CPA

Ty= 10 ppm GA3

T^20 ppmCA3

Area of each plot

- (3X1) m*

Line to line distance

= 60 cm Plant to

plant distance * 40

cm

EFFECT OF P8R ONTHE 8BOWTH AND V1ELD OF SUMMER TOMSTO.

Mfterilh and

Omiqn ; SC 8 (Fadonal) T^^Pn : 10 F«+or A! *(V««irfu)

0WRJW*-4(VI)

ID DW1 Hybrid Tomato-4-(V») F«etw 11

Ftart jr«th ntyMvn'.tO t»#(T,) «) ttrr< w*fT,) a.) *o ^ om rr,)

M »*«• W| fTj) v> 80 rhi W j(T*J Dfltv of VfnfplsRtifij I 23.07.2006

Plate 1. Experimental field view under a polythene tunnel in summer season

28

Manures and fertilizers

Ten tons of cowdung as an organic matter and chemical fertilizers @ 450 kg

urea, 250 kg TSP and 150 kg MP per hectare were applied. During final land

preparation, half of the cowdung and the enti re amount of TSP were applied. The pits

were prepared one week before planting. The remaining cowdung and lA of MP were

applied at that time. Top dressing was done in three equal installments at 10, 25 and 40

days after transplanting to apply the entire urea and rest 2

A of MP.

Intercultural operation

Weeding and mulching were done followed by top-dressing and irrigation at 15

days interval. Stacking and pruning were done at that time.

Gap Filling

When the seedlings were established, the soil around the base of the seedlings

was pulverized. Healthy plants did a few gaps filling from the border whenever it was

required.

Plant protection

Insect pest: Preventive measures had been taken against the insect pests like cut

worm, leaf hopper and others. Melathion 57 EC was applied @ 2 ml/liter. The

insecticide application was done fortnightly from a week before first harvesting.

Disease: There were several infestation of diseases had been showed during the

cultivation of summer tomato. Among the diseases, leaf curl of tomato, leaf browning

and wilting were enough. To protect the plants from disease infestation Admier and

Rodomil @ 0.5 ml/liter and Diazinon @ 1 ml/liter was applied at 15 days interval.

29

Plant growth regulator application

Plant growth regulator at different concentration had been sprayed to the flower

of tomato. The plant growth regulators were 4-Chlorophenoxy acetic acid (Tomatotone)

(20 ppm and 40 ppm) a fruit setting PGR and Gibberellic acid -3 (GA3) (10 ppm and 20

ppm). The plant growth regulators were sprayed at three times on the blooming flower

clusters by a mini hand sprayer.

3.10. Collection of data

Data were collected from five randomly selected plants of each replication of

whole treatments that separately on the following parameters in each unit plot.

3.10.1. Days to 50% flowering

It was estimated as the number of days required from sowing to first flower

opening of the 50% plants of each replication.

3.10.2. Flowers per cluster

Flowers of each cluster starting from one to five clusters were counted in each

selected plants and their average was taken as number of flower per cluster.

3.10.3. Fruits per cluster

The average value of total number of fruits in the fruited clusters was counted

and was taken as fruits per cluster.

30

3.10.4. Fruit set (%)

The value was calculated by using the following formula-

Total number of fruits of Is' five clusters

Fruit set % = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X 1 0 0

Total number of flowers of Ist five clusters

3.10.5. Fruits per plant

The average value of the total number of fruits per plant harvested at different

dates from the five selected plants was counted and taken as fruits per plant.

3.10.6. Fruits per plot

Fruits per plant were helped to measure the fruits per plot. Each plot contained

24 tomato plants of individual variety. So, multiply the total number of fruits

per plant with the no. of plants per plot

3.10.7. Individual fruit weight (g) #

Based on the ten representative fruits individual fruit weight in gram was

calculated.

3.10.7. Yield per plant (g)

Total weight of fruits (g) of five plants was recorded and yield per plant was

calculated.

3.10.9. Yield per plot (kg)

Total weight of whole plants fruit in each plot was recorded and yield per plot

was calculated.

I

31

3.10.10. Yield per hectare (ton)

Each plot size was 3 X 1 m2. So, yield per hectare was calculated in ton. It was

measured by the following formula –

Fruit yield per plot (kg)

Fruit yield (t/ha) =------------------------------------------------- ~

Area of plot in square meter

3.10.11. Fruit length (cm)

By using a digital slide calipers fruit lengthy was measured from the neck of

the fruit to the bottom of the same from ten representative fruits and their

average was taken as the length of the fruit.

3.19.12. Fruit diameter (cm)

Fruit diameter/ Breadth was measured along the equatorial part of the same ten

representative fruits taken for fruit length by digital slide calipers and their

average was taken as the diameter of the fruit.

3.10.13. Branches per plant

At final harvest, all the primary branches were counted in each of the five

selected plants and their average value was taken as number of branches per

plant.

3.10.14. Plant height (cm)

Plant height was measured from the soil surface to the t ip of the tallest branch

at final harvest and value was the average of five plants.

3.10.15. Days to 1st

harvest

The interval between transplanting to first harvest was calculated.

3.10.16. TSS (%)

A hand Refractrometer was used to record the percent of total soluble solids or

Brix percentage. The value was the average of five representative fully

ripened fruits.

32

3.10.17. Viable pollen grain (%)

Freshly anthesised flowers were collected from the field. Pollens from fresh

flowers were tested for percent viability with the following me thod. Dusting of

the pollen grains from the anther cone were done on a glass slide. Carmine

Acetic Acid (CAA) solution (single drop) was used to stain the specimen and

was covered with a cover slip. Pollen grains were viewed under a light

microscope. The pollen grains which were normal and properly stained were

considered as viable while those were not well stained or wrinkled were

considered as non-viable pollen grains.

Statistical analysis

The data in respect of growth, yield and yield contributing charac ters were

statistically analyzed to find out the statistical significance of experimental results by

using MSTAT-C a computer based program. The means for all the treatments were

calculated and analyses of variance for all the characters were performed by F test.

Treatment means were compared by Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) and

coefficient of variation (CV %) were also estimated as suggested by Gomez and Gomez

(1984).

I

CHAPTER lV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The result of the experiment along with interpretation and discussion in relation

to the different tomato varieties and plant growth regulators application are illustrated

in this chapter. Different yield contributing characters of tomato responded remarkably

against the corresponding treatments. The effect of varieties and plant growth regulator

as well as their interaction on most of the plant characters and yield were significant,

which are discussed in details chronologically as follows:

4.1 Main effects of varieties on floral characteristics of tomato

4.1.1. Days to 50% flowering

Days required to 50% flowering of two heat tolerant tomato varieties of were

recorded under field condition. There was no significant difference between two

varieties, BARI Tomato-4 and BARI Hybrid Tomato-4 and it varied from 43.86 days to

44.40 days (Table 1) where the higher (44.40 days) was found in BARI Tomato -4. High

temperature probably interrupted the process of flowering (Ahmad, 2002).

4.1.2. Number of flowers per cluster

36

Significant variation was observed between two varieties in case of number of

flowers per cluster (Table 1). The maximum (7.02) flowers per cluster were produced by

BARI Hybrid Tomato-4 which was about 20% more than BARI Toamto-4 (5.85). The

number of flowers per cluster is an important character which has got the significance to

determine the yield of tomato fruit. The production of flowers per cluster may be affected

by the cultivars and temperature. Aung (1976) and Stevens (1979) reported that an extent

of decreased flower number depends on cultivars. The finding supported to the variation

between two varieties in the present investigation.

4.1.3. Viable pollen grain

The most important character for bearing fruits was pollen viability. Percent via ble

pollen grain varied significantly between the two heat tolerant varieties of tomato (Table

1). BARI Tomato-4 exhibited the lower (32.78%) viable pollen grains than BARI Hybrid

Tomato-4 (42.45%). The result indicated that both the heat tolerantO varieti es have the

capability to produce high percent of viable pollen grain as per carmine acetic acid

viability test, gives an apparent indication of pollen viability. Bodo (1991) reported that

the production of viable pollen decreased with the increase of day temperature.

M,

Table 1. Main effects of varieties and plant growth regulators on the floral


37

Means in a column followed by the same letters or without letter are not significantly different at 1% and 5% level by DMRT

NS

**, Significant at 1% level; , Non Significant Where,

Vi = BARI Tomato - 4

V2 = BARI Hybrid Tomato - 4

T0 = Control/ no PGR

T, = 4 - CPA 20 ppm

T2 = 4 - CPA 40 ppm

T3 = GA3 10 ppm

T4 = GA3 20 ppm

4.2. Main effects of varieties and plant growth regulators on plant


38

4.2.1. Number of branches per plant

The number of branches per plant did not show significant difference between the

two varieties at final harvest stage (Table 2). The number of branches per plant slightly

varied from 5.06 to 5.21. BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 (5.21) showed the lower number of

branches per plant compare to BARI Tomato-4 (5.06). Phookan et al. (1990) found that

the number of branches per plant varied from 5.00 to 10.50 in summer season under

plastic house conditions. Results of the present experiment was little bit lower to their

findings, which might be due to the difference of growing environments or the difference

of varieties or both.

