SALT STRESS STUDIES IN MANGO- A REVIEW

Article Id: ARCC4132 | Page : 75-78
Citation :- SALT STRESS STUDIES IN MANGO- A REVIEW.Agricultural Reviews.2007.(28):75-78
A.K.Dubey, A.K. Singh and Manish Srivastav
Address : Division of Fruits and Horticultural Technology Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi-110 012, INDIA

Abstract

Soil salinity is now considered as the frontier area of the Indian agricultural research. In India problem of soil salinity Is causing concern over 8.5 m hectare area and the potential soil salinity hazard is threatening another 27% land area. This problem is more pronounced in Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Orissa, Gujrat, Punjab, Rajashthan, West Bengal, Maharashtra, Andra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Mango is the most important fruit crop of India and it is grown on 1.401 million hectare land with total production of 9.782 million tones. It is more sensitive to soil salinity at younger stage. Northern India is the largest belt of mango cultivation contains appreciable amount of salts due to introduction of canal irrigation. It has now become serious problem for the establishment of new mango orchards. In irrigated areas, salinity is almost a universal threat because irrigation water normally contains hundred or thousands mg salts per liter of irrigation water. Little efforts have been made to study the effect of salts in systematic manner. Emphasis must be given to find out the physiology of salt stress in mango and its impact on the different plant growth functions. There are two-three mango genotypes having some degree of tolerance to salt but studies on the exact mechanism and level of salt tolerance in those mango genotypes still lacking. Identification of salt tolerant rootstocks and performance of scion cultivars on those rootstocks in saline conditions will determine the success and expansion of mango area in salt affected soils.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahmed. A.M. and Ahmed, EE (1997). Ann. Agric. Sci. 35: 901-908.
  2. Anonymous (1989). IIHR, News 10 (4): 1-3
  3. Anonymous (2004). Survey of Indian Agriculture, 2004.
  4. Bhambota, J.R. et a/., (1963). Punjab Hart. J. 8: 164-170.
  5. Hoult, M.D. et a/., (1997). Acta Hart. 455: 455- 458.
  6. Jindal, P'C et a/., (1979a). Haryana J. Hart. Sci.8:39-4l.
  7. Jindal, P.C. et a/., (1975). Haryana J. Hart. Sci. 4: 112-15
  8. Jindal, P.C. eta/., (1976). HaryanaJ. Hart. Sci.5:13-14.
  9. Jindal, P.C. et a/., (1979b). Indian J. Agric. Sci 49:105-109
  10. Jindal, P.C. et a/.. (1983). Prog. Hart. 15 (3):226·228.
  11. Jindal, PcC and Makhija, M. 1983. Progressive Horticulture 15(3): 226-228.
  12. Martinez et a/., (1999). Irrigation Under Conditions of Water Scarcity Vol. IG 17th International Congress on Irrigation
  13. and Drainage, Granada, Spain. Published In Commission on Irrigation and Drainage. pp 61-71.
  14. Nigam JK et ai, (2002). Indian J. Hart. 59 (1): 17-23.
  15. Pandey, R.M. et aI., (1971). Curro Sci. 40 : 356-57
  16. Rao and Pathak (1989). Indian J. Hart. 6(2): 99-102.
  17. Samra, J.S. (1985). Indian J. Hart. 42(3-4): 178-183.
  18. Samra, J.S. (1989). Acta Hart. 231:306-31l.
  19. Schmutz, U. and LUdders, P (1993). Acta Hart. 341:160-167
  20. Schmutz, U. and Ludders, P. (1994). Angewandte- Botanik Berichte 5: 189-193.
  21. Schmutz, U. and Ludders, P. (1998). AngewaTledte- Botanik, 72: 131-135.
  22. Schmutz, U. and Ludders, P. (1999). Gartenbauwissenscnaft 64(2) : 60-64.
  23. Schmutz, U. and Ludders, P. (1999). Plant Genetic Resource News Jetter 119: 7-11.
  24. Schmutz, U. et aI. (2000). Acta Hart. 509: 269-276
  25. Schmutz, U. et a/., (1993). Acta Hart. 341:160:167.
  26. Singh, AK ( 1985). M.Sc. Thesis JARI, New Delhi
  27. Wang, W.R. et a/., (2000). J. Trap. Subtrap. Bot. 8: 333·338.
  28. West, DW. (1986). Acta Hart. 175:321-332.

Global Footprints