branched coconut palms_furtado

7/26/2019 Branched Coconut Palms_Furtado

1/6

274

13. . epson, F. P.

Depart.

ngric, l

ij i, Pall/pillet r,'o. ] j

.

p.

3, Suva 1915.

l ~

'Kern er

I on

Maurilaul1,

A- The Na.lmuZ History

of

P7,MltS.

Rngli

sh

Eel

.

Yol.

n ,

1.

onelol1

1895. pp.

9(i

99.

I :' . I, uth, B. fla11 dbllch der lilldcnbiolo.r;ie. BIl.

III

, L

ei

p'l,ig.

19M, pp

.

59

and ')8 .

10.

1\1IJlI

'er , Jls ie M., Imperfec-t C o o n l 1 t

o ' l / . / I i . .\" e /l) J 017t; Hal .

(:(trf/.

.

11

, 1901 , PI'. 69-71.

1

7.

I,oyola, J. I. rle.

j i l i

'

ILI as I lIi{;ia'

lI(Js, Orlim ,

Cioa,

1806.

18. I'etch, '

I .

'l'he Flower 0'1

ihe

Cocon ut- Trop . .'I.r;rirll/.I1I.1i.,/ .

XU , 19 1B. pp.

5

In.

Ilnngachari.

K.

-

JI

.l;a:n1l1J7

of

NlclI1en/al'l/

lio/

I

I/I,I/

/01

I idin.

2nd

ErlitOo

Marlra s.

p. ~

2,n. ~ a . ' 1 . ~ < f

de.

0 ('ol/1U iro, :\ov>I-Uoa .

~ 9

2 1.

Samp

son .

1-1.

COo The ('OCOIl1 /

1 01111.

I,ondon, '192:, .

..

Smith. If.

fl.

F.

A. fl

. 1II1 e, .( O,O/llUS: fhe

( ' O I i S O / . ~ of

II, I

ga.,I,

2nd

E(l . London, 191,3. .

\'an

(ler I\olrl . Quoted

h ~

I-hlll ger ,

PI' . ?,

:L

2., . \\'orsd e

ll

, \\'. C

o {rili cip/es at { lal1/-T I'I'II/olo(J J. \'01.

I I,

Lon

dol1

191

G, pp

. 191-102.

BR NCHED COCONUT

PALMS

ND THEIR

FERTILITY

Apropos of the note on the

Fel'till:tY, of

Bmnchcri

( oco lltil

Pltllns

by Mr

.

Burkill,

published on page 1-2 of Vol.

III

of this

Rltllelin, the following may not he without in tere. t to reaelers.

Xorma ll

),

one coconut fruit gives ri se to .one shoot an el this

in its t

urn

to one stem.

t

is not

inf

requently, howeve l',

thnt

one

meets with

wiele

deviations from

this

normal

p henomen on. A nu t,

for

in

tance, may on

germination,

give ri se to more th

an

one shoot,

each

arising

from a sep

arate carpe

l in the

nu

t.

Th

e writer has

110t

~ o n l e

across an instance where a

nut

h

ad mor

e tlian two fer tile

c

HI'pel

s:

but

it

must

be

re

member

ed

that

the coco

nu

t has a

tr

ilo

Plllar ovary whereill normally t

wo

of t

he

locules become abortive.

('a

ses, the;efore. ma.' occur ;vhere all three

ca rp

els

ma.,I'

be

stimu-

lated i'o

be

come fertile a.' in

so

me speci

eR Tela1

'ed

to Cocos 1Mwifem.

POI'heR

repo

rt

s o

a

nut with t

hr

ee cell s

separated

hI'

leathery

',11k

8aml'son (I )

appears

to ha

ve

seen cases where t he septa

separntill

g the ovul

es

were

hard

amI

not

lea.thery.

'POl

be

s. in his

ll1'tic-le above refe

rred

t o write : 1 ha

ve

seen al 0 nuts with

c e l l ~

l'angilll( from

1'0111'

to eight

f;lld

ten .

r

~ e n d

VOll

a rough ouLline

sketr

h

01'

a tree whir-h ha s eome

up from

a

nu

t of fOlll'teell ce

l k

all of

\\

'h ieh

germinating.

prorlu( ' in, ); a

h'pe

with fomtecn stems


2/6

275

u ll.ited at the

ua

se.

f

Forbes' conclusions as to

the

occurrence

0 1

mor

e than t

hr

ee ce lls in a nut are con'ect, then

the

phenomenon

C'oncer

ned mig

ht

ue a case of vegeta tive

multip

li

cation

of carpel

s.

