UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA

LOW INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS AND STIMULATION PRACTICES AFFECTING IN HEVEA BRASILIENSIS (MUELL.ARG.)

ISMAIL BIN HASHIM

FP 1988 3

[t 'S hereby �ertified that we have read this �heR�s entitled 'Low Intensi ty Tapping Systems and Stimulation ProcLl.cef'; Affecting Response s in Hevea Brasiliensis (Muell. Arg.)' by Tsmail bin Hashim, Rnd in our opinion it is �atisfactcry in terms of the scope , quality, and presentation as partial fulfilment of the req:Iirernents fa! the degree of Doctor ot Philosophy

� :"�.,;. . . , .a.�.\j·�·,Jj,t (j�,. t, -- , . . . . . . . . . �.-........ . ., . . .. . . . \ . . SULAIMAN M. YASSIN, Ph.D.

Professor/Dean of Graduate Studies Universiti Pertenian Malaysia (Chairman Board of Examiners)

\\ ,/ .......... � ... . M.R. SETHURAJ, Ph.D. Director of Research

Rubber Research Inst i t u te of India Kottayam, India

(External Examiner)

.

---�\t-. -

_ ..... ---t--D'AUZAC. JEAN, CLAUDE. Ph.D.

Professor Laborato1.re dt"> Physiologif> VegetDle Applique(�

:.r:,iveri te de S,- iences et Te:c.hLiql'P' du Lan�uedoc, Frdnce

(Externa] Examiner)

.. .. . . . . .. . .. 'I . .. . .. . . .. " • • .,

�rOHAMNi\ D MD. ALI. Ph. D. As�ucialP Profe�su!

Facul L 'f 01 A'S�, { III lure Uri versi t 1 PerlLl,d ciT! En lajPlcl

(Inte:nn: rX<lIT,it:er)

U-"dA'_A�� .. � -" ,-:-.-,-.-.-,---RAJA MUHN1�D RAJA HARUN, Ph.D.

Associate Professor Faculty of Agriculture

Universiti Pertanian Malaysia (Internal Examiner/Supervisor)

LOW INTENSITY TAPPING SYS'I'EMS A.l-m STIMULA'rION PRACTICES AFFECTING RESPONSES IN HEVEA �RASILIENSIS (MUELL. ��G.)

by

ISMAIL BIN HASHIM

A thesis submitted in pa.rtia.l f:tlfilment of tht3 requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in the Depa.:::·"timent of Agronomy and Hortlcul ture

Faculty 0: Agriculture Universiti Pertanian Malaysia

July 1988

This work was accomplished with the valuable contributions

from many individuals . While it

mention all, I am pleased to

following:

is not possible for

express my gratitude

me

to

to

the

I am grateful to the Director, As sistant Director (Biology)

and Board of the Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia for

allowing me to pursue this study on a part-time basis.

The llnderstanding, useful suggestions and guidance from my

supervisors, Associate Prof . Dr Raja Muhammad bin Raja Harun and

As sociate Prof. Dr Wong Kai Choo are much appreciated . I am also

indebted to Dr P . D . Abraham, Head of Tapping and Exploitation

Physiology Division for his cooperation and expert advice .

Many of my colleagues were very helpful, especially to Dr

S. Sivakumaran for reading through the initial draft, Dr

Samsidar Hamzah for providing the electron microscopy service,

Dr S.W. Pakianathwi for allowing his staff, Encik Aw Kim Fatt to

hBlp in the physiological studies, Encik Napi bin Daud and Encik

Mohl IUdb bin Mohd Yusof, the RRIM s tati sti cians , 3.nd to �;n(!jE.

Lee Chew Kang, 'luan Haj i Ahmad Zarin bin Raj 1 Na. t 'rasi 'md 'ruan

Haj i Sakhiblill bin Mohd Husin for their capable sllpervi::> ion of

thE: field tria.ls sited a.t r.heir respective !'&gi.,);lS. 'l'IH�

ii

involvement of Dr PIng Tat Chin and Dr Yoon Pooi Kong in the

conduct of the preliminary trials also needs mention here.

I ·also appreciate the dedication of the many field staff

involved without whose effort, systematic and proper records may

not be obtained. I also wish to thank Puan Siti Rashidah, Encik

Albert Chua, Encik D. Ramasamy, Encik Rahman Karimon, Encik

Richard Chua, Encik Henry Chua, Encik M . Munusamy, Encik Liang

Heng Mo and Encik Choo Gee Tiem for their technical assistance.

