Meadow orchrad in_guava

100 %
0 %
Information about Meadow orchrad in_guava

Published on June 28, 2016

Author: MominSaeed1

Source: slideshare.net

1. 2

2. INTRODUCTION  Guava is an important fruit crop in tropical and subtropical regions of the country due to the hardy nature of its tree and prolific bearing even in marginal lands.  Its cultivation requires little care and inputs. But, of late, this crop has exhibited a paradigm shift in the production system, from subsistence farming to commercial production. 3

3. 4 Major guava producing country in world

4. 5 Major guava growing states in India

5. 6 Production share of Guava in India (Anonymous, 2013)

6. Country wise share of export of guava from India 7 (Anonymous, 2013)

7. Strength  The country is endowed with climatic condition for large cultivation.  Number of cultivars and their adoption in different agro climatic condition make the guava produce available.  Network research infrastructure to support the development.  Different season of availability of guava crop.  Changing dietary habit with rise in income would need more guava produce. 8

8. Weakness 9  Inadequate database in guava.  Inadequate supply of quality plant material of improved cultivars.  Inadequate trained human resource for technology dissemination.  High incidence of pest and guava wilt (most destructive disease)  Lack of adoption of improved technology.

9. Why Meadow Orcharding ?  The traditional system of cultivation has often posed problems in attaining desired levels of productivity due to large tree canopy hence a need arose to improve the existing production system, besides increasing its productivity.  Currently, there is a worldwide trend to plant fruit trees at high density to control tree size and maintain desired architecture for better light interception and ease in operations such as pruning, pest control and harvesting. Meadow Orcharding enhances production and quality of fruits. 10

10. Non intensive, age old planting system, trees planted at wide spacing, accommodating about 100-250 plants/ha. Less input and care intensive, holds popularity among growers. Output from orchard during early 5-10 years is less. Pruning done at minimal level, orchard raised so as to favour maximum development of trees. . Trees acquire commercial production potential after 7-10 year of planting. 1) Low density planting: Different types of planting 11

11. Highly minimized distance covering 250-500 plants/ha. Lead in output reliable growers to produce amenable fruit crops like pomegranate, citrus, guava, papaya, banana, etc. Proper pruning undertaken to manage tree in desirable shape. More care intensive, labour requirement is more, obtained yield is also more. 2) Medium density planting Different types of planting 12

12. Very condensing planting with 500-5000 plants/ha. Required heavy pruning. Yield as well as expenses per unit area is high. Ultra-high density:– 2,000-5,000 plants/ha. Medium high density:– 500-1,000 plants/ha. Optimum high density:– 1,000-2,000 plants/ha. 3) High density planting Different types of planting 13

13. Meadow-grassland, also known as Ultra-high density planting. Heavy use of growth regulators as well as pruning Plants intended to produce yield after 2 years age. 5,000-1, 00,000 plants/ha in order to maintain tree form Sever top pruning is practiced similar to mowing of grassland. 4) Meadow Orchard Different types of planting 14

14. Planting system Spacing (meter) Density of plant /ha Low density 8×8 156 Medium density 6×6 277 High density 3×3 1111 Ultra-High density 3×1.5 2222 Meadow Orcharding 2×1 5000 Table 1. Different spacing and density of plants/ha of guava 15

15. 16CISH, Lucknow

16. The Meadow Orchard is a modern method of fruit cultivation. There is a shift in farmers' perception from production to productivity and profitability. Achieved through high density planting. Concept of Meadow Orchard 17

17. Recently, there is a trend to plant fruit trees at closer spacing leading to high density or meadow orchard. Higher and quality production is achieved from densely planted orchards through judicious canopy management and adoption of suitable tree training systems. A comparison between meadow orchard system and the traditional system of fruit growing is necessary to evaluate the potentiality of this technique. Concept of Meadow Orchard 18

