Effect of pruning techniques and fertilizer application on yield and quality of guava (Psidium guajava L.) cv. Sardar under Chatrapti Sambhajinagar condition of Maharashtra

Introduction

Guava (Psidium guajava L.), known as the "Apple of the Tropics," is highly valued for its nutritional content, aroma, and flavor. Rich in vitamin C, pectin, calcium, and phosphorus, it is consumed fresh or processed into products like jelly, juice, and jam. Originating from tropical America, guava was introduced to India in the 17th century by Portuguese explorers and is now cultivated globally, thriving in diverse soils and climates. Guava grows best in tropical and subtropical regions, requiring a temperature range of 23-28 °C and annual rainfall of 1000-2000 mm. The tree, belonging to the Myrtaceae family and is hardy, drought-tolerant, and highly productive with minimal care. Its adaptability and high nutritional value make it a significant fruit crop, ranking fifth in India's fruit production.

The fruits, borne on current season growth, are rich in vitamin C (100-260 mg/100 g pulp), sugars, and minerals like phosphorus, calcium, and iron. Pruning plays a crucial role in maintaining productivity by stimulating new shoot growth for flowering and fruiting. Proper pruning enhances light penetration, photosynthesis, and fruit quality. Due to economic importance of guava, the present study investigates the effect of pruning techniques and fertilizer application on the quality and yield of guava (Psidium guajava L.) cv. Sardar under Chatrapti Sambhajinagar condition of Maharashtra. Observations were recorded primarily on quality and yield characteristics of the fruit.

Chemical Attributes

For estimation of Titrable Acidity, Ascorbic Acid (Vitamin C), Pectin, Total Soluble Solids (TSS), Reducing Sugars, Non-reducing Sugars, Total Sugars attributes procedure developed by rangantha was followed.

Yield

Result and Discussion

Data presented in Table shows that, titrable acidity of guava fruits was significantly affected by pruning and fertilizer treatments. The minimum titrable acidity (0.41%) was recorded in treatment T 9 (pruning shoots at 90 cm with soil application of N: P 2 O 5: K 2 O @ 1000:400:400 g/plant). This was statistically at par with treatment T 7 (0.44%) where pruning was done at 90 cm but with fertilizer applications of 900:300:300 g/plant. In contrast, the maximum titrable acidity (0.67%) was observed in the control (T 0: no pruning with RDF). Acidity is a crucial quality parameter, especially for fruits like citrus, pomegranate, and aonla. It helps balance sweetness, as overly sugary fruits have shorter storage lives. An optimal blend of acids and sugars is essential for quality fruits. In this study, treatment T 9 demonstrated the lowest acidity, corroborating findings by Nadal and Arola (1995) [17] . The reduction in titrable acidity during ripening is attributed to decreasing malic acid concentrations, as noted by Calo et al. (1997) [3] in grapes.

The effect of pruning and fertilizer treatments on ascorbic acid content is presented in [12] , Kumar et al. (2008) [11] , and Kumar et al. (2009) [10] in guava.

Data on pectin content is presented in Table shows that the highest pectin content (1.66%) was recorded in treatment T 9 (shoots pruning at 90 cm with soil application of N: P 2 O 5: K 2 O @ 1000:400:400 g/plant), followed by T 7 (1.57%) and T 8 (1.46%) where pruning was done at 90 cm but with fertilizer applications of 900:300:300 g/plant and 800:200:200 g/plant, respectively. all statistically at par with each other. The lowest pectin content (0.58%) was observed in the control (T 0 ) which had no pruning and only the recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF) was applied. Higher pectin content during fruit maturation is attributed to enzyme-regulated sugar accumulation and transformation, which maintain the structural framework of the fruit.

Pruning improves fruit quality by enhancing sugar content, as supported by Tahir and Kamran (2002) [23] .

Table No. 1 highlight the effect of pruning and fertilizers on TSS. The maximum TSS (11.71%) was recorded in treatment T 9 (pruning shoots at 90 cm with soil application of N: P 2 O 5: K 2 O @ 1000:400:400 g/plant), which was statistically at par with T 7 (11.50%) where pruning was done at 90 cm but with fertilizer applications of N: P 2 O 5: K 2 O @ 900:300:300 g/plant. The minimum TSS (9.99%) was observed in the control (T 0 ) which had no pruning and only the recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF) was applied.

Pruning at 90 cm enhances TSS by improving carbohydrate availability and reducing crop load during the rainy season. Fertilizer application also contributes to sugar accumulation and hydrolysis of proteins, as noted by Nateshbeena et al.