The patience shown by Encik Teo Kim Wah in the computation of

tables and typing of this thesis is very much admired .

This work may

understanding and love

not have

from my

materialised

wife, Sapiah,

without the

and my children

Idayu, Idahani, Idham and Idazureen, who provide the comfort,

and are a constant source of inspiration for me to proceed

despite the busy official and personal matters affecting a part­

time student.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS • • • • • . . . . .. . . ., . . . ., ., . . .. . . . ., ., . . . ., . ., . ., ., . . . .

TABLE OF CONTENTS • • • • ., ., ., ., ., • & . ... . . ., ., ., ., ., ., ., ., ., .. ., ., .. .. .. .. ., ., ., ., ., ., ..

LIST OF TABLES • . . . . . . • . • . . . ., ., .. ., ., .. ., ., ., ., .. ., .. .. ., ., .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. ..

LIST OF FIGURES • • . • • .. .. .. .. .. .. .. to .. ., .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. r. .. � .. .. .. .. . .. .,

LIST OF PLATES .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. <I ..

L':'S'1' OF APPENDICES • • • . . • • . • . . • .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. " .. .. .. .. .. ..

LIST O� ABBREVIATIONS • • • . • .

ABSTRACTS ........................................................................... ., .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION • • . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CHAPTER 2 - REVIEW OF LITERATURE . • • . . . • • • • • . • . . • • . . . . . .

CHAPTER 3 - PRELIMINARY FIELD TRIALS • • • • • • • • .

1.

MATERIALS AND METHODS • .

EXPERI:tvIE:NTAL ............ '" .. .. .. ,. .. ., .. .. . .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

RESPONSES TO FOURTH DAILY TAPPING SYSTEHS AND STIWJLATION PRACTICES ON VIRGIN BARK OF SECOND BASE PANEL • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . .

freatments • • • " OI • • • • • • ft . "' .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. .. . O . ; .

li�S111 ts ...... ., .. .. .. .. .. ..

DiscussIon • • • • • . . • • • r . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. � ... . J • • • ( • • • • •

1"

ii

iv

viii

xiv

xvii

xvii i.

xix

64

66

73

II. RESPONSES TO QU��TER CUT CHM�GE-OVER SYSTN� AND STIMULATION PRACTICES ON VIRGIN BARK OF

Page

SECOND BASE PANEL.. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 88

Trea tments . ... . " . . .. . . . . . . . " . . I> . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. " • .. 88

Resul ts . .. . . . . .. . . .. .. . . " . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. R8

Discussion.. • . • . • • . . . . . • • . • . . . • . . • . . . . . . • . • . . �EY III. RESPONSES TO LOW-INTENSITY CONTROLLED UPWARD

TAPPING SYSTEM AND STIMULATION PRACTICES ON VIRGIN BARK OF FIRST HIGH PANEL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Trea tments .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 99

Resul ts . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 100

Discussion. . • • • • • • • • • . • . . . . . . • . • • • • • • • . ... . . . � IV. RESPONSES TO DIFFERENT STIMULATION PRACTICES

ON RENEWED BARK OF FIRST BASE PANEL. . . . . . . . . . 107

Treatments ...... .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. � .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 107

Resul ts .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 107

Discussion. .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... ...... .... .... .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1)1f JHAPTER 4 - MAIN FIELD TRIALS. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . 121

MA'rERIALS AND METHODS. . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . 1 22

EXPERIMENTAL . . • • . . , . . . . . . • . . • . . • • • . . . . . . . . . . . .. 128

I. RESPONSES TO LOW INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS AND STIMULATION PRACTICES ON VIRGIN B��K OF FIRST BASE PANEL. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 128

Treatments . • . • • . • . • • • . . . . • • . . • . • . • . • . . . . . . . . • . . 128

R€s ul ts .. .. " . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. . II '" I • • • � .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. <. " " c. • • • • ... 129

Discussion. ..... ... . .... . .. .. . . . . . .. . . .. . . ... .. i'72.

v

II . RESPONSES TO LOW INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS AND STIMULATION PRACTICES ON VIRGIN BARK OF SECOND

Page

BASE PAN'EL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

Treatments . . . . . . . � . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