In case of plant growth regulator, the number of branches per plant at final harvest

was significantly affected by the treatments (Table 2). The numbers of branches per plant

at final harvest were statistically different and higher (7.10) number was counted by the

non-plant growth regulator treatment i.e. control, where plant growth regulator

treatments gave statistically similar results which were less than non - plant growth

regulator one. The highest (5.38) number of branches per plant was found when 4 -CPA

applied at 40 ppm concentration. The second highest (4.86) number of branches per plant

was observed in the spray of GA3 at 20 ppm concentration. Plant growth regulator spray

of 4-CPA at 20 ppm and GA3 at 10 ppm concentration showed the similar results in terms

of number of branches per plant. So, it was observed that number of branches per plant

was slightly decreased by the plant growth regulator application over non -plant growth

regulator.

39

Application of plant growth regulator (4-CPA at 20 ppm concentration) has a

suppressive effect on vegetative growth as a whole (Ramin, 1998). So number of

branches per plant reduced may be due to plant growth regulator application.

The combined effect of varieties and different concentrations of plant growth

regulator on the number of branches per plant at final harvest is presented in Figure 1.

The highest (7.23) number of branches per plant was obtained from the treatment V|To

which is significantly different from the other combinations. The lowest number of

branches per plant (3.35) wras given by the treatment V2Ti which is statistically similar

to V]T3 (3.40), V2T4 (4.10), and V[T2 (4.20). The second highest number of branches

per plant was counted in V2T0 (6.98) which was statistically as V2T2 (6.57).

6

8

40

V1T0 V2T0 V1T1 V2T1 V1T2 V2T2 V1T3 V2T3 V1T4 V2T4

Treatment

Figure 2. Combined effect of varieties and plant growth regulators on number of

branches per plant

Where,

V! = BARI Tomato - 4



T i = 4 - CPA 20 ppm

T2 = 4 - CPA 40 ppm

T3 = GA3 10 ppm

T4 = GA3 20 ppm

42

4.2.2. Plant height

Plant height of two varieties of summer tomato under field conditions at final

harvest showed significant differences (Table 2). Plant height ranged from 95.88 cm to

99.80 cm. BARI Hybrid Tomato-4 produced the taller (99.80) plants than BARI

Tomato-4 (95.88). It was revealed that most of the hybrids of tomato performed better

under field conditions in Bangladesh. Phookan et al. (1990) reported that when grown

tomato in summer under plastic house conditions the plant height ranged from 46.00 cm

to 95.00 cm in an experiment with 29 hybrids of tomato and also showed variations

among the hybrids in plant height.

In case of plant growth regulator, the plant height at final harvest was

significantly affected by the treatments (Table 2). Plant heights (cm) at final harvest

were statistically different and higher (107.22 cm) plant height was measured in the

non- plant growth regulator treatment where plant growth regulator treatments gave the

lower plant height. GA3 at 10 ppm concentration gave the tallest (98.99 cm) plant height

among the treatments and the shortest (91.00) plant height at final harvest was found in

4-CPA at 20 ppm concentration. So, it revealed that plant height at final harvest

decreased when plant growth regulator was applied . This might be due to the

suppressive effect of plant growth regulator on the vegetative part of the plant or may

be more photosynthetes supplied to the fruits as number of fruits increased by plant

growth regulator that reduced the vegetative growth.

Significant influence was found in the plant height due to the combined effect of

tomato varieties and plant growth regulators that was presented in figure 3. The highest

(113.25 cm) plant height was measured in V 2T0 whereas V]T2 showed the lowest (87.95

cm) plant height that is statistically same as V|T| (87.97 cm). The second highest

(101.67 cm) plant was recorded from the combination of V 2T2 which was statistically

similar to the combinations of V|T3 (101.33 cm), V|T0 (101.19 cm), V|T4 (100.98 cm)

and V2T3 (96.66 cm).

Table 2. Main effects of varieties and plant growth regulators on the plant

characteristics

43

Means a in column followed by the same letters or without letter are not significantly

different at 1% and 5% level by DMRT

V i = BARI Tomato - 4


To = Control/ no PGR

T, = 4-CPA 20 ppm

T2 = 4 - CPA 40 ppm

T3 - GA3 10 ppm

T4 = GA3 20 ppm

Treatment Number of branches/plant PI ant height (cii n)

Variety

V, 5.067 95.88 b

v2 5.215 99.80 a

Level of NS *

Significance

Plant growth

regulator

To 7.107 a 107.22 a

T, 4.113 c 91.00 c

t2 5.385 b 94.81 be

t3 4.240 c 98.99 b

t4 4.860 be 97.07 b

Level of ** **

Significance

CV% 4.90 4.44

NS ", Significant at 5% level; , Non Significant **, Significant at 1% level;

Where,

44

l^u

100

80

60

40 I

20 II 0


Treatment

Figure 3. Combined effect of varieties and plant growth regulators on plant

height at final harvest

Where,

V! = BARI Tomato - 4

V2 ~ BARI Hybrid Tomato - 4


T] = 4 - CPA 20 ppm

T2 = 4 - CPA 40 ppm

T3 = GA3 10 ppm

T4 = GA3 20 ppm

4.3. Main effects of varieties and plant growth regulators on plant


4.3.1. Fruit set

Significant variation was observed between the varieties in term of percent fruit

set which significantly ranged from 40.46% to 42.52% (Table 3). The higher (43.25%)

fruit set percent was found in variety BARI Hybrid Toamto -4 which was nearer to BARI

Tomato-4 (40.46%). Baki & Stomuel (1993) and Rama & Kalloo (1989) reported that

fruit set in the heat tolerant hybrids of tomato ranged from 1.9 to 46.97%, which is in

agreement with the present findings.

Significant effect due to plant growth regulator application was found on percent

fruit set (Table 3). The highest (45.38%) percent fruit set was observed by the PGR

treatment of 4-CPA at the rate of 40 ppm concentration over non-PGR treatment

(36.44%). The second highest (43.33%) percent fruit set was counted by the PGR

treatment of GA3 at the rate of 10 ppm concentration. Auxin have been suggested as the

predominate plant growth regulator factor controlling fruit set (AVRDC, 1982). High

temperature reduced the level of endogenous auxin. Applications of exogenous auxin

maintain the proper level of auxin which induces fruit set. As a result fruit set percent

increased by plant growth regulator application. The fruit setting is increased

particularly in summer varieties by the application of plant growth regulators (AVRDC,

1990).

It was evident that the combined effect between varieties and plant growth

regulator significantly affected the percent fruit set (Table 4). The highest (47.50%)

percent fruit set was obtained in V|T 2 that was statistically different with other treatment

combinations. The lowest (34.93%) percent fruit set was measured in the treatment V|T 0

and it was statistically similar to the treatment V,T| (35.59%). The second highest

(46.18%) percent fruit set was obtained by the treatment of V2T| followed by the

treatment V2T3 (44.46%), V2T2 (43.25%), V^Tj (42.21%), V|T4 (42.09%) that were

statistically similar. Increasing fruit set by using the plant growth regulator

“Tomatotone” was also reported by AVRDC (1990).

4.3.2. Fruit length

48

Fruit length of two heat tolerant varieties differed significantly (Table 3). The

maximum number of long (4.10 cm) fruit was measured in BARI Hybrid Toamto -4 than

BARI Toamto-4 (3.70 cm). Ahmad (2002) found similar trends of result in an experiment

of 49 varieties in summer-rainy season which ranged from 1.94 to 5.46 cm.

Fruit length (cm) was significantly affected by the plant growth regulator

application which is shown in Table 3. The maximum fruit length (4.69 cm) was measured

in the PGR treatment over non-PGR treatment (3.82 cm). Among the plant growth

regulator treatments, 4-CPA at 20 ppm concentration gave the highest (4.69 cm) fruit

length and the lowest (4.22 cm) fruit length was observed from 4 -CPA at 40 ppm

concentration. Cell division and cell elongation enhanced by hormone application. So, fruit

length may be increased due to plant growth regulator effect. It is reported that utilization

of plant growth regulator (4-CPA) can be considered for increasing fruit size under high

temperature conditions (AVRDC, 1982).

Fruit length (cm) was significantly influenced by the combined effect of varieties

and plant growth regulator application (Table 4). The highest (5.14 cm) fruit length was

measured from the treatment combinations of VjT] and the second highest (5.06 cm) f ruit

length was found in V|T3 among the other treatments. The shortest (3.77 cm) fruit length

was measured in V|T0 which was statistically similar to V2T„ (3.88 cm).

4.3.3. Fruit diameter

Significant variation was observed between two varieties in respect of fruit diameter

which ranged from 3.57 cm to 4.74 cm (Table 3). The higher fruit diameter (4.74 cm) was

obtained from BARI Hybrid Tomato-4 variety than BARI Toamto-4 (3.57 cm).

There had a significant effect of plant growth regulator on fruit diameter which is

shown in Table 3. PGR treatment gave better results over non-PGR treatment (3.62 cm). 4-

CPA at 20 ppm concentration produced the highest (4.70 cm) fruit diameter among the

others. The lowest fruit diameter was measured in the plant growth regulator application of

4-CPA at 40 ppm concentration (4.01 cm). Fruit diameter may be increased due to

increased rate of cell division and cell elongation by plant growth regulator. When

tomatoes are grown under unfavorable conditions with application of synthetic plant

growth regulators, the treatment increase fruit set and fruit size (AVRDC, 1990).

In case of combined effect the treatment VjTj gave the highest (4.74 cm) fruit

diameter among the other treatment combinations. The second highest (4.54 cm) fruit

diameter was measured in V2T4 which was statistically similar to V)T3 (4.47 cm) and V2T2

(4.39 cm). The treatment V|T0 gave the minimum (3.59 cm) fruit diameter among the

others (Table 4).

