study on growth, flowering and carotenoids …singh netam, my elder sister-sister in law,madhunetam...

STUDY ON GROWTH, FLOWERING AND

CAROTENOIDS CONTENT OF AFRICAN MARIGOLD

(Tageteserecta) UNDER CHHATTISGARH PLAINS AGRO-

CLIMATIC CONDITION

M.Sc. (Hort.)Thesis

By

MANISHA NETAM

DEPARTMENT OF FLORICULTURE AND LANDSCAPE

ARCHITECTURE

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE

INDIRA GANDHI KRISHI VISHWAVIDYALAYA

RAIPUR (Chhattisgarh)

2017

STUDY ON GROWTH, FLOWERING AND

CAROTENOIDS CONTENT OF AFRICAN MARIGOLD

(Tageteserecta) UNDER CHHATTISGARH PLAINS AGRO-

CLIMATIC CONDITION

M.Sc. (Hort.)Thesis

Submitted to the

Indira Gandhi KrishiVishwavidyalaya, Raipur

by

ManishaNetam

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE DEGREE OF

Master of Science

in

(Horticulture)

College ID -120115187U.E. ID -20151622601

JULY, 2017

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I feel great pride in expressing about my academic journey with deepest sense of

gratitude and sincere thanks to those people who gave their contribution. It was their

blessings showered on me that I travelled the academic path with ease and reached to this

end

Words fail to express my humble gratitude, appreciation, reverence and sense of

indebtedness to my major advisor Dr. Gaurav Sharma, Assistant Professor, Department

of Floriculture and Landscape Architecture, College of Agriculture, Raipur whose

unimpeachable and incessant guidance, creative thoughts and plentiful encouragement in

spite of all his multifarious responsibilities, helped me to accomplish the research

successfully.

My co-advisor, Dr. NeerajShukla, Professor and Head, Department of Floriculture and

Landscape Architecture, College of Agriculture, IGKV, Raipur, (C.G.), has been always

there to listen and give advice. I am deeply grateful to him for the long discussions that

helped me sort out the technical details of my work. Dr. S.K. Nair, Assistant Professor,

Department of Genetics and plant Breeding and Dr. D. Khokhar, Assistant Professor,

Department of Plant Physiology, insightful comments and constructive criticisms at

different stages of my research were thought-provoking and they helped me focus my

ideas. I am grateful to him for holding me to a high research standard and enforcing

strict validations for each research result, and thus teaching me how to do research.

I wish to express my cordial thanks to Dr. Ravi R. Saxena Professor, Department of

Agricultural Statistics and Social Science (Language), who is one of the best teachers that

I have had in my life. He sets high standards for his students and he encourages and

guides them to meet those standards. He introduced me to Statistical Logic and his

teachings inspired me to work on this dissertation. I am indebted to him for his

continuous encouragement and guidance.

Particularly, I would like to acknowledge Dr. L.S. Verma and Dr. T. Tirkey, Assistant

Professor, Department of Floriculture and Landscape Architecture.

I pay my sincere thanks to Harsh bhaiya, Radhebhaiya, Karanbhaiya, Shekharbhaiya,

Manojbhaiya, Gautambhaiyaand all other non-teaching staff of Department of

Floriculture and Landscape Architecture for timely cooperation and help during the

entire research work.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. MadhavPandey (Librarian, Nehru

Library, Raipur) for giving me there kind help during my present study.

I wish to record my grateful thanks to Dr. S.K. Patil, Hon’ble Vice Chancellor, Dr. O.P.

Kashyap Dean, College of Agriculture, Dr. S.S. Rao, Director Research Services, Dr.

M.P. Thakur,DirectorServices,Dr.S.S. Sa, Director of Instructions and Dr. G.K.

iv

Shrivastava, Dean Student Welfare IGKV, Raipur for providing necessary facilities

technical and administrative supports for conductance of this research work.

No words can felicity unveils the feeling of recourse, foster and supportive received from

family and friends. I would like to grateful to my friends and family who has supported me

either directly or indirectly are praiseworthy. From the depth of my heart, I owe

everything to my beloved family my mother – father, Mrs. TriveniNetam and Mr.Chetan

Singh Netam, my elder sister-sister in law,MadhuNetam and Kundan Singh Dhruw, my

loving brothers Rupendra and Deependra who have been the imperative cause of

incentive and having faith that aid me becoming better and all are rooting for me

throughout my work. This thesis would not have been accomplish in a approving way

without the kith and kin fondness, strong willed, forego, coddle backing, scrupulous

thanksgiving and blessings of the biggest asset of my life.

I am pleased to thank to my workmate/compatriot for their succor, backing and stand

shoulder to shoulder with me AbhilashShuklawho have done me a great service. I would

like to thanks my seniors VikasRamteke Sir,SushilKashyap Sir, JitendraSahu Sir.I cannot

forget friends who went through hard times together, cheered me on, and celebrated each

accomplishment: PriyankaKujur,SushmaNetam,RuchiOtti,TanuSahu& Harsh Turkar. I

will miss you all.

In the last but not least I am thankful to the almighty God. Thank you God… please

continue to light my path and let me be a light for anothers.

DATED:

ManishaNetam

Department of Floriculture and Landscape Architecture College of Agriculture, I.G.K.V. Raipur (C.G.)

v

LIST OF CONTENTS

Chapter No. Title Page (s)

No.

CERTIFICATE – I I

CERTIFICATE – II II

ACKNOWLEDMENT III

TABLE OF CONTENTS IV

LIST OF TABLES V

LIST OF FIGURES VI

LIST OF PLATES VII

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS VIII

ABSTRACT IX

I INTRODUCTION 1

II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 3

2.1 Growth and flowering attributes 3

2.2 Xanthophyll yieid and its attributes 7

III MATERIALS AND METHODS 13

3.1 Geographical Situation 13

3.2 Experimental Site and Season 13

3.3 Weather condition 14

3.4 Soil characteristics of the experimental field 14

3.5 Design and layout of experiment 16

3.6 Cultural operations 21

3.6.1 Raising of seedlings 21

3.6.2 Field preparation 21

3.6.3 Irrigation 21

3.6.4 Manures and fertilizers 21

3.6.5 Pinching 22

3.6.6 Weeding 22

3.6.7 Plant protection 22

3.7 Observations recorded 22

3.7.1 Observations of vegetative phase 22

3.7.1.1Plant height (cm) 22

3.7.1.2Plant spread (cm) 22

3.7.1.3 Number of primary branches plant-1 22

3.7.1.4 Number of secondary branches plant-1

23

3.7.1.5 Number of leaves plant-1

23

3.7.2 Observations of flowering attributes 23

vi

3.7.2.1 Days to first bud appearance 23

3.7.2.2 Days to 50% flowering 23

3.7.2.3 Flower diameter (cm) 23

3.7.2.4 Number of flowers plant-1

23

3.7.2.5 Flower weight plant-1

(g) 23

3.7.2.6 Flower yield (t ha-1

) 23

3.7.2.7 Duration of flowering (days) 24

3.8 Observation on xanthophyll and its

attributes

24

3.8.1 Xanthophyll content kg-1

of petal meal (g) 24

3.8.2 Xanthophyll estimation 24

3.8.3 Apparatus and reagents 24

3.8.4Procedure 24

3.8.4.1 Preparation of solutions 24

3.8.4.2 Hot saponification 25

3.8.4.3 Calculation 25

3.9 Statistical Analysis 27

IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 29

4.1 Vegetative growth parameters 29

4.1.1 Plant height (cm) 29

4.1.2 Plant spread (cm) 34

4.1.3 Number of primary branches plant-1

37

4.1.4 Number of secondary branches plant-1

40

4.1.5 Number of leaves plant-1 43

4.2 Flowering attributes, yield and

xanthophylls content

46

4.2.1 Days to first bud appearance 46

4.2.2 Days to 50 per cent flowering 49

4.2.3 Flower diameter (cm) 52

4.2.4 Number of flowers plant-1

55

4.2.5 Flower weight plant-1

(g) 60

4.2.6 Flower yield (t ha) 63

4.2.7 Duration of flowering (days) 66

4.2.8 Xanthophyll content (g kg-1

of petal meal) 69

vii

V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 72

VI REFERENCES 76

VII APPENDIX 83

V VITA 84

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Title

Page

1 Physcio – chemical composition of soil at experimental site 15

2 Treatment details 17

3 Performance of marigold genotypes for plant height (cm) 31

4 Performance of marigold genotypes for plant spread (cm) 35

5 Performance of marigold genotypes for number of primary

branches

38

6 Performance of marigold genotypes for number of seconary

branches plant-1

41

7 Performance of marigold genotypes for number Number of

leaves plant-1

44

8 Performance of marigold genotypes for days to first bud

appearance

47

9 Performance of marigold genotypes for days to 50 %

flowering

50

10 Performance of marigold genotypes for flower diameter (cm) 53

11 Performance of marigold genotypes for number of flowers

plant-1

57

12 Performance of marigold genotypes for flower weight per

plant (g)

61

13 Performance of marigold genotypes for flower yield (t ha-1

) 64

14 Performance of marigold genotypes for duration of flowering

(days) 67

15 Performance of marigold genotypes for xanthophyll content

(g kg-1

of petal meal)

70

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Title

Page

1 Meteorological details about the weather condition prevailing

during the course of experiment

19

2 Layout of Experimental Field 20

3 Performance of marigold genotypes for plant height (cm) 32

4 Performance of marigold genotypes for plant spread (cm) 36

5 Performance of marigold genotypes for number of primary

branches

39

6 Performance of marigold genotypes for number of seconary

branches plant-1

42

7 Performance of marigold genotypes for numberNumber of

leaves plant-1

45

8 Performance of marigold genotypes for days to first bud

appearance

48

9 Performance of marigold genotypes for days to 50 % flowering 51

10 Performance of marigold genotypes for flower diameter (cm) 54

11 Performance of marigold genotypes for number of flowers

plant-1

58

12 1Performance of marigold genotypes for flower weight per

plant (g)

62

13 Performance of marigold genotypes for flower yield (t ha-1

) 65

14 Performance of marigold genotypes for duration of flowering

(days)

68

15 Performance of marigold genotypes for xanthophyll content (g

kg-1

of petal meal)

71

x

LIST OF PLATES

Plate Title Page

Plate I A view of experimental site 18

Plate II Preparation of solutions and hot saponification 26

Plate III Variation in plant height of different genotypes at 30 DAT 33

Plate IV Variation in plant height of different genotypes at 60 DAT 33

Plate V Diameter of flower in genotype CGSG-2 55

Plate VI Diameter of flower in genotype PBG (check variety) 55

Plate VII Number of flowers plant-1

in CGMS-1 59

Plate VIII Number of flowers plant-1

in PBG (check variety) 59

xi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

% - Per cent

/ - Per

@ - At the rate

MT - Million tones

at par - At equality

C.D. - Critical difference

cm - Centimeter

CV - Coefficient of variation

DAT - Days after transplanting

et al. - Co workers

etc. Excetera

Fig. - Figure

i.e. - That is

g - Gram

Kg Kilogram

NS - Non significant

Var. - Variety

via. - Through

viz. - Namely

SEm±

Anova

-

-

Standard error of mean

Analysis of variance

x

recorded in variety PNG at 60 and 90 DAT. Maximum number of leaves plant-1

was

recorded in genotype CGJS-3 at 30, 60 and 90 DAT.

The earlieast days to first bud appearance was recorded in variety PNG

whereas, the earliest days to fifty % flowering was recorded in check variety PBG.

The genotype CGR-2 recorded maximum flower diameter while maximum flower

weight plant-1

was recorded in CGRJ-1. The variety PA recorded longest duration of

flowering. The maximum number of flowers plant-1

was recorded in the CGMS-1 .