Dis CUB sion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196

III . RESPONSES TO LOW INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS AND STIMULATION PRACTICES ON VIRGIN BARK OF FIRST HIGH PANEL . " . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii 200

Trea tments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200

Reaul ts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. , . . . . . 201

Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " . . . . 220

ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 224

Profitability of young rubber - Clone RRIM 712 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227

Profitability of mature rubber - Clone RRIM 600 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231

Profitability of pigh panel exploitation - Clone RRIM 600 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233

Discussion and conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235

CHAPTER 5 - PHYSIOLOGICAL AND ANATOMICAL STUDIES ON DIFFERENT INTENSITIES OF TAPPING AND STIMULATION PRACTICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239

MATERIALS A.W METHODS . • • " . • • . • • • • . • • . • . . . . . • . . . 239

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246

vi

RESPONSES OF YIELD AND GROWTH PARAMETERS TO DIFFERENT INTENSITIES OF TAPPING AND

Pa.ge

STIMULATION PRACTICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246

Resul ts . . . . . . . . " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 246

Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 258

PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSES TO DIFFERENT INTENSITIES OF TAPPING AND STIMULATION PRACTICES .. . ........................ . .. .. ...... .. ............ II .. ......... a .. .. .. 267

Reaul ts.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 267

Discussion .. .. .. a ...... .. .. .. .. .... .............. . .. .............. � .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 283

ANATOMICAL RESPONSES TO DIFFERENT lNTENSITIES OF TAPPING AND STIMULATION PRACTICES .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. ill .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. • .. .. .. .. .. 290

Results .... .. ...... .. .. .... .. ........ � .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . 290

Discussion .... " .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 300

CHAPTER 6 - GENERAL DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303

CHAPTER 7 .- PROPOSAL FOR FUTURE RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 321

CHAPTER 8 - SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324

BIBLIOGRAPHY .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. " .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. " 332

APP'ENDICES . .. ...... .. .. .... . .. .. .... .. ........ .. .. .. . . . . . It • • • • • • • • • '1 . ... • • • • • • 353

VITA . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • . • . • • • • • • • • . • • • . . . . . .3 59

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1 • MATERIALS AND METHODS OF PRELIMINARY TRIALS 67

2 . TABLE FOR G/T/T, KG/HA OVER FIVE YEARS ON 74 CLONE RRIM 701 , PANEL BO-2 - SOUTH . . . . . . . . . 75

3 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T, KG/HA AND PERCENTAGE RESPONSE OVER FIVE YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 701 , PANEL BO-2 - SOUTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

L�. COMPARATIVE D . R . C . AND LATE DRIP OVER FIVE YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 701 , PANEL BO-2 - SOUTH . . 81

5. COMPARATIVE DRYNESS INCIDENCE, BARK CONSUMPTION AND GIRTH INCREMENT OVER FIVE YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 701 , PANEL BO-2 - SOUTH . . 83

6. YIELD IN G/T/T, KG/HA , D . R . C . AND LATE DRIP OVER FIvE YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 623 , PANEL BO-2 - SOUTH • • • • if • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 89

7 . COMPARATIVE DRYNESS INCIDENCE, BARK CONSUMPTION AND GIRTH INCREMENT OVER FIVE YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 623 , PANEL BO-2 - SOUTH . . 95

8 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T AND KG/HA WITH PERCENTAGE RESPONSE OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE GT 1 , PANELS BI-1 AND HO-1 - CENTRAL . . . . . . . . 1 01

9 . DRY RUBBER CONTENT AND LATE DRIP OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE GT 1 , PANELS BI-1 AND HO-1 -CEN'TRAL. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 04

1 0 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T OVER SEVEN YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 605 , PANEL BI-1 - NORTH . . . . . . . . 108

1 1 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN KG/HA AND PERCENTAGE RESPONSE OVER SEVEN YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 605 , PANEL BI-1 - NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 09

1 2 . PERCENTAGE D . R . C . OVER SEVEN YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 605 , PANEL BI-1 - NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 3

viii

Table Page

1 3 • PERCENTAGE LATE DRIP OVER SEVEN YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 605 , PANEL BI-1 - NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 4

1 4 . PERCENTAGE DRYNESS INCIDENCE AND BARK CONSUMPTION OVER SEVEN YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 605 , PANEL BI-1 NORTH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 5

1 5 . GIRTH INCREMENT OVER SEVEN YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 605 , PANEL BI-1 - NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 6