4.3.4. TSS (%)

Significant variation was found between the fruits of two varieties of BARI Toamto -

4 and BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 in respect of TSS content (Table 3). BARI Hybrid Toamto -4

showed the highest (3.97) percent total soluble solids which was statistically similar to

BARI Toamto-4 (3.52). The result was supported by the findings of Ahmed (2002) where

TSS (%) was found to vary from 3.00 to 5.50 in an experiment in summer season. TSS

percent differed between the varieties which might be due to the genetical factors of the

varieties concerned.

Plant growth regulator application has remained a significant impact on TSS content

of tomato (Table 3). GA3 at the rate of 20 ppm concentration (3.96) and control treatment

(3.82) gave the best performance in case of TSS percentage. The lowest (3.45) TSS was

measured in spraying of 4-CPA at 20 ppm concentration (Table 3).

In case of combined effect the highest (4.27) TSS percent was found in V 2T4 and

V2T0 (4.22) over the treatment V2T3 (4.15), which was close to the treatment V 2T2 (3.77),

V|T2 (3.72), V,T4 (3.65), V2T, (3.45), V,T, (3.51), V,T0 (3.43). V,T3 gave the lowest (3.29)

TSS percent followed by the remaining combinations which gave statistically similar

results (Table 4).

Table 3. Main effects of varieties and plant growth regulators on the fruit

characteristics

51



**, Significant at 1% level; *, Significant at 5% level

Where,




T| = 4 - CPA 20 ppm

T2 = 4 - CPA 40 ppm

T3 = GA3 10 ppm

T4 = GA3 20 ppm

Treatment

IB?

riuit set (%) Fruit length

(cm)

. .......

Fruit

diameter

(cm)

TSS (%) • L

: f , , r - . - - ;

Variety

V, 40.46 b 3.70 b 3.57 b 3.52 b

v2 42.52 a 4.10a 4.74 a 3.97 a

Level of

Significance

* * * *

Plant growth regulator

To 36.44 c 3.82 c 3.62 d 3.82 a

T, 40.87 b 4.69 a 4.70 a 3.45 b

t2 45.38 a 4.22 b 4.01 c 3.75 ab

t3 43.33 ab 4.63 a 4.50 b 3.72 ab

t4 41.45 b 4.52 ab 4.26 be 3.96 a

Level of

Significance

** * * *

CV% 5.82 2.30 2.53 6.45

Table 4. Combined effect of varieties and plant growth regulators on the fruit

characteristics

52




Where,



To = Control/ no PGR

T| = 4 - CPA 20 ppm

T2 = 4 - CPA 40 ppm

T3 = GA3 10 ppm

T4 = GA3 20 ppm

Treatment Fruit set (%) Fruit length

(cm)

Fruit diameter (cm) TSS (%)

V,T0 34.93 e 3.77 e 3.59 e 3.43 cd

V,T, 35.59 e 5.14 a 4.74 a 3.51 cd

v,t2 47.50 a 3.99 de 3.78 de 3.72 bed

v,t3 42.21 bed 5.05 b 4.47 b 3.29 d

v,t4 42.09 bed 4.09 de 3.93 d 3.65 cd

V2To 37.94 de 3.88 e 3.75 d 4.22 a

v2t, 46.18 ab 4.24 d 4.18 bed 3.45 cd

v2t2 43.25 abc 4.45 c 4.39 be 3.77 be

v2t3 44.46 abc 4.21 d 4.08 c 4.15 ab

v2t4 40.81 cd 4.96 be 4.54 b 4.27 a

Level of

Significance

** * * **

CV% 5.82 2.30 2.53 6.45

4.4. Effect of varieties and plant growth regulators on the yield contributing


53

4.4.1. Number of fruits per cluster

Significant variation was found between the varieties for fruits per cluster (Table

5). The number of fruits per cluster varied from 2.34 to 3.01. The maximum (3.01) fruits

were produced per cluster in BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 which was statistically different

from BARI Tomato-4 (2.43).

Plant growth regulator application caused a significant distinction between two

heat tolerant varieties in terms of number fruits per cluster (Table 5). 4 -CPA at 40 ppm

concentration (3.15) gave the highest number of fruits per cluster among the treatment s

bul the minimum (2.11) number of fruits per cluster was found in nor. -PGR treatment.

The remaining plant growth regulator application, GA 3 at 20 ppm (2.81), 4- CPA at 20

ppm (2.70) and GA3 at 10 ppm (2.59) concentrations were given a little bit higher re sult

over non-PGR application. Exogenous plant growth regulator application increased fruit

set percent which resulted number of fruits per cluster.

The number of fruits per cluster did not show any significant variation by the

combined effect of varieties and plant growth regulator (Table 6). It was observed that

the highest (3.41) number of fruits per cluster was obtained in V 2T2 which was

statistically similar to V2T4 (3.20), V2T, (3.10), V2T3 (2.97), V2T0 (2.33), V,T, (2.30) and

V|T3 (2.21). The treatment V|T0 gave the lowest (1.90) number of fruits per cluster

followed by the remaining combinations which gave statistically similar results.

—i

Table 5. Main effects of varieties and plant growth regulators on the yield


54

Number of Days to 1st «

fruits/plot harvest

Treatment Number of Number of

fruits/plant fruits/cluster

Variety

8.35 b 60.80 b 2.34 b 61.60 V,

12.70 a 60.27 105.47 a 3.01 a V, NS ** ** Level of

Significan

ce

**

Plant

growth

regulator 43.16 d 60.50 5.77 e 2.11 c

10.63 c 96.83 b 61.00 2.70 b

16.45 a 60.50 115.83 a 3.15 a

7.18 d 64.83 c 61.33 2.59 b T, 12.57 b 95.00 b 61.33

NS

2.81 b

** ** Level of

Significance

CV%

**

6.34 9.18 5.81 9.04 Means a in column followed by the same letters or without letter are not significantly different at 1% and 5% level by DMRT

NS

**, Significant at 1% level; , Non Significant Where,

Vi - BARI Tomato - 4



T, = 4 - CPA 20 ppm

T2 = 4 - CPA 40 ppm

T3 = GA3 10 ppm

T4 = GA3 20 ppm

4.4.2. Number of fruits per plant

Significant variation was observed on number of fruits per plant between two heat

tolerant varieties (Table 5). The number of fruits per plant ranged from 8.35 to 12.70. The

higher (12.70) number of fruits per plant were produced in BARI Hybrid Toamto -4 and

the minimum (8.35) number of fruits per plant were obtained in BARI Toamto-4. Phookan

et al. (1990) conducted an experiment to evaluate 29 varieties of tomato in relation to

eight different growth and yield attributing parameters under plastic house conditions

during summer season and found fruit number ranging from 2.67 to 70.00 which are good

in agreement with the result of the present study. The results also have the similarity to

the findings of Ahmad (2002).

The plant growth regulator influenced significantly on the number of fruits per

plant (Table 5) and produced the higher (16.45) number of fruits per plant than that of

non-PGR treatment (5.77). The highest numbers (16.45) of fruits per plant were obtained

with spraying of 4-CPA plant growth regulator at the concentration of 40 ppm and the

second highest (12.57) numbers of fruits per plant were found by GA 3 at the concentration

of 20 ppm. The third (10.63) and forth (7.18) highest numbers of fruits per plant was

obtained from spraying 4-CPA and GA3 at the concentrations of 20 ppm and 10 ppm

respectively. It has been reported that, in an experiment with 20 F| crosses, the

tomatotone (commercial name of 4-CPA) treatment observed to have an appreciable

effect on the number and weight of fruits of all lines (AVRDC, 1982). There are also

reports that numbers of fruits per plant were increased under polytunnel with tomatotone

application (AVRDC, 1997).

56

The combined effect on the number of fruits per plant was significantly different

(Table 6). The treatment V2T2 gave the highest (22.48) number of fruits per plant over the

treatment ViT0 (5.65) followed by the rest which were statistically different from each

other except treatment V2T4 (18.17) and VjTj (11.81) was the second and third highest

number of fruits per plant respectively, because the treatment V2T3 (7.50), V1T3 (6.86),

V]T4 (6.97), V2T0 (5.90) gave the statistically similar results. These findings are in

agreement with AVRDC (1997) that fruits per plant were increased under polytunnel with

“Tomatotone” application. The findings of AVRDC (1997) demand that fruits per plant

were increased under polytunnel conditions with hormonal treatment.

4.4.3. Number ofiruits per plot

Significant variation was observed between two varieties of BARI Hybrid Toamto -

4 and BARI Toamto-4 in case of number of fruits per plot (Table 5). The higher (105.47)

number of fruits per plot were counted in BARI Hybrid Toamto -4 than that of BARI

Toamto-4 (60.80).

The plant growth regulator influenced significantly on the number of fruits per plot

(Table 5). The highest (115.83) number of fruits per plot was obtained due to spraying of

4-CPA at 40 ppm concentration over non plant growth regulator treatment (43.16). GA 3

(95.00) and 4-CPA (96.83) both at 20 ppm concentrations gave the second highest number

of fruits per plot.

The number of fruits per plot showed significant variation by the combined effect

of varieties and plant growth regulator (Table 6). The highest (144.00) number of fruits

per plot was counted in treatment combination of V 2T2 and the lowest in V|T () (39.00).

