TUBER SIZE EFFECTS ON YIELD AND NUMBER OF POTATO MINITUBERS OF COMMERCIAL VARIETIES IN A GREENHOUSE PRODUCTION SYSTEM

Year 2021, , 123 - 128, 29.06.2021

Ercan Ozkaynak

https://doi.org/10.17557/tjfc.950280

Cited By: 3

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the effects of three different minituber (Mt) sizes (large, cutting and
small) on the number and yield of minitubers (Mts) in 6 commercial potato varieties. The research was carried
out according to the split plot design of greenhouse conditions in the 30x30cm plant density in 2017 and 2018.
From potato varieties, Soylu were given the highest values in large and small Mt sizes, the number of Mt per
plant and per hectare. Mt weight per plant, average Mt weight and Mt yield per hectare Cevher variety
showed better performance than other varieties. Approximately 48-50 % of the Mts obtained in terms of Mt
size were determined as Mts of 45-60 mm. The size of the cutting Mt was given a higher yield per hectare and
the number of Mts than the others. According to the results of the study, Mts of commercial varieties in
greenhouse conditions were planted in 30x30 cm plant density and 90% of them were planted directly in the
field (≥ 25mm), firstly. Approximately 700000 Mts can be produced from one hectare greenhouse in the
greenhouse production system in narrow plant density.

Keywords

Conventional, minituber, Solanum tuberosum L., yield.