1 6 . EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS OF MAIN TRIALS . . . . . . . . . . 1 24

1 7 . TABLE FOR G/T/T AND KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE PB 255 , PANEL BO-1 - NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 30

1 8 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T , KG/HA WITH PERCENTAGE RESPONSE AND D . R. C . OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE PB 255 , PL�EL BO-1 - NORTH . . . . 1 32

1 9 . COMPARATIVE LATE DRIP , DRYNESS INCIDENCE, BARK CONSpMPTION AND GIRTH INCREMENT OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE FB 255 , PANEL BO-1 -NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . u . . . . . . 1 34

20 . TABLE FOR GiT/T AND KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 , PANEL BO-1 - NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . 1 37

21. COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T, KG/HA WITH PERCENTAGE RESPONSE AND D . R.C. OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 , PANEL BO-1 - NORTH . . 1 38

22, COMPARATIVE LATE DRIP , DRYNESS INCIDENCE , BARK CONSUMPTION AND GIRTH INCREMENT OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 , PANEL BO-1 -NORTH • • • • • � • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .a a • • • 1 40

23 . TABLE FOR G/T/T AND KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 71 2 , PANEL BO-1 - NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . 1 43

24. COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/ T , KG/HA WITH PERCENTAGE RESPONSE AND D . R . C . OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 71 2 , PANEL BO-1 - NORTH . . 1 44

ix

Table Page

25 . COMPARATIVE LATE DRIP , DRYNESS INCIDENCE, BARK CONSUMPTION AND GIRTH INCREMENT OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 71 2 , PANEL BO-1 -NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 46

26 . TABLE FOR G/T/T AND KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 71 2 , PANEL BO-1 - EAST . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 49

27 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T, KG/HA WITH PERCENTAGE RESPONSE AND D . R . C . OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 71 2 , PANEL BO-1 - EAST . . 1 51

28 . COMPARATIVE LATE DRIP , DRYNESS INCIDENCE, BARK CONSUMPTION AND GIRTH INCREMENT OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 71 2 , PANEL BO-1 -EAST .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 53

29 . TABLE FOR G/'I'/T AND KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE PR 255 , PANEL BO-1 - EAST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 55

30 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T . KG/HA WITH PERCENTAGE RESPONSE AND D . R . C . OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE PR 255 , PANEL BO-1 - EAST . . . . . 1 56

3 1 . COMPARATIVE LATE DRIP, DRYNESS INCIDENCE, BARK CONSUMPTION AND GIRTH INCREMENT OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE PR 255 , PANEL BO-1 - EAST . 1 58

32. CUMULATIVE YIELDS IN KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS FOR YOUNG RUBBER, PANEL BO-1 AT DIFFERENT SITES . • . . • . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 1 60

33 . COMPARATIVE ITELD IN G/T/T AND KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 71 2 , PANEL BO-1 AT DIFFERENT SITES. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 1 66

34. TABLE FOR G/T/T AND KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600, PANEL BO-2 - NORTH . . . ........ 1 80

35 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T, KG/HA Wl'fH PERCENTAGE RESPOnSE AND D . R.C . OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRrM 600 , PANEL BO-2 - NORTH.. 181

x

Table Page

36 . COMPARATIVE LATE DRIP , DRYNESS INCIDENCE, BARK CONSUMPTION AND GIRTH INCREMENT OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 , PANEL 00-2 -NORTH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • " • • • • • • • 1 83

37 . TABLE FOR G/T/T AND KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 , PANEL BO-2 - SOUTH . . . . . . . .. . . 1 86

38 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T, KG/RA WITH PERCENTAGE RESPONSE AND D . R . C . OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 , PANEL 00-2- SOUTH .. 1 87

39. COMPARATIVE LATE DRIP , DRYNESS INCIDENCE, BARK CONSUMPTION AND GIRTH INCREMENT OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 , PANEL BO-2 -SOUTH . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 89

40 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T AND KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 , PANEL BO-2 AT DIFFERENT SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ... . 192

41. TABLE FOR G/T/T AND KG/RA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 , PANELS BI-1 AND HO-1 -CENTRAL . 202

42. COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T AND KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 ,PANELS BI-1 AND HO-1 .- CENTRAL • • e a . .. . . . . . .. . . . . ".,............. 203

