1Division of Fruit Science, SKUAST-Kashmir, Jammu and Kashmir, India

2Division of Soil Science, SKUAST-Kashmir, Jammu and Kashmir, India

Corresponding Author Email: sheikhmehraj10@gmail.com

DOI : https://doi.org

Keywords

Apple, Clonal rootstocks, hilling media, Root length and Saw dust, rooted layers

Download this article as:

Abstract

The present study was conducted at the experimental field of Division of Fruit Science, SKUAST-Kashmir, Srinagar  on one year old rootstock of various types  viz.,  M9-T337 (S1), M-27(S2), MM-106(S3), P-22(S4),  MM-111(S5) by applying ten hilling materials viz., Vermiculite (T1), Saw dust (T2), FYM (T3),Vermicompost (T4), Vermiculite + Saw dust + Pseudomonas (T5),  + Saw dust + Azotobacter (T6), FYM + Vermicompost + Pseudomonas (T7), FYM + Vermicompost+ Azotobacter (T8), Pseudomonas+ Azotobacter+ Soil (T9), Control(T10) (only soil was used as a hilling material) and two propagation techniques viz.,  mound and trench layering. During this study maximum root length (12.90 cm), root number (7.50), root initiation points (4.71), root fresh weight (8.05) and root dry weight (5.93 g) were recorded with saw dust (T2) hilling material. Moreover, propagation technique P2 (trench layering) showed significant effect over P1 (mound layering) in terms of root length, root number per layer and root initiation points. Therefore, above findings will play an important role in augmenting the quality planting production through various multiplication techniques.

Introduction

Apple (Malus × domestica Borkh.) is the most important fruit crop of J&K, besides plays an important role in the nutritional security of the country [1].  Jammu and Kashmir produces approximately 18 lakh metric tonnes of apple which is about 70 per cent of the production of the apples in India with a productivity of about 11.42 MT/ ha [2] which is very low in comparison to New Zealand (56 MT/ha) and Chile (50MT/ha).This gap could be bridged by creating high density orchards [3], through the use of various clonal root stocks  viz., M-9, M-27, MM-111, MM-106, Merton-793 and P-22. Nowadays, Clonal rootstocks showed an important role in fruit industry to maintain the genetic make-up and thus, produce rootstocks of homogeneous nature [4]. Presently apple growers are focussing on the production of high quality apple in order to increase their high income return which has been plagued due to poor quality, uneven packaging in conventional orcharding [5]. Due to the introduction of the High Density Plantation (HDP), new cultivars, area expansion and re-plantation of old unproductive orchards, the demand for growing these HDP plants has been increased significantly [6]. In this regard, SKUAST-Kashmir has introduced various clonal rootstocks (M9-T337, M-27, MM-106, P-22, MM-111 and Merton-793) from Holland which is under evaluation. So in order to produce maximum number of daughter stocks from the mother stocks, the present experiment was evaluated by using different types of hilling media along with the best propagation technique.

Material and Methods

The present experiment was conducted during 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 at Apple orchard nursery SKUAST-Kashmir. The rootstocks used during the experimental research consist of M9-T337, MM-106, M-27, P-22 and MM-111 and were one year old at the time of planting. These rootstocks were planted at a distance of 90 cm × 45 cm. The one year old mother stocks were headed back to the soil line during first week of March. After 25 days emerging shoots were mounded up with hilling media. The hilling media was subsequently applied at 45 days intervals amounting to the total of 5kg per plant up to the growing season (October). During the experimental trial ten hilling materials were applied viz., Vermiculite (T1),  saw dust (T2), FYM (T3), Vermicompost (T4), Vermiculite + Sawdust + Pseudomonas (T5), vermiculite + Saw dust + Azotobacter (T6), FYM + Vermicompost + Pseudomonas (T7), FYM + Vermicompost + Azotobacter (T8), pseudomonas + Azotobacter + Soil (T9), Control (T10) (only soil was used as a hilling material). These mother stools were managed routinely. For the multiplication of these rootstocks two propagation methods were employed. The details of the treatment combinations are tabulated in the Table 1 which was replicated thrice in RBD (randomized block design). In this experiment root number per layer, root length, root initiation points, root fresh weight and root dry weight were measured [7]. The statistical significance of the data was carried out using OPSTAT [8].