The second highest treatment V2T4 (129.33) was statistically dissimilar with other

treatment combinations of V2T] (117.67), ViT2 (87.67) and V2T3 (89.00).

Table 6. Combined effect of varieties and plant growth regulators on the yield


57


different at 1% and 5% level by DMRT NS

Non Significant

**, Significant at 1% level;

Where,


V2 = BARI Hybrid

Tomato T0 = Control/

no PGR Ti - 4 - CPA

20 ppm T2 = 4 - CPA

40 ppm T3 = GA3 10

ppm T4 = GA3 20 ppm

' Treatment fflrT

1

Number of

fruits/cluster

Number of '

fruits/plant

Number of

fruits/plot

V ,T0 1.90 d 5.65 f 39.00 g

V,T, 2.30 ed 11.81 c 76.00 e

v,T2 2.90 b 10.43 cd 87.67 d

V,T3 2.21 cd 6.86 ef 40.67 g

V,T4 2.41 c 6.97 ef 60.67 f

<

NJ

H

o 2.33 cd 5.90 ef 47.33 g

v2T, 3.10 ab 9.46 d 117.67 c

v2t2 3.41 a 22.48 a 144.00 a

v2t3 2.97 ab 7.50 e 89.00 d

V2T4 3.20 ab 18.17b 129.33 b

Level of NS ** **

Significance . _ ..... i

CV% 9.04 9.18 5.81

4.4.4. Days to first harvest

There was no significant variation between the two varieties of tomato in case of

days to first harvest which is shown in figure 4. BARI Hybrid Toamto -4 required

minimum days (60.27) to harvesting the mature fruits which was statistically similar to

BARI Toamto-4 (61.00). In case of plant growth regulators treatment, it could not cause

any significant impact on days to first harvest because they were statistically similar to

one another. The interaction effect of varieties and plant growth regulators also could n ot

perform any effect on days to first harvesting and they were statistically similar.

60


Treatment

Figure 4. Combined effect of varieties and plant growth regulators on the time

of first harvesting

Where,

Vj = BARI Tomato - 4



Ti = 4 - CPA 20 ppm

T2 — 4 - CPA 40 ppm

T3 = GA3 10 ppm

T4 = GA3 20 ppm

61

t

-

J

J

4.4.5 Individual fruit weight

There had no considerable variation observed on the individual fruit weight

between two varieties (Table 7). The individual fruit weight of BARI Hybrid Toanito - 4

variety was 39.20 g which is statistically similar to the variety of BARI Toamto -4

(38.02 g). At night temperature of 14°C, Went (1957) obtained tomato fruit three times

higher than the size as obtained at 26°C. The temperature range of the present study was

24.50°C to 33.25°C (Appendix 1). Ahmad (2002) also found the range of individual

fruit weight from 5.25 g to 43.38 g among 25 heat tolerant varieties which supports the

findings of the present study.

The highest (42.53 g) individual fruit weight was observed to spraying of 4 - CPA

at 20 ppm concentration and the minimum (35.75 g) was measured in non -PGR

treatment (Table 7). The second highest (40.25 g) average individual fruit weight was

counted by plant growth regulator application of 10 ppm GA 3 and the lowest (36.66 g)

one was 4-CPA hormone at 40 ppm concentration. As fruit size increased by plant

growth regulator, consequently individual fruit weight increased. Generally average

fruit weight increased 10 to 40% by the plant growth regulator treatment (AVRDC,

1982).

Significant differences were provided by the combined treatment for the character

of individual fruit weight (Table 8). It was observed that the highest (45.30 g)

individual fruit weight in gram was produced by the treatment V|T|. The second highest

(43.45 g) individual fruit weight was measured in V|T 4 which is statistically similar to

V,T3 (41.71 g) treatment. Non- plant growth regulator treatment combination, V,T 0 and

V2T0 gave the lowest individual fruit weight among the total plant growth regulator

treatment combinations which was 30.20 g and 35.00 g respectively. But the lowest

average individual fruit weight was counted from V|T 2 (29.55 g).

4.5. Effect of varieties and plant growth regulators on the yield of tomato

62

4.5.1. Fruit yield per plant

There was a momentous effect of varieties on fruit yield per plant which ranged from 300.27 to

460.02 g per plant (Table 7). The higher (460.04 g) fruit yield was obtained in BARI Hybrid Toamto -4

which was statistically different from BARI Toamto-4 (300.27). Baki (1991) conducted as experiment

on heat tolerant tomato under high temperature conditions (39°C day/ 28°C nights) and reported that

yield of tomato varied depending on the level of heat tolerance of the varieties. Findings of Ahmad

(2002) also support the results of this trait.

It was revealed from the observations that the plant growth regulator has a great effect on the

fruit yield per plant. The plant growth regulator treatment (4 - CPA at the rate of 40 ppm concentration)

provided significantly higher (476.90 g) fruit yield per plant over non- plant growth regulator

treatment which produced on an average 262.77 g fruit yield per plant (Table 7). The second highest

(440.41 g) fruit yield per plant was obtained due to the application of GA 3 at the 20 ppm concentration

which gave a little bit higher result than that of 4 -CPA at the 20 ppm concentration (402.81 g). There

had a report that tomatotone treatment accelerated fruit setting and increased yield remarkably.

Tomatotone appears highly efficient for yield enhancement of good F t combinations (AVRDC, 1982).

The findings of AVRDC (1997) also demand that fruit yield per plant increased under polytunnel

conditions with plant growth regulator treatment.

63

The combined effect on fruit yield per plant was significant among the treatment

combinations (Table 8). It was observed that the highest (621.68 g) fruit yield per plant was

obtained in V2T2 which was statistically different from other treatment combinations.

Except V2T4 (575.21 g) and V2Ti (482.85 g), all other hormonal combinations were given

statistically similar results. The treatment combination V]T 0 produced the lowest (241.84 g)

fruit yield per plant followed by V,T, (322.77 g), V,T 2 (332.1 1 g), V,T3 (299.00 g), V,T4

(305.51 g) and V2T0 (283.71 g) and these were statistically similar to each other.

Table 7. Main effects of varieties and plant growth regulators on the yield and

yield attributes of tomato

64

Means a in column followed by the same letters or without letter are not significantly different at 1% and 5% level by DMRT


Where,




T| = 4 - CPA 20 ppm

T2 = 4 - CPA 40 ppm

T3 = GA3 10 ppm

T4 = GA3 20 ppm

Treatments Individual

Fruit weight

(g)

Yield/plant(g) Yield/plot \

(kg)

Yield (t/ha) •

.

Variety

v, 38.02 300.27 b 7.55 b 24.95 b

V2 39.20 460.02 a 11.02 a 36.75 a

Level of

Significance

NS ** ** **

Plant growth regulator

To 35.75 e 262.77e 6.44 e 21.45 e

T, 42.53 a 402.81 c 9.66 c 32.19 c

t2 36.66 d 476.90 a 11.81 a 39.39 a

t3 40.25 b 317.88 d 7.97 d 26.00 d

t4 38.76 c 440.41 b 10.57 b 35.20 b

Level of

Significance

* ❖ ** ** **

CV% 6.26 6.35 5.20 4.70

4.5.2. Fruit yield per plot

65

Remarkable variation was founds between the two heat tolerant varieties on fruit yield

per plot which ranged from 7.55 kg to 11.02 kg per plot (Table 7). The higher fruit yield

(11.02 kg) was found from BARI Hybrid Tomato-4 which was statistically different from

BARI Toamto-4 (7.55 kg). Picken (1984) conducted an experiment that high day (above

32°C) and night (above 21°C) temperature were reported as limiting fruit -set and yield due

to an impaired complex of physiological process in the pistil, which results in floral or fruit

abscission and yield of tomato differed depending on the level of heat tolerance of the

hybrids. Findings of Ahmad (2002) also supported the results of this trait.

Significantly higher fruit yield per plot was observed due to plant growth regulator

application over non plant growth regulator treatment (Table 7). In case of the plant growth

regulator treatment, 4-CPA at 40 ppm concentration, the highest (11.81 kg) fruit yield per

plot was obtained where non plant growth regulator treatment (T 0) produced 6.44 kg fruits

per plot. The second highest (10.57 kg) fruit yield per plot was recorded due to the

application of GA3 at 20 ppm concentration which is a little bit higher than the application

of 4-CPA at 20 ppm concentration (9.66 kg). As a fruit size was enlarged by plant growth

regulator, consequently individual fruit weight, fruit yield per plant and fruit yield per plot

increased. Generally fruit yield per plot increased 10 - 50% by the plant growth regulator

treatment (AVRDC, 1982).

66

Significant difference was found by the combined effect of variety and plant growth

regulator in case of fruit yield per plot (Table 8). It was observed that the highest (15.23 kg)

fruit yield per plot was produced by the treatment combination of V 2T2 over the treatment

combinations of ViT0 (6.17 kg) and V2T0 (6.70 kg) which were statistically similar to each

others and second one was V2T4 which produced 13.57 kg fruits per plot. The treatment

combinations V]Ti (7.80 kg), ViT2 (8.40 kg), V1T3 (7.83 kg), V1T4 (7.57 kg), V2T3 (8.12

kg) were statistically similar to each another.