43 . COMPARATIVE D . R . C . , LATE DRIP , DRYNESS AND BARK CONSUMPTION OVER TWO YEARS FOR CLONE RRIM 600 , PANELS BI-1 AND HO-1 - CENTRAL..... 205

44. TABLE FOR G/'I'/T AND KG/RA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 , PANELS BI-1 AND HO-1 - NORTH . 208

45 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T AND KG/HA WITH PERCENTAGE RESPONSE OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 , PANELS BI-1 AND HO-1 - NORTH. . . . ... 21 0

46. COMPARATIVE D.R.C. , LATE DRIP , DRYNESS AND BARK CONSUMPTION OVER TWO ·YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 , PANELS BI-1 AND HO-1 - NORTH....... 21 2

xi

Table Pag�

47 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T AND KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 600 ,PANELS BI-1 ,HO-1 AT DIFFERENT SITES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4

48 . GROSS REVENUE AND YIELD RESPONSE OVER TWO YEARS FROM LOW INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS ON TWO CLONES AT DIFFERENT SITES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226

49 . COMPARATIVE NET AND % REVENUE, MEAN % TAPPING COST AND YIELD PER TAPPER FROM LOW INTENSITY SYSTEMS ON YOUNG RUBBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228

50. COMPARATIVE NET AND % REVENUE ,MEAN % TAPPING COST AND YIELD PER TAPPER FROM LOW INTENSITY SYSTEMS ON MATURE RUBBER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232

51 . COMPARATIVE NET AND % REVENUE,% TAPPING COST AND YIELD PER TAPPER FROM LOW INTENSITY SYSTEMS ON HIGH PANELS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234

52 . EXPERIMEN�AL DETAILS FOR STUDIES ON ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY ON CLONE PR 255 , PANEL BO-1 -CENTRAL. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 242

53 . SELECTION OF TREES BASED ON YIELDS AT TIME OF BARK SAMPLINGS FOR CLONE PR 255 . . . . . . . . . . . 245

54 . TABLE FOR G/T/T AND KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE PR 255 , PANEL BO-1 - CENTRAL . . . . . . . . . . . 247

55 . COMPARATIVE YIELD IN G/T/T, KG/HA WITH PERCENTAGE RESPONSE AND D . R . C . OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE PR 255 , PANEL BO-1 - CENTRAL. . 248

56 . COMPARATIVE PERCENTAGE LATE DRIP , DRYNESS INCIDENCE, BARK CONSUMPTION AND GIRTH INCREMENT OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE PR 255 , PANEL BO-1 - CENTRAL� • • " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 'I . . . . 254

57 . NOMINAL TAPPING INTENSITIES OF THE FIVE TAPPING SYSTEMS AGAINST MEAN G/T/T, D . R.C . , LATE DRIP, DRYNESS INCIDENCE, BARK CONSUMPTION AND GIRTH INCREMENT OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE PR 255 , PANEL BO-1 - CENTRAL. . 257

xii

Table Page

58 . DISTRIBUTION OF PERCENTAGE FALL IN TURGOR PRESSURES IN DIFFERENT TAPPING SySTEMS. . . . . . . 275

59 . DISPLACEMENT AREAS AND PLUGGING INDEX OF LOWEST INTENSITY AND HIGHEST INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS AGAINST 1 /2S d/2 CONTROL • • • • • • 278

60 . RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TIELD , PLUGGING INDEX AND DRAINAGE AREA OF LOWEST INTENSITY AND HIGHEST INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS AGAINST 1 /2S d/ 2 CONTROL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282

61 . BARK THICKNESS, NUMBER, AND DIAMETER OF LATEX VESSELS IN TREES SUBJECTED TO DIFFERENT INTENSITIES OF TAPPING - CLONE PR 255 , PANEL BO-1 - CENTRAL . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. 296

xiii

I

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. THE METABOLIC PATHWAY IN RUBBER BIOSYNTHESIS 18

2. SIZE AND SHAPE OF THE DRAINAGE AREA 22

3. DIAGRAMATIC PRESENTATION OF THE CONCEPTS OF LATEX FLOW AND PLUG FORMATION................ 25

4. FLOW CHART ON THE CONCEPTS OF ETHYLENE ACTION IN YIELD STIMULATION.................. 58

5 . MONTHLY YIELD PATTERN IN KG/HA OVER FIVE YEARS FOR LOW INTENSITY FOURTH DAILY TAPPING SYSTEM WITH TWO LEVELS OF ETHEPHON STIMULATION ON CLONE RRIM 701 , PANEL BO-2.... 79

