B. Yield parameter
2) TSS%
4.9 Total soluble solid (TSS)
TSS of different sweet potato varieties showed significant differences (Figure 10 and Appendix VII). The highest TSS was observed in Kokei (14.21 %). On the other hand, the lowest TSS of tuber was observed in V2 (11.84 %). It has been reported that sucrose is the most abundant sugar in raw sweet potatoes with smaller amount of glucose and fructose (Bouwkamp, 1985). These results correlate with the findings by Chattopadhyay et al. (2006).
TSS of different sweet potato varieties showed significant differences at different levels of fertilizer application (Figure 11 and Appendix VII). The highest TSS was observed in Maruhisa dose (Chemical fertilizer + Improved compost) (13.49 %). On the other hand, the lowest TSS of tuber was observed in Control (T0) (13.45 %).
Interaction effect of TSS of different sweet potato varieties and fertilizer dose showed significant differences (Table 6 and Appendix VII). The highest TSS was observed in the combination of Naruto-kintoki (14.26 %) in control
33.5 34 34.5 35 35.5 36 36.5 37 37.5 38
T0 T1 T2
Fertilizer doses
Dry weight
39
treatment which was followed by Naruto-kintoki when applied in BARI recommended dose (14.23 %). Statistically similar results also found in fewer combination. On the other hand, the lowest TSS was observed in Annoh- Kogane when applied BARI recommended doge (11.56 %).
Figure 10. Total soluble solid of 4 sweet potato varieties
V1: Annoh-Beni, V2: Annoh-Kougane, V3: Kokei, V4: BARI Sweet potato12
Figure 11. Total soluble solid of different levels of fertilizer application on sweet potato varieties
T0: Control (No chemical fertilizer and no compost), T1: BARI fertilizer dose, T2: Maruhisa dose (Chemical fertilizer + Improved compost)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
V1 V2 V3 V4
Total soluble solid (TSS)
Sweet potato varieties
13.3 13.35 13.4 13.45 13.5
T0 T1 T2
Total soluble solid (TSS)
Fertilizer doses
40
Table 6. Interaction effect of variety and different dozes of fertilizer on dry weight and TSS of sweet potato
Quality parameters of sweet potato
Treatments Dry weight TSS (%)
V1T0 37.66ab 13.96a
V1T1 38.66ab 13.73ab
V1T2 37.66ab 13.66ab
V2T0 36.33ab 11.93bc
V2T1 36.00ab 11.56c
V2T2 39.33a 12.03bc
V3T0 33.33ab 14.26a
V3T1 36.66ab 14.23a
V3T2 37.33ab 14.13a
V4T0 32.66b 13.80ab
V4T1 33.66ab 14.00a
V4T2 36.66ab 14.00a
LSD Value 6.176 1.923
CV (%) 10.038 8.449
Mean followed by the same letters are not significantly different (p<0.05) according to LSD test.
V1: Annoh-Beni, V2: Annoh-Kougane, V3: Kokei, V4: BARI Sweet potato12
T0: Control (No chemical fertilizer and no compost), T1: BARI fertilizer dose, T2: Maruhisa dose (Chemical fertilizer + Improved compost)
41
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The present study was conducted in the Agronomic field of Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka, to optimize the fertilizer dose for sweet potato cultivation. The experiments were arranged in a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. Sweet potato vines were grown in the field and the Data were taken by sampling the vine. Different data of growth, physiology and biochemical parameters were measured. Plant height, tuber weight and dry weight were measured.