4.5. 3. Yield (t/ha)

67

■

Significant variation was observed between the two heat tolerant tomato varieties

(Table 7) in respect of yield (t/ha). BARI Hybrid Tomato-4 gave higher fruit yield

(36.75 t/ha) and the lower fruit yield 24.95 t/ha was obtained in BARI Tomato - 4. An

experiment was conducted with two heat tolerant varieties (BINA Tomato -2 and BINA

Tomato-3) to study the yield performance at three locations (Magura, Comilla and

Khulna) during the summer season in 1997 (BINA, 1998). It was observed that BINA

Tomato-2 produced higher fruit yield at Magura (38 t/ha) and Khulna (17 t/ha), while

BINA Tomato-3 gave higher yield (29 t/ha) at Comilla. However, mean fruit yield from

three locations showed that, the variety BINA Toamto-2 produced higher fruit yield than

BINA Toamto-3. The result of this experiment supports the findings of the present

study.

Plant growth regulator application significantly influenced fruit yield (t/ha) over

non plant growth regulator treatment (Table 7). The highest (39.39 t/ha) fruit yield per

hectare was obtained from the application of 4-CPA at 40 ppm concentration and the

lowest (21.45 t/ha) fruit yield was found in non-PGR treatment. The second highest

(35.20 t/ha) yield was found due to the application of GA 3 at 20 ppm concentration

which was statistically different from other plant growth regulator treatments of 4 -CPA

(32.19 t/ha) and GA3 (26.00 t/ha) at 20 ppm and 10 ppm concentrations respectively.

Tomatotone appears highly efficient for yield enhancement of good F! combinations

(AVRDC, 1982). The findings of AVRDC (1997) also demand that fruit yield per

hectare increased under polytunnel conditions with plant growth regulator treatment.

The combined effect of varieties and plant growth regulator on the yield of tomato

per hectare has shown a significant variation (Table 8). It was observed that the highest

(50.79 t/ha) fruit yield per hectare was found from the treatment combination of V 2T2 and

V2T4 (45.18 t/ha) gave the second highest yield per hectare among the other treatment

combinations. The lowest (20.57 t/ha) yield was found from ViT 0.

Table 8. Combined effect of varieties and plant growth regulators on the yield

and yield attributes of tomato

69


different at 1% and 5% level by DMRT **, Significant at 1% level;

Where,




Ti = 4 - CPA 20 ppm

T2 = 4 - CPA 40 ppm

T3 = GA3 10 ppm

T4 = GA3 20 ppm

Treatment Individual

fruit weight / v ■ < (g)

Yield/plant , * (g)

(kg)

V,T0 30.20 e 241.84 f 6.17 e 20.57 f

V ,T, 45.30 a 322.77 de 7.80 d 26.00 de

v,T2 29.55 f 332.1 Id 8.40 d 28.00 d

v,t3 41.71 be 299.00 de 7.83 d 24.94 e

v,t4 43.45 b 305.61 de 7.57 d 25.22 e

V2To 35.00 d 283.71 e 6.70 e 22.33 f

v2t, 38.71 bed 482.85 c 11.52 c 38.39 c

v2t2 31.67 de 621.68 a 15.23 a 50.79 a

v2t3 37.65 cd 336.76 d 8.12 d 27.05 de

v2t4 39.98 c 575.21 b 13.57 b 45.18 b

Level of

Significance

** ** ** sf: *

CV% 6.26 6.35 5.20 4.70

71

4.5.4. Relationship between pollen viability percent and fruit set of two varieties

A positive linear relationship was observed between viability percent and fruit set

percent (Figure 5). The equation was y = 33.69 + 0.206x and the value of the coefficient of

determination (R2 = 1.000) gave a good fit and that the fitted regression line had a

significant regression coefficient. Fruit set percent increased with the increase of pollen

viability percent (Figure 6).

4.5.5. Relationship between pollen viability percent and yield of two tomato varieties

When yield of tomato per plant was regressed against pollen viability percent, a

positive linear relationship was observed between them (Figure 7). The equation was y = -

224.54 + 16.01x and the value of the coefficient of determination (R2 = 1.000) gave good

fit and that the fitted regression line had a significant regression coefficient. The

regression line indicated that yield per plant depend on pollen viability percent (Figure 8).

two varieties

73

Figure 6. Comparison between the two varieties according to their pollen viability

percentage and fruit set percentage

500 i

74

BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 BARI Toamto-4

Yield/plant (g)

Figure 7. Relationship between pollen viability percentage and yield of two varieties

500

400

300

200

100

Pollen viability %

Figure 8. Comparison

between the two varieties

according to their pollen viability percentage and yield per plant in gram

BARI Hybiid Toam y = -224.548 + 16.01x 400

300

200

100

0

R2= 1.000

BARI Toamto-4

WH

50 20 30

Pollen viability (%)

40 10 0

75

ECONOMICAL ANALYSIS

Economical analysis was done with a view to comparing the cost of tomato

production and its benefits under different types of plant growth regulators and its

different concentration. For this purpose, the input costs for the land preparation,

planting, transplanting, poly tunnel, fertilizer, crop protection, spray of plant growth

regulator, harvesting, lease of the land, man power and miscellaneous were recorded

against each treatment. Treatments with different types of plant growth regulator needed

more cost than non-plant growth regulator treatment. The highest (2.58) benefit cost ratio

was found in the treatment combination of V 2T2 and ths lowest (1.07) in V,T0.

Details shown in Appendix 9.

Considering farmgate market price of the tomato Tk. 30000/ton in off season

Table 9. Economical analysis of different treatment combination

Treatments Total cost of

production

(Tk./ha)a

Yieid (t/ha) Gross

return

(Tk./ha)b

Net

return

(Tk./ha)

BCR

V,T0 573286 20.57 617100 43814 1.07

V,T, 580890 26.00 780000 199110 1.34

V|T2 588494 28.00 840000 251506 1.42

v,t3 573856 24.94 748200 174344 1.30

v,t4 574426 25.22 756600 182174 1.31

V2To 573286 22.33 669900 96614 1.16

v2t, 580890 38.39 1151700 570810 1.98

v2t2 588494 50.79 1523700 935206 2.58

v2t3 573856 27.05 811500 237644 1.41

v2t4 574426 45.18 1355400 780974 2.35

75

CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

76

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Summary

An investigation with two heat tolerant tomato varieties with different

concentrations of plant growth regulators were undertaken with a view to find out the

more suitable variety as well as effective concentration of plant growth regulator for

summer-rainy season. A field experiment was conducted at the Horticulture farm of

BARI, Joydebpur, Gazipur during May to August, 2006. The experiment was laid out in a

RCB (factorial) design with three replications. Different morphological, floral, fruit,

yield contributing characteristics and yield responded remarkably to the treatments that

reflected in the results. Data on 17 component characters of yield of the said summer

varieties were recorded.

For days to 50% flowering between two heat tolerant varieties, the result of the

study did not show a marked variation. Number of flowers per cluster also showed wide

variation ranging from 5.85 to 7.02 and BARI Hybrid Toamto -4 produced the higher

number of flowers per cluster about 20% more than BARI Toamt -4. Fruit set % achieved

from two varieties within the range of 40.46% to 43.25% where BARI Hybrid Toamto -4

was in higher position. In case of individual fruit weight, BARI Hybrid Toamto -4

obtained higher (39.20 g) than BARI Toamto-4 (38.02 g). Yield per plant of BARI

Toamto-4 and BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 varieties ranged from 300.27 g to 460.02 g

respectively. Fruit length and fruit diameter also varied according the tomato variety but

it was not so much high. The higher fruit length and diameter was produced by BARI

Hybrid Toamto-4 (4.10 and 4.74 cm respectively) than BARI Toamto-4 (3.70 cm and

3.57 cm respectively). Branches per plant were not varied highly between the two

varieties. BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 showed the higher plant height (99.80 cm) than BARI

Toamto-4 (95.88 cm). BARI Hybrid Toamto-4

78

produced higher TSS percentage which was about 3.97% and BARI Toamto -4 had

3.52%. Between two heat tolerant varieties, BARI Hybrid Toamto -4 showed the higher

(42.75%) percent of viable pollen grain in fresh flower.

Considerable effect of different plant growth regulator application at different

concentration between the two varieties was observed over non - plant growth regulator

treatment in respect of various parameters. 4-CPA application at 40 ppm concentration

gave the highest fruit set (45.38%), number of fruits per cluster (3.15), number of fruits

per plant (16.45), fruit yield per plant (476.90 g), fruit yield per plot (11.81 kg) and yield

(39.39 t/ha). The highest fruit length (4.69 cm) and diameter (4.70 cm) of fruit

consequently higher individual fruit weight (42.53 g) was found from spraying of 4 -CPA

at 20 ppm concentration. But plant growth regulator application of 4 -CPA at 20 ppm and

GA3 at 10 ppm concentration reduced the number of branches per plant. Plant height also

became dwarf due to application of 4- CPA at 20 ppm concentration (91.00 cm).

In case of combined effects, BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 variety with 4-CPA at 40

ppm concentration gave the highest results in term of number of fruits per cluster (3.41),

number of fruits per plant (22.48), number of fruits per plot (144.00), yield per plant

(621.68 g), yield per plot (15.23 kg) and yield was 50.57 ton per hectare. The highest

(47.50%) percentage of fruit was set by BARI Toamto-4 variety with 40 ppm of 4-CPA

application, on the contrary application of 20 ppm 4-CPA with same variety showed the

lowest (35.59%) percentage of fruit set. BARI Toamto -4 with 20 ppm 4- CPA application

has increased both fruit length (5.14 cm) and diameter (4.74 cm) of tomato fruits over

non- plant growth regulator treatment with same variety which ultimate result was the

highest individual fruit weight (4530 g). TSS percentage was the highest in BARI Hybrid

Toamto-4 about 4.25% without application of any plant growth regulator.