Results and Discussions

it is indicated from the data depicted in table-1 that various hilling media applied during the experimental trial significantly increased root number per layer however maximum root number (7.50)  was recorded with saw dust,  Vermiculite+ Saw dust+ Pseudomonas (7.12) as hilling medium. Among the various rootstocks, maximum root number per layer (7.75) was recorded in MM-111 and less root number per layer (5.45) was recorded in M-27.Interaction between rooting media, rootstocks and propagation methods was found to be significant. The maximum  root number per layer was found in MM-111 (8.97) with Vermiculite+ Saw dust+ Pseudomonas as hilling media under trench layering whereas, less root number per layer (4.07) was recorded in M-27 (S2) with soil as hilling media under mound layering. Further it was studied that propagation technique P2 (trench layering) showed significant effect over P1 (mound layering) in terms of root number per layer 7.02 as compared to 5.98.

 The different rooting media as well as various propagation techniques showed significant effect on the average root length per layer (Table-2). Both MM-111(S5) and MM-106 (S3) showed   maximum root length (11.68 and 10.79 cm respectively) per layer, however M-27 (S2) attained the lowest root length per layer (9.85cm). Among the different rooting media the rootstocks mounded with saw dust produced maximum root length (12.90 cm). Interaction between different rooting media, rootstocks and propagation methods were also found to be significant. MM-111 with saw dust as hilling media under trench layering produced maximum root length per layer (14.59 cm) in comparison to all other treatment combinations. However, minimum root length (6.84 cm) was recorded in M-27 with soil as a hilling material under mound layering.

 The data revealed to root initiation points affected by different hilling media and propagation techniques presented in Table-3. The data indicated that maximum root initiation points (4.71) were recorded with saw dust as rooting media. The minimum root initiation points (2.12) were observed in control. Interaction between rooting media, rootstocks and propagation methods were found non-significant. Among the different clonal rootstocks maximum root initiation points were found in MM-111 (4.69) followed by MM-106 (3.93) and the minimum root initiation points (2.95) were found in M-27.The effect of two propagation techniques viz., mound and trench layering for the production of root initiation points were found to be non-significant.

The data depicted from table 4 and 5 showed that that all the hilling media showed a significant effect on the root fresh (8.05 g) and root dry weight (5.93 g). The maximum root fresh and root dry weight were found maximum under saw dust as a hilling media. During the course of experimental research the interaction between various rootstocks, propagation techniques and different hilling media were found significant.

The increase in root characters/ traits in saw dust may be attributed to be due to excellent aeration, good drainage of water, better water holding capacity better root penetration [9]. Optimum media temperature under saw dust as hilling media increased soil flora and fauna thus improving soil fertility status [10]. Continuous increase in media temperature during the period of investigation results in maximum number of root primordial cells beside activity of root initials which leads to the formation of fibrous roots [11]. The lower media temperature under the soil leads to the reduction and proliferation of the secondary roots [12]. It was also found that the influence of the different rooting media on the growth of root traits is due increase in aeration and greater oxygen diffusion [13-16]. It has also been reported that the effect of various organic hilling media on the various clonal root stocks (M9, M26, P60 and MM106) in Poland during 1996-2000 [17]. It has also been opined that the effect of rooting of Kiwi hardwood cuttings in saw dust, sand and observed that saw dust as good hilling media as compared to sand [18]. They also observed that saw dust showed maximum root initiation points in Kiwi hard wood cutting as compared to other organic substrate. It has also observed that root zone temperature affects root initiation of stem cuttings in plants. Maximum number of root initiation points leads to reduction in the mortality of the plants and if during the transportation few root initiation points are damaged the plant will still survive [19]. So it clearly from the results and discussion that application of various hilling media results in the growth of root traits. Further it is concluded that saw dust results in maximum growth of root length, root number per layer, root fresh, root dry weight and root initiation points

Table 1. Details of treatments for the growth of various apple clonal rootstocks

TreatmentMediaRatio
   
T1Vermiculite100%
T2                        Saw dust100%
T3FYM100%
T4Vermicompost100%
T5Vermiculite+ Saw dust+ Pseudomonas1:1
T6Vermiculite + Saw dust +Azotobacter1:1
T7FYM + Vermicompost + Pseudomonas1:1
T8FYM + Vermicompost+ Azotobacter
T9Pseudomonas+Azotobacter + Soil100%
T10Control ( soil as a hilling media )

Table 2.  Influence of various hilling media, propagation methods and their interaction on average root length (cm) of daughter stocks from the motherstock.