I f, all the othe hand , his conclnsiol1 s were based mer ely on

the

Illlm

h


3/6

276

ca

Res

gJVw g c isagn)'lble smell. '

l'hough

a specia l wateh was no t

ke

pt

on the plan tat ion 1'0 1' t he di sease ,e1 it IV,I S cust

omarv

to

kill and bUnl nil such p lan ts t ha t cam e to the no tice of t he

manager

a nd sp ray the

lJ

eighbouring OJ]es wit h c

opp

er sulphate . rt was

sa id tha t t he disease

wa

s never see n in t he I

i}s

ta te on p[,ln

ts

old

er

t han te n 01' tweh e vea l'S a nd t hat t he cases were alw,

lVs

spoTud ie,

the a

U-ac

kee l tl pes ll -lre

J oCl.:

tllT iJlg ill groups

01

he

cu

-llg Il \

r

defill ijc

relation to the old ('a es .

All

t hi s inl'OI

l11

ation

cO

llpled with

nn'

obse rv

ation

of t he Iact t ha t n umerou s plants sh

ow

in g s imilar

o\'mp to IllS, eseap cd th e Ho t ice of the Ill all in cha rge of t he phlllta

hon

and thai

' t he disease neither killed these nn

treated

pl ant,

nor

d id i t seem to spreael rolll these to t he neighho uring trees

leel me to the eonclusion t ha t t he t rouble ill qu estion wa s ot her

t ha n the ' uspected bnl r s.

Rut

even if their l ife was I)] olongerl fo r mOre ve

aT

S T elo

n

ot

think they would g ive

ri

se

to

the peTmanent ly br

an

ched palm.

at

len

st

the phen

omr

non concern ed woulrl he

ve

r

I'

different

f rom

that of fhe ord inHl 'y Hl11 iAca

i:io

n

in palms.

(cf. Burkill's

pa

.per ).


4/6

277

The pe

dun

cle

that

bears

th

ese abnormal

st

ruc

tm es

is essentially

oE th e type of the normal inflorescen

ces

: clean, and fibrous for a

:f

oot or less hom the base, while t he structure of the

bran

ches

from the point of fork is

qf

the type of the stem. 'rhe peduncle

do

es

n

ot

in

crea

se

in

si

ze

mu

ch more t

han th

e pe

du

ncle of normal

initoresccnces, and , like t he peduncle of normal inflorescen ces, has

a te

nd

ency to form absciss layer a

nd separat

e form th e

main

axis.

S

om

e of th

ese

bulbils bear minute inflorescen

ces

con sisting of tiny

male floret s and no femal e. In the cases ob

se

rved by me these

itowers were borne by secondary shoots

pr

oduce d on t he bulbils.

The bulbils do not show any tend ency to form roots in urti

r.c-ia

l

media ( ) ('

0).

Dr.

Puln

ey A

nd

y

('

) has described a

mO

llstrosit.y which

con sisted in the phyHody of t he greater portion of

th

e female

itowers in the spadix, and not of

th

e whole inflorescence itself.

H ere too the flow er-bud cannot, by such metamorphosis, g.ive

ri

se

to r amifica ti on in a

palm

without a t ru e axillary leaf-bud.

Fertility

In the abo ve ciscu

ss

ion i t bec

om

es cle

ar

that the term

br

anching is loo

se

ly applied to various

ph

enomena, including

some t

hat

ca

nnot

be

cl

assed as bran ching.

And

it is possible t

hat

the conce

ption

that the true branched palms

ar

e permanently

in

fert

ile has org

ina

ted from the con fusion w

hi

ch ex ists as to the

meaning of t he te

rm

bran

ched coconut Jalms,

th at

is, by t rans

ference to other s of th e conception derived from some special case

or

vh

enomena. Otherwi

se

the

pr

evalen

ce

of the idea th

at th

e

branched palms

ar

e perman en tly unprod uctive is r eally unfound ed.