(1993) [18] and Tirkey et al. (2003) [24] in bananas. T 9 's high TSS is linked to enhanced carbohydrate metabolism and

International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research https://www.biochemjournal.com protein synthesis, as reported by Tisdale and Nelson (1966) [25] .

The maximum total sugar content (8.59%) was recorded in T 9 , followed by T 7 (8.39%) and T 8 (8.23%), all statistically at par. The minimum total sugar content (6.50%) was observed in the control (T 0 ). Data on reducing sugar content is presented in Pruning and fertilization together (T 9 ) resulted in the highest sugar content in guava fruit. This must be due to a synergistic effect, where pruning improves nutrient transport and photosynthesis, while fertilization provides the necessary nutrients for optimal plant growth and fruit development.

Pruning and fertilization may increase the activity of enzymes like amylase, which breaks down complex carbohydrates into simple sugars, enhancing sugar translocation to the developing fruit. These results is congruent with Tahir and Kamran (2002) [23] , Tisdale et al. (1966) [25] , Kundu et al. (2007) [12] , Kumar et al. (2008, 2009) [11,10] , have reported similar findings in guava and other fruit crops.

Number of Fruits per Plant

The data presented in Table No. 1 highlights the significant differences in the number of fruits per plant, with values ranging from 82.51 to 247.03 based on the application of various pruning and fertilizer treatments. The treatment with the highest number of fruits per plant (247.03) was the pruning of the shoot at 90 cm from the tip, combined with soil application of N: P 2 O 5: K 2 O at 1000: 400: 400 g/plant (T 9 ). This treatment was at par with treatments such as T 7 (232.77), T 8 (211.75), T 6 (191.7), and T 4 (177.34). In contrast, the minimum number of fruits was recorded for treatment T 0 (82.51). Pruning, particularly in combination with appropriate fertilizer application, seems to be enhance fruit production. This effect may be attributed to the pruning treatment stimulating the development of more flowers, possibly by reducing the number of blind flower buds on the tree. The results align with the findings of Bajpai et al. (1973) [2] , Gopikrishna (1981) [7] , and Singh (2001) [22] , who observed similar results in guava. The significant increase in fruit number under T 9 treatment might be attributed to the balanced nitrogen supply which likely promoted the translocation of phytohormones to the shoots, stimulating flower and fruit initiation. This treatment not only enhanced the number of fruits but also led to improve on the other yield parameters, such as the number of shoots, flowers, and fruit set. Consequently, the higher number of fruits per plant and increased single fruit weight contributed to higher overall yield, as also noted by Hanamanth (2002) [8] in mango production.

The data in Table No. 1 clearly demonstrates that, the fruit yield per tree varied between 10.94 and 56.18 kg due to different pruning and fertilizer treatments. The highest yield (56.18 kg) was observed in treatment T 9 , which involved pruning the shoot at 90 cm combined with the soil application of N: P 2 O 5: K 2 O at 1000: 400: 400 g/plant.

Where as lowest yield (10.14 kg) was recorded in treatment T 0 , which had no pruning and used recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF). Among the treatments, pruning at 90 cm consistently resulted in increased fruit yield. This could be attributed to the plants preparing food during the rainy season, which was then diverted to support fruit development during the winter season. Chandra and Govinda (1995) [4] observed similar results in guava.

The increased yield under treatment T 9 can be attributed to the synchronized supply of water and NPK in the root zone, matching the plant's water and nutrient demands. This balanced nutrient management might have promoted higher fruit yield. These findings align with the work of Singandhupe et al. (2003) [21] in tomatoes and Mandal et al.

The shoot pruning at 90 cm with NPK application might have also contributed to enhanced metabolic responses, including an increase in amino acid content in the leaves. This could have stimulated higher nitrogen turnover in the guava trees. According to Mengel & Kirkby (1987) [16] , during nitrogen turnover, the conversion of inorganic nitrogen to organic nitrogen compounds, such as amino acids, proteins, and chlorophyll, is influenced by plant nutrition. Additionally, potassium (K+) plays a significant role in promoting CO 2 assimilation and enhancing photosynthesis by influencing the synthesis of ribulosebisphosphate carboxylase and reducing CO 2 resistance in the mesophyll (Peoples & Koch, 1979) [19] . Potassium also facilitates phloem loading and the translocation of newly synthesized photosynthetic material, as well as mobilized stored nutrients (Malek and Baker, 1977; Koch & Mengel, 1977) [14,9] . The combined effect of higher levels of nitrogen and potassium likely increased photosynthesis and nutrient transport, leading to higher guava yields, as observed by Dantas et al. (2007) [5] .

