The Effect of Plant Spacing and Cutting Interval on Growth of Moringa Oleifera
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Journal of Agricultural Science and Applications (JASA)
The Effect of Plant Spacing and Cutting Interval on
Growth of Moringa Oleifera
C. T. Gadzirayi *1, F. N. M. Kubiku 2, J. F. Mupangwa, 3 L. Mujuru 4, T. J. Chikuvire 5
1,2,4,5
Bindura University of Science Education, Faculty of Agriculture and Environmental Science, P. Bag 1020, Bindura,
Zimbabwe
3
University of Swaziland, Department of Animal Science, P. O. Luyengo, Luyengo, Swaziland
*1
gadzirayichris@yahoo.co.uk
Abstract- Two provenances of Moringa oleifera grown in and the diversity of objectives, thus there are no clear
Zimbabwe, namely Malawi and Mutoko were evaluated to conclusive plant density specifications to prescribe given the
determine the effect of plant spacing and cutting interval on diversity of physical, social and economic context under
plant growth. A split-split plot experimental design was set up which the production systems are to be performed.
with provenance as main plot factor, plant spacing as sub-plot
factor and cutting interval sub-sub plot factor at Bindura
Therefore this study sought to establish optimum plant
University of Science Education’s research unit. The spacing and cutting interval that fit within the tropical
provenances were tested at two plant spacings of 15 cm x 15 cm climatic conditions and production system especially for
and 20 cm x 20 cm, and two cutting intervals of 60 days and 75 better plant growth.
days.
The research was conducted at Bindura University of
The results showed that at first establishment, 90 days after Science Education in Zimbabwe. The site lies on latitude
planting, Mutoko provenance had higher (pJournal of Agricultural Science and Applications (JASA)
P14K7) were applied per planting station. Weeding was done Mi = fixed effect of the ith provenance; i = 1, 2
manually at one month interval. Bj = fixed effect of the jth block; j = 1, 2, 3
C. Data Collection Dk = fixed effect of the kth planting spacing; k = 1, 2
Cl = fixed effect of the lth cutting interval = 1, 2
Five plants were randomly selected from the net plot of
0.6 m x 0.6 m for measurement on a weekly basis. The (MD)ik = the treatment interaction effect of provenance
response parameters measured were plant height, root collar and planting spacing.
diameter, number of leaves and canopy diameter. Plant (MDC)ikl = the treatment interaction effect of provenance,
height was measured from the base of the plant to the top of spacing and cutting interval
the apical meristem using a tape measure, root collar εijkl = random error associated with observation; εijkl ~
diameter was measured at the base of the plant stem using a N(0.σ2).
veneer sliding callipers and canopy size was estimated by
averaging measured diagonal diameters of the canopy using III. RESULTS
a tape measure. Leaf number was obtained by counting the
number of individual compound leaves on the stem. A. Growth Performance 90 Days from Establishment
D. Statistical Analysis There was no significant interaction (p>0.05) effect of
provenance and spacing on the growth height of the plants,
A statistical package SAS was used to generate diameter of root collar, number of leaves on the plant and
multivariate analysis of variance on the means to determine the diameter of the canopy (Table 1). The provenances had a
the experimental treatment combination effects. The least significant effect (p0.05) on canopy diameter (Table 1).
differences. The mathematical model for growth assessment Mutoko provenance had a higher (p0.05) on root
provenance, kth planting spacing and lth cutting interval collar diameter, height of the plants, the number of leaves
and diameter of the canopy.
µ = overall mean (constant)
TABLE I EFFECT OF PROVENANCE AND PLANT SPACING ON GROWTH AT 90 DAYS
Plant height Root collar Canopy diameter
Provenance Spacing No. of leaves
(cm) diameter (cm) (cm)
15x15 36.00 0.70 10.57 34.58
Malawi
20x20 34.68 0.74 10.14 36.24
15x15 42.69 0.86 11.21 36.40
Mutoko
20x20 37.71 0.86 11.06 36.27
Provenance 3.46 0.52 0.40 2.32
LSD Spacing 3.50 0.50 0.40 2.36
ProvenancexSpacing 5.00 0.74 0.56 3.36
Provenance 0.048* 0.000* 0.0050* 0.576ns
P-value Spacing 0.199ns 0.513ns 0.294ns 0.640ns
ProvenancexSpacing 0.455ns 0.499ns 0.615ns 0.294ns
* = Significant at p0.05
B. Growth Performance at 60 Day Cutting Interval no significant (p>0.05) effect on root collar diameter and
sprouts. The Mutoko provenance planted at 20 cm x 20 cm
There were significant differences (pJournal of Agricultural Science and Applications (JASA)
20x20 1.35 6.67 0.37 4.78c
LSD0.05 Provenance 0.10 1.80 0.06 0.40
Spacing 0.08 1.60 0.04 0.08
ProvenancexSpacing 0.12 2.28 0.06 0.50
P-value Provenance 0.004* 0.000* 0.199ns 0.021*
Spacing 0.152ns 0.002* 0.562ns 0.010*
ProvenancexSpacing 0.95ns 0.30ns 0.11ns 0.01*
LSD is the least significant difference. Means followed by letter in the same column are significantly different.
* = significant at p0.05
C. Effect of Provenance and Plant Spacing on Regrowth at displayed significant differences (pJournal of Agricultural Science and Applications (JASA)
E. Effect of Provenance and Plant Spacing on Regrowth at significantly (p0.05) on number of sprouts and diameter of the sprouts.