PropagationP1; Mound Layering P2; Trench Layering   
Rootstock   MediaS1S2S3S4S5Sub meanS1S2S3S4S5Sub meanMedia meanRoot stock mean
T110.5010.1710.8410.2512.1710.7911.5011.1711.8411.2513.1711.7911.29S1=10.39
T212.3911.6712.5211.8413.5912.4013.3912.6713.5212.8414.5913.4012.90S2=9.85
T39.509.3410.549.4011.179.9910.5010.3410.5810.4012.1710.8010.39S3=10.79
T410.0810.0010.839.8411.8310.5211.0810.8411.8311.0012.8311.5211.02S4=10.09
T511.8410.7012.1710.8412.7811.6712.8411.7013.1711.8413.7812.6712.17S5=11.68
T610.8010.5011.5010.6712.5011.1911.8011.5012.5011.6713.5012.1911.69 
T7  9.308.509.588.6710.679.3410.309.5010.549.6711.6710.349.84 
T88.678.179.208.509.508.819.679.1710.209.5010.509.819.31 
T98.177.349.178.179.348.449.178.3410.179.1710.349.448.94 
T107.086.847.837.008.207.568.787.848.838.089.208.568.06 
Mean9.899.3510.349.5911.1810.0710.8910.3511.2410.5912.1811.0510.56 

S1; M-9T337     S2; M-27     S3; MM-106     S4; P-22      S5; MM-111

C.D(p≤0.05)

            Media (M):0.52;M×P:0.73 
            Rootstock (S):0.36;M×S:1.16 
            Propagation (P):NS;P×S:M×P×S:   0.59 

Table 3.  Influence of various hilling media, propagation methods and their interaction on average root number per layer of daughter stock from the mother stock

PropagationP1; Mound LayeringSubP2; Trench Layering   
Rootstock     MediaS1S2S3S4S5MeanS1S2S3S4S5Sub mean  Media mean  Root stock mean
  
T16.255.306.385.267.476.137.306.347.726.268.517.236.68S1=6.48
T26.905.567.386.828.226.987.956.608.427.929.248.037.50S2=5.45
T36.185.206.285.107.266.007.206.227.356.208.277.056.53S3=6.86
T46.205.286.305.207.406.087.256.307.436.308.437.146.61S4=5.94
T5  6.605.456.996.017.936.607.636.478.107.088.977.657.12S5=7.75
T6  6.485.396.675.877.506.387.526.427.726.938.547.436.90 
T7  5.814.486.275.087.175.766.875.377.266.108.216.766.26 
T8  5.194.356.215.056.505.466.275.307.256.097.546.495.98 
T95.104.286.014.906.455.356.215.526.625.967.506.365.86 
T10 Control4.804.075.014.786.435.025.855.076.065.827.426.045.53 
Mean5.954.946.345.417.245.987.015.967.396.478.277.026.50 

S1; M9-T337     S2; M-27     S3; MM-106     S4; P-22     S5; MM-111

                 C.D (p≤0.05)

            Media (M):0.18;M×P:0.26
            Rootstock (S):0.13;M×S:0.41
            Propagation (P):0.83;P×S:0.18

   M×P×S                      :             0.59

Table 4.  Influence of various hilling media, propagation methods and their interaction on root initiation points of daughter stock from the mother stock.

PropagationP1; Mound LayeringSubP2; Trench Layering   
Rootstock   MediaS1S2S3S4S5MeanS1S2S3S4S5Sub MeanMedia MeanRootstock  Mean
  
T13.603.154.183.504.603.814.493.504.684.105.544.464.13S1=3.71
T24.303.344.454.504.984.315.194.205.414.835.945.114.71S2=2.95
T33.153.073.723.004.253.444.043.004.344.035.284.143.79S3=3.93
T43.233.103.883.344.433.604.123.174.384.055.394.223.91S4=3.43
T54.203.254.424.174.804.175.094.005.144.345.764.874.52S5=4.69
T63.843.184.383.834.754.004.833.674.844.305.714.674.33 
T73.112.783.212.344.203.134.003.004.173.745.214.023.58 
T83.102.563.102.174.183.023.992.674.003.525.143.863.44 
T92.881.672.892.003.322.553.442.343.703.305.143.583.07 
T101.361.171.431.262.981.622.142.002.702.304.022.622.12 
Mean3.282.733.563.014.253.364.143.194.303.855.314.163.76 