6. TIELD IN KILOGRAM PER PANEL BASIS FROM THE LOW FREQUENCY 1 /2S d/4 SYSTEM WITH STIMULATION ON CLONE RRIM 701, PANELS BO-2 AND BI-1 - SOUTH............................. 80

7. TIELD RESPONSES IN KG/HA OVER FIVE YEARS FOR THE QUARTER CUT CHANGE-OVER SYSTEM WITH STIMULATION ON CLONE RRIM 623, PANEL BO-2.... 91

8. YIELD IN KILOGRAM PER PANEL BASIS FROM THE QUARTER CUT CHANGE-OVER SYSTEM WITH STIMULATION ON CLONE RRIM 623, PANELS BO-2 AND BI-1 - SOUTH............................. 92

9. CUMULATIVE YIELD IN KG/HA OF CONTROLLED UPWARD TAPPING WITH DIFFERENT LENGTHS OF CUT, FREQUENCIES Ah� ETHEPHON CONCENTRATIONS OVER TWO YEARS ON CLONE GT 1, PANEL BI-1 AND HO-1 • • • • • u • • • • • • • • � • a III • • • • if' • • • • • • til . . . .. .. . . . iii • • 1 03

10. YEARLY YIELD TREND IN KILOGRAM PER HECTARE FOR SEVEN YEARS ON CLONE RRIM 605, PANEL BI-1 -- NORTH. COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF STIMULATION METHODOLOGy. .. ............ .. ..... 111

xiv

Figure Page

11 • RESPONSES IN MEAN KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS FOR THREE TAPPING SYSTEMS ON YOUNG RUBBER, PANEL BO-1 OF CLONES PB 235 , RRIM 600 AND RRIM 71 2 - NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . ,. • • • • � .. . .. " • • • • 163

1 2 . RESPONSES IN MEAN KG/HA OVER TWO YEARS FOR THREE TAPPING SYSTEMS ON YOUNG RUBBER, PANEL BO-1 OF CLONES RRIM 71 2 AND PR 255 - EAST . . . . 1 64

13. COMPARATIVE PERFORMANCE BETWEEN SITES, CLONE RRIM 71 2 PANEL BO-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 ( a ) CUMULATIVE YIELD KG/HA AT NORTH AND EAST (b) CYCLICAL YIELD TREND AT NORTH AND EAST

1 4. YIELD TRENDS AND OTHER RELATED PARAMETERS OVER TWO YEARS FROM LOW INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS ON YOUNG RUBBER OF CLONE RRIM 71 2 - NORTH AND EAST • • • � • • .. • .. • • • • • • • • • .. .. .. • • • • • .. • • 169

1 5 . COMPARATIVE YIELD, MEAN D . R . C . , OF DIFFERENT ETHEPHON CONCENTRATIONS AND PLUGGING INDICES OF UNSTIMULATED LOW INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS WITH DIFFERENT CLONES ON PANEL BO-1 - NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 1

16. YIELD TRENDS AND OTHER RELATED PARAMETERS OVER TWO YEARS FROM LOW INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS ON MATURE RUBBER OF CLONE RRIM 600 - NORTH AND SOUTH. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193

1 7 . CYCLICAL YIELD TRENDS L� COMPARATIVE EVALUATION BETWEEN STAGGERED AND CONTINUOUS ETHEPHON APPLICATION ON CLONE RRIM 600, PANEL BO-2 AT NORTH AND SOUTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

18 . COMPARATIVE PERFORMANCE BETWEEN SITES , CLONE RRIM 600 P!NELS DI -1 , HO·-1. • . • • • • . • • • . • . • • . • • 21 6 (a) CUMULATIVE YIELD ( KG/HA) AT CENTRAL AND

NORTH (b) CYCLICAL YIELD TREnD AT CEN'fRAL AND

NORTH

1 9. YIELD TRENDS AND OTHER RELATED PARAMETERS OVER TWO YEARS FROM LOW INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS ON OLD RUBBER OF CLONE RRIM 600 - CENTRAL AND NORTH... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 7

xv

Figure Page

20 . COMPARATIVE YIELD PERFORMANCE OF LOW INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS WITH DIFFERENT PANELS ON CLONE RRIM 600 - NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 9