TABLE V EFFECT OF PROVENANCE AND PLANT SPACING ON REGROWTH 75 DAYS SECOND CUTTING
Provenance Spacing Root collar diameter Sprout diameter No. of sprouts
Malawi 15x15 1.17a 0.57 2.98
20x20 1.82bc 0.85 2.53
Mutoko 15x15 1.45ac 0.79 2.68
20x20 1.15a 0.55 4.03
LSD0.05 Provenance 0.32 0.2 0.62
Spacing 0.24 1.7 0.32
ProvenancexSpacing 0.46 0.30 0.88
P-value Provenance 0.40ns 0.79ns 0.18ns
Spacing 0.29ns 0.07ns 0.22ns
ProvenancexSpacing 0.04* 0.08ns 0.05ns
LSD is the least significant difference. Means followed by letter in the same column are significantly different.
* = significant at p0.05
therefore the differential effect of the two plant spacing at
IV. DISCUSSION
early stage of growth would have no effect on growth. The
A. Growth Performance at 90 Days Establishment Period results are consistent with [8] in their study to determine the
effect of plant spacing and harvesting frequency on growth
Mutoko provenance had higher (pJournal of Agricultural Science and Applications (JASA) is minimum self thinning of sprouts compared to closer effect of increasing competition is related to decreasing spacing [8, 9] . However plant spacing of 15 cm x 15 cm and concentrations of growth factors. 20 cm x 20 cm did not have significant (p>0.05) effect on root collar diameter and the sprout diameter because of no Similarly significant interaction (p
Journal of Agricultural Science and Applications (JASA)
subsequent cutting. Closer plant spacing, 15 cm x 15 cm, [6] Nduwayezu, J. B., Chamshama, S. A. O., Mugasha, A. G.,
produced plants with greater height, while wider plant Ngaga, Y. N., Khonga, E. B. and Chabo, R. G. (2007).
spacing, 20 cm x 20 cm, gave plants with bigger stem Comparisons in seed Kernel Sizes and Early Growth
diameter. Mutoko provenance at 20 cm x 20 cm had higher performamce of different Moringa oleifera provenances in
Southwest of Botswana. Disov. Innov, 2007; Vol 19 (special
regrowth compared to Malawi provenance at the same level edition 1 & 2).
of plant spacing.
[7] Solorio Sanchez, F. J., and Solorio Sanchez, B. (2002).
Integrating fodder trees into animal production systems in the
RECOMMENDATIONS tropics. Tropical and Subtropical Agro-ecosystems, 1 (2002):
The Mutoko provenance is recommended for early pp.1-11. University of Yucatan, Mexico.
establishment because it gives better growth potential for [8] Amaglo, N. K., Timpo, G. M., Ellis, W. O. And Bennett, R. N.
most of the growth parameters at each subsequent cutting (2006). Effect of spacing and harvesting frequency on the
growth and leaf yield of Moringa (Moringa oleifera Lam), a
interval. Plant spacing of 20 cm x 20 cm is recommended
leafy vegetable crop. Moringa and other highly nutritious
because it supports growth of bigger stems and higher plant resources: Strategies, standards and markets for better
number of sprouts and therefore increases chance of survival. impact on nutrition in Africa. Accra, Ghana, November 16-18,
2006.
REFERENCES [9] Walker, K. P. (2007). Productivity of four fodder tree species,
[1] King, B. T. and Reynolds, L. (1986). Alley farming in the their nutritional value and potential role in ruminant
humid and sub-humid tropics. Paper presented at the institute production in Eastern Botswana. A doctorial thesis, University
for Tropical Africa Board of Trustees meeting, Ibadan, of Stellenbosch.
Nigeria. [10] Ball, R.A., Purcell, L.C. and Vories E.D. (2000). Short-Season
[2] Ella, A. (1988). Evaluation and productivity of forage tree Soybean Yield Compensation in Response to Population and
legumes grown at various densities and cutting frequencies Water Regime. Crop Sci. 40: pp. 1070-1078.
alone or with a companion grass. University of New England, http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2000.4041070x
Armidalia Australia. MSc. Thesis (Rural Science), pp. 118. [11] Turgut, I., Duman, A., Bilgili, U. and Acikgoz, E. (2005).
[3] Sanchez , R. N. (2006). Moringa olifera and Cratylia argentea: Alternate row spacing and plant density effects on forage and
Potential fodder species for Ruminant in Nicaragua. Doctoral dry matter yield of corn hybrids (Zea mays L.). J. Agron. Crop
thesis. ISSN 1652 - 6880, ISNB 91- 576 - 7050 – 1. Sci. 191: pp. 146-151.
[4] Olivier, C. (2004). Intensive Moringa oleifera cultivation in http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.2004.00146.x
the North of Senegal. [12] Akinbamijo, Y., Nouala, S., Saecker, J., Adesina, M. A.,
http://www.moringanews.org/documents/Leafproduction.doc Hoffmann, E., Muetzel, S., Fuglie, L., Becker, K. (2003).
accessed September 21, 20. Prospects of Moringa oleifera as a Feed Resource in the West
[5] Ivory, D. A. (1989). Major characteristics, agronomic features African Mixed Farming System. “Technological and
and nutitional value of shrubs and tree fodders. In: Shrubs and Institutional Innovations for Sustainable Rural Development”,
tree fodders for the farm animals. Devendra, C. (ed), IDRC – Gambia, Senegal, West Africa.
276e, Ottawa, Canada, pp. 22-38. [13] Janick, J. (1972). Horticultural Science. 2nd Edition. W.H. W.
H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco. pp. 586.
[14] Norman, J. C. (1992). Tropical vegetable crops. Arthur H
Stockwell Limited, London, pp. 110-52.
JASA Volume 2, Issue 2 Jun. 2013 PP. 131-136 www.j-asa.org © American V-King Scientific Publishing
136You can also read