18. Attributes Traditional system Meadow system Bearing After two years From first year Production Average yield is 12-20 t ha-1 Average yield is 40-60 t ha-1 Management Difficult to manage due to large tree size Easy to manage due to small tree size Labour requirement Requires more labour Requires less labour Production cost Higher cost of production Lower cost of production Quality Large canopy, poor sunlight penetration and poor quality fruits Small canopy better air and sunlight penetration ,minimum disease incidence and high quality fruit with good colour development. 19 Table 2. Comparison between traditional system and meadow orchard system of guava Singh (2010)CISH, Lucknow

19. Maximum fruiting branches. Minimum structural branches. Better utilization of solar radiation. Increase the photosynthetic efficiency. Due to the dwarf tree minimum operation cost. More trees per unit area leading to higher income. Advantage of Meadow Orcharding 20

20. Component for meadow orchard system 21 Singh (2013)CISH, Lucknow  Dwarf  Suitable to market  Varieties  Root stock  Plant utilize maximum light  Suitable to guava  well fertile  Near to source  Water  INM  IPM  True to type  Healthy  Free from disease & pest  Plant trained for making dwarf canopy

21. 22 Establishing Meadow Orchard Meadow Orchard System is a new concept of guava planting which has been developed for the first time in India at Central Institute for Subtropical Horticulture , Lucknow Planting The planting is done at 2.0 m (row to row) x 1.0 m (plant to plant), which gives a density of 5000 plants ha-1.

22. 23 First pruning  The tree are pruned and trained three time in a year to allow maximum production of quality fruit during the first year.  A single trunk tree with no interfering branches up to 30-40 cm from the ground level is desirable to make dwarf tree architecture  After a period of 1-2 month of planting all the tree are topped at a uniform height of 30-40 cm from the ground level initiation of new growth below the cut and no side shoot or branch should remain after topping.  This is done to make a single trunk straight up to 40 cm height.

23. 24 First pruning Growth after first pruning Topping at height of 30 to 40 cm from the ground level

24. 25 Second pruning  After 15-20 days of topping new shoot emerge. In general, 3-4 shoot are retained from below the cut point after topping .  As shoot mature generally after a period of 3-4 month, they are reduced by 50 percent of their total length so that new shoot emerge below the cut Point.  This is done to attain the desirable tree canopy architecture and strong frame work.

25. 26 Second pruning CISH, Lucknow

26. 27 Third pruning  The emerged shoot are allow to grow for 3-4 month before they are again pruned by 50 per cent. After pruning, new shoot emerge on which flowering take place. It is emphasized that shoot pruning is done thrice a year. This leads to desired canopy development. Though fruiting starts in the same year. Pruning is continued so that plants remain dwarf. After a year, pruning operation is done especially in May-June, September- October and January-February.

27. 28 Third pruning CISH, Lucknow

28. Initiation of new shoot and flowering after shoot pruning 29CISH, Lucknow

29. Re-pruning of shoot (above the fruiting point) of shoot for initiation of new shoot 30CISH, Lucknow

30. New shoot emerge after re-pruning and flowering take place 31CISH, Lucknow

31. Pruned tree is heavily Fruiting 32CISH, Lucknow

32. 33 Overview of meadow orchard CISH, Lucknow

33. 34

34. Continue shoot pruning (50%) on tree every year Shoot initiate and flowering take place Further Prune the shoot after 3-4 month of emergence (cutting back to 50% of their total length) Multiple shoot emerge below the cut end Prune the shoot after 3-4 month of emergence (cutting back to 50% of their total length) Retain 3 to 4 shoot only New shoot emerge below the cut surface Top tree height of 30-40 cm from the ground level after 1-2 month of planting Field planting (2×1m) Meadow Orcharding 35 Singh (2008)CISH, Lucknow

35. 36 Singh (2008)CISH, Lucknow Continue..