Maximum flower yield was obtained in the genotype CGRJ-1 whereas, the maximum

xanthophyll content was recorded in CGJS-3.

o`f)] iq"iu] mit ,oa tSUFkksfQy dh ekiksa gsrq T;knkrj thu Á:iksa us egRoiw.kZ

fofHkUurk,a n”kkZ;hA ikS/kjksi.k ds 30 fnuksa ckn vf/kdre ikS/k ÅapkbZ thu Á:i lhth,lth-

2 esa ,oa 60 fnuks ckn lhthvkj-2] tcfd ikS/kjksi.k dh 90 fnuksa ckn vf/kdre ikS/ks ÅapkbZ

lhthts,l-4 esa ntZ dh xbZA ikS/kjksi.k ds 60 fnuksa ckn vf/kdre ikS/k QSyko lhthvkj-2

esasa ,oa 90 fnuksa ckn lhthvkjts-1 esasa ntZ dh xbZA ikS/ksjksi.k dh 30 fnuksa ds ckn ÁkFkfed

'kk[kkvksa dh vf/kdre la[;k lhth,lth-2 esa tcfd lhthvkj-3 esa 60 ,oa 90 fnuksa ckn

ik;h xbZ A ikS/kkjksi.k dh 60] 90 fnuksa ds ckn f}rh;d 'kk[kkvksa dh vf/kdre la[;k fdLe

ih,uth esa ik;h xbZA jksi.k ds 30] 60 ,oa 90 fnuksa ckn ifRr;ksa dh vf/kdre la[;k

lhthts,l-3 esa ik;h xbZA

ÁFke iq"Ik dfydk dh lcls de fnukss esa mifLFkfr fdLe ih,uth }kjk de ls de

fnukss esa ntZ dh xbZA iq"iu dh 50 voLFkk lcls igys ihchth ¼ekud Átkfr½ esa ntZ dh

xbZA vf/kdre iq"Ik O;kl thu Á:i lhthvkj-2 esa Ikk;h xbZA vf/kdre iq"i Hkkj

lhthvkjts-1 esa ntZ dh xbZA fdLe iwlk vfiZrk esa iq"iu dh lcls yEch voLFkk ntZ dh

xbZA vf/kdre iq"i la[;k lhths,e,l-1 esa ntZ dh xbZA vf/kdre iq"i mit lhthvkjts-1

esa ik;h xbZ tcfd tSUFkksfQy dh vf/kder ek=k lhthts,l-3 esa ntZ dh xbZA

1

CHAPTER-I

INTRODUCTION

Flowers are associated with mankind from the dawn of civilization. They are

symbol of affection, beauty, friendship and love. They are also used for decoration and

aesthetic purpose and they have tremendous economic value as cut flower, loose

flower, for perfumes and other products. Today floriculture is recognized as a

lucrative business, because of its higher potential per unit area than most of the other

field crops.

Marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) is an immensely popular annual flower

crop widely grown throughout the world. Marigold belongs to the family Compositae

and genus Tagetes. The genus Tagetes comprises about 33 species of which Tagetes

erecta (African marigold) and Tagetes patula (French marigold) are under commercial

cultivation in India. Marigold is native of Central and South America, especially

Mexico. The chromosome number is x = 12 and 2n = 24. The other species introduced

in India are Tagetes signata Linn. Tagetes minuta Linn, Tagetes lucida and Tagetes

tenuifolia. Marigold with its bright colours ranging from yellow to orange is the best

for combination in any colour scheme. In India, marigold ranks first among the loose

flowers followed by chrysanthemum, jasmine, tuberose, and crossandra. The estimated

area under marigold cultivation in India is about 64 thousand ha with a production of

608.97 thousand MT (Anon, 2017). In Chhattisgarh, marigold is cultivated in an area

of 4129 ha with a production of 29 thousand MT (Anon, 2016). It is one of the

dominating flowers which fetches high price in the local market. Marigold has a great

demand as loose flowers, and is widely used for making garlands and for decorative

purposes. It is grown in flower beds, borders and also even as potted plants. It has

gained popularity on account of its easy cultivation, wide adaptability and production

throughout the year. Apart from this, it is widely used as colorant in the food and

animal feed industry.

2

Marigold flower is one of the richest sources of natural carotenoids. It has

gained popularity on account of carotenoids production. Carotenoids are organic

pigments which are naturally occurring in the chloroplast and chromoplats of plants

and some photosynthetic organism like algae. Carotenoids are responsible for the

yellow, orange and red pigment in a large variety of plants.

Orange colour marigold has emerged as rich source of carotenoids pigments

namely xanthophyll, which is widely used as dietary supplement in poultry industry to

enhance the broiler skin colour and egg yolk pigmentation (Naik et al., 2004).

Industrial use of carotenoids extracted from flowers is being used commercially in

pharmaceuticals, food supplements, animal feed additive and as food colorants.

Marigold plants are commercially grown for pigment production in Mexico, Peru and

India (Bose et al, 2002) and in India mostly southern part of the country.

Though potential as well demand of marigold in Chhattisgarh is high, yet low

productivity due to poor yielding ability of genetic populations is one of the major

constraints in its commercial cultivation. The commercial cultivation of marigold with

higher flower yield and carotenoids in general and xanthophylls in particular is the

requirement of the state. Therefore, there is a need to identify varieties/genotypes best

suited for commercial cultivation in the state.

Moreover, in Chhattisgarh state, which is having rich biodiversity, there is a

greater chance to find out marigold genotypes with variations of economic value for

flowering and xanthophylls content.

Keeping these points in view, the present investigation “Study on growth,

flowering and carotenoids content of African marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) under

Chhattisgarh plains agro-climatic condition” was undertaken with the following

objectives:-

1. To study the morphological characters of marigold genotypes

2. To study the performance of different marigold genotypes for growth and

flowering parameters

3. To determine the major carotenoids content in marigold petal extracts

3

CHAPTER - II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A brief review of research work done on the growth, flowering, yield and

carotenoids contents in marigold is being discussed in this chapter. It includes brief

results of the research work done in India and elsewhere which is similar to or closely

related with the present investigation. The works on the evaluation of marigold

genotypes for growth, flowering and carotenoids content of African marigold have

been summarized under following heads:

2.1 Growth and flowering attributes

2.2 Xanthophyll yield and its attributes

2.1 Growth and flowering attributes

Howe and Waters (1982) evaluated twenty-two marigold cultivars (Tagetes

spp.) as bedding plants. Information was acquired on the dates when the first floral

bud began to open and was fully open, the heights at different stages of plant

development, flower diameter, disease and insect resistance, growth habit, and

consumer preference.

Kelly and Harbaugh (2002) evaluated eighty four cultivars of African

marigold (Tagetes erecta) and french marigold (T. patula). Cultivars viz., `Inca Gold'

and `Royal Gold' (African marigold), `Disco Granada' (French marigold) and Golden

Boy' and `Hero Gold' (French dwarf-double gold class) were observed to perform well

with similar heat and cold hardiness zones.

Verma et al. (2004) collected twelve genotyopes of T. patula and twenty

genotypes of T. erecta from Uttaranchal, India and evaluated for 9 character traits viz.,

plant height, number of leaves plant-1

, leaf length, leaf width, peduncle length, number

of branches plant-1

, stem diameter, plant canopy and flower diameter. The tallest

plants (208.01 cm) were observed in the genotype NIC-14859, while the shortest plant

was observed in NIC-14839. The highest number of branches plant-1

(25.80) was

4

obtained from NIC-14841. The highest stem diameter was obtained from NIC-14847

(1.81 cm). The plant canopy spread was highest (6855.11 cm) in NIC-14848, while the

lowest was in NIC-14834. The flower diameter (7.67 cm) was maximum in NIC-

14865.

Rao et al. (2005) reported the maximum plant height (84 cm), leaf area (3762

cm2), total dry matter per plant (42.96 g) in ‘Orange Double’ and maximum plant

spread (46.0 cm) and number of branches per plant(20.00) in ‘Hyderabad Local

Selection 1’.

Rao et al. (2005) screened different cultivars of African marigold for yield and

pigments. Better plant growth was found in Orange Double cultivar with the highest

plant height. The cultivar Orange Double gave the highest fresh flower yield with a

total carotenoids yield of 51.07 kg ha-1

. Early flowering was observed in Orange

Double cultivar followed by Pusa Narangi Gainda. Duration of flowering was also

observed to be higher in Orange Double cultivar followed by Pusa Basanti Gainda.

Naik et al. (2005) identified a suitable and stable genotype for higher flower

production of marigold (Targets erecta L.) across the environments. The results of the

stability analysis over three environments (Viz, Kharif 2001-02, Rabi 2001-02 and

Kharif 2002-03 revealed that the genotype, African Marigold Orange (AMO) recorded

significantly higher flower yield (16.47 t/ha) per hectare with a B: C ratio of 3.28 as

compared to the local check (Orange Double).

Singh and Singh (2006) evaluated performance of twenty nine genotypes of

African marigold (Tagetes erecta Unn.) and reported significant variation in

germplasm for all the growth and flowering parameters. The germplasm TEG16

exhibited best performance on number of primary branches plant-1

, number of flowers

plant-1

and dry weight of leaf. However, germplasm TEG17 resulted in maximum

flower longevity and dry weight of flower, whereas maximum duration of flowering

was recorded with TEG13. Germplasm TEG23 exerted poorest performance on

various growth and flowering attributes.

Verma and Beniwal (2006) evaluated thirty two marigold genotypes for their

resistance to the root knot nematode. No susceptible or highly susceptible reaction was

5

observed in any of the genotypes, including the local control (Pusa Narangi). Eight

genotypes (MGH-126, MGH-127, MGH-131, MGH-138, MGH-141, MGH-154,

MGH-159 and MGH-160) exhibited moderate resistance. Only one genotype, i.e.

MGH-136, was highly resistant to the root knot nematode.

Singh and Mishra (2008) conducted an experiment to assess the diversity of

forty five genotypes of marigold (Tagetes spp.). Marigold germplasm exhibited

significant variation for various growth parameters. Cross 'Sutton Orange' x

'Crackerjack Mix' recorded maximum plant height (127.80 cm), whereas parent

'French Dwarf' attained maximum plant spread and maximum secondary branches

plant-1

(76.61 cm and 107.40). 'Pusa Narangi Gainda' x 'Late Summer' attained the

maximum flower diameter (13.00), flower yield ha-1

(182.13 ha-1

). Cross 'Seraceul' x

'Late Summer' exhibited the maximum duration for flowering (134.00 days) in the first

year and cross 'Pusa Narangi Gainda' x 'French Dwarf' attained the longest flowering

duration (132.33 days) in the second year.

Narsude et al. (2010) reported significant variations for different growth and

yield attributes. The genotype Pakharsangavi Local had significantly maximum plant

height (114.64 cm) and stem girth (5.37 cm). Maximum spread of plant (64.48 cm)

was observed in genotype Tuljapur Local-2, number of flowers per plant, yield plant-1

and yield hectare-1

. The genotype Tuljapur Local –1 showed significantly superior

performance. The genotype Marigold Orange Bunch required maximum days (109.67)

to last picking and duration of flowering was also longer (56.33 days) in this genotype.

Raghuvanshi and Sharma (2011) evaluated french marigold cultivars and

recorded highly significant variation among cultivars for all the traits studied. Cultivar

Safari Queen recorded maximum plant height (35.80 cm), flower yield/sq2 meter (8.27

kg), seed yield per plant (0.54g), and seed yield/sq2 meter (9.06g). Plant spread (30.37

cm) was recorded maximum in ‘Harmony Boy’. The ‘Bonanza Bolero’ recorded

maximum values for three traits viz. leaf area (34.58 cm2).flower diameter (5.26 cm)

and 1000-seed weight (2.60g). Maximum carotene content of 3747.50 μg/g was

obtained in cv. ‘Honey Comb’ which was at par with cv. ‘Hero Harmony’

(3745.83μg/g).

6

Anuja and Jahnavi (2012) studied genetic variability and heritability involving

thirty genotypes of French marigold and indicated that there were highly significant

differences between the genotypes for flower yield and other growth and flower

attributes.

Krol (2012) evaluated five genotypes of pot marigold which differed in colour

and in size of inflorescences viz., ‘Orange King’, ‘Persimmom Beauty’ ‘Promyk’,

‘Radio’ and ‘Santana’. For, morphological features ‘Orange King’ performed best. It

produced the most numerous and shapeliest inflorescences, with the biggest number of

ligulate flowers. Raw material yield of compared cultivars oscillated from 849 to 1661

kg ha-1

of flower heads, and the ligulate flowers themselves from 449 to 1141 kg ha-1

.

In both cases the highest yield was obtained by ‘Orange King’, and the lowest by

‘Promyk’.

Munikrishnappa et al. (2013) conducted an investigation to evaluate suitable

varieties for growth and flower yield of China aster. The maximum flower yield

(37.91 t ha-1

) was recorded in ‘Phule Ganesh White’and it was lowest variety Local

(9.97 ton). Number of cut flower production was maximum (55.43) in ‘Phule Ganesh

Violet’ and the lowest number of cut flower plant-1

was produced in Shashank (40.92).

The maximum number of cut flowers (40.76 lakh ha-1

) was recorded in ‘Phule Ganesh

Violet’ and minimum number of cut flower (31.64 lakh ha-1

) was recorded in

‘Kamini’.

Bharathi and Jawaharlal (2014) evaluated twenty eight genotypes of African

marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) for growth and flowering traits. The marigold germplasm

exhibited significant variation for various growth and flowering traits. The earliest day

taken for flower bud appearance was found in ‘Bangalore Local Tall’ (29.47 days) and

earliest flower bud opening was observed in Double Orange (46.00 days). The highest

plant height was recorded in Dharmapuri local (113.27 cm) and the highest number of

primary and secondary branches plant-1

was observed in ‘Bidhan-1’ (22.40 and 41.47

respectively). The highest flower yield per plant was recorded in ‘Coimbatore Local

Orange’ (1.48kg) followed by ‘Coimbatore local orange’ (1.12 kg).

7

Choudhary et al. (2014) evaluated thirty genotypes of marigold. All the

genotypes showed significant variations for growth, flowering and yield parameters.