79

Conclusion

The following conclusions have been made on the basis of findings of the present

investigation:

• BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 and BARI Toamto-4 are two common heat tolerant varieties

which have shown wide range of variability on yield and its component characters.

BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 performed better as it produced higher percentage of fruit set,

average individual fruit weight, fruit length, fruit diameter, yield per plant as well as

yield per hectare. For its high pollen viability it showed higher fruit set under the hot -

humid summer conditions of Bangladesh.

• Better performance was observed under the plant growth regulator application of 4 -

CPA at 40 ppm concentration in respect of fruit set percent, number of fruits per

cluster, number of fruits per plant as well as yield per plant.

• BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 with application of 40 ppm 4-CPA performed the best in

terms of fruit set percentage, fruits per cluster, number of fruits per plant, yield per

plant and yield per hectare with the highest (2.58) BCR value.

80

Recommendations

BARI Hybrid Toamto-4 with 4-CPA plant growth regulator at 40 ppm

concentration may be recommended for summer -rainy season.

Further study on collection, identification and hybridization may be undertaken

for developing heat tolerant genotypes without plant growth regulators.

81

LITERATURE CITED

Abdullah, A A. and Verkerk, K. 1968. Growth, flowering and fruit -set of the tomato at

higher temperature. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 16: 71 - 76.

Ajlouni, M. M., Shibli, R. A. Hussain, A. and Erifej, K. I. 1996. Seasonal distribution of

yield of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) cultivars grown in Jardan. Indian J.

Agric. Sci., 66(9): 541-545.

Ahmad, S. 2002. Genetics of fruit set and related traits in tomato under hot-humid

conditions. Ph.D. Thesis. BSMRAU. pp. 44 - 180.

Ahmed, S.U.; Shaha, H. K. and Sharfuddin, A. F. M. 1988. Study of heterosis and

correlation in tomato. Thai Journal of Agricultural Science. 21 (2): 117 -123.

Allard, R. W. 1960. Principles of plant breeding. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New Work. pp.

189-222.

Alvarez, M. 1985. Evaluation of tomato hybrids in summer. Heterosis for morphological

characteristics and fruit weight. Cultivars -Tropicals. & (1): 37 - 45.

Anonymous. 1998. Developed vegetables varieties and technologies. Olericulture division,

HRC, BARI, Joydebpur, Gazipur. pp. 25 - 38.

Anonymous. 1988. Production Year Book. Food and Agricultural Organization of the

United Nations, Rome, Italy. 42 : 190 - 193.

Anonymous. 1995. Agro-climatological data. Agromet Division, Bangladesh Meterological

Department, Joydebpur, Gazipur. pp. 35-65.

Aung, L. H. 1976. Effect of photoperiod and temperature on vegetable and reproductive

responses of Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 101 : 358-360.

AVRDC. 1982. Progress Report. Asian Vegetables Research and Development Center,

Shanhua, Tainan, Taiwan, pp. 19 - 54.


Shanhua, Tainan, Taiwan, p. 541.




Shanhua, Tainan, Taiwan, p. 541.



AVRDC. 1990. Progress Report. Asian Vegetables Research and Development Center, Shanhua, Tainan, Taiwan, p. 447.

Baki, A. A. and Stomuel, J.R. 1993. Pollen viability and fruit set of heat tolerant and

sensitive tomato genotypes under optimum and high temperature regimes.

HortScience. 28 (5): 135 - 145.

Baki, A. A. and Stomuel, J.R. 1993. Pollen viability and fruit set of tomato genotypes

under optimum and high temperature regimes. HortScience. 30 (1): 115-117.

Berry, S. Z. and Uddin, M. R. 1988. Effect of high temperature on fruit set in tornato

cultivars and selected germplasm. HortScience. 23: 606 - 608.

BINA. 1998. New varieties of summer tomato, BINA Tomato-2 and BINAS Toamto- 3

(Folder in Bengali). Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear Agriculture, Mymensingh.

Bodo, R. T. 1991. Comparison of different pollen viability assays to evaluate pollen

fertility of potato diploids. Euphytica. 56: 143 - 148.

Borkowski, J. Czapski, J. and Horbowicz, M. 1998. The influence of different methods of

tomato plant treatment by ethrel on the ripening and level of etephon residue in

tomato fruit. ISHS Acta Horticulturae 137: Growth Regulators, XXIIHC.

Brammer, H. 1971. Soil resources, Soil survey project, Bangladesh AGL: SF/Pck. 6.

Technical Report. 3. p. 8.

Carrol, C. P. and Low, P. I. 1976. Aspects of male fertility in group Tubersum diplods.

Potato Res. 19 (1): 109 - 121.

Charlels, W. B. and Harris, R. E. 1972. Tomato fruit set at high and low temperatures. Can.

J. Plant Sci. 52: 497 - 506.

Chaudhury, R. C. and Khanna, K. R. 1972. Exploitation of heterosis in tomato yield and

components. South Indian Hort. 20: 59 - 65.

Cheema, D. S.; Surjan, S. and Kuo, C. G. 1993. Variability in heat-tolerant tomato

83

germplasm. Adaptation of food crops to temperature and water stress: proceedings

of an international symposium, Taiwan, 13-18 August 1992. Department of

Vegetable Crops, Landscaping and Floriculture, Punjab Agricultural University,

Ludhiana 141004, India. 12: 316 - 320.

Chen, H. H.; Shen, Z. Y. and Li, P. H. 1982. Adaptability of crop plants to high

temperature stress. Crop Sci. 22: 719 - 725.

Dane, F.; Hunter, A. G. and Chambliss, O.L. 1991. Fruit set, pollen fertility and combining

ability of selected tomato genotypes under high temperature field conditions. J.

Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 116 (5): 906 - 910.

Dinar, M. J.; Rudich, J. and Zamski, E. 1983. Effect of heat stress cr. carbon transport from

tomato levels. Annals of Botany. 50: 97- 103.

Dinar, M. J.; Rudich, J. and Zamski, E. 1982. Effect of heat stress on carbon transport from

tomato levels. Annals of Botany. 78: 90 - 100.

El-Ahmadi, A. B. and Stevens, M. A. 1979 b. Genetics of high temperature fruit set in the

tomato. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 104: 691 - 696.

El-Ahmadi, A. B. and Stevens, M. A. 1979a. Reproductive responses of heat tolerant

tomatoes to high temperatures. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 104 : 689 -691.

El-Mahdy, I.; E-Metwally, G.; El-Fadly and Mazrouh, A. Y. 1990. Inheritance of yield and

fruit setting quality of some tomato crosses grown under heat stress conditions in

Egypt. J. Agric. Res. Tanta University, 16 (3): 517 - 526.

E-Metwally; El-Zewily, A.; Hassan, N. and Zanata, O. 1996. Inheritances of fruit set and

yield of tomato under high temperature conditions in Egypt. 1st

Egypt- Hung. Hort.

Conf., 1:112 -122.

Foefanova, N. D. 1962. Effect of gibberellic acid on setting and development of fruit in

tomatoes. Hort. Abst. 32: S. No. 1111. M. Sc. (Hons) thesis by Ihsar, A. 1970, Dept,

of Hort. NWFP Agric. Univ. Peshawar).

Gardner, C. O. 1968. Principles of Genetics. John Willey and Sons, New York. pp. 221 -

242.

Gomez, K. A. and Gomez, A. A. 1984. Statistical procedures for Agricultural Research.

John Willey and Sons. Inc. New York. pp. 67-215.

Gowen, J. W. 1952. Development of the heterosis concept, pp. 152 - 178. In: Heterosis

(Hayes, H. K. ed.) Iowa State College Press. Amer. Iowa.

84

Hanna, H. Y.; McBride, J. M. and Romaine, D. J. 1994. Feasibility of extending tomato

harvest season by planting heat tolerant cultivars. Proceedings of the Florida State

Horticultural Society. USA. 107: 111 - 113.

Hanna, H. Y. and Hernandez, T. P. 1979. Heat tolerance in tomato. Hort. Sci. 14(2): 121.

Hanna, H.Y. and Hernandez, T. P. 1980. A study of several characters related to heat

tolerance in tomato. Hort. Sci. 15 (3): 45 - 56.

Heiser, C. J.1969. Love apples. In: Nightshades: The paradoxical plants. Freeman. San Francisco, CA. pp. 53 -105.

Ho, L. C.1979. Regulation of assimilate translocation between leaves and fruits in the

tomato. Annals of Botany, 43: 437 - 448.

Hossain, S. M. M. and Haque, M. M. 1984. A study on the feasibility of growing tomatoes

during summer in Bangladesh. Bangladesh J. Agric., 9(2): 77 - 79.

Howlett, F. S. 1936. The effect of carbohydrate and nitrogen deficiency upon

microsporogenesis and the development of the male gametophyte in the tomato

{Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). Annals of Botany. 50: 767 - 803.

Ibrahim, M M. 1984. Genetic and physiological studies on heat a nd cold tolerance in

tomato. Ph. D. Thesis. Cairo University, pp. 35 - 68.

Iwahori, S. 1965. High temperature injuries in tomato. IV. Development of normal flower

buds and morphological abnormalities of flower buds treated with high temperature.

J. Japan Sco. Hot. Sci. 34: 33 - 68.

Iwahori, S. 1967. Auxin of tomato fruit at different stages of its development with a special

reference to high temperature injuries. Plant Cell Physiol. 8: 15 - 22.