Yield parameters includes tuber length (cm), number branch/ plant, total weight of tubers/plant (kg), and yield. Quality parameters include dry weight, and TSS. In the present study 4 sweet potato varieties has shown their yield and quality performance. Different varieties have shown different performance in yield and quality analysis. Some varieties have shown better performance in plant height but not good at yield performance. At vegetative stages, the highest and lowest plant height was observed in (74.86cm), (44.25cm), (115.04cm), (7.82cm), (186.60cm), (88.79cm), at 40, 70 and 100 DAP respectively in V3T2, V1T0, V4T2, V3T0 and V4T1, V3T0 respectively. The number of branch plant–1 at all growth stages differed significantly due to variety, different vine parts and their interactions. The highest branch plant-1 (2.93), (6.26) and (7.40) was observed in BARI sweet potato 12 applied maruhisa treatment. The highest and the lowest leaves plant-1was observed BARI sweet potato 12 applied maruhisa treatment and Annoh-Kogane in control condition respectively. The highest tuber length /plant, tuber/plant (kg), yield was observed in Kokei with maruhisa (chemical fertilizer + improved compost). This might be due to the variation of genetic makeup of the different sweet potato genotypes. The highest and the lowest tuber diameter were observed in BARI sweet potato 12 with maruhisa (chemical fertilizer + improved compost) and Annouh-Beni in control condition respectively. Dry
42
weight of storage roots plant–1 differs significantly from genotype to genotype.
Best quality of tuber gives best market value. The highest (24.40 t ha-1) and the lowest yield (8.76 t ha-1) was observed in Kokei and Annoh-Kogane variety respectively. The highest and the lowest dry weight were found in Annoh- Kougane with maruhisa (chemical fertilizer + improved compost) and BARI sweet potato 12 in control treatment. The highest (14.26%) and the lowest (11.56%) TSS was observed in Kokei 14 T0 in control treatment and Annoh- Kogane with BARI recommended fertilizer, respectively.
Finally, it may be concluded that application of maruhisa (chemical fertilizer + improved compost) fertilizer Kokei appeared as the promising practice in sweet potato cultivation in terms of yield.
Considering the situation of the present experiment, further studies in the following areas may be suggested:
1. Another experiment may be carried out with various sweet potato varieties.
2. Other levels of fertilizer and other fertilizer dose also may be used for further studies.
3. Such study is needed in different agro-ecological zones (AEZ) of Bangladesh for regional compliance and other performance.
43
REFERENCES
Ahmed, M. R. 2019. Farmers’ Performance on Sweet Potato Cultivation. MS.
Thesis, Department of Agricultural Extension and Information System, Sher-e-bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka-1207.
Akther, E. 2018. Screening of Sweet Potato Varieties (Ipomoea Batatas (L.) Lam) for the Characters of Yield and Quality. MS. Thesis, Department of Agricultural Botany, Sher-e-bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka- 1207.
Ali, M. R., Costa, D. J., Abedin, M. J., Sayed, M. A. and Basak, N. C. 2009.
Effect of Fertilizer and Variety on the Yield of Sweet Potato.
Bangladesh J. Agril. Res., 34(3): 473-480.
An, L. V., Frankow-Lindberg, B. E. and Lindberg, J. E. 2003. Effect of harvesting interval and defoliation on yield and chemical composition of leaves, stems and tubers of sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas (L) Lam.) cultivars. Field Crops Res., 82(1): 49-58.
Anonymous, 1988a. Review of vegetable crop programme Memmonite Central Committee (MCC), Bangladesh. pp. 26-35.
Anonymous, 1988b. Crop Status Report. Christian Reformed Worlds Relief Committee, Bogra. pp. 124-127.
Anonymous. 1997. Fertilizer Recommendation Guide. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council, Farmgate, New Airport Road, Dhaka-1215. p22.
Anselmo, B. A., Ganga, Z. N., Badol, E. O., Heimer, Y. M. and Nejidat, A.
1998. Screening sweet potato for drought tolerance in the Philippine highlands and genetic diversity among selected genotypes. Tropical Agric., Trinidad., 75:189-196.
Backer, J., Ruiz, M. E., Munoz, H. and Pinchinat, A. M. 1980. The use of sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas (L) Lam) in animal feeding. II. Beef production. Tropical Animal Production., 5(61).
44
Bertelson, D., Dismukes, R., Hoff, F. and Lee, H. 1994. Sweet potatoes: An economic assessment of the feasibility of providing multiple-peril crop bnbn/ insurance.