The genotype ‘Hisar Jaffri-2’ exhibited best performance in terms plant spread (77.72

cm), numbers of secondary branches plant-1

(150.97), number of buds plant-1

(217.10),

duration of flowering (76.53 days) and flower yield plot-1

(20.99 kg). The genotype

MGH-148-3-3 recorded maximum stem diameter (2.14 cm) and dry weight of plant

(130.72 g), whereas it was minimum (0.61 cm and 9.91 g, respectively) in ‘Hisar

Beauty’. Maximum diameter of flower (8.21cm) was recorded in ‘MGH-09-276’,

while it was minimum (4.01 cm) in ‘Hisar Jaffri-2’. The maximum dry weight of

flower (2.04 g) was recorded in ‘MGH-09-271’.

Sahu (2016) evaluated seventeen genotypes of African marigold (Tagetes

erecta L.) for Variability, heritability and genetic advance and reported significant

vatiation in germplasm for all the growth and flowering parameters.

Manik and Sharma (2016) evaluated fifteen genotypes of African marigold

(Tagetes erecta L.) for yield attributes and xanthophyll content. All the genotypes

showed variations for growth and yield parameters. Maximum plant height was

recorded in the genotype CGSG-1 at 30 and 60 DAT whereas in genotype CGJS-1 at

90 DAT. Maximum plant spread and primary branches plant-1

was recorded in the

genotype CGSG-1. Whereas, maximum number of secondary branches plant-1

at 60

and 90 DAT was recorded in CGRJ-1. Maximum number of flowers plant-1

, flower

yield plot-1

and flower yield ha-1

was observed in genotype CGSG-1.

2.2 Xanthophyll yield and its attributes

Gregory et al. (1986) used high performance liquid chromatography to analyze

the lutein esters in Marigold flowers (Tagetes erecta). Result showed that the lutein

ester concentrations in fresh Marigold flowers varied from 4 pg g-1

in greenish yellow

flowers to 800 pg g-1 in orange brown flowers.

El-saeid et al. (1996) recorded the maximum carotenoid content, volatile oil

and biomass yield with the application of 238 kg N ha-1

in Tagetes patula.

8

Vargas and Lopez (1997) conducted an experiment to study the identity of

lutein isomers of marigold (Tagetes erecta) samples treated with enzymes. Enzymatic

treatment on 5% solids slurry produced the marigold meal with the highest all trans-

lutein content (25.1 g kg-1

) dry weight. The solids content was the principal factor that

affected the carotenoid profiles. An analysis of the distribution showed that 15% solids

gave the highest all-trans-lutein percentage in treated meals. Interestingly, with 20%

solids both the degradation of lutein and the percentage of all-trans-zeaxanthin were

the highest.

Vargas and Lopez (1997) reported that the highest carotenoid yields were

obtained using the enzyme ECONASE-CEP. This enzyme at 0.1% w/w increased

extraction from 1.7 to 7.4 g kg-1

of marigold flower in dry weight and that such

treatment may enhance carotenoid extraction at the industrial level as well.

Naik (2003) reported that, petal meal yield ha-1

and xanthophyll content per

kilogram of petal meal was increased with increase in the level of N and P which was

maximum (22.36gm and 19.90g ka-1

petal meal) at a treatment combination of ‘N’ 250

kg and ‘P’ at 120 kg ha-1

in marigold.

Bolanos et al. (2004) studied the effect of a noncommercial enzyme

preparation on xanthophyll extraction from marigold flower (Tagetes erecta). The

results show that the extraction yield depends directly on the extent of the enzymatic

hydrolysis of cell walls in the flower petals and that it is possible to reach yields in

excess of those previously reported for treatments with commercially available

enzymes (29.3 g kg-1

of dry weight).

Cantrill et al. (2004) reported that lutein, prepared by saponification and

crystallization, contains more than 80% total carotenoids of which lutein is present at

70 – 78 %, zeaxanthin 2 – 9% and other carotenoids are also present. Waxes (14%)

and fatty acids (1%), present in the unprocessed oleoresin, make up the balance of the

material.

Rao et al. (2005) reported that the cultivar ‘Orange Double’ gave the highest

fresh flower yield with a total carotenoids yield of 51.07 kg ha-1

and the cultivar ‘Pusa

9

Narangi Gainda’ produced the highest total carotenoids g-1 of fresh weight of flower

petals followed by ‘Orange Double’.

Kaul and Bedi (2006) conducted a study with eight genotypes of African

marigold for xanthophyll as natural source. The result showed the ranges of

xanthophylls content varaied from 0.76 to 1.42%. Among all the genotypes the highest

xanthophyll (5 kg ha-1

) was found in orange colour genotypes suggesting them use for

commercial production.

Shubha (2006) reported that in marigold, yield components like petal meal

yield, xanthophyll yield ha-1

with maximum net returns were maximum in the

treatment combination of vermicompost (12.5 % N) + poultry manure (12.5 % N) +

Azo along with 75% RDN ha-1

.

Deineka et al. (2007) studied the accumulation of xanthophylls in five cultivars

representing three marigold species including T. erecta (Rhodes and Orange Snow

cultivars), T. patula (Bolero and Harmony) and T. tenuifolia (Red Gem) of marigold

(Tagetes) species and observed that more than 90% of xanthophylls in flowers are

retained upon drying and the content of lutein diesters in the dry material can exceed

15 mg g-1

.

Li et al. (2007) analyzed eleven Chinese cultivars of marigold to determine

their major phytochemical contents and antioxidant activities. The different cultivars

of marigold showed considerable variations in their lutein ester contents, ranging from

161.0 to 611.0 mg per 100 g of flower (dry basis). The different cultivars of marigold

also showed marked variations in total phenols and flavonoids.

Singh et al. (2008) estimated carotenoids and its fractions in six promising

genotypes of African marigold (Tagetes erecta) followed by effect of grading of

flowers and harvesting stage on recovery of total carotenoids and its fractions, i.e.

carotene, mono-hydroxy pigment (MHP) and di-hydroxy pigment (DHP) including

dry matter and moisture content. The flowers from each genotype were harvested at

two different stages, i.e. half-bloom and full-bloom. Half-bloom flowers contain more

amount of pigment than full-bloom in all the genotypes. However, ‘Pusa Narangi

Gainda’ showed maximum recovery of total carotenoids and di-hydroxy pigment,

10

while Selection-19 and Selection-22 had the maximum carotene and mono-hydroxy

pigment respectively at half bloom stage. Large flower gave maximum recovery of

pigments than small flowers in all the genotypes. Maximum recovery of total

carotenoids and DHP was found in ‘Pusa Narangi Gainda’.

Ma et al. (2008) extracted lutein esters from marigold (Tagetes erecta L.). The

results showed that the maximum yield of lutein esters was 1263.62 mg 100 g-1

marigold.

Pratheesh et al. (2009) studied the raw sample of marigold flower with two set

(A1 & A2) - one stored without preservation and the other with proper preservation

technique. For processing, the full-blown marigold flowers having minimum calyx

portion are taken and then laden in a room. Chromatographical separation of

saponified and unsaponified oleoresin were performed and Trans-Lutin identified as

the major constituent. Well-preserved flowers emphasizing the significance of flower

preservation in the extraction of xanthophylls. The stability and amount of

xanthophylls also increased from 105.19 g kg-1

to 226.88 g kg-1

on saponification and

subsequent purification with Ethylene Dichloride.

Bhattacharyya et al. (2010) analyzed three different cultivars of marigold

flowers (Tagetes patula L.) (Marigold orange, Marigold yellow, and Marigold red) for

the lutein ester contents, and the in vitro antioxidative activities of the flower extracts

were compared. Result showed that the marigold orange (MGO) variety contains the

maximum amount of lutein.

Ahmad et al. (2011) studied the effects of various NPK levels on growth,

flowering and xanthophyll contents of African marigold (Tagetes erecta, ‘Double

Eagle’) and French marigold (Tagetes patula, ‘Yellow’). Result showed the

xanthophyll contents were higher in plants fertilized with 15:20:10 g m-2 NPK

application.

Sujith et al. (2012) conducted supercritical fluid extraction of lutein esters

from marigold flowers and found the saponification of lutein esters after

preconcentration gives a much higher yield of lutein compared to the lipase catalyzed

hydrolysis. The modified saponification method of the pre-concentrated lutein esters

11

serves to be an efficient and economical process for the production of lutein. The

lutein thus produced is a potent nutraceutical and a natural colourant that can be

incorporated into different foods after proper encapsulation to improve its stability in

foods.

Sarkar et al. (2012) found that saponification of carotenoid esters leads to

decomposition at high temperature and high concentration of alkali. Lutein ester is

collected from marigold flower. Findings showed efficient saponification in 0.5 M

KOH at 500ºC for 30 minute.

Shivakumar et al. (2014) cunducted a field investigation on fifteen diverse

genotype of African marigold for correlation analysis to understand the association

between component characters and their relative contribution to xanthophyll content to

bring about a rational improvement in the desirable direction. The 19 characters

related to growth, flowering, and xanthophyll content revealed that, the genotypic and

phenotypic correlation of xanthophyll content was found to be positively highly

significant with petal meal yield ha-1

, flower yield plant-1

, number of petals flower-1,

flower weight, flower diameter, number of flower plant-1

, flowering duration, day to

50 % flowering, secondary branches, primary branches, plant height.

Tiwary et al. (2014) conducted an experiment with the main objective to

optimize petal yield from important marigold genotypes viz., ‘African marigold-

Double’ (AFM-D), ‘African marigold-Single’ (AFM-S), ‘African marigold-

orange’(AFM-O), ‘French marigold-Orange’ (FRM-O), ‘French marigold-Double’

(FRMD), and LC (Local type). Among them ‘FRM-O’ produced highest petal meal 82

g kg-1 of fresh flower and the genotype ‘FRM-D’ produced lowest petal meal yield 69

g kg-1

of fresh flower.

Kaimainen et al. (2015) analyzed oil extraction of lutein esters from marigold

flowers was successful, with a lutein yield (present as lutein esters but calculated as

free lutein) of 1.1 mg/g of marigold flowers (fresh weight). The lutein contents of oil

extracts were 0.50 mg/ml for the first extract, 0.23 mg/ml for the second extract, and

0.36 mg/ml for the combined extract.

12

Sahu (2016) reported that the xanthophyll content varied significantly amongst

of different genotypes. Significantly maximum xanthophyll content (20.20 g) was

recorded in the genotype T9 followed by T17 (20.09 g) and T6 (19.79 g).

Manik and Sharma (2016) reported that the highest petal meal yield kg-1

of

flower was found in Pusa Narangi Gainda whereas, the petal meal yield ha-1

was found

maximum in genotype CGRJ-2. The genotype CGSG-1 recorded maximum

xanthophylls content kg-1

of petal meal and xanthophyll yield ha-1

.

13

CHAPTER-III

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present chapter deals with information regarding the materials used and

techniques employed during the course of investigation entitled “Study on growth,

flowering and carotenoids content of African marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) under

Chhattisgarh plains agro-climatic condition”.

The present investigation was conducted at the Horticultural Research cum

Instruction Farm of the Department of Floriculture and Landscape Architecture,

College of Agriculture, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

under Chhattisgarh Council of Science and Technology (CCOST) sponsored adhoc

project on Marigold.

3.1 Geographical Situation

Raipur, the capital of Chhattisgarh state of India is situated in the central part

of Chhattisgarh and lies between 21014’06.8” N latitude and 81042’41” E longitude at

an altitude of 289.56 m above mean sea level. The climate of Raipur is characterized

as dry sub- humid with normal rainfall of 1200 mm per annum, mostly concentrated

during the monsoon months i.e. June to September. The pattern of rainfall, particularly

during August to November months has great variation from year to year. The

maximum temperature goes as high as 46ºC during summer and minimum as below as

6ºC during winter months. The relative humidity varies from seventy to ninty percent

from middle of June to end of March.

3.2 Experimental Site and Season

The experimental site was located at the Horticultural Research cum

Instruction Farm of the Department of Floriculture and Landscape Architecture,

College of Agriculture, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur,

Chhattisgarh.The experiment was conducted during the kharif season of year 2016-

14

2017. Adequate facilities for conduction of experiment existed at the experimental

site.

3.3 Weather condition

The meteorological observations recorded during the investigation have been

presented in Figure 3.1 and Appendix I. Weekly meteorological observations from

June 2016 to November 2016 were recorded. During the crop period the maximum

temperature varied between 28.75ºC to 40.84ºC, whereas, minimum temperature

ranged between 11.35ºC to 26.34ºC. The maximum and minimum relative humidity

ranged between 33 to 94 percent whereas, the bright sunshine varied from 1.2 to 10.0

hours day-1

and evaporation rate recorded varied from 2.5 to 4.7 mm.

3.4 Soil characteristics of the experimental field

The soil of the experimental field was silt-loam. The soil samples (upto a depth

of 20 cm) were collected randomly from five different places of the experimental site

before layout of experiment. The samples were mixed thoroughly and a uniform

sample was analyzed for assessing the physico-chemical properties of the soil. The

physico-chemical composition of soil sample is presented in the Table 1.

