Dr. Lelisa J. Teodosio

Aklan State UniversityBanga, Aklan, Philippines

Co-Researchers: Dr. Geronimo L. Gregorio, Dr. Elsa I. Abayon, Dr. Cora F. Navarra, Dr. Vicente J. Gallardo and Dr. Malco M. Teodosio

Field Evaluation of Tissue-Cultured Spanish Red Pineapple

(Ananas comosus L.) Applied with Different Cultural

Practices

Research Sub-studiesResearch Sub-studies

• Sub-study 1 - Growth and Fiber Yield of Tissue-Cultured Spanish Red

Pineapple Grown from Medium Fortified with Various Levels of BAP and Degrees of Shading

• Sub-study 2 - Field Performance of Tissue-Cultured Spanish Red

Pineapple Grown from Various Planting Materials Applied with Different Rates of NPK

Significance of the ResearchSignificance of the Research

• Farmer-grower• Piña Players• Researchers• Stakeholders from other industries

Growth and Fiber Yield of Tissue-Cultured Spanish Red Pineapple Grown from Medium

Fortified with Various Levels of BAP and Degrees of Shading

Study 1

ObjectivesObjectives

• Determine the effect of different concentrations of BAP during seedling production and various degrees of shading on the growth and fiber yield of TCSRP under field conditions.

• Find out the interaction effect between the two factors.

• Calculate the economic return of producing the piña fibers.

Experimental TreatmentsExperimental Treatments

Factor A (BAP Levels) Factor B (Degree of Shading)

A1 – 3 ppm B1 – control

A2 – 5 ppm B2 – 25%

A3 – 7 ppm B3 – 50%

A4 – 10 ppm B4 – 75%

Findings of the StudyFindings of the Study

Degree of Shading

(%)

BAP Level

Meanns

3 ppm 5 ppm 7 ppm 10 ppm

Control 17.06a 10.56c 16.64ab

14.84abc

14.78

25 16.90a 11.71a 13.68a 11.00a 13.32

50 14.13ab

15.76a 10.65b 13.63ab 13.54

75 17.55a 11.86a 9.50b 10.78b

12.42

MEAN* 16.41a 12.47b 12.62b

12.56b 13.52

Table 1. Mean number of months from planting to maturity of tissue-cultured SR pineapple as influenced by various levels of BAP and degrees of shading.

CV (a) = 18.94; CV (b) = 16.63

Findings of the StudyFindings of the Study

Degree of Shading

(%)

BAP Level

Meanns

3 ppm 5 ppm 7 ppm 10 ppm

Control 131.61 109.33 138.38 126.33 126.41

25 137.17 130.00 126.89 124.61 129.67

50 120.39 109.28 115.90 128.61 118.54

75 128.83 106.42 113.33 94.07 110.66

MEAN* 129.50a 113.76b 123.63ab 118.41b 121.32

Table 2. Mean plant height (cm) at harvest of tissue-cultured SR pineapple as influenced by various levels of BAP and

degrees of shading.

CV (a) = 7.90; CV (b) = 19.60

Findings of the StudyFindings of the Study

Degree of Shading

(%)

BAP Level

Meanns

3 ppm 5 ppm 7 ppm 10 ppm

Control 52.0052.00 42.0042.00 50.3350.33 50.0050.00 48.5848.58

25 50.3450.34 48.0048.00 46.3346.33 42.0042.00 46.6746.67

50 45.6645.66 50.0050.00 51.6751.67 49.3349.33 49.1649.16

75 55.3355.33 47.3447.34 46.0046.00 40.0040.00 47.1747.17

MEAN* 50.83a 46.84b 48.58ab 45.33b 47.90

Table 3. Mean number of leaves produced per plant at harvest by tissue-cultured SR pineapple as influenced by various levels of BAP and degrees of shading.

CV (a) = 11.20; CV (b) = 19.30

Findings of the StudyFindings of the Study

Degree of Shading

(%)

BAP Level

Mean*

3 ppm 5 ppm 7 ppm 10 ppm

Control 35.00a/a 24.33a/c 34.00a/ab 29.67a/ab 30.75a

25 30.67ab/a 24.33a/ab 25.00b/ab 22.00b/b 25.50c

50 26.33a/a 29.33a/a 28.67ab/a 30.00a/a 28.58ab

75 35.00a/a 24.67a/b 23.67a/b 22.33b/b 26.42bc

MEAN** 31.75a 25.67d 27.83b 26.00bc 27.81

Table 4. Mean number of harvestable leaves per plant produced by tissue-cultured SR pineapple as influenced by various levels of BAP and degrees shading.