Iwahori, S. and Takahashi, K. 1964. High temperature injuries i n tomato. III. Effects of

high temperature on flower buds and flowers of different stages of development. J.

Japan Soc. Hort. Sci. 33: 33 -41.

Iwahori, S.; Sakiyama, R. and Takahashi, K. 1963. High temperature injuries in tomato. I.

Effects of different temperature on fruit setting and yield of seedlings treated at

different stages of development. J. Japan Soc. Hort. Sci. 32: 197 -204.

Jamwal, R. S.; Pattan, R. S. and Saini, S. S. 1984. Hybrid vigor and combining ability in

tomato. South Indian Hort. 32 (2): 69 - 74.

Jenkins, J. A. 1948. The origins of the cultivated tomato. Econ. Bot. 2: 379.

Johanson, S. P. and Hall, W. C. 1953. Vegetable and fruiting response of tomato to high

85

temperature and light intensity. Bot. Gaz. 114: 449 - 460.

Kakizaki, Y. 1930. Breeding crossed eggplants in Japan. J. Hered. 21: 253 - 258.

Kalloo. 1989. Tomato (Lycopersicon esrulentum Mill.). Indian Hort. 33(1): 12-15.

Khalid, A. N. M. 1999. Floral abscission and reproductive efficiency in summer and winter

tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) varieties. MS thesis, Dept, of Horticulture

BAU, Mymensingh. 50 p.

Kou, C. G.; Chen, B. W.; Chou, M. H.; Tsai, C. C. and Tsay, J. S. 1979. Tomato fruit set at

high temperature. In: Cowel R. (ed.) Proc. 1st

Intl. Symp.Tropical tomato. Asian

Vegetable Research and Development Center, Shanhua, Taiwan. 94 - 108.

Leopold, A.C. and Kriedeman, P. E. 1975. Plant growth and development. Second Edition.

Me. Graw Hill Book Co., New York. pp. 305 - 306.

Legon, Martin C.; Diaz, N. and Garcia, P. G. 1984. Performance of tomato hybrids and

their parents in summer. Centro Agricola. 11(1): 35 - 44.

Levy, A.; Robinowitch, H.O. and Kader, N. 1978. Morphological and physiological

characters affecting flower drop and set of tomatoes at high temperature. Euphytica.

27: 211-218.

S4

Lin, T. C. and Hong, W. T. 1989. Development of the new summer tomato variety

Taichung Asveg 4. Bulletin-of-Taichung-District-Agricultural-Improvement-

sattion. Tatsuen, Changhua, Taiwan. 25: 55 - 64.

Lohas, D. P. and Peat, W. E. 1998. Floral characteristics of heat tolerant and heat sensitive

tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) cultivars at high temperature. Scientia Hort.

73 (1): 53 - 60.

Martinez, J.A.; Carbonell, M. and Almela, L. 1998. Influence of gibberellic acid (GA 3) and

planting distance on globe artichoke cultivars affected by tomato spotted wilt virus

(TSWV): 5th

International Congress on Artichoke. ISHS Acta Horticulturae 660.

Mercade, J.A.; Trigi, M. M.; Reid, M. S.; Valpuesta, V. and Quesada, M. A. 1997. Effects

of low temperature in pollen morphology and fertility: Evidence of cold induced

auxine alternations. Hort. Sci. 72: 317 - 326.

Midmore, D. J.; Roam, Y. C. and Wu, M. H. 1993. Management of moisture and heat stress

for tomato and hot pepper production in the tropics. In: pp.452-460. Kuo, C. G.

(ed.). Proc. of Intl. Symp. Adaptation of food crops to temperature and water stress.

AYRDC, Taiwan. 13-18 August 1992.

Monteiro A.A. 1998. Tomato fruit growth in relation to methods of improving fruit -

setting. ISHS Acta Horticulturae 137: Growth Regulators, XXIIHC.

Nieuwhof, M. 1968. Effect of temperature on the expression of male sterility in Brussels

sprout (Brassica oleracea var. Germifera). Euphytica. 17: 265 - 273.

Nothmann, J. 1997. Varietal response of different tomato cultivars to plant growth

regulator treatments. ISHS Acta Horticulturae 137: Growth Regulators, XXI IHC.

Opena, R. T. 1985. Development of tomato and Chinese cabbage cultivars adapted to the

hot humid tropics. Acta. Hot. 153: 421 - 436.

Opena, R. T. and Lo, S. H. 1979. Genetics of heat tolerance in heading Chinese cabbage.

Hort. Sci. 14: 33 - 34.

Opena, R. T.; Kuo, C. G. and Yoon, J. Y. 1987. Breeding for stress tolerance under tropical

conditions in tomato and heading Chinese cabbagc. In: Chang, W. N. Mac Gregor ,

P. W. and Bay Piterson, J. (ed.). Improved vegetable production in Asia. Food and

fertilizer Technol. Ctr., Taipei, Taiwan, pp. 88 - 109.

85

Ozgiiven, A.I.; Paksoy, M. and Abak, K. 2000. The effects of 4 - CPA in tomato growing in

greenhouse on the the fruit set, quality and amount of 4-CPA residue in fruits: VIII

International Symposium on Plant Bio-regulation in Fruit Production, ISHS Acta

Horticulturae 463.

Orzolek, M.D. and Kaplan, R.C. 2002. Effect of the addition of growth rergulators in gel

on growth and yield of tomatoes: Symposium on the Timing of Field Production of

Vegetables, ISHS Acta Horticulturae 198.

Pereira, J. F. M. and Reisser, J. C. 1998. Sowing date of tomato in plastic house for out of

season production: summer- autumn crop. Agropecuaria-Clima- Temperado.

Embrapa Clima Temperado, Cx. Postal 403, CEP 960-970, Pelotas (RS), Brazil.

1(1): 73 -77.

Phookan, D. B.; Talukdar, P.; Shadeque, A. and Chakravarty, B. K. 1990. Genetic

variability and heritability in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) genotypes

during summer season under plastic house condition. Indian J. Agric. 68 (6): 304 -

306.

Picker., A. J. F. 1984. A review of pollination and fruit -set in tomato {Lycopersicon

esculentum Mill.). Hort. Sci. 59: 1-13.

Polowick, P. L. and Sawhney, V. K. 1985. Temperature effect of male fertility and flower

and fruit development in Capsicum annum L. Scientia Horticulture. 25: 117-127.

Rahman, S. M. L.; Nawata, E. nad Sakuratani, T. 1998. Effect of temperature and water

stress on growth, yield and physiological characteristics of hceat-tolerant tomato.

Japanese Journal of Tropical Agriculture. 42(1): 46 - 53.

Ramin, A. A. 1998. Effect of 4-CPA on fruit set in tomato under low temperatures in the

field. Department of Horticulture, College of Agriculture , Shahid Kamran

University, Ahwaz, Iran.

Rana, M. K. and Kalloo, G. 1989. High temperature tolerance in tomato: Evaluation of

genotypes. Veg. Sci. 16(2): 156-167.

Rappaport, 1.1957. Effect of gibberellins on growth flowering fruiting of early pack

tomatoes. Hort Abst. 27(4): S.NO.3568. Rashid, M. M. 1993. Shabji Biggan. Bangla Academi, Dhaka. Pp. 192 -219.

Rick, C. M. and Dempsey, W. H. 1969. Position of the stigma in relation to fruit setting

of the tomato. Bot. Gaz. 130: 180- 186.

86

Rudich, J.; Zamski, E. nad Regey, Y. 1977. Genotypic variation for sensitivity to high

temperature in the tomato pollination and fruit -set. Bot. Gaz. 138: 448 - 452.

Rylski, I. 1973. Effect of night temperature on shape and size of sweet pepper (Capsicum

annum L.). J. Amer. Sco. Hrt. Sci. 98: 149 - 152.

Saito, T. and Ito, H. 1967. Studies on the growth and fruiting in the tomato. IX. Effects

of the early environmental conditions and cultural Genotypes on the

morphological and physiological development of flowers and the flower drop . J.

Japan. Sci. 36: 195 - 205.

Santipracha, Q. 1994. Yield trial of heat-tolerant table tomato in summer in Songkhla.

Kaen-Kaset-Khon-Agriculture-Journal. Department of Plant Science, Prince of

Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkhla 90112, Thailand. 22 (2) : 60 - 65.

Sasaki, H.; Yano, T. and Atsushi, Y. 2005. Reduction of High Temperature Inhibition in

Tomato Fruit Set by Plant Growth Regulators. Department of Vegetable and

Floricultural Science, National Agricultural Research Center for Tohoku Region, Morioka, Iwate 020-0198, Japan.

Scott, J. W.; Olson, S. M.; Howe, T. K.; Stoffela, P. J.; Bartz, J. A. and Bryan, H. H.

1995. Equinox heat-tolerant hybrid tomato. HortScience. Gulf Coast Research

and Education Center, University of Florida, 5007. 60"1 Street East, Bradenton,

FI 34203, USA. 30(3): 647 - 648.

Shaheed, S. M. 1984. Soil of Bangladesh: General Soil Types. Soil Resources

Development Institute (SRDI), Dhaka, Bangladesh, p.3.

Shalaby, G. I.; Imam, M. K.; Naeear, A; Wali, E. A. and Mohamed, M. F.1983. St udies

on combining ability of some tomato cultivars under high temperature conditions.