Bhagsari, A. bbn/ S. and Harmon. 1982. Photosynthesis and photosynthate partitioning ibn/bn/ n sweet potato genotypes. Journal of American Society Horticulture Science bn/bnbn/bnbn/ 107, 506-510.
Bhuiya, M. R. and Akanda, M. S. 1982. Bn/ Effect of different sources of organic materials alone and in combination nbn/ with two fertilizer levels on growth parameters and combination of rice. Bangladesh J.
Agric., 7(3-4): 32-39.
Brown, R. H. 1992. Photosynthesis and plant productivity in sweet potato. In
“Sweet potato technology for the 21st century”. Eds. WA Hill, CK Bonsai, PA Loretan. Tuskegee University. Albama, 273-281 pp.
Choudhury, S. H., Ahmed, S. U. and Sharfuddin, A. F. M. 1986. Effect of number of nodes in different types of vine cuttings on the growth and yield of sweet potato. Bangladesh Hort., 14: 29-33.
Constantin, R. J., Ones, L. G. J., Hammett, H. L., Hernandez, T. P. and Kahlich, C. G. 1984. The response of three sweet potato cultivars to varying levels of Nitrogen. J. Am. Soc. Hort. Soc., 109: 605-614.
Crowder, L. V. and Chedda, H. R. 1982. Tropical Grassland Husbandry.
Longman Inc., New York.
Dayal, T. R., M. D. Upadhya, G. T. Kurup, M. S. Palaniswami and V. P. Pony.
2006. Possibilities for Improvement of Yield and Dry Matter Content in Sweet Potato (Ipomoea batatas L.). In: Tropical Tuber Crops, Problems, Prospects and Future Strategies, Kurup.
Delowar, H. K. M. and Hakim, M. A. 2014. Effect of salinity levels on the morpho-physiological characteristics and yield attributes of sweet potato genotypes. Int. J. Sci. Res., 10: 929-934.
Development Centre (AVRDC), Taiwan. 2-30 pp.
Dziedzoave, N. T., Graffham, A. J., Westby, A., Otoo, J. and Komlaga, G.
2009. Influence of variety and growth environment on b-amylase
45
activity of flour from sweet potato (Ipomea batatas). / Food Control., 21 (2010) 162–165. doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2009.05.005
Ehisianya, C. N., Lale, N. E. S., Umeozor, O. C., Amadi, C. O. and Zakka, U.
2011. Evaluation of effectiveness of variety, tillage method and time of harvest on sweet potato yield and the population of sweet potato weevils, Cylas punctillis (Bohemann) (Coleoptera: Brentidae). Int. J. Ad.
Sci. and Tech. Res., (1) 2 165-180.
Elias, M., Hossian, M., Quasem, J. A., Islam, M. S. and Rashid, M. M. 1991.
Effect of phosphaorus fertilization on the growth and yield of potato.
Bangladesh J. Agric. Res., 16(2): 153-156.
Eneji, A. E., Agboola, A. A., & Isola, O. 1995. The weed suppressive ability of sweet potato in a cassava + maize + sweet potato intercrop. Nigerian J.
Weed Sci., 8: 13-18.
FAO. (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2017.
Database at http://apps.fao.org.
FAOStat. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2016.
Food and agricultural commodities production. http://faostat3.fao.org.
Farooque, A. M. and Husain, A. 1973. Studies on the comparative morphological characters and the yield of the seven varieties of sweet potato. Bangladesh Hortic., 1: 37-44.
Farrell, D. J., Jibril. H., Perez-Maldonado, R. A. and Mannion, P. F. 2000. A note on a comparison of sweet potato vines and Lucerne meal for broiler chickens. Animal Feed Sci. Tech., 85: 145-150.
Figueroa, V. and Rodriguez, J. 1994. Un alimento seco para aves basado en mieles de cana de azucar. Livestock Res. for Rural Development, 6 (1).