36. 37 Back pruning 50 per cent removal of entire plantCISH, Lucknow

37. 38 Growth pattern and fruiting under meadow orchard 1st year 2nd year CISH, Lucknow

38. 39 Growth pattern and fruiting under meadow orchard 3rd year 4th year CISH, Lucknow

39. 40

40. 41

41. Varieties No of new shoot Flowering (%) Fruit set (%) Yield (kg/plant) Sardar 18.5 86.4 54.3 7.23 Sweta 17.0 44.0 49.1 8.14 CISH-G-5 15.0 51.4 49.7 8.39 CISH-G-6 14.4 57.8 51.0 7.11 Lalit 13.6 72.4 48.7 8.51 Allahabad Safeda 13.4 64.4 48.4 7.16 Hybrid seedling 10.6 37.6 54.4 4.20 CD(0.05) 2.33 3.10 3.14 1.3 42 Table 3. Influence of topping hedging on no of new shoot, flowering, fruit set and yield of different varieties of guava under meadow orchard. Singh (2011)CISH, Lucknow

42. Treatment Fruit Weight (g) Fruit length (cm) Fruit width (cm) TSS ̊ Brix Acidity (%) Ascorbic acid(mg 100/g) Total sugar (%) Sardar 165.0 7.2 7.0 11.3 0.31 162.6 8.2 Sweta 142.6 6.9 6.9 12.0 0.29 180.0 8.3 CISH-G-5 126.0 6.2 6.3 10.90 0.34 169.3 8.6 CISH-G-6 138.5 6.8 6.9 12.1 0.27 165.0 8.4 Lalit 113.0 5.5 7.2 11.4 0.31 171.3 8.4 Allahabad Safeda 150.0 6.8 6.7 9.9 0.34 169.3 7.5 Hybrid seedling 91.0 4.9 4.6 10.0 0.34 189.2 7.4 CD (0.05) 2.92 0.38 0.22 0.78 0.05 11.03 0.37 43 Table 4. Influence of topping and hedging on fruit quality of different varieties under meadow orchard. Singh (2011)CISH, Lucknow

43. 44CISH, Lucknow

44. 45

45. Densities 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year 6th Year 7th Year 1.5×3.0 m 26.0 38.0 47.0 52.0 55.0 3.0×3.0 m 18.0 26.0 30.0 35.0 38.0 6.0×3.0 m 11.0 17.0 24.0 28.0 31.0 6.0×6.0 m 6.0 12.0 15.0 19.0 27.0 2.0×1.0 m 13.0 25.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 46 Singh (2008) Table 5. Guava yield obtained under different densities (tonnes/ha). CISH, Lucknow

46. 47 Spacing(m) Cost Benefit Ratio 1st year 2nd year 3rd year 4th year 5th year 6th year 7th year 2.0 x 1.0 2.68 3.38 3.44 3.67 3.0 x 1.5 1.56 1.72 1.95 2.16 2.34 3.0 x 3.0 1.79 1.89 1.96 2.02 2.13 6.0 x 3.0 1.18 1.46 1.86 1.88 2.02 CISH, Lucknow Singh (2008) Table 6. Economic analysis of B:C ratio of one hectare at different spaced planting. 47

47. Year Total expenditure Production (tonne) Gross return Net income Cost benefit ratio 1st 161183 13 78000 0 0 2nd 40711 25 150000 109289 2.86 3rd 54686 40 240000 185314 3.38 4th 67507 50 300000 232493 3.44 5th 76945 60 360000 283055 3.67 Table 7. Economic analysis of establishment, maintaining, and return from one hectare meadow orchard spaced at 2×1 m (5000 plant ha-1) CISH, Lucknow Singh (2008)48