15

Table 1: Physcio-chemical composition of soil at experimental site

S.No. Particulars Value Group/

Class

Method followed

A. Physical analysis

Sand (%) 33.01 - International pipette

method (Black, 1965)

Silt (%) 38.32 - -

Clay (%) 28.63 - -

Class Sandy

loam

-

B. Chemical analysis

1. Organic carbon

(%)

0.31 Low Walkey and Black’s rapid

titration method

(Jackson 1967)

2. Available N

(kg/ha)

185.2 Low Alkaline permagnet method

(Subbiah and Asija, 1967)

3. Available P2O5

(Kg/ha)

11.25 Low Olsen’s method

(Olsen, 1954)

4. Exchange K2O

(kg/ha)

325.00 Medium Flame photometer method

(Jackson, 1967)

5. pH 6.88 Neutral Glass electrode pH meter

(Piper, 1967)

6. Electrical

Conductivity at

25oC

0.21 Normal Solubridge method

(Black, 1965)

16

3.5 Design and layout of experiment

The experimental field was laid out in Randomized Block Design with three

replications. The treatment consisted of eighteen genotypes including named varieties

of African marigold .The layout of the experimental field is given in Fig. 2 and its

general view in Plate 1.

Experimental details:

Crop : African Marigold (Tagetes erecta L.)

Design of experiment : Randomized Block Design (RBD)

Number of treatment : 18

Number of replication : 3

Gross plot size : 2.0 × 2.0 m

Net plot size : 1.6 × 1.6 m

Number of plots : 54

Number of plants/plot : 20

Spacing : 40 × 40 cm (R-R × P-P)

Planting date : 23/07/2016

17

Table 2 : Treatment details

Sr no. Treatment

Notation

Genotype/varieties Location/Source

1. T1 CGRG-1 Raigarh

2. T2 CGRG-2 Raigarh

3. T3 CGJS-1 Jashpur


5. T5 CGRJ-1 Rajnandgaon

6. T6 CGRJ-2 Rajnandgaon



9. T9 CGMS-1 Mahasamund

10 T10 CGMS-2 Mahasamund

11 T11 CGR-2 Raipur

12 T12 CGR-3 Raipur

13 T13 CGDU-1 Durg

14 T14 CGSG-2 Sarguja

15 T15 CGKS-1 Keshkal

16 T16 Pusa Basanti Gainda (Check) IARI,New Delhi

17 T17 Pusa Narangi Gainda IARI,New Delhi

18 T18 Pusa Arpita Gainda IARI,New Delhi

18

Plate I: A view of experimental site

19

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

MaxT(°C) MinT(°C) RF (mm) RH I (%) RH II (%) WS(kmph) SS (hr)

Standard meteorological weeks

Fig. 1 Meteorological details about the weather condition prevailing during the course of experiment

20

R3

0.5 m 2 m

Fig. 2 Layout of Experimental Field

2 m

0.50 m

S N

T9

T8

T16

T11

T14

T13

T12

T7

T10

T2

T17

T5

T18

T4

7 m

47 m

R2 R1

T15

T6

T3

T13

T17

T15

T7

T9

T14

T11

T2

T3

T18

T4

T16

T6

T1

T5

T8

T10

T12

T1

T13

T18

T17

T8

T10

T5

T12

T6

T14

T16

T15

T3

T9

T14

T11

T2

T7

T1

21

3.6 Cultural operations

3.6.1 Raising of seedlings

Marigold seeds were sown on raised beds, measuring 120 x 60 x 15 cm.

The soil of bed was prepared to fine tilth with incorporation of well rotten FYM

(15 kg) and 250 g DAP/ bed. The line sowing of seeds was done at 4-5 cm spacing.

The seed beds were covered with a mixture of garden soil and coarse sand. The

nursery beds were covered by the paddy straw after sowing. Initially, watering was

done with watering can at alternate days. The sowing was done on 23rd

June. The

seeds germinated within 4-5 days of sowing and thereafter mulch cover was

removed. The seedlings were hardened by withdrawing the watering in forenoon 2-

3 days before lifting the seedlings. The transplanting was done after 27 days.

3.6.2 Field preparation

Field preparation was done by ploughing the field with mould board plough

once, followed by leveling and weeding manually. Harrowing was done to break

the clods followed by criss-cross ploughing by cultivator and then the field was

pulverized by rotavator. During harrowing, well rotten FYM @10 kg/m2

was

incorporated in the soil. The experiment was laid out with the help of measuring

tape, rope and bamboo pegs. The small-sized beds were then prepared.

3.6.3 Irrigation

The first irrigation was given just after transplanting with the help of hazara

(rose can) and subsequent irrigation were given by plot to plot system and the

interval between two irrigation was adjusted according to the requirement of the

crop.

3.6.4 Manures and fertilizers

Well decomposed FYM @ 20 tonnes ha-1

was applied at the time of land

preparation. The fertilizer dose of 90:90:75 kg ha-1

NPK was applied in two splits

i.e. half the dose of ‘ N’ and full dose of ‘P’ and ‘K’ at the time of transplanting

and remaining 50 % ‘N’ was applied at the time of pinching in the form of urea.

22

3.6.5 Pinching

The African marigold seedlings were pinched one month after transplanting

in order to break their apical dominance so as to increase their lateral spread.

3.6.6 Weeding

For better growth and development of marigold plants, the experimental

field was kept weed-free by hand weeding and hoeing at regular intervals.

3.6.7 Plant protection

The prophylactic measures were adopted timely and uniformly as and when

required to protect the crop against insect-pests and diseases.

3.7 Observations recorded

Five plants were selected randomly in each treatment plot and tagged for

the purpose of recording data on various parameters.

3.7.1 Observations of vegetative phase

3.7.1.1 Plant height (cm)

The plant height of five randomly selected plants from each plot was

measured from the ground level to the tip of the plant with the help of meter scale.

The average height was then worked out by dividing the summation with five.

3.7.1.2 Plant spread (cm)

The plant spread was measured in the five randomly selected plants with

the help of meter scale in the North- South and East-West direction. The average

value was then worked out.

3.7.1.3 Number of primary branches plant-1

All the branches which came out from the main stem were counted and

recorded at 30, 60 and 90 DAT. This was done on all the five tagged plants in each

treatment and then average worked out.

23

3.7.1.4 Number of secondary branches plant-1

Number of secondary branches per plant of the five randomly selected plants from

each plot was counted at 60 and 90 DAT the average was then calculated by

dividing the summation with five.

3.7.1.5 Number of leaves plant-1

The number of leaves plant-1

of the five randomly selected plants plot-1

was

recorded at 30, 60 and 90 DAT. The average was then worked out by dividing the

summation with five.

3.7.2 Observations of flowering attributes

3.7.2.1 Days to first bud appearance

The number of days taken from transplanting to the appearance of first bud

in each tagged plants was counted.

3.7.2.2 Days to 50% flowering

When 50 per cent of the plants came into flowering, this observation was

taken with reference to the date of planting.

3.7.2.3 Number of flowers plant-1

The total number of flowers plant-1

was counted per plant from each plot at

the flowering stage and then averaged to get the value.

3.7.2.4 Flower diameter (cm)

The diameter of flowers at fully open stage from five randomly selected

plants was recorded and then averaged for arriving at the flower size. The size of

flower was measured with the help of verneir callipers .

3.7.2.5 Flower weight plant-1

(g)

For flower weight plant-1

weight of fresh flowers from the five randomly

selected plants was recorded with the help of pan balance and average value was

calculated.

3.7.2.6 Duration of flowering (days)

It was recorded by counting the days of first flowering to fading of the last

flower.

24

3.7.2.7 Flower yield (t ha-1

)

It was worked out by multiplying total number of plants and flower yield

plant-1

for each plot and then worked out per unit area (t ha-1

).

3.8 Observation on carotenoids and its attributes

The observations on major carotenoids content i,e xanthophyll and the

procedure involved in its estimation is as below:

3.8.1 Xanthophyll content kg-1

of petal meal (g)

Xanthophyll content kg-1

of petal meal was calculated based on chemical

analysis.

3.8.2 Xanthophyll estimation

Xanthophyll was estimated by AOAC method (Lawrence, 1990). The

procedure followed is as follows:

3.8.3 Reagents and Apparatus

1) Extractant: 10 parts of hexane + 7 parts of acetone + 6 parts of absolute alcohol

+ 7 parts toluene.

2) Sodium sulphate – 10% in distilled water.

3) Methanolic potassium hydroxide – 40 per cent (Dissolve 40 g KOH in 100 ml

methanol).

Spectrophotometer was used for to estimate the total carotenoids

concentration in mixture or extract of carotenoids in a marigold petal meal sample.

3.8.4 Procedure

3.8.4.1 Preparation of solutions

The dried petals were grinded into fine powder and were homogenized

well. Then 0.05 g of petal meal was weighed accurately and put into 100 ml

volumetric flask, after which 30 ml extractant was pipetted and shaked well for 10-

15 minutes.

25

3.8.4.2 Hot saponification

Two ml of 40 per cent methanolic KOH was pipetted into flask and shaked

for one minute. The flask was refluxed in a water bath at 56°C. Air condenser was

attached to prevent loss of solvent. The sample was then cooled. It was then kept in

dark for one hour after which pipette 30 ml hexane was pipette into flask. It was

shaked for one minute. The volume was made up with 10 per cent sodium sulphate

solution and shaked vigorously for one minute. This was kept in dark for one hour.

Then upper phase was collected in a 50 ml volumetric flask. Three ml of upper

phase was pipette into 100 ml volumetric flask and the volume made up with

hexane was mixed well and absorbance at 474 nm was measured.

3.8.4.3 Calculation

The total xanthophyll content in the sample was calculated by using the formula:

Where,

A474 = Absorbance at 474nm

W = Weight of the sample (petal meal) in g

236 = Translation specific absorbitivity for 1 gm -1

26

Plate II: Preparation of solutions hot saponification

27

3.9 Statistical Analysis

The data collected from various observations recorded in the field as well

as laboratory were subjected to statistical analysis by standard analysis of variance

technique (Gomez and Gomez, 1984). The skeleton of ANOVA for Randomized

Block Design is as follows:

ANOVA TABLE

Source of

variation

Degree

of

freedom

Sum of

squares

Mean

sum of

squares

F value

calculated

F value

tabulated

Replication (r-1) RSS MSR MSR /

MSE

Treatment (t-1) TrSS MST MST /

MSE

Error (r-1)(t-1) ESS MSE

Total (rt-1)

Where,

r = Replication

t = Treatment

SSR = Sum of square for replication

SST = Sum of square for treatment

SSE = Sum of square for Error

MSR = Mean sum of square for replication

MST = Mean sum of square for treatment

MSE = Mean sum of square for error

Fc = F value calculated

Ft = F value from table

In order to compare the mean value of treatment, standard error and critical values

were calculated as follows.

28

a. Standard Error of mean

S Em ± = √

Where,

S Em = Standard error of mean

EMS = Error Mean of square

r = Number of replications

b. Critical Difference

CD = SEd x t Value at 5% at error degree of freedom

S Ed = √

Where,

S Ed = Standard error of difference between two treatment means

EMS = Error Mean of square

r = Number of replications

29

CHAPTER – IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results of the experiment entitled “Study on growth, flowering and

carotenoids content of African marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) under

Chhattisgarh plains agro-climatic condition” have been presented in this

chapter. The data recorded on various morphological, growth, flowering and yield

parameters of marigold genotypes and the results of present investigation obtained

have been interpreted under the following heads:

4.1 Vegetative growth parameters

4.2 Flowering attributes, yield and xanthophylls content

4.1 Vegetative growth parameters

4.1.1 Plant height (cm)

The periodical observation with respect to height of plants were recorded

and are presented in Table 3 and depicted in Fig. 3.

The data indicates that there were significant differences observed among

the treatments with respect to plant height at 30, 60 and 90 DAT.

At 30 DAT, maximum plant height (37.07 cm) was recorded in the

genotype CGSG-2 which however was found to be at par with the genotypes

CGJS-3 (36.73 cm), CGR-2 (36.67 cm), CGJS-4 (33.67cm) and check variety

(PBG). The minimum plant height was recorded in the genotype CGMS-2 (18.27

cm).

At 60 DAT, the maximum plant height was recorded in CGR-2 (84 cm)

which however, was at par with genotypes CGJS-3 (78.93 cm), CGJS-4 (77.60

cm), CGRG-1 (76.40 cm), and CGSG-2 (71.80 cm) but significantly higher than

PBG (Check). Whereas, the minimum plant height was recorded in genotype

CGRG-2 (41.53 cm).

At 90 DAT, maximum plant height was recorded in CGJS-4 (115.10 cm)

which, was at par with genotypes CGR-2 (114.60 cm), CGJS-3 (112.60 cm),

30

CGSG-2 (107.73 cm), CGRG-1 (105 cm) and CGMS-1 (104.86 cm).Whereas, the

minimum was recorded in genotype CGRG-2 (67.86 cm).