Giang, H. H., Ly, L. V. and Ogle, B. 2004. Digestibility of dried and ensiled sweet potato roots and vines and their effect on the performance and economic efficiency of F1 cross bred fattening pigs. Livestock Res. for Rural Devel.; 16 (7).
46
Gomez, K. A. and Gomez, A. A. 1984. Statistical Procedures for agricultural research second edition. A Wiley Inter Science Production, John Whiley
& Sons. New York. p.680.
Gonzalez, C., Diaz, I., Vecchionacce, H., and Ly, J. 2003. Performance traits of pigs fed sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.) foliage ad libitum and graded levels of protein. Livestock Res. for Rural Devel., (15) 9.
Goswami, S. B., Sen, H. and Jana, P. K. 1995. Tuberization and yield potential of sweet potato cultivars as influenced by water management practices.
J. Root Crops., 21(2), 77-81.
Hossain, M. A., Salahuddin, A. B. M., Roy, S. K., Nasreen, S. and Ali, M. A.
1995. Effect of green manuring on the growth and yield of transplanted aman rice. Bangladesh J. Agric. Sci., 22(1): 2 1-29.
Huaman, Z. 1992. Descriptor for sweet potato. International Potato Centre, Asian Vegetable Research and Development Centre (AVRDC), International Board for Plant Genetic Resources (IBPGR). Lima, Peru.
Huaman, Z. 1997. Botany, origin, evolution and biodiversity of the sweet potato. In “Sweet potato germplasm management training manual”. Ed.
Z Huaman. International Potato Centre (CIP); Lima, Peru
Huang, D. J., Lin, C. D., Chen, H. J. and Lin, Y. H. 2004. Antioxidant and antiproliferative activities of sweet potato (Ipomoea batatasL. Lam Tainong 57) constituents. Bot. Bull. Acad. Sin., 45: 179- 186.
Indira, P. and Kabeerathumma, S. 1988. Physiological response of sweet potato under water stress. 1. Effect of water stress during the different phases of tuberization. J. Root Crops., 14(2), 37-40.
Islam, M. S., Yoshimoto, M., Yahara, S. and Yamakawa, O. 2002.
Identification and characterization of foliar polyphenolic composition in sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L) genotypes, J. Agric. Food Chem., 50:
3718- 3722.
Jahan, M. M. A., Islam, A. K. M. A. and Siddique, M. A. 2009. Studied on growth and yield of sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas poir) as influenced
47
by variety and time of harvest. http://aminipb.
faculty.bsmrau.edu.bd./2009/07.
Kassali, R. 2011. Economics of Sweet Potato Production. International Journal
of Vegetable Science., 17:313–321. DOI:
10.1080/19315260.2011.553212.
Kays, S. J. 1985. The physiology of yield in sweet potato. In “Sweet potato products: A natural resource for the tropics”. ED. JC Bouwkamp. CRC Press; Boca Raton, Florida., 79-132 pp.
Kochian, L. V., O. A. Hoekenga and M.A. Pineros, 2004. How do crop plants tolerate acid soils? mechanisms of aluminum tolerance and phosphorous efficiency. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol., 55: 459-493.
Kusano, S. and Abe, H. 2000. Anti-diabetic activity of white skinned sweet potato (Ipomoea batatasL.) in obese zucker fatty rats. Biol. Pharm. Bull., 23(1):23- 26.
Martin, F. W. 1988. Sweet potato.http:// echonet.org/ Technotes/
sweetpotato.htm.
McCraw, D. 2000.Sweet potato production.http://agweb. edu/pearl/hort/
vegetables/f6022.htm.
Moat, M. and Dryden, G. M. 1993. Nutritive value of sweet potato forage (Ipomoea batatas (L) Lam.) as a ruminant animal feed. Papua New Guinea J. Agric. Forestry and Fishery., 36(1): 79-85.
Monamodi, E.L., Bok, I. and Karikari, S.K. 2003. Changes in nutritional composition and yield of two sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.) cultivars during their growth in Botswana. UNISWA J. of Agric., (11) 5–
14.