48. 49

49. Treatment Number of flowers shoot-1 Fruit set (%) Fruit retention (%) 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 I0 (no pruning ) 35.47 41.67 42.02 44.03 41.09 43.22 I1(pruning of 25% previous season growth) 47.53 54.33 42.42 44.37 41.50 43.39 I2 (pruning of 50% previous season growth) 42.73 49.20 43.68 45.06 42.25 44.60 I3(pruning of 75% previous season growth) 37.12 43.67 44.51 46.43 42.99 46.09 SEm ± 0.757 0.866 1.053 0.529 0.757 0.388 CD 5% 2.136 2.480 3.015 1.514 2.169 1.110 Table 8. Effect of pruning intensity on number of flowers shoot-1 ,fruit set and fruit retention in guava under meadow orchard. 50MPUAT, Udaipur Pilania Shalini (2009)

50. Table 9. Effect of pruning intensity on number of fruit and fruit yield (q/ha) in guava under meadow orchard. Treatment Number of fruits /plant Yield (kg/plant) Yield (q/ha) 2007 2008 Pooled Pooled I0 (no pruning ) 40.0 52.0 4.18 240.48 I1(pruning of 25% previous season growth) 31.80 41.20 4.68 254.26 I2 (pruning of 50% previous season growth) 37.20 45.60 3.13 256.27 I3(pruning of 75% previous season growth) 40.87 51.0 4.94 275.71 SEm ± 0.349 0.137 0.003 0.006 CD 5% 0.781 0.349 0.009 0.044 51MPUAT, Udaipur Pilania Shalini (2009)

51. Treatment Fruit diameter (polar) (cm) Average fruit weight (g) Ascorbic acid (mg 100 g-1 pulp) Total sugar (%) Pooled Pooled Pooled 2007 2008 I0 (no pruning ) 4.45 101.36 214.83 10.68 14.827 I1(pruning of 25% previous season growth) 4.57 106.15 218.01 10.78 14.95 I2 (pruning of 50% previous season growth) 4.86 121.83 222.20 11.27 15.63 I3(pruning of 75% previous season growth) 4.93 127.79 227.48 11.03 15.30 SEm ± 0.010 0.746 0.769 0.0124 0.0172 CD 5% 0.029 2.120 2.166 0.036 0.049 Table 10. Effect of pruning intensity on fruit diameter, average fruit weight, ascorbic acid and total sugar in guava under meadow orchard. 52MPUAT, Udaipur Pilania Shalini (2009)

52. Table 11. Effect of pruning intensity on TSS , acidity, average pulp weight and pulp: seed ratio in guava under meadow orchard. Treatment TSS (%) Acidity (%) Average pulp weight (g) Pulp: seed ratio Pooled Pooled Pooled 2007 2008 I0 (no pruning ) 14.53 0.48 96.73 18.72 24.84 I1(pruning of 25% previous season growth) 14.66 0.50 101.53 20.32 25.11 I2 (pruning of 50% previous season growth) 15.32 0.43 117.93 28.39 31.68 I3(pruning of 75% previous season growth) 15.00 0.43 123.84 29.61 33.61 SEm ± 0.012 0.006 0.741 0.369 0.576 CD 5% 0.034 0.071 2.087 1.056 1.651 53MPUAT, Udaipur Pilania Shalini (2009)

53. 54 Treatment No of flowers/plant Summer Season Rainy Season Winter Season 2009- 2010 2010- 2011 2009- 2010 2010- 2011 2009- 2010 2010- 2011 T1 104.44 45.00 97.31 56.63 14.25 48.75 T2 72.85 22.42 90.59 28.65 17.63 32.76 T3 74.60 25.69 102.42 23.39 18.39 32.86 T4 93.67 21.74 101.99 25.78 11.26 28.06 T5 85.63 15.85 100.35 14.56 7.72 18.42 T6 93.38 15.75 99.94 33.25 20.13 33.88 SEm 15.40 8.28 20.27 13.55 3.40 7.85 CD at 5% NS NS NS NS 8.26 NS Ranchi, Jharkhand Maheta Sarita et al. (2013) Table 12. Effect of pruning on no of flower plant -1 of different season crop of guava cv. Sardar. T1 No pruning T2 80% pruning in May T3 60% pruning in May T4 80% pruning in October T5 60% pruning in October T6 Pruning at three time in year 54