Plant height is attributed to be an important varietal character that depends

upon the genetic constitution. The variation in plant height among the various

genotypes might be due to genotypic differences in phenotypic expression of plant

height and variations in different genotype-environmental interaction effects on

plant height (Bharathi and Jawaharlal, 2014).Similar variation in plant height due

to genotypes was also reported by Rao et al. (2005), Singh and Singh (2006) and

Khanvilkar et al. (2003) in marigold.

31

Table 3. Performance of marigold genotypes for plant height (cm)

Plant height (cm)

Genotypes

30 DAT

60 DAT

90 DAT

CGRG-1 18.67 76.40 105.00

CGRG-2 19.73 41.53 67.86

CGJS-1 22.20 63.00 99.26

CGJS-2 25.60 64.06 98.13

CGRJ-1 19.80 64.33 99.53

CGRJ-2 26.20 67.46 100.00

CGJS-3 36.73 78.93 112.60

CGJS-4 33.67 77.60 115.10

CGMS-1 25.40 66.73 104.90

CGMS-2 18.27 59.33 89.86

CGR-2 36.67 84.00 114.60

CGR-3 23.47 61.73 96.26

CGDU-1 19.80 57.93 92.60

CGSG-2 37.07 71.80 107.70

CGKS-1 23.00 59.46 69.80

PBG (Check) 29.07 52.60 79.33

PNG 25.67 53.53 76.40

PA 20.87 54.06 98.06

SEm± 2.92 4.32 4.16

C.D. at 5% 8.44 12.47 12.02

32

Fig. 3 Performance of marigold genotypes for plant height (cm)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12 T13 T14 T15 T16 T17 T18

Pla

nt

hei

gh

t (c

m)

Treatments

30DAT

60DAT

90DAT

33

Plate III : Variation in plant height of different genotypes at 30 DAT

Plate IV: Variation in plant height of different genotypes at 60 DAT

34

4.1.2 Plant spread (cm)

The perusal of data presented in Table 4 indicates that there were

significant differences observed among the treatments with respect to plant spread

at 60 and 90 DAT (Fig. 4)

At 60 DAT, significantly maximum plant spread was recorded in CGR-2

(48.56 cm) which was found to be at par with majority of the genotypes CGJS-4

(47.53 cm), CGSG-2 (47.16 cm), CGR-3 (46.07 cm), PA (45.33 cm), CGJS-3 (45.1

cm), CGMS-2 (44.33 cm), CGMS-1 (43.80 cm), CGRG-1 (43.06 cm), CGRG-2 (42

cm), CGJS-2 (40.63 cm) and CGRJ-2 (40.50) whereas, the minimum plant spread

was noticed in check variety PBG (29.43 cm).

Whereas at 90 DAT, maximum plant spread was recorded in CGRJ-1

(53.20 cm) which however was at par with all the marigold genotypes except

CGDU-1 (40.43 cm) and PBG (36.86 cm) which recorded the minimum plant

spread.

The observations are in line with the finding of Singh et al. (2003), Poonam

and Kumar (2007), Narsude et al. (2010), Raghuvanshi and Sharma (2011) and

Choudhary et al. (2014) in marigold, who also observed variation in plant spread in

different genotypes of marigold due to the inherent character of marigold

genotypes.

35

Table 4. Performance of marigold genotypes for plant spread (cm)

Plant spread (cm)

Genotypes

60 DAT

90 DAT

CGRG-1 43.06 48.00

CGRG-2 42.00 49.60

CGJS-1 39.36 46.30

CGJS-2 40.63 47.56

CGRJ-1 36.76 53.20

CGRJ-2 40.50 51.27

CGJS-3 45.10 52.30

CGJS-4 47.53 52.70

CGMS-1 43.80 51.56

CGMS-2 44.33 46.86

CGR-2 48.56 49.60

CGR-3 46.07 47.10

CGDU-1 32.33 40.43

CGSG-2 47.16 48.13

CGKS-1 39.70 45.35

PBG(Check) 29.43 36.86

PNG 32.47 40.17

PA 45.33 49.07

SEm± 2.85 2.73

C.D. at 5% 8.235 7.88

36

Fig. 4 Performance of marigold genotypes for plant spread (cm)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


Pla

nt

spre

ad

(cm

)

60DAT

90DAT

Treatments Treatments

37

4.1.3 Number of primary branches plant-1

The data on number of primary branches plant-1

are presented in Table 5

and illustrated in Fig. 5.

At 30 DAT, the maximum number of primary branches plant-1

were noticed

in genotype CGSG-2 (11.53) which however, was at par with variety PA (9.40) but

significantly superior over rest of the genotypes. The minimum number of primary

branches was recorded in CGKS-1 (5.53).


were

recorded in CGR-3 (18.53) which, was at par with genotypes CGSG-2 (17.40),

CGMS-2 (16.60), CGRJ-1 (15.73), CGRG-1 (15.40), CGJS-4 (15.80), PA (15.80),

CGJS-3 (15.06) and CGRJ-2 (14.66) and PNG (14.33) but significantly superior

over check variety PBG. The minimum number of primary branches was recorded

in genotype CGMS-1 (9.26).

However at 90 DAT, number of primary branches plant-1

was found to be

non significant.

The variation in number of primary branches plant-1

might be due to the

difference in their genetic composition and varied growth rate among the

genotypes of marigold (Narsude et al., 2010). Further, the individual genetic

makeup of the genotypes may also have been influenced by the environmental

conditions. Similar variations for number of branches were also observed by

Ravikumar (2002), Rao et al. (2005), Singh and Singh (2010), Narsude et al.

(2010a) in marigold and Munikrishnappa et al. (2013) in China aster.

38

Table 5. Performance of marigold genotypes for number of primary branches

Number of primary branches plant-1

Genotypes

30 DAT

60 DAT

90 DAT

CGRG-1 7.93 15.40 17.35

CGRG-2 6.07 11.33 14.73

CGJS-1 6.67 13.40 19.78

CGJS-2 6.00 13.07 15.53

CGRJ-1 6.53 15.73 18.00

CGRJ-2 7.87 14.67 17.40

CGJS-3 6.40 15.07 17.47

CGJS-4 8.47 15.80 19.73

CGMS-1 6.80 9.27 15.27

CGMS-2 7.07 16.60 20.27

CGR-2 9.00 11.73 16.20

CGR-3 8.53 18.53 20.53

CGDU-1 6.07 12.80 15.13

CGSG-2 11.53 17.40 20.13

CGKS-1 5.53 7.13 15.67

PBG (Check) 6.60 13.67 17.27

PNG 6.63 14.33 17.40

PA 9.40 15.80 18.27

SEm± 0.82

1.57 1.64

C.D. at 5% 2.37

4.54

NS

39

Fig. 5 Performance of marigold genotypes for number of primary branches plant-1

0

5

10

15

20

25


Nu

mb

er o

f p

rim

ary

bra

nch

es

Treatments

30DAT

60DAT

90DAT

40

4.1.4 Number of secondary branches plant-1

The number of secondary branches plant-1

were recorded at 60 and 90 DAT

and are presented in Table 6 and depicted in Fig.6.

At 60 DAT, the maximum number of secondary branches plant-1

were

observed in variety PNG (51.93) which, was at par with check variety PBG (49.40)

and genotypes CGJS-4 (41) and CGR-3 (40.93). The minimum number of

secondary branches was recorded in CGDU-1 (24.93).

A similar trend for number of secondary branches plant-1

was observed 90

DAT, the maximum number of secondary branches plant-1

were noticed in variety

PNG (55.40) which, was at par with variety PBG (54.24) but superior over other

genotypes. The minimum number of secondary branches was recorded in genotype

CGDU-1 (29.86).

The numbers of secondary branches plant-1

may have increased due to

pinching of plant which might have forced the auxiliary buds to thrive well (Kelly

and Harbaugh, 2002). Similar results have also been reported by Khanvilkar et al.

(2003) in marigold and Munikrishnappa et al. (2013) in China aster.

41

Table 6. Performance of marigold genotypes for number of secondary branches

plant-1

Number of secondary branches plant-1

Genotypes

60 DAT

90 DAT

CGRG-1 37.60 39.06

CGRG-2 31.80 39.53

CGJS-1 30.73 40.46

CGJS-2 32.13 40.93

CGRJ-1 30.93 34.60

CGRJ-2 35.87 42.08

CGJS-3 34.67 40.60

CGJS-4 41.00 46.20

CGMS-1 33.47 41.20

CGMS-2 35.67 37.80

CGR-2 38.13 43.31

CGR-3 40.93 45.08

CGDU-1 24.93 29.86

CGSG-2 35.20 41.80

CGKS-1 32.73 45.13

PBG (Check) 49.40 54.24

PNG 51.93 55.40

PA 35.60 40.20

SEm± 4.03 2.58

C.D. at 5% 11.64 7.44

42

Fig. 6 Performance of marigold genotypes for number of secondary branches plant-1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


Nu

mb

er o

f se

con

dary

bra

nch

es

Treatments

60DAT

90DAT

43

4.1.5 Number of leaves plant-1

The number of leaves plant-1

were recorded periodically at 30, 60 and 90

DAT are presented in Table 7 and depicted in Fig. 7.

At 30 DAT, number of leaves plant-1

was found to be non significant.

At 60 DAT, the maximum number of leaves plant-1

were recorded in

genotype CGJS-3 (27.80 cm) which however, was at par with genotypes CGSG-2

(26.46), PBG (26.40), CGRG-1 (25.86), CGRJ-1 (25.33), CGR-2 (24.93), CGJS-1

(24.66), CGJS-4 (24.33), CGR-3 (24.33) and CGDU-1 (24.26). The minimum

number of leaves was recorded in genotype CGKS-1 (14.40).

At 90 DAT, the maximum number of leaves plant-1

were noticed in

genotype CGJS-3 (43.86 cm) which, however was at par with all the other

genotypes except CGRG-2 (37.46) whereas, minimum number of leaves plant-1

was recorded in genotype CGKS-1 (26.13).

The production of more number of leaves may be attributed to the

production of more number of branches per plant (Verma et al., 2004). Similar

variation in number of leaves plant-1

among the genotypes was also observed

previously in marigold by Singh and Misra (2008) and Zosiamlianana et al. (2012)

in china aster.

44

Table 7. Performance of marigold genotypes for number of leaves plant-1

Number of leaves plant-1

Genotypes

30 DAT

60 DAT

90 DAT

CGRG-1 14.07 25.86 41.60

CGRG-2 14.13 22.73 37.46

CGJS-1 12.33 24.66 38.86

CGJS-2 13.97 23.00 40.13

CGRJ-1 13.60 25.33 40.20

CGRJ-2 12.93 21.00 34.86

CGJS-3 17.61 27.80 43.86

CGJS-4 17.07 24.33 38.46

CGMS-1 13.20 21.73 38.73

CGMS-2 13.33 24.00 41.80

CGR-2 17.33 24.93 42.26

CGR-3 16.13 24.33 42.00

CGDU-1 12.27 24.26 40.00

CGSG-2 17.13 26.46 43.33

CGKS-1 14.27 14.40 26.13

PBG (Check) 15.33 26.40 40.13

PNG 14.40 22.80 39.00

PA 11.47 18.26 40.00

SEm± 1.39 1.67 2.13

C.D. at 5% NS 4.83 6.15

45

Fig. 7 Performance of marigold genotypes for number of leaves plant-1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50


Nu

mb

er o

f le

aves

Treatments

30DAT

60DAT

90DAT

46

Flowering attributes, yield and xanthophyll content

4.2.1 Days to first bud appearance

Days to first bud appearance was significantly influenced by the different

genotypes. The data pertaining to number of days to first bud appearance is

presented in Table 8 and Fig 8.

Significantly earliest days for first bud appearance was recorded in variety

PNG (48 days) which was at par with check variety PBG (48.33 days) and

genotype CGJS-3 (50.33 days) but significantly superior to rest of the treatments.

The observations are in line with the findings of Mohanty et al. (2002) in

marigold and Bhaskarar et al. (2016) in gaillardia. The different period required for

first flower bud appearance in marigold genotypes might be due to varied growth

rate and the genetic makeup of the genotypes (Nayak et al., 2005).

47

Table 8. Performance of marigold genotypes for days to first bud appearance

Genotypes

Days to first bud appearance

CGRG-1 68.00

CGRG-2 65.33

CGJS-1 65.33

CGJS-2 69.00

CGRJ-1 69.00

CGRJ-2 68.67

CGJS-3 50.33

CGJS-4 67.00

CGMS-1 69.67

CGMS-2 71.33

CGR-2 67.67

CGR-3 71.00

CGDU-1 72.67

CGSG-2 65.67

CGKS-1 59.00

PBG (Check) 48.33

PNG 48.00

PA 105.00

SEm±

2.09

C.D. at 5% 6.04

48

Fig. 8 Performance of marigold genotypes for days to first bud appearance

0

20

40

60

80

100

120


Days

to f

irst

bu

d a

pp

eara

nce

Treatments

49

4.2.2 Days to 50 % flowering

The data pertaining to the number of days required for 50 percent flowering

are presented in the Table 9 and graphically illustrated in Fig. 9 Significant

differences has observed for number of days taken to 50% flowering.