CV (a) = 9.80; CV (b) = 13.70

Findings of the StudyFindings of the Study

ItemDegree of Shading (%)

Control 25 50 75

Average Yield (t/ha) 1.93 2.13 2.20 1.97

Gross Income (M) 3.25 3.59 3.70 3.25

Production Cost (M) 1.58 1.56 1.79 1.79

Labor Cost (M) 1.33 2.19 2.46 1.19

Material Cost (K)Material Cost (K) 254 439 519 599

Net Income (M)Net Income (M) 1.67 2.03 1.91 1.53

ROWC (%) ROWC (%) 105.19 129.53 106.97 85.32

Table 5. Cost and return analysis per hectare (Php) of producing piña fiber derived from tissue-cultured SR pineapple

seedlings as influenced by various degrees of shading.

Field Performance of Tissue-Cultured Spanish Red Pineapple Grown from Various Planting

Materials Applied with Different Rates of NPK

Study 2

ObjectivesObjectives

• Evaluate the growth and yield of TCSRP seedlings grown from different planting materials applied with varying levels of NPK under field conditions.

• Find out the interaction effect between the two factors.

• Calculate the economic return of producing the piña fibers.

Experimental TreatmentsExperimental Treatments

Factor A (Source) Factor B (NPK Rate)

A1 – Crown B1 – control

A2 – Sucker B2 – 25%

A3 – Slip B3 – 50%

B4 – 75%

Findings of the StudyFindings of the Study

NPK Rate(% of RR)

Source of Planting Material Mean**

Crown Sucker Slip

Control 24.67b 26.67b 31.00a 27.45b

25 35.67a 33.00a 32.33a 33.67a

50 36.33a 30.33b 31.67b 32.77a

75 30.67b 35.00a 30.67b 32.11a

MEANns 31.83 31.25 31.42 31.50

Table 6. Mean number of harvestable leaves per plant produced by tissue-cultured SR pineapple as influenced by sources of planting materials and NPK rates.

CV (a) = 9.83; CV (b) = 10.16

Findings of the StudyFindings of the Study

NPK Rate(% of RR)

Source of Planting Material Mean**

Crown Sucker Slip

Control 116.40 114.25 124.47 118.37bc

25 108.31 115.33 112.06 111.90c

50 121.58 121.98 127.06 123.53ab

75 136.00 130.60 124.76 130.45a

MEANns 120.57120.57 120.54120.54 122.08122.08 121.06121.06

Table 7. Mean number of fiber strand of bastos per leaf produced by tissue-cultured SR pineapple as influenced by sources of planting materials and NPK rates.

CV (a) = 5.90; CV (b) = 4.30

Findings of the StudyFindings of the Study

ItemNPK Rate (% of RR)

Control 25 50 75

Average Yield (t/ha) 2.49 2.03 2.29 2.52

Gross Income (M) 4.19 3.42 3.86 4.24

Production Cost (M) 1.44 1.64 1.67 1.71

Labor Cost (M) 1.19 1.39 1.42 1.45

Material Cost (K)Material Cost (K) 250 251 253 254

Net Income (M)Net Income (M) 2.75 1.78 2.19 2.54

ROWC (%) ROWC (%) 191.05 108.56 131.13 148.60

Table 8. Cost and return analysis per hectare (Php) of producing piña fiber derived from tissue-cultured SR pineapple seedlings applied with various rates of NPK.

ConclusionsConclusions

• The different BAP concentrations in the tissue culture medium affected the growth of TCSRP, particularly the number of months from planting to maturity, plant height, number of leaves developed per plant and number of harvestable leaves.

• Subjecting TCSRP to different degrees of shading showed no variation on the growth and fiber yield except on the number of harvestable leaves.

ConclusionsConclusions

• Growth characteristics and fiber yield of TCSRP was not affected by the different sources of planting materials except for the plant height. Whereas, the different rates of NPK significantly affected the number of harvestable leaves per plant and number of fiber strands of bastos.

ConclusionsConclusions

• A significant interaction effect between the levels of BAP fortification and degrees of shading was observed on the number of months from planting to maturity and number of harvestable leaves per plant. Likewise, a significant interaction effect between the sources of planting materials and NPK rates was noted on the number of leaves developed per plant.

ConclusionsConclusions

• Higher net income and ROWC was realized in the use of TCSRP seedlings grown under 25% shading. On the other hand, the highest net income and consequently the highest ROWC were realized from the production of TCSRP without fertilizer treatment. Among the NPK-applied plants, the 75% rate gave higher economic return.

ImplicationsImplicationsAny of the three sources of planting

materials (crown, slip and sucker) could be used for the tissue-culture of Spanish Red pineapple. The Spanish Red pineapple should be cultured in a medium fortified with 3 and 5 ppm BAP for optimum growth.

TCSRP should be planted in 25% shaded area to yield the highest ROWC. The use of 75% NPK of RR is recommended to produce more fiber strands (bastos or coarse fiber) per leaf.

Thank you!Thank you!