2 1 • CYCLICAL TIELD IN MEAN G/T/T OVER TWO YEARS I

TAPPING WITH CLONE PR 255 , PANEL BO-1 -CENTRAL. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 250

22 . CYCLICAL MEAN DRY RUBBER CONTENT OVER TWO YEARS' TAPPING WITH CLONE PR 255 , PANEL BO-1 - CENTRAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252

23 . RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TAPPING INTENSITY OF CONTROL AND STIMULATED SYSTEMS ON YIELD IN KG/HA AND G/T/ T , MEAN D . R. C . , GIRTH INCREMENT , DRYNESS INCIDENCE AND MEAN BARK CONSUMPTION ON CLONE PR 255 , PANEL BO-1 . . . . . . 259

24 . FLOW RATES FOR THE DIFFERENT INTENSITIES OF TAPPING . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 268

25 . COMPARATIVE INITIAL FLOW RATES FOR THE DIFFERENT INTENSITIES OF TAPPING BETWEEN PRE- AND POST-TAPPINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270

26 . DISTRIBUTION OF ffiESSURE POINTS WITH TURGOR PRESSURES BEFORE TAPPING AND ( AFTER TAPPING ) . 271

27 . TURGOR PRESSURES BEFORE AND AFTER TAPPING AT 273 VARIOUS DISTANCES BELOW THE TAPPING CUT . . . . . . 274

28 . DISTRIBUTIO� OF PERCENTAGE FALL IN TURGOR PRESSURES WITH DIFFERENT INTENSITIES OF TAPPING • • • • • . • • • • • • • • . • • • • . • . . • • . & . . . . ...... "'.... 27('

29. REGRESSION LINE AND REGRESSION EQUATION OF YIELD ON DRAINAGE AREA . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . ... 2'19

30. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PLUGGING INDEX AND YIELD ..... . ............. ff . . . . .. .. .. " .. .. .. . . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . . a 281

xvj

LIST OF PLATES

Plate Page

1. THREE-DIMENSIONAL DIAGRAM OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE BARK OF HEVEA BRASILIENSIS............ 11

2. TANGENTIAL LONGITUDUNAL SECTION OF A HIGH YIELDING TREE TAPPED WITH 1/2S d/2 SYSTEM SHOWING FULLY (F) AND PARTIALLY (p) PACKED LATEX VESSELS AND SIEVE TUBES (ST).......... 291

3. LOOSELY PACKED DISCRETE RUBBER PARTICLES WITH MEMBRANES NOT FUSED IN THE LATEX VESSEL OF A HIGH YIELDING TREE TAPPED WITH 1/2S d/2 SYSTEM. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 292

4. A SLIGHT INSTABILITY IN THE LATEX AS SHOWN BY THE MICROFLOCCULATION AROUND THE LUTOID (L) FROM A HIGH YIELDING TREE WITH 1/2S d/2 TAPPING WITH ETHEPHON STIMULATION............ 293

5. TANGENTIAL LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF A LOW YIELDING TREE TAPPED WITH 1/2S d/O.5 ET10.0% LAM SYSTEM SHOWING SCLEREIDS (SC ) AND PARTIALLY EMPTIED LATEX VESSELS (LV)......... 294

6 . TANGENTIAL LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF A LOW YIELDING TREE TAPPED WITH 1/2S d/O.5 ET10.0% LAM SYSTEM SHOWING SCLEREIDS (SC) AND EMPTY LATEX VESSEL (LV)............................ 295

7. LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF A LATEX VESSEL FROM A TREE TAPPED WITH 1/2S d/O.5 WITH ETHEPHON STlMU'LATION • • • $ • .. • • • • • • • .. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 297

8. LONGITUDINAL SECTION SHOWING WELL PRESERVED LATEX VESSEL WITH STABLE AND DISCRETE RUBBER PARTICLES FROM A TREE TAPPED WITH 1/4S d/4 CONTROL • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • « • 298

9 . LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF LATEX VESSELS TAPPED WITH 1/48 d/4 ET10.0% SHOWING PARTIAL EMPTINESS IN E{E LATEX VESSELS. . . . .......... . 299

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix

1 . SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION OF THE TAPPING CUTS

Page

WITH ANNUAL BARK CONSUMPTION AND SOME OF THE TAPPING SYSTEMS REFERRED . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353