The data on days required for 50 percent flowering revealed that variety

PBG (Check) recorded the earliest days to 50% flowering (65.67 days) which was

at par with variety PNG (66.67 days) and genotype CGKS-1 (66.67 days).

However, these three treatments were found to be superior to rest of the genotypes.

The differences in flowering might be due to the different time period taken

by the different genotypes based on their genetic makeup (Singh and Singh, 2006).

The findings also corroborates with the findings of Nair and Shiva (2003) in

gerbera, Singh and Mishra (2008) in marigold, Palai et al. (2008) in

chrysanthemum.

50

Table 9. Performance of marigold genotypes for days to 50 % flowering

Genotypes

Days to 50 % flowering

CGRG-1 75.33

CGRG-2 76.33

CGJS-1 81.33

CGJS-2 79.00

CGRJ-1 81.33

CGRJ-2 79.33

CGJS-3 85.67

CGJS-4 80.67

CGMS-1 85.00

CGMS-2 86.67

CGR-2 76.33

CGR-3 89.67

CGDU-1 96.67

CGSG-2 85.00

CGKS-1 66.67

PBG (Check) 65.67

PNG 66.67

PA 128.67

SEm± 2.54

C.D. at 5% 7.33

51

Fig. 9 Performance of marigold genotypes for days to 50 % flowering

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140


Days

to 5

0 %

flo

wer

ing

Treatments

52

4.2.3 Flower diameter (cm)

Data pertaining to flower diameter are presented in Table 10 and Fig. 10.

The genotype CGR-2 recorded maximum flower diameter (6.61 cm) which,

however, was found to be at par with genotype CGSG-2 (6.01 cm) but superior

over rest of the genotypes including check variety PBG. However, the minimum

flower diameter (2.96 cm) was recorded in genotype CGJS-2.

The variation in flower diameter might be due to genetic makeup of

genotypes and more number of leaves which may have lead to more dry matter

accumulation, resulting in the accumulation of maximum photosynthates that may

have contributed to the production of bigger size flower (Verma and Beniwal,

2006). Similar results have been reported by Narsude et al. (2010) and Panwar et

al. (2013) in African marigold.

53

Table 10. Mean performance of marigold genotypes for flower diameter (cm)

Genotypes

Flower Diameter (cm)

CGRG-1 4.96

CGRG-2 3.75

CGJS-1 4.28

CGJS-2 2.96

CGRJ-1 5.32

CGRJ-2 4.02

CGJS-3 4.35

CGJS-4 5.28

CGMS-1 4.92

CGMS-2 3.68

CGR-2 6.61

CGR-3 4.82

CGDU-1 5.25

CGSG-2 6.01

CGKS-1 5.28

PBG (Check) 5.41

PNG 5.36

PA 4.59

SEm±

0.22

C.D. at 5% 0.63

54

Fig. 10 Performance of marigold genotypes for flower diameter (cm)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7


Flo

wer

d

iam

eter

(cm

)

Treatments

55

Plate V: Diameter of flower in genotype CGSG-2

Plate VI : Diameter of flower in PBG (check variety)

CGSG-2

PBG

56

4.2.3 Number of flowers plant-1

Various genotypes showed a significant difference for the number of

flowers plant-1

(Table 11 and Fig.11).

The maximum number of flowers plant-1

(50.73) was recorded in the

genotype CGMS-1, which however was at par with genotypes CGRG-1 (50.13),

PNG (48.60), CGRJ-1 (47.73), CGJS-4 (47.20), check variety PBG (46.60), CGJS-

2 (45.80), CGJS-1 (45.73) and CGMS-2 (43.53). The minimum number of flowers

plant-1

was recorded in genotype CGKS-1 (35.13).

The variation in number of flower plant-1

might be due to hereditary traits

of the genotypes. Number of flowers plant-1

may have increased with the increase

in number of branches plant-1

(Laishram et al., 2013). Moreover, different

photosynthesis efficacy of genotypes may have enhanced food accumulation

resulting in better plant growth and subsequently higher number of flowers per

plant (Sunitha et al., 2007). These results are in accordance with the findings

obtained by Singh and Sangama (2000) in China aster. Similar results were

reported by Narsude et al. (2010), Beniwal and Dahiya (2012), Singh et al. (2004)

and Singh and Misra (2009) in marigold.

57

Table 11. Performance of marigold genotypes for number of flowers plant-1

Genotypes

Number of flowers plant-1

CGRG-1 50.13

CGRG-2 36.00

CGJS-1 45.73

CGJS-2 45.80

CGRJ-1 47.73

CGRJ-2 41.87

CGJS-3 42.73

CGJS-4 47.20

CGMS-1 50.73

CGMS-2 43.53

CGR-2 39.80

CGR-3 42.33

CGDU-1 40.07

CGSG-2 45.00

CGKS-1 35.13

PBG(Check) 46.60

PNG 48.60

PA 41.47

SEm±

2.65

C.D. at 5% 7.65

58

Fig. 11 Performance of marigold genotypes for number of flowers plant-1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


Nu

mb

er o

f fl

ow

ers

Treatments

59

Plate VII: Number of flowers plant-1

in genotype CGMS-1

Plate VIII : Number of flowers plant-1

in PBG (check variety)

60

4.2.4 Flower weight plant-1

(g)

Flower weight plant-1

differed significantly with different treatments as is

evident from the data in Table 12 and Fig. 12.

Significantly maximum flower weight plant-1

(228.34 g) was recorded in

CGRJ-1 which, was found to be at par with genotypes CGMS-1 (212.90 g) and

CGSG-2 (200.81 g) but significantly superior over rest of the genotypes including

check variety PBG.

The flower weight plant-1

may have been dependant on the individual

flower weight as well as number of flowers plant-1

resulting in the variation in

fresh weight of flowers among the genotypes (Shivakumar et al. 2014).

The results are in accordance with the finding of Singh and Misra (2009),

Rao et al. (2005), Narsude et al. (2010) and Beniwal and Dahiya (2012) and Manik

et al. (2016) in marigold.

61

Table 12. Performance of marigold genotypes for flower weight plant-1

(g)

Genotypes

Flower weight plant-1

(g)

CGRG-1 135.57

CGRG-2 88.83

CGJS-1 121.05

CGJS-2 162.03

CGRJ-1 228.34

CGRJ-2 82.27

CGJS-3 148.04

CGJS-4 184.36

CGMS-1 212.90

CGMS-2 126.21

CGR-2 185.42

CGR-3 177.46

CGDU-1 164.30

CGSG-2 200.81

CGKS-1 57.83

PBG (Check) 166.01

PNG 192.61

PA 78.45

SEm±

11.27

C.D. at 5% 32.54

62

Fig. 12 Performance of marigold genotypes for flower weight plant-1

(g)

0

50

100

150

200

250


Flo

wer

w

eigh

t (g

m p

lan

t-1)

Treatments

63

4.2.6 Flower yield (t ha-1

)

Data pertaining to flower yield (t ha-1

) of marigold are presented in Table

13 and Fig. 13. The maximum flower yield (11.26 t ha-1

) was recorded in genotype

CGRJ-1 which was found to be at par with genotypes CGMS-1 (10.52 t ha-1

) and

CGSG-2 (10.34 t ha-1

) and PNG (9.72 t ha-1

) but significantly superior over rest of

the genotypes including check variety PBG (8.48 t ha-1

). However, minimum

flower yield was obtained in the genotype CGRG-2 (3.86 t ha-1

).

The variation in yield of flowers plant-1

might be attributed to the more

number of leaves as well as plant spread which might have resulted in production

and accumulation of maximum photosynthesis resulting the production of more

yield. The difference in flower yield per hectare may have varied due to positive

correlation with number of flowers per plant, flower diameter and weight of flower

plant-1

. Similar results have also been reported by Rao et al. (2005), Singh and

Singh (2006), Narsude et al. (2010) and Beniwal and Dahiya (2012) in marigold.

64

Table 13. Performance of marigold genotypes for flower yield (t ha-1

)

Genotypes

Flower yield t ha-1

CGRG-1 6.59

CGRG-2 3.98

CGJS-1 5.97

CGJS-2 9.08

CGRJ-1 11.19

CGRJ-2 4.24

CGJS-3 7.75

CGJS-4 10.00

CGMS-1 10.52

CGMS-2 6.67

CGR-2 9.25

CGR-3 8.63

CGDU-1 8.09

CGSG-2 10.34

CGKS-1 3.32

PBG (Check) 8.48

PNG 9.72

PA 8.91

SEm± 0.40

C.D. at 5% 1.15

65

Fig. 13 Performance of marigold genotypes for flower yield (t ha-1

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Flo

wer

Y

ield

(t

ha

-1)

Treatments

66

4.2.7 Duration of flowering (days)

The perusal of data presented in Table 14 and Fig. 14 on Duration of

flowering. The variety PA recorded longest duration of flowering (77 days) which,

was at par with CGJS-3 (75 days), PBG (73 days) and PNG (70.67 days). The

minimum duration of flowering was observed in genotype CGRG-2 (48 days).

The genetic control of the characters and modification in their expression

due to environmental conditions might be the possible cause observed for variation

in duration of flowering (Choudhary et al., 2014). Panwar et al. (2013) reported in

general a high range for duration of flowering in African marigold. Similar

findings have been also reported by Rao et al. (2005) and Raghuvanshi and

Sharma (2011) in African marigold.

67

Table 14. Performance of marigold genotypes for duration of flowering (days)

Genotypes

Duration of flowering (days)

CGRG-1 56.00

CGRG-2 48.00

CGJS-1 54.33

CGJS-2 54.67

CGRJ-1 56.00

CGRJ-2 55.00

CGJS-3 75.00

CGJS-4 55.67

CGMS-1 55.67

CGMS-2 51.00

CGR-2 55.33

CGR-3 52.00

CGDU-1 49.67

CGSG-2 56.67

CGKS-1 64.33

PBG(Check) 73.00

PNG 70.67

PA 77.00

SEm±

3.15

C.D. at 5% 9.10

68

Fig. 14 Performance of marigold genotypes for duration of flowering (days)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


Du

rati

on

of

flow

erin

g (

days)

Treatments

69

4.2.8 Xanthophyll content (g kg-1

of petal meal)

The perusal of data presented in Table 15 and Fig. 15 on xanthophyll

content g kg-1

of petal meal reveals that significantly maximum xanthophyll

content (27.87 g) was recorded in the genotype CGJS-3 which was significantly

superior to all other genotypes including check variety PBG (9.58 g). However, the

minimum xanthophyll content was recorded in genotype CGMS-1 (5.82 g).

The xanthophyll content variation may be due to colour of flower and also

due to different genetic makeup of genotypes (Naik, 2003). Higher xanthophyll

content might be due to increase in vegetative parameters which might have

contributed in production of more photosynthates resulting in greater accumulation

of dry matter which in turn leads to production of more dark colour flower with

higher xanthophyll ( Krol, 2012). The findings are in conformity with the research

finding of Rao et al. (2005), Iftikhar et al. (2011) and Manik et al. (2016) in

African marigold.

70

Table 15. Performance of marigold genotypes for xanthophyll content (g kg-1

)

Genotypes

Xanthophyll content (g kg-1

of petal meal)

CGRG-1 14.89

CGRG-2 21.74

CGJS-1 14.79

CGJS-2 12.77

CGRJ-1 24.49

CGRJ-2 14.53

CGJS-3 27.87

CGJS-4 26.66

CGMS-1 5.82

CGMS-2 15.25

CGR-2 13.49

CGR-3 27.78

CGDU-1 15.41

CGSG-2 19.57

CGKS-1 19.34

PBG(Check) 9.58

PNG 19.55

PA 11.89

SEm± 0.14

C.D. at 5% 0.41

71

Fig. 15 Performance of marigold genotypes for xanthophyll content (g/kg)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30


Xan

thop

hyll

con

ten

t (g

kg

-1)

Treatments

72

CHAPTER-V

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The present investigation “Study on growth, flowering and carotenoids

content of African marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) under Chhattisgarh plains

agro-climatic condition” was carried out in the Department of Floriculture &

Landscape Architecture, College of Agriculture, Indira Gandhi Krishi

Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur (C.G.) during the year 2016-17. The investigation was

undertaken to evaluate some indigenously available marigold genotypes for

growth, flowering and yield under Chhattisgarh plains condition.