Mupangwa, J. F., Ngongoni, N. T., Topps, J. H. and Ndlovu, P. 1997.
Chemical composition and dry matter degradability profiles of forage legumes Cassia rotundi flora cv. Wynn, Lablab purpureus cv. Highworth and Macroptilium atropurpureum cv. Siratro at 8 weeks of growth (pre- anthesis). Animal Feed Sci. Tech., 69: 167-178.
48
Naskar, S. K. and Chowdhury,S. R. 1994. Growth and yield response of eight sweet potato lines. Indian J. Plant Physiol., 37: 200-202.
Neppl, G. P., Wehner, T. C. and Schulthers, J. R. 2003. Interaction of border and center rows of multiple row plants in watermelon yield trials.
Euphytica; 131, N02.
Norman, M. J. T., Pearson, C. J. and Searle, P. G. E. 1995. Sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas). In “The ecology of tropical food crops”.2nd.
Cambridge University Press., 291-304 pp.
Nwinyi, S. C. O. 1992. Effect of age of shoot removal on tuber and shoot yields at harvest of five sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas (L) Lam.) cultivars.
Field Crops Res., 29(1): 47-54.
Onunka, N. A., Chukwu, L. I., Mbanasor, E. O., & Ebeniro, C. N. 2012. Effect of organic and inorganic manures and time of application on soil properties and yield of sweet potato in a tropical ultisol. J. of Agric. &
Social Res., 12(1), 182-193.
Onunka, N. A., Chukwu,L. I., Mbanasor, E. O. and Ebeniro, C. N. 2012. Effect of organic and inorganic manures and time of application on soil properties and yield of sweet potato in a tropical ultisol. J. Agric. Social Res., 12: 183-194.
Onwueme, I. C. and Charles, W. B. 1994. Tropical root and tuber crops.
Production, perspectives and future prospects. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. Plant Production and Protection Paper No. 126, Rome., 122 pp.
Onwueme, I. C. & Sinha, T. O. 1991. Field crop production in Tropical Africa, principles and practice (pp. 267-275). CTA (Technical Centre for Agriculture and Rural Cooperation) Ede, Netherlands.
Padmaja, G. 2009. Uses and nutritional data of sweet potato. In: Loebenstein, G and Thottappilly, G. (eds), The Sweet potato. Springer, The Netherlands. pp. 189-234.
Peet, M. 2000. Sweet potato. Production practices. http://www.c als.ncsu.
edu/sustainable/ peet/profiles/pps_pot.html.
49
Prakash, C. S. 1994. Sweet potato biotechnology: Progress and potential.
Biotechnology and development monitor 18, 18-19 http://www. pscw.
uva.nl/monitor/1811.htm.
Rashid, M. H., Bhuiyan, M. K. R. and Ahmed, M. S. 2000. Sweet potato breeding strategy in Bangladesh. African Potato Association Conference Proceedings Volume 5. Pp59-60.
Rashid, M. M., Mazumdar, A. A. and Molla, S. 2002. Performance of exotic germplasm of sweet potato in Bangladesh. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Sweetpotato Food and Health, July 2629, 2001, Lima, Peru, pp: 291-295.
Rashid. M. M. 1999. Shabji Biggan (in Bengali), (2nd edition).Rashid Pub.
House, Dhaka. p.526.
Raymond, W. M. and Gardiner, D. T. 1998. Soils in our environment. Upper Sandy River, New Jersey, USA, pp.736. 60
Romani, M., Borghi, B., Albercici, R., Delogu, G., Hesselbach, J. and Sclami, F. 1993. Intergenotypic competition and border effect in bread wheat and barley. Euphytica., 69, 1-2.
Rose, I. M. and Vasanthakaalam, H. 2011. Comparison of the Nutrient composition of four sweet potato varieties cultivated in Rwanda. Am. J.
Food. Nutr., 1(1): 34-38. doi:10.5251/ajfn.2011.1.1.34.38.