I

have

seen a

coc onut In

anchin

g

at the ba

se

bea

rin

g

f

ruit

s ; a

nd

there are numerous refer ences which show

tha

t branched

coconu ts are not in fe

rtil

e. Morri

s, (11)

for in

sta

nce, rep

ort

s a

fruit

in the Kew Museum

hom

a branch d coconu t t ree of the

Fiji I slands. According to Scott, ( IS) there was a

t.r

ee in the

vi c

ini

ty of C alcutta wi th five fruit-bea

ring

branches . H enry (8)

makes mention of a coconut t ree in the Marquezas I slands, which

at the age of eighteen branched in to two, both heacIs starting to beaT

fruit

s after two years from

th

e o

cc

urrence of

th

e forking. Among

these cases there

ar

e

at

least two references which are of inter es t

to Malay

a.

Th

e front ispiece of the t reati

se

on coconut by Munro

and Brown

('

) is of a coconut tree branc

hin

g out ne

ar

the to.p

into fi

ve

distin ct stem

s,

each of which is carry

in

g f

ru

i t. 'l'he

econd is of a coconut t ree in 'P enang which hall six bTan ches, each

of which were loaded with nuts

.

(3) Apart f rom these, the

ons

oi

s of the rtst

by Smi th and P ape (,0)

and

Hunge

r '

s J

ocos

nm ci f m ( 0). have photographs of branched coconut palms bearing

frui ts .

In

fact c

on

sidering

th

e presen

ce

of the photographs

in

the

above quoted st

andar

d

tr

e

ati

ses on co

conu

t, one cannot un der s

tand

the reputed prevalence in Malaya of t he view that branched coc

onut

palms aTe st erile,


5/6

27

8

By this I do not wi sh to be lUlderstood to say that all t ruly

bran ched coconut palms are productive. Cases may o

cc

ur wheTe

branched coc

onut

s may not start yielding for a very long period ;

but in such cases, before one can draw conclusions,

it

has to

be

ascer

tained whether the unproduc

ti

ve

ness is due to

want

of

pr

oper

caT

e,

to the fact t

hat

the tTee has

not

yet

fin

ished bra

n.

c

hi

ng, or to

som e other cause.

A veTY inteTesting })oint in connec tion with th

ese ab

normal

palms is to Imow how then progeny behave and i t is very astonishing

that nobody has ye t t

Ti

ed to solve this question. t is

not

yet

known, fOT in stance, whether

see

ds of th

ese pa

lms Will keep true

to the abnoTmal chaTactei 01 Teturn to the character o:f the parents

to these abnormal ones ;

wh

ether all of the

see

ds will do so 01: only,

a paTt of t hem, and. how

la

rge a

par

t. I n carrying investigations

in these lines care has to be taken to

pr

event cross-fer tilisation

wi

th the pollen from other plants. Tb is ,ll probably he

an

easy

matt

er with tbe dwarf coconuts

in :NIa

l aya where normally the

male and female flow ers r ipen i l l a manner as to cnSUTe self

poll

ination

if protec ted by a bag fTom foreign pollen.

f,

however,

t he

in

florescences of these abllorm al palms are protanch ous, then

the female flow ers will have to be artifi cially ferti li sed wi th the

pollen from the male flowers in the same

tree

. The brallches pf

palms subject to heavy w:inds

and

, therefor

e,

liable to be broken ,

may be induced to form

ae

rial roots on stems by marc

otta

ge and

th

en detached and nlanted

in

a place convenie

nt

to carry on with

the

obs

ervations. The crown of a palm thus detached has been

o

bse

rved by me to geow wh en planted out amI this

pra

ctice, i t

appears, is som etim

es

resorted to by the gardeners in Malabar,

Inelia. (0)

I n cases where the infloresce))ces foliate I have not come

across a sillgle refeTence stating that such tTees or their b

ul

biis have

borne fruits. In the case describ

ec

l bv Dr. u l n Andy the

tr

ee

do es not pToduce a pCJfect

fru

it. And probably these aTe the only

two

ph

enomena of the on

es

described above which are infer

ti

le.

These cases however should not be confu

se

d with the ones where

coco

nu

t fru its , instead of falling when matUTe and dry, remain on

the stalk

aud

under cer tain con ditions germin

at

e on the tree.

GuPpy ( ) saw a case where a seedling thus ge

rm

inated was about

g h

t ~

n in ches high.