54. Treatment Yield (t/ha) Summer Season Rainy Season Winter Season Total yield 2009- 2010 2010- 2011 2009- 2010 2010- 2011 2009- 2010 2010- 2011 2009- 2010 2010- 2011 T1 1.76 2.92 13.58 3.29 6.92 20.06 25.76 28.26 T2 1.56 5.01 12.71 2.91 10.12 22.56 24.39 30.48 T3 1.34 4.09 9.21 3.07 10.29 20.58 20.83 27.73 T4 1.69 5.60 17.56 4.61 6.48 12.11 25.73 22.32 T5 1.37 3.55 16.86 3.18 5.62 9.25 23.85 15.98 T6 3.73 9.07 16.48 4.92 5.03 23.26 34.88 37.24 SEm 0.61 1.26 1.26 0.90 0.46 1.26 2.53 1.82 CD at 5% 1.49 3.06 3.95 NS 1.13 3.06 6.14 4.43 Table 13. Effect of pruning on yield of different season crop of guava cv. Sardar. T1 No pruning T2 80% pruning in May T3 60% pruning in May T4 80% pruning in October T5 60% pruning in October T6 Pruning at three time in year 55Ranchi, Jharkhand Maheta Sarita et al. (2013)

55. Treatment Average fruit weight (g) Summer Season Rainy Season Winter Season 2009- 2010 2010- 2011 2009- 2010 2010- 2011 2009- 2010 2010- 2011 T1 119.76 102.06 113.72 99.22 136.68 108.25 T2 130.51 108.82 117.50 107.12 157.66 122.32 T3 131.85 110.02 119.32 105.36 142.03 119.45 T4 128.59 103.36 120.21 110.20 153.57 129.94 T5 131.38 106.77 118.40 115.23 150.74 130.01 T6 135.15 117.06 117.21 105.03 106.68 110.60 SEm 4.72 7.72 2.54 6.07 8.17 3.72 CD at 5% NS NS NS NS 19.86 9.04 Table 14. Effect of pruning on average fruit weight of different season crop of guava cv. Sardar. T1 No pruning T2 80% pruning in May T3 60% pruning in May T4 80% pruning in October T5 60% pruning in October T6 Pruning at three time in year 56Ranchi, Jharkhand Maheta Sarita et al. (2013)

56. 57

57. 58 Varieties No of new shoots % Flowering % Fruit Set Yield (kg/plant) Sardar 13.5 90.5 56.3 7.38 Sweta 18.4 50.3 54.2 8.46 CISH-G-5 16.3 52.0 49.1 8.53 CISH-G-6 14.4 57.8 51.0 7.34 Lalit 11.7 73.0 50.4 8.60 Allahabad Safeda 13.6 73.2 44.4 7.66 Hybrid seedling 12.5 46.4 54.3 6.14 CD(0.05) 2.33 3.10 3.14 1.3 58 Table 15. Influence of topping, hedging with black plastic mulch on flowering and yield of different varieties of guava under meadow orchard. Singh (2011)CISH, Lucknow

58. Treatment Fruit Weight (g) Fruit length (cm) Fruit width (cm) TSS ̊Brix Acidity (%) Ascorbic acid(mg 100/g) Total sugar (%) Sardar 187.0 7.6 7.3 13.4 0.26 166.6 9.3 Sweta 167.3 7.2 7.4 15.2 0.22 191.6 8.4 CISH-G-5 140.0 6.9 6.5 13.9 0.25 187.6 8.9 CISH-G-6 157.0 7.3 7.4 13.0 0.29 193.2 9.1 Lalit 140.0 7.4 7.3 12.9 0.29 194.3 9.0 Allahabad Safeda 169.0 7.7 7.5 12.0 0.29 181.3 8.0 Hybrid seedling 97.6 5.1 4.8 11.6 0.31 194.4 8.1 CD(0.05) 2.92 0.38 0.22 0.78 0.05 11.03 0.37 Table 16. Influence of topping and hedging with black plastic mulch on fruit quality of different variety under meadow orchard. 59 Singh (2011)CISH, Lucknow

