EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT MINITUBER SIZE AND PLANTING NUMBER ON THE MINITUBERS YIELD AND YIELD COMPONENTS OF BASCIFTLIK BEYAZI LOCAL GENOTYPE

Year 2016, Volume: 5 Issue: 11, 64 - 69, 31.10.2016

Yasin Bedrettin Karan Gungor Yilmaz

Abstract

This study was conducted during 2013 – 2014 under net greenhouse conditions in the Turkey-Tokat-Artova. Minitubers of a local genotype, Basciftlik Beyazi, were produced at The Potato Research Institute, Nigde-Turkey. Three different sized minitubers were planted into pots in different planting units. Tubers were harvested at the end of October. The three different size minitubers were planted into pots in different concentrations with three replications. The large size had one minituber per pot (Unit 1). The medium sized had three different layouts, one minituber per pot, two minitubers per pot, and three minitubers per pot (Units 2-4). The small-sized minitubers also had three different layouts, two minitubers per pot, three minitubers per pot, and four minitubers per pot (Units 5-7).  The aim of this study was to determine the effect of different planting units on tubers yield of Basciftlik Beyazi genotype. The highest tuber number produced from was in Unit 6 (49.68) in 2013. In 2014, Unit 1 (42.84) produced the highest number of tubers. Mean comparison among number of tubers indicated that unit 6 and 7 had higher tuber numbers than other planting units. The highest tuber yield per pot was from Unit 7 (2160.0 g; 1921.04 g) in both years. Also, in the second year of this study, results showed that the highest tuber yield per pot occurred in Unit 7 and Unit 1. The best average tuber yield per pot (2040.52 g) for both years was in Unit 7. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of different planting units on tubers yield of Basciftlik Beyazi genotype.

Keywords

Potato, minituber, seed potato production.

References

• Struik, P.C., 2007. The canon of potato science: Minitubers. Potato Res. 50:305–308.
• Ranalli E, 1997. Innovative propagation methods in seed tuber multiplication programs. Potato Res 40:439-453.
• Haverkort AJ, M Van de Waart, and J Marinas, 1991. Field performance of potato microtubers as a propagation material. Potato Res 34:353-364.
• Struik PC and Lommen W.J.M., 1990. Production, storage and use of micro and mini-tubers. Proc. 11th Tri Conf of the Euro Assoc Potato Res (EAPR), Edinburg, pp. 122-33.
• Tadesse M, Lommen WJM and Struik P.C., 2001. Effects of temperature pre-treatment of transplants from in vitro produced potato plantlets on transplant growth and yield in the field. Potato Res 44: 173-85.
• Sharma AK, Venkatasalam EP, Singh RK and Singh S., 2010. Effect of variety and planting method of micro-plants on potato mini-tuber production during off-season in north-western Himalaya. Potato J 37(1-2): 28-32.
• Ahloowalia BS., 1994. Production and performance of potato minitubers. Euphytica 75:163-172.
• Millam, S. and Sharma, S.K., 2007, Potato Biology and Biotechnology Advances and Perspectives. Part VII. Biotechnology. 3.2.2. Mini tubers page: 49.
• Yurtsever, N., 1984. Deneysel İstatistik Metotları. Toprak ve Gübre Araştırma Enstitüsü Yayınları, Genel Yayın No: 121, Teknik Yayın No: 56, Ankara.
• Lommen, W.J.M., 1999. Causes for low tuber yields of transplants from in vitro potato plantlets of early cultivars after field planting. J. Agric. Sci. 133: 275-284.
• Gupta VK, Kumar S, Baishya LK and Kumar M., 2003. Effect of planting density on mini-tuber production from micro-propagated plants. Potato J 30: 43-44.
• Rykbost, K. A., and B. A. Charlton. 2004. Effect of pronuclear minituber seed size on production of Wallowa Russet seed. Potato Res. 75: 91 -96.
• Bardas, M. (2004). Studies about increasing the multiplication coefficient of seed potatoes by using mini -tubers of Romanian varieties under ecological conditions of the research and development institute for potato and sugar beet Brasov. Summary of Doctoral Thesis.