C. X.

FURTA

D

O

Bibl

ography

1.

AN

DY

, P . S.- On Branched P alms in Southe

rn Tnd ia.

T1'( ll

s.

L

inn

So

c. XXVI, (187

0)

pp. 661-662.

See alRo J. Shor

t

t s ar ti cle on the same subjec t in the

JOU1 .

Linn. Soc. Botany, Vol XI, (1871) pp. 14-17.

2. BURKILL, I . J-f.- An m o m t y in the Coconut Palm.

J 1t1.

R . .As;n

c Soc., S

tmi

ts

131 . No. 9, (1915) p. 15.

3.

Ce

ylon

Ob

se1

vc

r.

~

ov.

7,

] 9M- Quoted

in

A.gric .

IV

ews,

Barbad

os

,

T, p. 62,


6/6

279

4. l OHJJ I:S, H. O.

otes on the Cocos N u c i f e r a - J o ~ Botany,

XVII,

(1879) pp. 19 3-194.

5.

FUJt1'ADO, C. X. and BAlUlli'J:O,

P.

C.-

An

Abnormality of

Coconut Infloresce

nce-The

Poona l

1g

l

ic

.

Co

llege Maga

zine, XII, (19 ) No. 2, p. 81-82.

6.

FUH1'ADO , C. X.-Vegetative Reproduction in Coconuts

The POO'

( g'ric. Coli. Mag.

XV, 1922, pp. 144-146.

7. Guppy, IT.

B.- Obse'rv(,tions of

u Natu

'mlist in the Pacific,

London, 1906, Vol II, p. 472.

8. HEN

RY,

('.- l ntelm,t. R ev , of Sci. (md Pmct . of Agl'im,ltu're,

Rome, (1920), No. 10 88 .

9. H UNGEH F.

W.

1'.- Cocos m,cij'era., Amsterdam, 1920, p. 218,

pI.

LIX.

10. IYE NGA

R,

M. O. P .

ote on a Bulbiferous Coconut Tree

from M:

alabar-Jowr.

Ind'ian Botany, Vol. III, (1923)

pp. 2 9-2

91.

11. MOlUll S,

D.-On

the Phenomenon Concerned

in

the Pro

duction of Forked and Branched Palms-Joul. Linn. Soc.

Bot.

XXIX,

(1892) pp. 281-298.

12. MU NHO, Jl.. IV.

an

c

BllOIV N. JJ. C A. Pmctic(,l G ~ , i d e to

Coco

nut Planting, London, 1916.

13

. l)],1 c]I , T. hnormalities of the Coconut Palm-Ann. Roy.

Bot.

Gw

r

d.

Pcmdeniya

Vol VI, (1915-17) pp . 25-29.

14

. PET

CH '1. and

G,

WD, C. H .- The Heplacement of the

ferminal Bud ill the Coconut Palm. Annuls of Botany,

XXXVII,

1923, pp. 445-450.

15. RIDLEY, H . N .-Branching ill Palms-Annals of Botuny,

Vol

XXI,

(1907) , .pp.

415-See

also WorsdelFs Ter

atology,

Vol

1.

pp. 10,9-111.

16. SAMp

ON H

C.- T he COCO'n-l,t Fulm : The Science und

Pmcti

ce of C o c o

n ~ , C ~ l t i v a t i o n London, 1923. pp.

17.

~ ( ) U O U T J o : et L E K

O V ~ K y

Q u o t

e

d by WOIlS

DELL,

01 .

Cit.

pp. 85 et 90.

18.

SCOTT J. - (]wrden

e'/ S'

C

h1-onicle, Vo l. L,

pt

. I (1874) p. 11 8

19. SUAHPLES, A., and LAMBOUlulE,

J . -Ob

servations in Malaya

on Bud-rot of Coc

ouut

s. Anna,ls of Botuny,

.

XXXVI,

19

22, pp. 55 -

70

.

20. SM l1 lf,

U H.

and PAPE, F . A.

G.

Coc

onuts: The Consols

o the East, London, 1913, p. 424.

21 . WonsDle

LL

, IV. C.-

'1

he Principles of

Plant-Terato

logy, Vol.

I,

London, 1915, pp, 109-111.

branched coconut palms_furtado

Documents