References

• Ahloowalia, B.S. 1994. Production and performance of potato mini-tubers. Euphytica 75(3): 163-172.
• Beukema, H.P. and V.D. Zaag. 1990. Introduction to Potato Production. Wegeningen. Netherlands. 207.
• Corrêa, R.M., J.E.B.P. Pinto, V. Pinto, É.S. Faquin, A.B. Reis and W.E. Monteiro Dyer. 2008. A comparison of potato seed tuber yields in beds, pots and hydroponic systems. Scientia Horticulturae 116(1): 17-20.
• Dimante, I. and Z. Gaile. 2014. Potato minitubers technology – its development and diversity. Research for Rural Development 1: 69-76.
• Dimante, I. and Z. Gaile. 2015. The effect of planting density on potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) minituber number, weight and multiplication rate. Research for Rural Development 1: 27-33.
• Dimante, I. and Z. Gaile. 2018. Assessment of potato plant development from Minitubers. Agronomy Research 16(4): 1630-1641.
• Dimante,I., I. Mežaka and Z. Gaile. 2019. The effect of minituber weight on their field performance under a Northern European environment. Agronomy Research 17(2): 396-407.
• Farran, I. and A.M. Mingo Castel. 2006. Potato minituber production using aeroponics: effect of plant density and harvesting intervals. American Journal of Potato Research 83: 47-53.
• Freed, R., S.P. Einensmith, S. Guetz, D. Reicosky, V.W. Smail and P. Wolberg. 1989. User’s Guide to MSTAT–C Analysis of Agronomic Research Experiments. Michigan State University, USA.
• Fulladolsa, A.C., K.E. LaPlant, R.L. Groves and A.O. Charkowski. 2018. Potato plants grown from minitubers are delayed in maturity and lower in yield, but are not at a higher risk of potato virus Y infection than plants grown from conventional seed. American Journal of Potato Research 95(1): 45-53.
• Georgakis, D.N., D.I. Karafyllidis, N.I. Stavropoulos, E.X. Nianiou and I.A. Vezyroglou. 1997. Effect of planting density and size of potato seed-minitubers on the size of the produced potato seed tubers. Acta Horticulturae 462: 935- 942.
• Haverkort, A.J. and A. Verhagen. 2008. Climate change and its repercussions for the potato supply chain. Potato Research 51(3-4): 223-237.
• Hossain, A, A. Mahmud, A. Mamun, Md. Shamimuzzaman and M. Rahman. 2015. Optimization of minituber size and planting distance for the breeder seed production of potato. American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 3(2): 58-64.
• Karafyllidis, D.I., D.N. Georgakis, N.I. Stavropoulos, I.A. Vezyroglou and E.X. Nianiou. 1997. Effect of planting density and size of potato minitubers on their yielding capacity. Acta Horticulturae 462: 943-949.
• Kumar, D., V. Singh and B.P. Singh. 2011. Growth and yield of potato plants developed from in vitro plantlets in nethouse. Potato Journal 38(2): 143-148.
• Mahmoudpour, A. 2014. Effects of different sizes of Mini-tuber on yield and yield components of potato variety Agria. International Journal of Advanced Biological and Biomedical Research 2(4): 1099-1104.
• Mallick, S.R., M.A. Hossain, M.M. Rahman, R. Sarker and S.A. Jui. 2017. Minituber Yield Potentials of Potato Varieties of Bangladesh. International Journal of Agricultural Papers 2 (2): 22-30.
• Mohamed, F.H., G.F. Omar, K.E. El-Hamed and B. El-Safty. 2018. Influence of Plant Density and Genotype on Potato Minituber Production from Microshoots and Microtubers. CATRINA. 17 (1): 77-84.
• Otroshy, M. 2006. Utilization of tissue culture techniques in a seed potato tuber production scheme. PhD Thesis, Wageningen University Wageningen, The Netherlands, 264 p.
• Ozkaynak, E. and B. Samanci. 2005. Yield and yield components of greenhouse, field and seed bed grown potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) plantlets. Journal of Akdeniz University Faculty of Agriculture 18(1): 125-29.
• Ozturk, G. and Z. Yildirim. 2010. A comparoson of Field Performances of Minitubers and Microtubers used in seed potato Production. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 15: 141- 147.
• Ozturk, G. and Z. Yildirim. 2011. Uniformity of Potato Minitubers Derived From Meristem Cultures of Nuclear Seed Stocks. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 16: 149-152.
• Ozturk, G. and Z. Yildirim. 2014. Comparison of old and new clones of potato nuclear seed stocks for tuber uniformity in the greenhouse. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 19: 90-95.
• Ozturk, G. 2017. Determination of the Morphological and Yield Characteristics of Old and New Meristem Stocks Used in Basic Seed Production in Potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L.). Journal of Agriculture Faculty of Ege University 54: 293-300.
• Ozturk, G. and Z. Yildirim. 2020. Tuber characteristics of disease free meristem clones of some potato genotypes. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 25: 174-180.
• Park, S.W., J.H. Jeon, H.S. Kim, S.J. Hong and C.A.H. Joung. 2009. The effect of size and quality of potato microtubers on quality of seed potatoes in cultivar ‘Superior’. Scientia Horticulture 120(1): 127-129.
• Roy, R.D., V. Souza Machado, S.M.M. Alam and A Ali. 1995. Greenhouse production of potato (Solanum tuberosum L. cv. Desire) seed tubers using in vitro plantlets and rooted cuttings in large propagation beds. Potato Research 38(1): 61-68.
• Sadawarti, M.J., R.K. Samadhiya, V. Kumar, S.P. Singh Roy, E.P., Venkatasalam, T., Buckseth, R.K., Singh, K.K., Pandey, S.K. Chakrabarti. 2018. Hi-tech planting materials performance under in vivo conditions for potato breeder seed production. International Journal of Chemical Studies 6(3):817-822.
• Santos, B.M. and P.R. Rodriguez. 2008. Optimum in-row distances for potato minituber production. HortTechnology. 18(3): 403-406.
• Sharma, A.K. and K.K. Pandey. 2013. Potato mini-tuber production through direct transplanting of in vitro plantlets in green or screen houses. Potato Journal 40(2): 95-103.
• Sharma, A.K., E.P. Venkatasalam and V. Kumar. 2013. Potato mini-tuber production during main and off crop seasons in high hills of north-western Himalaya. Potato Journal 40(1): 29-37.
• Singh, P., J. Singh, A. Mirza. 2019. Standardization of fundamental components in aeroponics for minituber seed potato production : A Review. Plant Archives 19(2): 1968- 1972.
• Struik, P.C. 2007. The canon of potato science: minitubers. Potato Research 50(3-4): 305-308.
• Veeken, A.J.H. and W.J.M. Lommen. 2009. How planting density affects number and yield of potato minitubers in a commercial glasshouse production system. Potato Research 52: 105-119.
• Venkatasalam, E.P., J. Latawa, S. Sharma, S. Sharma, A.K. Sharma, S. Sharma, R. Patial and S. Singh. 2011. In vitro and in vivo performance of potato cultivars for different seed production systems. Potato Journal 38(2): 149-154.
• Zimba, C., J.P. Njoloma, J.A. Nyaika, W.F. Mwase, M.F. Maliro, J.M. Bokosi and M.B. Kwapata. 2014. Minituber production potential of selected Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) genotypes in different propagation media. African Journal of Biotechnology 13(48): 4430-4437