S1; M9-T337    S2;M-27    S3; MM-106     S4; P-22     S5; MM-111

     C.D(p≤0.05)

Media (M):0.36;M×P:NS
Rootstock (S):NS;M×S:NS
Propagation (P):NS;P×S:0.36
    M×P×S:NS
                                                             

Table – 5:- Influence of various hilling media, propagation methods and their interaction on root fresh weight (g) of daughter stocks from the mother stock

PropagationP1; Mound Layering P2; Trench Layering   
Rootstock   MediaS1S2S3S4S5Sub meanS1S2S3S4S5Sub mean  Media Mean  Rootstock Mean
  
T110.5010.1710.8410.2512.1710.7911.5011.1711.8411.2513.1711.7911.29S1=10.39
T212.3911.6712.5211.8413.5912.4013.3912.6713.5212.8414.5913.4012.90S2=9.85
T39.509.3410.549.4011.179.9910.5010.3410.5810.4012.1710.8010.39S3=10.79
T410.0810.0010.839.8411.8310.5211.0810.8411.8311.0012.8311.5211.02S4=10.09
T511.8410.7012.1710.8412.7811.6712.8411.7013.1711.8413.7812.6712.17S5=11.68
T610.8010.5011.5010.6712.5011.1911.8011.5012.5011.6713.5012.1911.69 
T79.308.509.588.6710.679.3410.309.5010.549.6711.6710.349.84 
T88.678.179.208.509.508.819.679.1710.209.5010.509.819.31 
T98.177.349.178.179.348.449.178.3410.179.1710.349.448.94 
T107.086.847.837.008.207.568.787.848.838.089.208.568.06 
Mean9.899.3510.349.5911.1810.0710.8910.3511.2410.5912.1811.0510.56 

S1; M9-T337     S2; M-27     S3; MM-106     S4; P-22     S5; MM-106

     C.D (p≤0.05)

Media (M):0.38;M×P:0.73
Rootstock (S):0.26;M×S:0.85
Propagation (P):0.17;P×S:0.38
    M×P×S:1.20

Table 6.  Influence of various hilling media, propagation methods and their interaction on dry root weight (g) of daughter stocks from the mother stocks

PropagationP1; Mound Layering P2; Trench Layering   
Rootstock     MediaS1S2S3S4S5Sub MeanS1S2S3S4S5Sub Mean  Media Mean  Rootstock Mean
  
T14.293.454.643.675.094.234.523.584.643.854.734.264.25S1=4.08
T26.313.786.156.107.385.945.264.856.566.026.865.915.93S2=3.39
T34.053.323.713.564.283.783.983.524.393.734.554.033.91S3=4.28
T44.073.434.283.654.353.964.453.544.493.854.634.194.07S4=3.86
T55.583.716.014.796.435.305.334.015.865.216.315.345.32S5=4.37
T64.733.625.323.776.074.704.883.625.093.855.744.644.67 
T72.752.663.603.464.183.334.203.383.623.464.323.803.56 
T82.502.452.882.483.442.753.302.753.313.393.423.232.99 
T92.452.342.822.313.422.673.092.703.252.833.363.052.86 
T102.001.892.451.903.172.352.561.743.132.053.302.502.43 
Mean3.943.074.133.794.553.904.273.374.403.824.644.104.00 

S1; M-9 T337      S2; M-27     S3; MM-106     S4; P-22     S5;;MM-111

     C.D(p≤0.05)

Media (M):0.16;M×P:0.23
Rootstock (S):0.11;M×S:0.37
Propagation (P):0.17;P×S:0.52
    M×P×S:0.50


Author’s contribution

Conceptualization and designing of the research experiment (Sheikh Mehraj, A.H.  Pandit), Data collection and analysis (Sheikh Mehraj, Mohammed Tauseef Ali, Nowsheen Nazir), Preparation of the manuscript (Shaziya Hassan and S.A Wani),

Declaration

            The authors do not have any conflict of interest.

