IMPACT OF WATER SOLUBLE GA3 TABLETS IN MANIK CHAMAN GRAPES

S.D. RAMTEKE1*, VIKAS URKUDE2, S.R. BHAGWAT3, U.V. DESHMUKH4, A.P. BIRHADE5
1ICAR-National Research Center for Grapes, P.B. No. 3, Manjari Farm P.O Solapur Road, Pune, 412307
2ICAR-National Research Center for Grapes, P.B. No. 3, Manjari Farm P.O Solapur Road, Pune, 412307
3ICAR-National Research Center for Grapes, P.B. No. 3, Manjari Farm P.O Solapur Road, Pune, 412307
4ICAR-National Research Center for Grapes, P.B. No. 3, Manjari Farm P.O Solapur Road, Pune, 412307
5ICAR-National Research Center for Grapes, P.B. No. 3, Manjari Farm P.O Solapur Road, Pune, 412307
* Corresponding Author : sdramteke@yahoo.com

Received : 31-12-2017     Accepted : 31-12-2017     Published : 30-01-2018
Volume : 10     Issue : 2       Pages : 5053 - 5055
Int J Agr Sci 10.2 (2018):5053-5055

Keywords : GA3, GA3 Tablet, Bioefficacy, Manik Chaman Grapes
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to the Director of ICAR-National Research Centre for Grapes, Pune for providing the necessary facilities to carry out the study
Author Contribution : All author equally contributed

Cite - MLA : RAMTEKE, S.D., et al "IMPACT OF WATER SOLUBLE GA3 TABLETS IN MANIK CHAMAN GRAPES." International Journal of Agriculture Sciences 10.2 (2018):5053-5055.

Cite - APA : RAMTEKE, S.D., URKUDE, VIKAS, BHAGWAT, S.R., DESHMUKH, U.V., BIRHADE, A.P. (2018). IMPACT OF WATER SOLUBLE GA3 TABLETS IN MANIK CHAMAN GRAPES. International Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 10 (2), 5053-5055.

Cite - Chicago : RAMTEKE, S.D., VIKAS URKUDE, S.R. BHAGWAT, U.V. DESHMUKH, and A.P. BIRHADE. "IMPACT OF WATER SOLUBLE GA3 TABLETS IN MANIK CHAMAN GRAPES." International Journal of Agriculture Sciences 10, no. 2 (2018):5053-5055.

Copyright : © 2018, S.D. RAMTEKE, et al, Published by Bioinfo Publications. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Abstract

A field trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of GA3 tablets (soluble in water) in grapes for improving the quality and yield. The trial was conducted during the season 2016-17 in grower’s vineyard located at Pandharpur (M.S.), India. The experiment was performed on Manik Chaman grape variety which was grafted on Dogridge rootstock. Different treatments of Gibberellic acid tablets (GA3 93%) and powders (GA3 90%) were applied at flowering, 3-4 mm berry stage and 6-8 mm stage of berry development. The observations of bunch weight, 100 berry weights, berry length, TSS, Acidity and yield parameters were taken at harvest. The data showed significant differences in mean bunch weight, berry size, quality and yield parameters. The mean bunch weight was recorded maximum in GA3 tablets when applied @ 40 ppm (372 g) treatments whereas it was found lowest in no application of GA3 (235.7 g). The berry sizes, skin thickness and yield per vine were also recorded significantly highest in GA3 applied plants. No symptoms of any abnormality, toxicity were found either on the leaves, canes, shoot or in grapes berries with the application of GA3 tablets up to 80 ppm concentration.

References

1. Abdul A.H., Zhang S.S., Chen D., Chen L., Chen K., Xu, C.J. and Chen Z. (1998) Scientia-Agricultura-Sinica, 31(1), 92-94.
2. Ben-Tal Y. (1990) Am. J. Enol. Vitic, 41, 142-146.
3. Bhat Z.A., Srihari D. and Reddy Y.N. (2004) Annals of Biology, 20, 75-77.
4. Cai-Li H., Hu- C. and Luo-Zheng R. (1996) South-China-Fruits, 25(2), 45-47.
5. Chadha K. L. and Shikhamany S. D. (1999) Malhotra Publishing House, New Delhi, India, 338-380.
6. Joblan M.J.P., Merino H.R., Wilckens E.R. and Medina E. (1995) Agro-Ciencia, 11(2),119-127.
7. Nakamura M. and Hori Y. (1981) Tokohu J. Agr. Res, 32, 1-13.
8. Rafaat. S., Elgendy S., Ghada S.S. and Ahmed O.A. (2012) Journal of American Science, 8(5), 21-34.
9. Ramteke S.D., Somkuwar R.G., Shikhamany S.D. and Satisha J. (2002) Indian J. Agric. Sci., 72(1), 3-5.
10. Ramteke S.D. and Somkuwar R.G. (2005) Ind. J. plant physiol, 10(2), 179-181.
11. Retamales J. and Cooper T. (1993) Acta Hortic, 329, 81-83.
12. Roper T.R. and Williams L.E. (1989) Plant Physiology, 89, 1136-1140.
13. Sheng B., Lin J., Shao M., Rui D. and Chang Y.H. (2004) Jiangsu. J. of Agril. Sci, 20 (1), 32-37.
14. Zoffoli J.P., Latorre B.A. and Naranjo P. (2009) Postharvest Biology and Technology, 51(2), 183-192.