Performance of different arrowroot (Maranta arundinacea L.) genotypes for growth, yield and quality attributes

Authors

  • Imamsaheb S J AICRP (Tuber Crops), Dharwad Regional Horticultural Research and Extension Center, Dharwad University of Horticultural Sciences, Bagalkot, Karnataka, India
  • Shreedhar D AICRP (Tuber Crops), Dharwad Regional Horticultural Research and Extension Center, Dharwad University of Horticultural Sciences, Bagalkot, Karnataka, India
  • J B Gopali AICRP (Tuber Crops), Dharwad Regional Horticultural Research and Extension Center, Dharwad University of Horticultural Sciences, Bagalkot, Karnataka, India
  • Laxman H K AICRP (Tuber Crops), Dharwad Regional Horticultural Research and Extension Center, Dharwad University of Horticultural Sciences, Bagalkot, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48165/jefa.2024.19.02.17

Keywords:

Maranta arundinacea, Gwowth, Yield and Quality attributes

Abstract

 

The study was conducted at RHREC, Dharwad during 2021-2022 with seven genotypes of arrowroot to assess their performance for growth, yield and quality attributes. Plant height ranged from 103.97 cm (TAr-18-5) to 119.54 cm (TAr-18-10) with mean of 109.45 cm. Number of tillers per plant ranged from 6.21 (TAr-18-5) to 9.15 (TAr-18- 10) with a mean of 7.71. Maximum number of leaves were observed in the genotypes TAr-18-10 (56) and minimum in genotypes TAr-18-5 (38.78). The mean of number of rhizomes per plant was 10.93. Maximum number of rhizomes per plant was observed in TAr-18-10 (12.66) whereas minimum was recorded in TAr-18-5 (9.66). Estimated rhizome yield per hectare in arrowroot genotypes ranged from 20.87 tons (TAr-18-5) to 30.72 tons (TAr-18-10) with an average of 27.14 tons. The dry matter content of arrowroot genotypes ranged from 73.09 per cent (TAr-18-4) to 78.77 per cent (TAr-18-3). The total starch content of arrowroot genotypes ranged from 14.33 per cent (TAr-18-3) to 18.39 per cent (TAr-18-5). The carbohydrate content of arrowroot genotypes ranged from 30.44 per cent (TAr-18-12) to 32.56 per cent (TAr-18-4). The crude protein content of arrowroot genotypes ranged from 3.58 per cent (TAr-18-2) to 4.37 per cent (TAr-18-1). 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anonymous, 2016, Indian horticulture data base, National Horticulture Board, Ministry of Agriculture.

Boakye, P. B., Kwadwo, O., Asante, I. K. and Parkes, E. Y., 2013, Genetic variability of three cassava traits across three locations in Ghana. African J. of Plant Sci., 7(7): 265-267.

Burhan, A., 2007. Relationship among yield and some yield characters in potato. J. Biol. Sci., 7: 973-76.

Kadans, J. M., 1985, Encyclopedia of medicinal herbs. ThorsonsPublis., P. (39).

Khayatnezhad, M., Shahriari, R., Somarin, S. and Zabihi, R., 2011, Correlation and Path Analysis Between Yield and Yield Components in Potato (Solanum tubersum L.). Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 7(1): 17-21.

Lamboro, A., Petros, Y. and Andargie, M., 2014, Correlation and path coefficient analysis between yield and yield components in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Plant Science Today., 1(4): 196-200.

Mishra, A. C., Singh, N. P., Kamal, S. and Kumar, V., 2006, Studies on genetic variability, heritability and genetic advance in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Inter. J. of Plant Sci., 1(1): 39-41.

Mohanty, P., Ashok. P., Rout, M. K. and Sasikala, K., 2016, Character association and path analysis of sweet potato [Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam.] genotypes.J. of Crop and Weed., 12(1):76-80.

Mongsang, T. L., Sarkar, K. K., Mandal, A. B. and Dewanjee, S. 2010. Genetic assessment of some important traits in potato with their correlation. Env. Ecol., 28: 259-61.

Ntawuruhunga, P. and Dixon, A. G. O., 2010, Quantitative variation and interrelationship between factors influencing cassava yield. J. Appl. Biosci., 26: 1594 – 1602.

Odeku, O. A., 2013, Potentials of tropical starches as pharmaceutical excipients: A review. Starch, 65(1-2):89-106.

Pradhan, A. M., Nandeshwar, B. C., Sarkar, K. K. and Konar, A., 2011, Estimation of genetic parameters and association of traits related to yield in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). J. of Crop and Weed., 7(2): 229-231.

Rangare, S. B. and Rangare, N. R., 2013, Genetic variability and character association in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Trends in Biosci., 6(5): 603-607.

Reddy, p. p., 2015, Arrowroot, Maranta arundinacea. Plant Protection in Tropical Root and Tuber Crops.,Springer. 319-322.

Sahu, G. D., Singh, J. and Mehta, N. 2005. Correlation and path coefficient analysis in sweet potato. Env. Eco., 23: 207-11.

Sattar, M. A., Sultana, N., Hossain, M. M., Rashid, M. H. and Islam, A. K. M. A., 2007, Genetic variability, correlation and path analysis in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Bangladesh J. Pl. Breed. Genet., 20(1): 33-38.

Sharavati, M. B., Srinivasa, V., Anusha, R. B. and Shubha, A. S., 2018, Genetic variability studies in sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam) genotypes under hill zone of Karnataka, India. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci., 7(9): 850-858.

Shintu, P. V., Radhakrishna, V. V. and Mohanan, K. V., 2016, A study of the genetic variability of West Indian arrowroot (Maranta arundinacea L.) in Kerala state of India. Agri. Forestry and Fisheries., 5(5): 186-190.

Sivakumar, V., Celine, V. A. and Girija, V. K., 2018, Evalution of yard long bean (Vigna ungiculata(L.)walp. Ssp. sequipedalisver. dc) genotypes for Collar rot and Web blight. Int. J. Curr. Microb. App. Sci., 7(7): 4238-4245.

Teshome, A., Veeraragavathatham, D. and Kanan, M., 2004, Genetic variability and correlation studies in sweet potato. Madras Agric. J., 91(7-12): 420-424.

Tirkey, P. L., Singh, J., Chaurasia, P. C. and Sarnik, D. A., 2011, Character association and path coefficient studies in sweet potato [Ipomoea batatas (l.) Lam.] genotypes. J. Plant Development Sci.,3(1- 2): 137-143.

Published

2024-07-02

How to Cite

S J, .I., D, S., Gopali , J.B., & H K, L. (2024). Performance of different arrowroot (Maranta arundinacea L.) genotypes for growth, yield and quality attributes. Journal of Eco-Friendly Agriculture, 19(2), 332–335. https://doi.org/10.48165/jefa.2024.19.02.17