References

[1]. Juniper, B. E., Watkins, R., & Harris, S. A. (1996, September). The origin of the apple. In Eucarpia Symposium on Fruit Breeding and Genetics 484 (pp. 27-34).

[2]. Bharti, V., Sarma, K., Kumar, T., Singh, J., & Ahirwal, S. K. (2022). Aquaculture: To Achieve Economic Development in Bihar, India-A Review. International Journal of Bio-Resource & Stress Management13(9).

[3]. Goswami, A. K., Jai, P., & Singh, A. K. (2014). High density planting system in tropical fruits. HortFlora Research Spectrum3(3), 298-300.

[4]. Di Vaio, C., Cirillo, C., Buccheri, M., & Limongelli, F. (2009). Effect of interstock (M. 9 and M. 27) on vegetative growth and yield of apple trees (cv “Annurca”). Scientia Horticulturae119(3), 270-274.

[5]. Lee, J. S., & Yoon, T. M. (2001). Some Chip Budding Techniques for Improving the Nursery Performances in Apple Trees. Horticultural Science & Technology19(3), 352-357.

[6]. Seemüller, E., Moll, E., & Schneider, B. (2008). Apple proliferation resistance of Malus sieboldii-based rootstocks in comparison to rootstocks derived from other Malus species. European Journal of Plant Pathology121(2), 109-119.

[7]. Hartmann, H. T., Kester, D. E., Davies, F. T., & Geneve, R. L. (1997). Plant propagation: principles and practices (No. Ed. 6). Prentice-Hall Inc.

[8]. Sheoran, O. P., Tonk, D. S., Kaushik, L. S., Hasija, R. C., & Pannu, R. S. (1998). Statistical Software Package for Agricultural Research.

[9]. Jacobs, F.D., Rose. R., Diane, l. Haase. and Paul. D.M. 2003 Influence of nursery soil amendments on water relations, root architectural development, and field   performance of Douglas-fir transplants. New Forests 26: 263–277

[10]. Chhukit,K. 2009. Studies on vegetative propagation of kiwifruit (ActinidiadeliciosaChev.)M.Sc.Thesis, Department of Fruit science. Dr. Y S Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan-173230 (HP).

[11]. Repo, T., Leinonen, I., Ryyppö, A., & Finér, L. (2004). The effect of soil temperature on the bud phenology, chlorophyll fluorescence, carbohydrate content and cold hardiness of Norway spruce seedlings. Physiologia Plantarum121(1), 93-100.

[12]. Lahti, M., Aphalo, P. J., Finér, L., Lehto, T., Leinonen, I., Mannerkoski, H., & Ryyppö, A. (2002). Soil temperature, gas exchange and nitrogen status of 5-year-old Norway spruce seedlings. Tree physiology22(18), 1311-1316.

[13]. Chow, P. N., Grant, C. A., Hinshalwood, A. M., & Simundsson, E. (2018). Adjuvants For Agrochemicals: A Selected Bibliography Of World Literature In The English Language. In Adjuvants and Agrochemicals (pp. 171-213). CRC Press.

[14].Yang, S. K, Choi, K. J., Kim W. S. and Kim, S. C. 1999. Effect of culture media on rooting and      root growth of lateral shoots of cutting in cherry tomato.  Korean J. Hortic. Sci. Technol40(3): 294-296

[15]. Ramesh, C. 1999. Clonal propagation of some Malling and Malling Merton apple rootstocks through stool layering. M.Sc. Thesis. Department of Fruit science. Dr. Y S Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan-173230 (HP)

[16]. Kopytowski, J. 2001. Effect of different substrates on rootage of shoots in mother plantation of selected apple clones. Sodininkyste ir Darzininkyste20 (2): 155-159.

[17]. Kishore, D. K., Pramanick, K. K., & Sharma, Y. P. (2001). Standardization of kiwifruit (Actinidiachinensis var. delicosa) propagation through hardwood cuttings. Journal of Applied Horticulture3(2), 113-114.

[18]. Dawson, I. A., & King, R. W. (1994). Propagation of some woody Australian plants from cuttings. Australian journal of experimental agriculture34(8), 1225-1231.

[19]. Tiwary, D. K., & Hasan, A. (1999). Leaf nutrient and chlorophyll content in banana(Musa AAA) under the influence of Azotobacter and Azospirillum inoculation. Environment and Ecology17(2), 346-350.

Similar Posts