The experimental material consisted of eighteen genotypes of marigold

i.e., CGRG-1, CGRG-2, CGJS-1, CGJS-2, CGRJ-1, CGRJ-2, CGJS-3, CGJS-4,

CGMS-1, CGMS-2, CGR-2, CGR-3, CGDU-1, CGSG-2, CGKS-1 including

named varieties viz., Pusa Basanti Gainda (check variety ), Pusa Narangi Gainda

and Pusa Arpita. Observations on thirteen important characters viz., plant height,

plant spread, number of primary branches plant-1

, number of secondary branches

plant-1

, number of leaves plant-1

, days to first bud appearance, days to 50%

flowering, duration of flowering, flower diameter, flower weight plant-1

, number

of flowers plant-1

, flower yield (t ha-1

) and xanthophyll content were recorded on

five competitive randomly selected plants from each replication. These were

evaluated in the field in a randomized block design with three replications. The

observations were recorded for growth, flowering and yield characters. The results

of the investigation presented in chapter four are summarized here as under:

The maximum plant height (37.07 cm) at 30 DAT was recorded in the

genotype CGSG-2 which however, was found to be at par with the genotypes

CGJS-3 (36.73 cm), CGR-2 (36.67 cm) and CGJS-4 (33.67cm) but significantly

superior over standard check variety (PBG). At 60 DAT, the maximum plant

height was recorded in CGR-2 (84 cm) which however, was at par with CGJS-3

(78.93 cm), CGJS-4 (77.6 cm) and CGRG-1 (76.40 cm), but significantly higher

than Pusa Basanti Gainda (standard check). At 90 DAT, maximum plant height

was recorded in genotype CGJS-4 (115.06 cm) which however, was at par with

73

genotypes CGR-2 (114.6 cm), CGJS-3 (112.6 cm), CGSG-2 (107.73 cm), CGRG-1

(105.00 cm) and CGMS-1 (104.86 cm).

At 60 DAT,maximum plant spread was recorded in genotype CGR-2 (48.56

cm) and was found to be at par with the genotypes CGJS-4 (47.53 cm), CGSG-2

(47.16 cm), CGR-3 (46.07 cm), PA (45.33 cm), CGJS-3 (45.1 cm), CGMS-2 (44.33

cm), CGMS-1 (43.8 cm), CGRG-1 (43.06 cm), CGRG-2 (42 cm), CGJS-2 (40.63

cm). At 90 DAT,maximum plant spread was recorded in genotypeCGRJ-1 (53.20

cm) which was found to be at par with majority of the genotypes.

In case of number of primary branches plant-1

at 30 DAT, the maximum

number were noticed in genotype CGSG-2 (11.53 cm) which, was at par with

variety PA (9.40 cm) but significantly superior over standard check variety (PBG).


were noticed in

genotype CGR-3 (18.53 cm) which however, was at par with genotypes CGSG-2

(17.4 cm) , CGMS-2 (16.6 cm) , CGRJ-1 (15.73 cm) , CGSG-1 (15.40 cm) ,

CGJS-4 (15.8 cm) , PA (15.8 cm) , CGJS-3 (15.06 cm) and CGRJ-2 (14.66 cm)

but significantly superior over check variety (PBG). At 90 DAT, number of

primary branches plant-1

was found non significant. The maximum number of

primary branches plant-1

were noticed in genotype CGR-3 (20.53 cm).

At 60 DAT, the maximum number of secondary branches plant-1

were

noticed in variety PNG (51.93 cm) which, was at par with PBG (49.40) , CGJS-4

(41.00) and CGR-3 (40.93 cm). At 90 DAT, the maximum number of secondary

branches plant-1

were noticed in PNG (55.40 cm) however, was at par with PBG

standard check variety (54.24 cm).

At 30 DAT, number of leaves plant-1

was found to be non significance. The

maximum number of leaves plant-1

were noticed in genotypes CGJS-3 (17.61 cm)

.At 60 DAT, the maximum number of leaves plant-1

were noticed in genotype

CGJS-3 (27.80 cm) which, was at par with genotypes CGSG-2 (26.46), PBG

(26.40), CGRG-1 (25.86), CGRJ-1 (25.33), CGR-2 (24.93), CGJS-1 (24.66),

CGJS-4 (24.33), CGR-3 (24.33) and CGDU-1 (24.26 cm). At 90 DAT, the

maximum number of leaves plant-1

were noticed in genotype CGJS-3 (43.86 cm)

however, was at par with genotypes CGSG-2 (43.33 cm) , CGR-2 (42.26 cm) ,

CGR-3 (42 cm), CGRG-1 (41.60 cm) , CGMS-2 (41.8 cm) , CGRJ-1 (40.20 cm) ,

74

CGJS-2 (40.13 cm) , PBG (40.13 cm), CGDU-1 (40 cm), PA (40 cm), PNG (39

cm), CGJS-1 (38.86 cm), CGMS-1 (38.73 cm) and CGJS-4 (38.46 cm).

The significantly earliest of days for first bud appearance were recorded in

variety PNG (48 days) which was at par with check variety PBG (48.33 days) but

significantly superior to rest of the genotypes.

For fifty percent flowering revealed that variety PBG (Check) recorded the

earliest days to 50% flowering (65.67 days) which was at par with variety PNG

(66.67 days) and genotype CGKS-1 (66.67 days). However, there treatments were

found to be superior to rest of genotypes.

The genotype CGR-2 (6.61 cm) recorded maximum flower diameter which,

however, was found to be at par with genotype CGSG-2 (6.01 cm) but superior

over rest of genotypes including check (PBG).

The maximum number of flowers plant-1

(50.73) was recorded in the

genotype CGMS-1 which, was found to be at par with genotypes CGRG-1

(50.13), PNG (48.60), CGRJ-1 (47.73), CGJS-4 (47.20), check variety PBG

(46.60), CGJS-2 (45.80), CGJS-1 (45.73) and CGMS-2 (43.53).

Significantly maximum flower weight plant-1

(228.34 g) was recorded in

genotype CGRJ-1 which, was found to be at par with genotypes CGMS-1 (212.90

g) and CGSG-2 (200.81 g) but superior over rest of the genotypes including check

(PBG).

The variety PA recorded longest duration of flowering (77 days) which,

however, was found to be at par with CGJS-3 (75), PBG (73) and PNG (70.67).

The maximum flower yield (11.26 t ha-1

) was recorded in genotype CGRJ-

1 which was found to be at par with genotypes CGMS-1 (10.52), and CGSG-2

(10.34) and PNG (9.72) but significantly superior over rest of the genotypes

including check variety PBG.

The maximum xanthophyll content (27.87 g) was recorded in the genotype

CGJS-3 which was significantly superior to all other treatments including check

variety PBG (9.58 g).

75

CONCLUSIONS

At 30 DAT, the maximum plant height was recorded in genotype CGSG-2

whereas, at 60 and 90 DAT, the genotype CGJS-4 recorded maximum

plant height.

At 30 DAT the maximum number of primary branches was recorded in

genotype CGSG-2 and at 60,90 DAT was recorded in genotype CGR-3 .

Secondary branches plant-1

were found to be maximum in treatment PNG.

Maximum number of flowers plant-1

was recorded the genotype CGMS-1

which however,was at par with genotypes CGRG-1, PNG, CGRJ-1,

CGJS-4, check variety PBG, CGJS-2, CGJS-1 and CGMS-2.

Genotype CGR-2 had the maximum flower diameter which however, was

at par with genotype CGSG-2.

Earliest days to 50 per cent flowering was noticed in genotype CGRG-2

.Whereas, the variety PA recorded longest duration of flowering and it can

be grown for taking number of picking.

Maximum Flower yield t ha-1

was recorded in genotype CGRJ-1 which

however, was at par with genotypes CGMS-1 and CGSG-2.

Genotype CGJS-3 recorded heighest xanthophyll content gram kg-1

.

76

REFERENCES

Ahmad, I., Asif, M., Amjad, A. and Ahmad, S. 2011. Fertilization enhances

growth, yield, and xanthophyll contents of marigold. Turk Journal of

Agriculture, 35 (3): 641-648.

Anonymous. 2016. Chhattisgarh Database, Directorate of Horticulture. Government of

Chhattisgarh, Raipur.

Anonymous. 2017. Horticulture crop estimate, Department of Agriculture &

Farmers Welfare (DAC&FW), Government of India,New Delhi,India.

Anuja, S. and Jahnavi, K. 2012. Variability, heritability and genetic advance

studies in French marigold (Tagetes patula L.). The Asian Journal of

Horticulture, 7(2): 362-364.

Aradhana Singh (2006). Study of performance of marigold hybrids under Pune

con-dition. M.Sc. thesis submitted to Mahatma Phule Krushi

Vidyapeeth, Rahuri.

Beniwal, B.S. and Dahiya, S.S., 2012. Variability studies in marigold (Tagetes

spp.). In: Abstracts of National Seminar on Sustainable Agriculture

and Food Security: Challenges in Changing Climate, held at CCS

Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, Haryana, March 27-28, p. 298.

Bhaskarwar, A.C., Jadhav, G.N., Ghube, N.N., Tayade, M.M. and Patekar, T.R.

2016. Performance of different gaillardia genotypes in respect of growth,

flowering, quality and yield parameters. IJRBAT,4(2):512-517.

Bharathi, T. and Jawaharlal, M. 2014. Evaluation of African marigold (Tagetes

erecta. L). genotypes for growth and flower yield under Coimbatore

conditions. Trends in Biosciences, 7(16): 2197-2201.

Bhattacharyya, S., Datta. S., Mallick. B., Dhar, P. and Ghosh, S. 2010. Lutein

content and in vitro antioxidant activity of different cultivars of Indian

77

marigold flower (Tagetes patula L.) extracts. Journal of Agricultural

and Food Chemistry, 58(14): 8259-8264.

Black, C.A. 1965. Method of soil analysis, Amer. Argon. Due. Madison,

Wisconsin, USA, pp. 131-137.

Bolanos, N.J.L., Islas, J.H., Alvarez, B.E., Martinez, R. R. and Lopez, P. O. 2004.

Improving xanthophyll extraction from marigold flower using

cellulolytic enzymes. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry,

52(11): 3394-8.

Boonnoun, P., Opaskonkun, T., Prasitchoke, P., Goto, M., Shotipruk, A. 2012.

Purification of free lutein from marigold flowers by liquid

chromatography. Engineering Journal, 16: 145-155.

Bose, T.K and Yadav, L.P. (1989). Commercial flowers. Kalyani Public. pp: 713-

729.

Cantrill, R. 2004. Lutein from Tagetes erecta. Chemical and Technical Assessment

(CTA), FAO. 63rd JECFA, 1(5): 5.

Choudhary, M., Beniwal, B. S. and Kumari, A. 2014. Evaluation of marigold

genotypes under semi-arid conditions of Haryana. Annals of

Horticulture, 7(1): 30-35.

Deineka, V. I., Sorokopudov, V. N., Deineka, L.A. and Tretyakov, M. U. 2007.

Flowers of marigold (Tagetes species) as a source of xanthophyll.

Pharmaceutical Chemical Journal, 41(10): 540-542.

El-Saeid, H. M., Hussen, M. S., Sterbeny, S. E., and Omer, E. A. (1996). Effect of

nitrogen on yield and active constituents of Tagetes Patula. Egyptian

Journal of Horticulture, 23 (1): 101-112.

Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. 1984. Statistical procedure for Agricultural

research. Second Edition, Wiley publication.

78

Gregory, G.K., Chen, T. and Philip, T. 1986. Quantitative analysis of lutein esters

in marigold flowers by high performance liquid chromatography.

Journal of Food Science, 51(4): 1093–1094.

Howe, T.K. and Waters, W.E. 1982. Evaluation of flowering annuals: Marigold

and zinnia. Florida State Horticulture Society, 95: 282-285.

Iftikhar, A. Muhammad, A., Atyab, A. and Ahmad, S. 2011. Fertilization enhances

growth, yield, and xanthophyll contents of marigold. Turk Journal of

Agriculture, 35: 641-648.

Jackson, M.L., 1967. Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of India Private

Limited, New Delhi, India,p. 498.

Jitendra Sahu (2016). Variability, Heritability and Genetic Advance Studies in

African Marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) Genotypes. M.Sc. thesis submitted

to Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur (C.G.)

Kaul, K. and Bedi, Y.S. 2006. Natural source of luetien: Marigold (Tagetes erecta

L.), Introduction, cultivation, selection and quality improvement under

mid hill condition of Himachal Pradesh.

Kelly, R.O. and Harbaugh, B.K. (2002). Evaluation of marigold cultivars as

bedding plants in Central Florida. Horticulture Technology. 12(3):477-

484.

Khanvilkar, M.H.(2003).Performance of African Marigold(Tagetes erecta) in north

Konkan coastal zone of Maharashtra. Journal of Maharashtra

Agriculture University, 28(3):333-334.

Krol, B. 2012. Yield and chemical composition of flower heads of selected

cultivars of pot marigold (Calendula officinalis L.). Acta Horticulture,

11(1): 215-225.

Laishram, N., Dhiman, S.R., Gupta, Y.C., Bhardwaj, S.K. and Singh, A. 2013.