Ruiz, M.E., Lozano, E. and Ruiz, A. 1981. Utilization of sweet potatoes (Ipomoea batatas (L) Lam) in animal feeding. III. Addition of various levels of roots and urea to sweet potato forage silage. Tropical Animal Production., 6(3): 234 -244.
Sarker, N. I., Jaman, S., Islam, M. S., Bari, A. and Shamsuddin, T. M. 1996.
Effect of chemical fertilizers and organic manure on the growth and yield of potato in Non- Calcareous Grey Flood plain Soil. Progress.
Agric., 7(1): 63-68.
Schultheis, J. R. and Wilson, L. G. 2000. What is the difference between a sweet potato and a yam http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/hort/hil/hil- 23a.html
50
Sen, H., Roychoudhury, N. and Mukhopadhyay, S. K. 1988. Performance of different sweet potato Ipomoea batatas entries in the alluvial soil of West Bengal. Environ. Ecol., 6: 431-436.
Sharfuddin, A. F. and Ahmed, S. U. 2005. Effect of different levels of soil moisture on the growth, photosynthesis and dry matter content of sweet potato. Punjab Veget. Grow., 20: 5-10.
Shen, S., Xu, G., Clements, D. R., Jin, G., Chen, A., Zhang, F. and Kato Noguchi, H. 2015. Suppression of the invasive plant mile-a-minute (Mikaniamicrantha) by local crop sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas) by means of higher growth rate and competition for soil nutrients. BMC Ecol., Vol. 15. 10.1186/s12898-014-0033-5.
Siddique, M. A., Hassanuzzaman, A. T. M. and Akbar, H. 1988. Growth and yield of three high-yielding sweet potato genotypes. Bangladesh J.
Agric., 13: 139-146.
Sidiky. B., Zoumana, K., Dibi, K. E. B. and Kouassi. J. H. M. 2019. Asian J.
Soil Sci. Plant Nutrition., 4 (3). 2019: 1-14
Som, D. 2007. Handbook of horticulture (pp. 512-416). New Delhi: India Council of Agric. Res.
Uwah, D. F., Undie, U. L., John, N. M. & Ukoha, G. O. 2013. Growth and Yield Response of Improved Sweet Potato (Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam) Varieties to Different Rates of Potassium Fertilizer in Calabar, Nigeria.
J. Agric. Sci.; Vol. 5, No. 7. doi:10.5539/jas.v5n7p61
Uwah, D. F., Undie, U. L., John, N. M. and Ukoha, G. O. 2013. Growth and yield response of improved sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam) varieties to different rates of potassium fertilizer in Calabar, Nigeria. J.
Agric. Sci., 5: 61-69.
Valenzuela, H., Fukuda, S. and Arakaki, A. 2000. Sweet potato production guidelines for Hawaii.http:// www.extento. hawaii. edu/kbase/ reports/
sweetpot_prod.htm
51
Verma, V.S., Singh, K.P., Singh, N.K., Singh, J.R.P. and Verma, S.P. 1994.
Rajendra Shakarkand 35 and Rajendra Shakarkand 43: Two high yielding selections of sweet potato. J. Root Crops., 20: 15-19.
Villargarcia, O. M. R. 1996. Analysis of sweet potato growth under differing rates of nitrogen fertilization. North California State
Yen, D. E. 1974. The sweet potato in the pacific and Ocania: An essay in ethno botany. Bishop Museum Press; Honolulu.
Yen, D. E. 1982.Sweet potato in historical perspective. In “Sweet potato”.Eds.
RL Villareal and TD Griggs.Proceedings of the First International Symposium. Asian Vegetable Res.
Yooyongwech, S., Samphumphuang, T., Theerawitaya, C. and Cha-Um, S.
2014. Physio-morphological responses of sweet potato [Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam.] genotypes to water-deficit stress. Plant Omics J., 7: 361-368.
Zaragoza: Acribia. 258 p.
Yang, X., Guan, P. C. and Chen. R. Y. 2006. Effect of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium on growth and yield of broccoli (Brassica oleracea L.
var. italica). China Vegetables., 3(44-47): 39
52
APPENDICES