59. Treatment No. of new shoot Flowering shoot (%) Fruit set(%) Yield (t/ha) Black mulch 13.1 78.0 63.0 63.5 Banana leaf mulch 13.1 77.5 62.7 62.5 Paddy straw 13.5 73.5 63.9 62.0 Grass mulch 13.2 72.6 63.0 62.0 Control (No-mulch) 12.7 70.6 61.1 60.0 CD (0.05) 2.94 4.09 1.79 2.23 60 Singh (2009) Table 17. Flowering, fruit set and yield in relation to different mulch under meadow orchard. CISH, Lucknow

60. Treatment Fruit weight (g) Fruit length (cm) Fruit diameter (cm) TSS 0Brix Ascorbic acid (mg/100g pulp) Acidity (%) Total sugar (%) Black mulch 235.0 7.1 6.97 13.0 176.8 0.32 9.3 Banana leaf mulch 250.0 7.9 7.20 12.8 177.7 0.34 6.9 Paddy straw 225.0 6.7 7.20 12.0 166.8 0.34 6.7 Grass mulch 220.0 6.0 6.90 12.0 175.8 0.33 7.8 Control (No-mulch) 215.0 6.0 6.06 11.7 162.2 0.35 6.7 CD (0.05) 31.44 1.72 1.06 1.12 15.27 0.025 2.25 Singh (2009) Table 18. Response of different mulches on fruit quality under meadow orchard. CISH, Lucknow 61

61. Conclusion 62  India is the largest producer of guava in the world but the productivity is very less as compared to developed countries because of the absence of improved production and protection technologies.  Meadow orchard planting system is one of the improved technologies with use of improved cultivars, cultural practices like canopy management and mulching leads to revolutionize the guava industry by enhancing productivity coupled with reduction of production cost along with best quality fruits.  Thus, it is clear that farmers should have to adopt this technology for improving its productivity.

Add a comment

Related pages

Meadow orchrad in guava | Momin Saeed - Academia.edu

2 INTRODUCTION Guava is an important fruit crop in tropical and subtropical regions of the country due to the hardy nature of its tree and ...
Read more

63517670 Meadow orchrad in_guava - ewjd.info

63517670 Meadow orchrad in_guava ... PDF Description : guava is an important fruit crop in tropical and subtropical regions of the country due to the hardy ...
Read more

Meadow orchrad in guava | Nafees Nursery

Tag Archives: Meadow orchrad in guava FRUIT PLANT , TIMBER PLANT , TIMBER PLANT , TOP 10 FRUIT PLANT NURSERY , NURSERY PLANT , LIVE PLANT SUPPLIER ,FRUIT ...
Read more

#Tags meadow orchrad in guava - ewjd.info

I need a hardware package and instructions for my mainstays patio furniture set. It is the oakmont meadows 7 piece set
Read more

meadow orchard in guava | Nafees Nursery

Search for: Tag Archives: meadow orchard in guava
Read more

Guava meadow orchard: effect of ultra-high density ...

Guava meadow orchard: effect of ultra-high density plantings and growth regulators on growth, flowering and fruiting.
Read more

Indian Journals

Meadow orchard under mulching with polyethylene film can be extremely productive (> 43.0 tonns/ha) after 3 years of planting over the control.] Top. Keywords.
Read more

Central Institute for Subtropical Horticulture

Ultra-high density planting system in guava : A ‘Meadow Orcharding’ system; very high productivity with superior fruit quality.
Read more

www.midh.gov.in

www.midh.gov.in
Read more