2. INTERNATIONAL TAPPING AND STIMULATION NOTATIONS . . . . . • . • • • . . • . . . . . . • • . . • • • • • • . • . . . . . 354

3. PROCEDURES ADOPTED IN THE APPLICATION OF YIELD STIMULANT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355

4 . FORMULAE FOR ECONOMIC ANALySIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356

5 . BREAKDOWN ON TAPPING COST ( PER HECTARE PER 'YEAR) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 357

6. FIXED COST PER HECTARE FOR ESTATE AND SMALLHOLDING AND PERCENTAGE TAPPING COST IN THE CALCULATION OF NET PROFIT . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358

xviii

LIST OJ" ABBREVIATIOBS

a . i. active ingredient

AVROS Algemene Vereniging Rubber Oostkust Sumatra

B-serum Bottom fraction serum

Beta coefficient Standardized regression coefficient

Ca Calcium

CoA Coenzyme A

CUT Controlled Upward Tapping

CV covariance

d . r . c . dry rubber content

ET ethephon

f . o .b . freight on board

g/t/t gram per tree per tapping

GT Gondang Tapen ( Indonesia )

IRCA Institut de Recherches sur Ie Caoutchouc

IRRDB International Rubber Research and Development Board

IPP

kg/ha

HAPA

Mg

MYA

isopentenyl p,yrophosphate

kilogram :per he ctare

Malaysian Agricultural Producers' As sociation

Magnesium

Mevalonic acid

xix

NUPW

NPK

NR

P

pH

PI

PR

PRI

R&D

SMR

TP

U-gouge

V-shape

2,4-D

2,4,5-T

National Union of Plantation Workers

Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Potassium

natural rubber

Phosphorus

p ower of Hydrogen

plugging index

Proefstation voor Rubber (Indonesia)

plasticity retention index

r esearch and development

Standard Malaysian Rubbe�

Turgor pressure

end of blade is U-shaped

end of blade is V-shaped

2,4-dichloro phenoxyacetic acid

2,4,5-trichloro phenoxyacetic acid

ABSTRACT

An abstract of the thesis presented to the Senate of Universiti Pertanian Malaysia in partial fulfilment of' the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

LOW INTENSITY TAPPING SYSTEMS AND STIMULATION PRACTICES

AFFECTING RESPONSES IN HEVEA BRASILIENSIS (MUELL. ARG.)

Chief Supervisor

by

Ismail bin Hashim

July, 1988

Associate Professor Raja Muhammad bin Raja Harun, Ph.D.

Supervisor Associate Professor Wong Kai Choo, Ph.D.

Co-Supervisor P.D. Abraham, Ph.D.

Faculty Agriculture

The natural rubber industry in Malaysia is experiencing

serious problems of high production costs and increasing

shortage of skilled tappers. 'I.'hus there is a pressing need to

evolve suitable tapping systems to resolve these problems. With

tais objective in mind, the suitability of various less laboU1'-

intensive low-intenslty tapping systems and stimuh.tion

practices are evaluated in this study.

xxi

The tapping systems included are the half-spiral fourth­

daily system (1/28 d/4), suitable for estates, and the quarter-

spiral alternate-daily change-over system (1/4S d/2 (t, t))

suitable for

stimulation.

smallholders; with

The conventional

various levels of ethephon

half-spiral al ternate-daily

tapping system (1/28 d/2) was included as control. Altogether,

three groups of trials comprising a series of long-term

preliminary trials, a series of main field trials and a trial on

exploitation physiology and anatomy were conducted.

In a series of long-term preliminary experiments, the 1/28

d/4 and the 1/48 d/2 (t,t) systems with stimulation have shown

promising results on both the basal and high panels of some

selected cultivars. These systems have given uniform and

sustained yields, higher dry rubber content, low late drip, low

dryness incidence, low bark consumption and better girthing than

the 1/28 d/2 control. 80me parameters on stimulation practices

were also established for evaluation in the main field trials.

Evaluation of

practices on clones

low intensity systems and stimulation

PB 255, RRIM 712, PR 255 and RRH1 600

carried out under main field trials confirmed the beneficial

features of these systems on base panel BO-1. This also holds

true for other panels on clone RRIM 600. Although the 1/23 d/2

systems were

observation,

most

the loW'

profitable during

intensity tapping

the two yeare of

systems showed a rising

yield trend with good secondary characteristics.

xxii