Loading...

Effect of Spacing and Fertigation on Growth and Yield Parameters of French Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) under Protected Cultivation

DOI: 10.18805/LR-4288    | Article Id: LR-4288 | Page : 742-748
Citation :- Effect of Spacing and Fertigation on Growth and Yield Parameters of French Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) under Protected Cultivation.Legume Research.2022.(45):742-748
T.M. Neethu, Nagarajappa Adivappar, V. Srinivasa, G.K. Girijesh neethumallik0@gmail.com
Address : Department of Vegetable Science, College of Horticulture Mudigere, University of Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences, Shivamogga-577 204, Karnataka, India.
Submitted Date : 25-11-2019
Accepted Date : 21-10-2020

Abstract

Background: French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is an important and widely grown leguminous vegetable. The area under this crop in protected cultivation is increasing due to its high yield and remunerative price. There is scanty of information on pacing and nutrients for fertigation under protected cultivation. Hence the experiment was carried out to determine the effect of spacing and fertigation on growth and yield parameters in French bean under naturally ventilated polyhouse during Kharif 2018 at Zonal Agricultural and Horticultural Research Station, Navile, Shivamogga.
Methods: The experiment was laid out in split plot design with three replications. There were 18 treatment combinations comprised of three different spacing treatments and six fertigation treatments. 
Result: Among all the treatments significantly highest number of primary branches (8.70) and secondary branches (8.50) at 45 days after sowing (DAS), number of pods plant-1 (220.20), pod length (20.66 cm), pod girth (2.95 cm) and pod weight (17.69g) were recorded in the treatment combination with 60 × 75cm with 44:70:53 kg ha-1 + mulching + micronutrient spray. The least number of primary branches (4.27), secondary branches (4.50), number of pods plant-1 (160.33), pod length (15.61cm), pod girth (1.75 cm) and pod weight (13.88g) were observed in the treatment combination with 60 × 45 cm spacing with 33:52.5:39.75 kg of N:P:K kg ha-1. The higher plant height at 45 DAS (480.50 cm) and yield (13.06 t) for 1000 m-2 was found in treatment combination 60 × 45cm with 44:70:53 kg ha-1 + mulching + micronutrient spray (S3T4). It was concluded from the study that, the closer spacing (60 × 45cm) with the combination of 44:70:53 kg ha-1 (N:P:K), mulching and micronutrient spray resulted in higher pod yield (13.06 t) 1000m-2.

Keywords

Fertigation Pod characters Polyhouse

References

  1. Asaye, B., Tilahun, T., Daniel, T. (2018). Effect of inter- and intra-row spacing on yield and yield components of mung bean (Vigna radiata L.) under rain-fed condition at Metema District, northwestern Ethiopia. Agric. and Food Secur. 7: 84.
  2. Assinapol, N., Praneetha, S., Rajasree, V. (2017). Performance of grafted brinjal (Solanum melongena L) under different spacing and fertigation levels. J. Pharm. Phytochem. 6(2): 307-311.
  3. Borhan, U., Paul, A.K., Fazle, B.A.S.M., Saima, S., Shah, J.M. (2014). Effect of different levels of nitrogen and phosphorus on the growth and yield of garden pea (Pisum sativum L.). Eco-friendly Agril. J. 7(09): 93-99.
  4. Deka, K.K., Milu R.D., Bora, P., Mazumder, N. (2015). Effect of sowing dates and spacing on growth and yield of cluster bean (Cyamopsistetragonoloba) in subtropical climate of Assam, India. Indian J. Agric. Res. 49(3): 250-254.
  5. Gomez, K.A., Gomez, A.A. (19840). Statistical procedures for agricultural research with emphasis on rice. John wiley and Sors, New York. pp. 680.
  6. Hussein, A., Benmoussa, M., Andabbad, M. (2018). Effect of population density and dose of nitrogen and potassium fertilizers on performance of green bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). J. Fundam. Appl. Sci. 10(1): 46-58.
  7. Jeevitha, D., Krishna Manohar, R., Madhuri, R.K., Vasnathakumari, R. (2017). Effect of spacing and fertigation on yield parameters of onion hybrid ArkaLalima. J. Hill Agric. 8(2): 250-252.
  8. Kalanjiya, S., Manickam, A. (2015). Fertigation studies in tomato. J. Pln. and Agric. Res. 1(1): 25-29.
  9. Krishnamoorthy, V., Noorjehan, A.K.A.H. (2014). Effect of water soluble and conventional fertilizers on growth and yield of chillies. J. Krishi Vigyan. 2(2): 28-30.
  10. Manjesh, M., Adivappar, N., Srinivasa, V., Girijesh, G.K., haranabasappa. (2019). Effect of plant densities and different environments on productivity and profitability of yardlong bean (Vigna unguiculata sub sp. sesquipedalis). Leg. Res. 42(3): 348-353. 
  11. Melak, A. (2018). Effect of Spacing on Yield Components and Yield of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) at Assosa, Western Ethiopia. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Sci. Pub. Grp. 7(2): 39-51.
  12. Mostafa, N.F., Zohair, M.M., Abdishakur, S.H. (2014). Effect of NPK fertigation rate and starter fertilizer on the growth and yield of cucumber grown in greenhouse. J. Agric. Sci. 9(6): 81-92.
  13. Muhammad, Z.Y., Muhammad, S.G., Mohammed, I.B., Andgaya, A.G. (2017). Influenced of phosphorus and intra row spacing on yield and yield components of lablab (Lablab purpureus) varieties in the Sudan Savanna, Nigeria. Int. J. Sci. Eng. App. Sci. 3(3): 276-285.
  14. Prabu, M., Natarajan, S., Pugalendhi, L., Murugesan, R. (2016). Impact of drip fertigation on leaf nutrient status and yield attributes in chilli (Capsicum annuum L.) Hybrid CCH1. Asian J. Hort. 11(1): 47-51.
  15. Sahana, P., Nagarajappa, A., Srinivasa, V., Girijesh, G.K., Ganapathi, M. (2018).Effect of nutrients and mulching on growth and yield of pole bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) under polyhouse. J. Farm Sci. Spl. 31(5): 592-594.
  16. Satodiya, B.N., Patel, H.C., Soni, N.V. (2015). Effect of planting density and integrated nutrient management on flowering, growth and yield of vegetable cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L) Walp]. The Asian J. Horti. 10(2): 232-236.
  17. Wondimu, W., Tana, T. (2017). Yield response of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) varieties to combined application of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers at Mechara. Eastern Ethiopia. J. Plant Biol. Soil Health. 4(2): 1-7.

Global Footprints