Microbial dynamics and physico-chemical properties of soil in the

rhizosphere of chrysanthemum (Dendranthema grandiflora) as

79

influenced by integrated nutrient management. Indian Journal of

Agricultural Science, 83(4): 447-455.

Lawrence, J.F. 1990. Determination of total xanthophyll and marigold oleoresin.

Journal of Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 2: 970-975.

Li, W., Gao, Y., Zhao, J. and Wang, Q. 2007. Phenolic, flavonoid, and lutein ester

content and antioxidant activity of 11 cultivars of chinese marigold.

Journal of Agricultural Food and Chemistry, 55(21): 8478-8484.

Ma, Q., Xu, X., Gao, Y., Wang, Q. and Zhao, J. 2008. Optimisation of supercritical

carbon dioxide extraction of lutein esters from marigold (Tagetes erecta

L.) with soybean oil as a co-solvent. International Journal of Food

Science Technology, 43: 1763–1769.

Manik.H. and Sharma.G. 2016. Promising marigold genotypes for flower and

xanthophylls yield under Chhattisgarh plains condition. Advances in

Life Science 5 (7):2659-2662.

Munikrishnappa, P.M., Patil, A.A., Patil, V.S., Patil, B.N., Channappagoudar, B.

B. and Alloli, T. 2013. Studies on the growth and yield parameters of

different genotypes of China aster (Callistephus chinensis Nees.).

Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Science, 26(1): 107-110.

Naik, B. 2003. Stability analysis and standardization of production technology for

flower and xanthophyll yield in marigold (Tagetes spp.). Ph.D. Thesis,

University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad.

Naik, B.H., Patil, A.A. and Basavaraj, N. 2005. Stability analysis in African

marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) genotypes for growth and flower yield.

Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Science., 18(3): 758-763.

Nair, A.S. and Shiva, K. N. 2003. Genetic variability, correlation and path

coefficient analysis in gerbera journal of Ornamental Horticulture. 6 (3):

180-187.

80

Nair, A.S. and Medhi, R.P. 2002. Performance of gerbera cultivars in the Bay

Islands. Indian journal of Horticulture. 59 (3): 322-225.

Narsude, P.B., Kadam, A.S. and Patil, V. K. 2010 a. Studies on the growth and

yield attributes of different African marigold (Tagetes erecta L.)

genotypes under Marathwada conditions. Asian Journal of Horticulture,

5(2): 284-286.

Narsude, P.B., Kadam, A.S. and Patil, V.K. 2010 b. Studies on the growth and

quality attributes of different African marigold (Tagetes erecta L.)

genotypes under Marathwada condition. The Asian Journal of

Horticulture, 5 (2): 407-410.

Olsen, S.R., Cole, C.V., Watanabe, F.S. and Dean, L. S. 1954. Estimation of

available P in soil by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. Circular

United State Department of Agriculture, p. 939.

Palai, L., Pratap, M. and Amrender, S. 2008. Evaluation of yellow coloured

chrysanthemum for growth, flowering and yield. The Orissa Journal of

Horticulture, 36(11): 116- 119.

Panwar, S., Singh, K.P., Janakiram, T. and Namita 2013. Genetic variability,

heritability and genetic advance in African marigold (Tagetes erecta L.)

genotypes. Progressive Horticulture, 45(1): 135-140.

Piper, C. S. 1967. In Soil and plant analysis. Hans publication, Bombay, p.368.

Poonam and Kumar, A. 2007. Garden beauty – A, promising chrysanthemum

cultivars of garden decoration. Jornal of Ornamental Horticulture, 10(3):

165-168.

Pratheesh, V.B., Benny, N. and Sujatha, C.H. 2009. Isolation, stabilization and

characterization of xanthophyll from marigold flower, Tagetes erecta L.

Modern Applied Science, 3(2): 19-28.

81

Raghuvanshi, A. and Sharma, B.P. 2011. Varietal evaluation of French marigold

(Tagetes patula Ninn.) under mid-hill zone of Himachal Pradesh.

Progressive Agriculture, 11(1): 123126.

Rao, C.C., Goud, P.V., Reddy, K. M. and Padmaja, G. 2005. Screening of African

marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) cultivars for flower yield and carotenoid

pigments. Indian Journal of Horticulture, 62(3): 276-279.

Ravikumar. 2002. Evaluation of China aster (Callistephus chinesis (L.) Nees)

genotypes under transitional zone of north Karnataka. M.Sc. (Agri.)

Thesis, University Agricultural Science, Dharwad (India).

Sarkar, C.R., Bhagawati, B., Das, L. and Goswami, B.C. 2012. An efficient

condition of saponification of lutein ester from marigold flower. Annals

of Biological Research, 3(3):1461-1466.

Shivakumar, Srinivasa, V., Sudeep, H.P., Shivayya, K.M. and Ketana, G.B. 2014.

Correlation studies in African marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) genotypes.

International Journal on Biological Science, 5 (2): 83-87.

Singh, D. and Singh, A.K. 2006. Characterization of African marigold (Tagetes

erecta Linn.). Journal of Ornamental Horticulture, 9(1): 40-42.

Singh, D., Sen, N.L. and Sindhu, S.S. (2003). Evaluation of marigold germplasm

under semi- arid conditions of Rajstan . Harayana Journal of Horticulture

Science, 32 (394):206-209.

Singh, D. and Misra, K.K. 2008. Genetic variability in quantitative characters of

marigold. Indian Journal Horticulture, 65(2): 187-192.

Singh, D. and Misra, K.K., 2009. Assessment of genetic traits of marigold (Tagetes

spp.) germplasm in Uttarakhand. Journal of Hill Research, 22(2): 86-94.

Singh, K.P. and Sangama. 2000. Effect of graded level of N and P on China aster

(Callistephus chinensis) cv. 'Kamini'. Indian Journal of Horticulture,

57(1): 87-89.

82

Subbiah, B.V. and Asija, G.L. (1956). A rapid procedure for the determination of

available nitrogen in soil. Current Sci., 25: 259-260.

Subha, B.M. (2006). Integrated nutrient management for growth, flowering and

xanthophylls yield of marigold (Tagetes erecta L.). M. Sc. (Ag.) Thesis,

Dharwad University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad.

Sujith, A., Hymavathi, T.V. and Devi, P.Y. 2012. Supercritical fluid extraction of

lutein esters from marigold. In. Journal of Biological and Life Sciences,

6(2):67-75.

Sunitha, H.M., Ravi, Hunje, Vyakaranahal, B.S. and Bablad, H.B. (2007). Effect of

pinching and growth regulators on plant growth, flowering and seed

yield in African marigold (Tagetes erecta Linn.). Journal of

Ornamental Horticulture, 10(2): 91-95.

Tiwary, B.K., Kumar, A., Nanda, A.K. and Chakraborty, R. 2014. A study on

optimization of marigold petal yield, pure lutein, and formulation of

free-flowing lutein esters. Journal of Crop Science Biotechnology.,

17(3): 175-181.

Vargas, F.D. and Lopez, O.P. 1997. Effects of Enzymatic Treatments of Marigold

Flowers on Lutein Isomeric Profiles. Journal of Agricultural and Food

Chemistry, 45(4): 1097–1102.

Verma, K.K. and Beniwal, B.S. 2006. Evaluation of marigold (Tagetes erecta L.)

genotypes for resistance against root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne

javanica. National Journal of Plant Improvement, 8(2): 184-185.

Verma, S. K., Singh, R. K., and Arya, R. R. (2004). Evaluation of Tagetes

germplasm. Scientific Horticulture, 9:219-224.

Zosiamliana, J. H., Reddy, G. S. N. And Rymbai, H., 2012, Growth, flowering and

yield characters of some cultivars of China aster (Callistephus chinensis

L. Ness). J. Natural Production Plant Resource. 2(2): 302-305.

83

Appendix-I: Meteorological details about the weather conditions prevailing during the course of experiment

Wk No. Date Max.Temp.

(°C)

Min.

Temp. (°C)

Rain-fall

(mm)

Relative

Humidity (%)

Vapour

Pressure (mm

of Hg)

Wind

speed

(kmph)

Evapo-ration

(mm)

Sun

shine

(hours)

I II I II

23 6June-12June 40.8 25.0 00 57.2 32.5 19.2 17.6 9.1 11.2 8.3

24 13-19 38.9 26.3 9.6 72.0 40.0 20.7 18.1 6.7 8.4 5.3

25 20-26 35.3 26.3 3.0 84.4 53.5 23.2 22.6 5.5 6.2 6.2

26 27-3 34.5 26.2 10.6 89.4 64.1 23.7 23.6 6.6 6.2 6.7

27 4July-10July 28.6 24.6 10.7 95.4 85.4 22.9 23.9 10.7 2.6 0.4

28 11-17 30.2 24.6 17.6 92.1 79.4 22.7 22.9 7.7 3.1 1.8

29 18-24 30.9 24.8 24.5 92.5 77.0 23.1 24.1 5.0 3.8 2.2

30 25-31 32.0 25.3 3.6 92.0 69.2 23.4 23.3 4.4 4.7 6.2

31 1Aug.-7Aug. 28.7 25.1 16.5 91.7 84.7 22.6 23.5 8.2 2.5 0.7

32 8.-14 30.0 22.3 2.7 89.1 73.1 22.2 22.3 8.8 3.3 2.3

33 15-21 28.9 11.3 1.6 88.4 72.2 21.3 20.8 8.7 2.9 3.1

34 22-28 31.6 25.8 3.7 91.4 73.2 23.9 23.2 4.0 3.6 3.8

35 29-4 32.4 25.7 7.8 91.2 68.8 24.2 23.5 4.6 3.6 3.9

36 5Sep.-11Sep. 30.6 25.0 09 86.7 67.5 21.8 22.1 4.5 3.3 1.2

37 12-18 31.2 24.7 16.1 94.5 78.8 23.8 24.2 2.5 3.9 4.6

38 19-25 31.9 24.8 9.2 93.7 73.4 23.6 23.3 3.4 4.6 6.2

39 26-2 29.4 24.4 20.6 97.2 85.8 23.4 23.7 2.5 3.2 3.0

40 3Oct.-9Oct. 30.7 24.6 5.5 96.2 70.4 23.7 22.9 1.7 2.9 3.4

41 10-16 32.1 21.4 00 91.1 37.4 18.9 13.5 1.3 3.8 7.9

42 17-23 31.2 18.5 00 91.5 35.8 16.2 12.1 1.2 3.8 10.0

43 24-30 31.3 18.9 00 85.1 41.1 14.8 13.5 1.7 3.7 8.8

44 31-6 30.4 19.9 00 83.8 47.1 15.4 14.8 2.3 3.4 8.0

45 7Nov.-13Nov. 29.7 13.6 00 91.7 28.2 11.5 8.4 1.4 3.4 8.6

46 14-20 29.2 13.5 00 87.5 31.0 11.3 9.5 1.5 3.0 8.0

47 21-27 30.4 11.9 00 88.1 24.2 9.9 7.6 1.8 3.0 8.6

48 28Nov.-4Dec. 30.1 13.8 00 88.2 33.7 11.3 10.1 1.4 3.2 8.2

7/6/2017 Gmail - TRENDS IN BIOSCIENCES JOURNAL NAAS SCORE 3.94 from 2017 (ISSN – PRINT -0974-8431 & ONLINE - 0976-2485)

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=331a7eef61&jsver=lEZPUTRTfxI.en.&view=pt&search=inbox&th=15d071a5bcab44d9&siml=15d07199c… 1/7

MANISHA NETAM <[email protected]>

TRENDS IN BIOSCIENCES JOURNAL NAAS SCORE 3.94 from 2017 (ISSN – PRINT-0974-8431 & ONLINE - 0976-2485) 5 messages

TRENDS IN BIOSCIENCES JOURNAL <[email protected]> Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 11:48 AMTo: MANISHA NETAM <[email protected]>

TRENDS IN BIOSCIENCES JOURNAL

NAAS SCORE 3.94 from 2017(ISSN – PRINT -0974-8431 & ONLINE - 0976-2485)

Dear Sir/Madam,

Accepted for Trends In Biosciences Journal – JULY, 2017 ISSUE

We accept your manuscript for publication in TRENDS IN BIOSCIENCESJOURNAL FREQUENCY - 48 ISSUES PER YEAR

MANUSCRIPTNO(MSSNO)-8394

TITLE-Evaluation of Marigold Genotypes under ChhattisgarhPlains Agro-Climatic Condition

Manisha Netam1*, Gaurav Sharma2

PUBLICATION FEE + PRINT COPY FEE – RS 2000 + 200 = RS 2200

LAST DATE FOR FEE SUBMISSION – 09-JULY-2017

ADDITIONAL PRINT COPY FEE (OPTIONAL) - RS 400 PER COPY

KINDLY FILL ONLINE AUTHOR DETAIL FORM

(copy and paste link on browser)

study on growth, flowering and carotenoids …singh netam, my elder sister-sister in law,madhunetam...

Documents