Assiut. J. Agric. Sci. 14: 35 - 56.

Shashi, K. and Satyanarayana, G. 1986.Breeding tomato for heat tolerance. Veg. Sci. 13

(2): 247 - 249.

Shelby, R. A.; Greenleaf, W. H. and Peterson, C. M. 1978. Comparative floral fertility in

heat tolerant and heat sensitive tomatoes. J. Amer. Sco. Hort. Sci. 103: 778 - 780.

Sidhu, A. S. and Singh, S. 1993. Studies on heterosis and divergence in tomato. Plant

Breeding Abstracts, pp. 64 - 68.

Singh, R. K. and Singh V. K. 1993. Heterosis breeding in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum

Mill.). Annals of Agril. Res. 14 (4): 416 - 420.

Singh, R. K.; Singh G. P. and Mandal, G. 1983. Heterosis in the inter -varietals crosses in

87

tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). In proceeding of National Seminar on the

production Technology of Tomatoes and Chilies. India. 53: 67 - 92.

Sprague, G. F. 1983. Heterosis in maize. Theory and Practices. Page 17. In: Heterosis,

Reappraisal of Theory and Practice. Monographs on Theoretical and Applied

Genetics. Vol. 6. Frankel, R. (ed.). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Stevens, M. A. and Rudich, J. 1978. Genetics potential for overcoming physiological

limitations on adaptability, yield and quality in the tomato. Hor t. Sci. 13: 673 - 678.

Stevens, M. A. 1979. Breeding tomatoes for processing. In: Tropical tomato. R. Cowell

(ed.). Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center, Shanhua, Tainan,

Taiwan, p. 290.

Sugiyama, T.; Iwahori. S. and Takahasi, K. 1966. effect of high temperature on fruit

setting of tomato under cover. Acta Hort. 4: 63 - 69.

Tindall, J. E. and Williams, J. T. 1977. Tropical vegetables and their genetic resources, pp.

28. In: Grubben, G. H. (ed.). IBPGR. Royal Tropical Institute, Amsterdam,

Netherlands.

Villareal, R. L.; Lai, S. H. and Wong, S. H. 1978. Screening for heat tolerance in the genus

Lycopersicon. Hort. Sci. 13: 479 - 481.

Villareal, R. L.; Lai, S. H. 1979. Development of heat tolerant tpmato varieties in the

tropics. In: 1SI

Intl. Symp. Tropical Tomato. W. R. Cowel (ed.). Asian Vegetable

Research and Development Center (AVRDC), Shanhua, Tainan, Taiwan, p. 290.

Went, F. W. 1957. The experimental control of plant growth. Chronica Botanica Co.,

Waltham, Mass. pp. 99 - 114.

Weaver, M. L. and Timm, H. 1988. Influence of temperature and plant water status on

pollen viability in Beans. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 113 (1): 31 - 35.

Xu, D. F.; Wang, A. X. and Zhang, Y. X. 1994. Breeding in new tomato cultivar, Hena 5,

for the summer and autumn seasons. China-Vegetables. Institute of Horticulture,

Henan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Zhengzhou, Henan 450002, China. 2:

30-32.

Yordanov, M. 1983. Heterosis in tomato. Monogr. Theory. Appl. Genet. 6: 189-219.

Younis, M. E. and S. E. Tigani, 1977. Comparat ive effect of growth substances on the

growth, flowering and fruiting of tomato plants. Acta. Agron. Acad. Societ.

Hung., 26: 89-103.

APPENDICES

88

Appendix 1. Monthly mean temperature, rainfall and relative humidity

during the crop period of 2006 at BARI, Gazipur.

Source: Meteorological Department, Gazipur.

Appendix 3. Analysis of variance for the selected heat tolerant tomato varieties under different

plant growth regulator concentration on plant characteristics

Year Month Temperature (°C) Relative humidity (%) Rainfall

(mm) Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum

May 24.50 33.14 77.35 85.45 137

2006 June 25.79 33.25 76.58 84.00 91

July 26.56 31.66 82.45 86.25 215

August 26.85 32.75 82.68 88.00 153

Average 25.92 32.70 79.76 85.92 149

Source of

variation

Mean sum of square

df Days to 50%

flowering

Number of flowers per

cluster

Pollen viability

(%)

Replication 2 22.500 0.909 22.500

Variety (A) 1 2.155 ^ ** 10.162

746.404

Plant growth

regulator (B)

4 6.436 NS

1.597 ** 135.825

Interaction (A

X B)

4 10.890 Ns

1.025 ** 105.128

Error 18 5.833 0.232 5.833

Appendix 2. Analysis of variance for the selected heat tolerant tomato varieties

under different plant growth regulator concentration on floral characteristics

89

Source of

variation

Mean sum of square

Cl I Number of branches/ plant Plant height (cm)

Replication 2 0.233 63.333 NS

Variety (A) 1 0.166 NS

115.052

Plant growth

regulator (B)

4 ** 8.805

* * 216.309

Interaction (A

X B)

4 ** 4.895

142.330

Error 18 0.063 18.889

Appendix 4. Analysis of variance for the selected heat tolerant tomato varieties

under different plant growth regulator concentration on fruit characteristics

90

Appendix 5. Analysis of variance for the selected heat tolerant tomato varieties under different

plant growth regulator concentration on yield contributing characteristics

Source of

variation

Mean sum of square

df Fruit set (%) Fmit

length

(cm)

Fruit

diameter

(cm)

TSS (%)

Replication 2 22.470 0.004 22.500 0.225

Variety (A) 1 31.765 0.029 23.127 NS

** 1.532

Plant growth

regulator (B)

4 ** 66.657

0.774 11.212 0.185

Interaction (A

X B)

4 ** 46.531

0.927 2.069 NS

** 0.275

Error 18 5.837 0.010 5.833 0.058

Source of

variation

Mean sum of square

df Number of Number of Individual fruit

fruits/cluster fruits/plant weight (g)

Replication 2 0.225 3.600 22.500*

Variety (A) 1 ** 3.247

** 142.441

10.443

Plant growth 4 0.853 109.666 201.421

regulator (B)

Interaction 4 0.046 NS

* * 68.129

** 82.978 (A X B)

Error 18 0.058 0.933 5.833

91

ZI

Appendix 6. Analysis of variance for the selected heat

tolerant tomato varieties under different plant growth

regulator concentration on yield contributing characteristics

Source of

variation

Mean sum of square

df Days to 1st

harvest

Yield/plot (g) Yield/plant

(kg)

Yield (t/ha)

Replication 2 57.200 0.900 2250.00 8.100

Variety (A) 1 13.347 ** 90.515

191462.81 ** 1044.654

Plant growth

regulator (B)

4 4.192 NS

27.047 ** 46738.17

** 308.519

Interaction (A

X B)

4 37.773 ** 13.691

21636.608** ** 143.404

Error 18 268.800 0.233 583.333 2.100

93

Appendix 9. Total cost of tomato production per hectare in summer as influence by different

plant growth regulator application

Appendix 9. (Cont’d)

Appendix 7. Labour requirements per hectare for various operations to produce summer tomato

SL.

No.

Heads for use of labour No. of

labours

1. Seed bed and main field preparation 128

2. Making polythene house 68

3. Planting and watering 45

4. Fertilizer and manure application 82

5. Irrigation 45

6. Weeding 85

7. Plant growth regulator and insecticide application 50

8. Harvesting (4 times) 48

9. Other operations 10

Appendix 8. Cost of fertilizer and manure per hectare SL.

No.

Fertilizer and manure Cost (Tk.)a

1. Cowdung 10 ton @ 700 Tk./ton 7000

2. Urea 450 kg @ 10 Tk./kg 4500

3. TSP 250 kg @ 18 Tk./kg 4500

4. MP 159 kg @ 18 Tk./kg 2700 a Calculated on the basis of June 2006 market price with carrying cost

SL.

No.

Category Cost (Tk.)b

1. Labour 561 man required @ 90 Tk./working day 50490

2. Ploughing (3 times) 3000

3. Cost of lease land Tk. 13000 for season (6 months) 6500

4. Cost of Cowdung, Urea, TSP and MP 18700

5. Cost of Polythene, G.I. Pipe, Bamboo Stick, Rope etc. 425000

6. Cost of insecticide and fungicide @ Tk.80/ 50 ml 1630

7. Cost of seedling Tk.300/1000 of each variety 7344

8. Cost of plant growth regulator

ii. Application of 4-CPA at 20 ppm concentration 6800

iii. Application of 4-CPA at 40 ppm concentration 13600

iv. Application of GA3 at 10 ppm concentration 510

v. Application of GA3 at 20 ppm concentration 1020

9. Miscellaneous cost 5% of the total input cost (from 1 - 8)

with

i. Control / no PGR 25633



iv. Application of GA3 at 10 ppm concentration 25 658


10. Total cost (from 1 - 9 ) with






11. Interest on running capital for 6 months (13% of the total

cost) with (from 1-10)






12. Total cost of production (from 1 - 1 1 )

i. In case of without PGR application 573286

ii. In case of 4-CPA application at 20 ppm concentration 580890

iii. In case of 4-CPA application at 40 ppm concentration 588494

iv. In case of GA3 application at 10 ppm concentration 573856

v. In case of GA3 application at 20 ppm concentration 574426 i h

Cost of hormone calculated on the basis of June 2006 market price

effect of plant growth regulator on the growth and …€¦ · cv coefficient of variation kg...

Documents