The data presented in Table No. 1on the influence of various pruning and fertilizer treatments on fruit yield per hectare indicates that the yield ranged from 4.37 to 22.47 tons per hectare. The highest yield (22.47 tons/ha) was achieved in treatment T 9 , which involved pruning the shoot at 90 cm and applying N: P 2 O 5: K 2 O at 1000: 400: 400 g/plant.

Conversely, the lowest yield (10.94 tons/ha) was recorded in treatment T 0 , where no pruning was done, and only the recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF) was applied. Data reveals that, treatment T 9 was superior in several yieldrelated parameters, including the number of fruits per plant, average fruit weight, yield per plant, and yield per hectare. This could be attributed to the pruning treatment, which likely diverted the tree's energy from producing cellulose (structural growth) to producing fructose (sugars), enhancing fruit production. Pruning also improves the plant's ability to absorb water, carbon dioxide, and sunlight, which are essential for photosynthesis, leading to higher carbohydrate production. These carbohydrates contribute to the tree's increased yield.

Additionally, pruning increases photosynthetic activity and fruit set by reducing fruit drop, leading to a higher number of fruits. This ultimately results in a higher fruit yield. These findings are consistent with the results of Ghum (2011) [6] in custard apple, Prakash et al. (2012) [20] , and Adhikari and Kandel (2015) [1] in guava, all of whom observed similar benefits of pruning in enhancing fruit yield.

Conclusion

The study highlights the significant influence of pruning and fertilizer treatments on guava fruit quality and yield.

Pruning at 90 cm combined with the soil application of N: P 2 O 5: K 2 O at 1000:400:400 g/plant (T 9 ) resulted in the highest yield (22.47 t/ha), maximum ascorbic acid (222.44 mg/100 g), total sugars (8.59%), and total soluble solids (11.71%), with the lowest titrable acidity (0.41%). This suggests that higher pruning intensity and balanced nutrient application improve fruit quality, sugar accumulation, and yield. The findings confirm that strategic pruning enhances carbohydrate metabolism, nutrient uptake, and photosynthesis, ultimately boosting guava productivity.

These results can guide optimal agronomic practices for improved guava cultivation.

References

1. Adhikari S, Kandel TP. Effect of time and level of pruning on vegetative growth, flowering, yield and quality of guava. International Journal of Fruit Science. 2015;15(3):290-301.
2. Bajpai PN, Shukla HS, Chaturvedi AM. Effect of pruning on growth, yield and quality of guava (Psidium guajava L.) var. Allahabad Safeda. Progressive Horticulture. 1973;2(4):73-79.
3. Calo A, Tomasi D, Crespan M, Costacurta A. Relationship between environmental factors and the International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research https://www.biochemjournal.com dynamics of growth and composition of the grapevine. Acta Horticulturae. 1997;427:217-232.
4. Chandra R, Govind S. Influence of time and intensity of pruning on growth, yield and fruit quality of guava under high-density planting. Tropical Agriculture. 1995;72:110-113.
5. Dantas BF, Pereira MS, Ribeiro LDS, Maia JLT, Silva DJ, Duenhas LH, et al. Metabolic responses of guava trees irrigated with different N and K levels in São Francisco Valley. Revista Brasileira de Fruticultura. 2007;29(2):323-328.
6. Rahuri: Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth; 2011.
7. Gopikrishna NS. Studies on the effect of pruning on vegetative growth, flowering and fruiting in Sardar guava [MSc thesis]. Dharwad: University of Agricultural Sciences; 1981.
8. Hanamanth YA. Irrigation and fertilization studies in high-density mango (Mangifera indica L.) [MSc thesis]. Bangalore: University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK; 2002.
9. Koch K, Mengel K. Effect of K on N utilization by spring wheat during grain formation. Agronomy Journal. 1977;69:477-480.
10. Kumar D, Pandey V, Anjaneyulu K, Nath V, Vishal. Optimization of major nutrients for guava yield and quality under east coastal conditions. Indian Journal of Horticulture. 2009;66(1):18-21.
11. Kumar P, Tiwari JP, Raj Kumar. Effect of N, P, K on fruiting, yield and fruit quality in guava cv. Pantprabhat. Journal of Horticultural Sciences. 2008;3(1):43-47.
12. Kundu S, Ghosh B, Mitra SK, Mazumdar D. Effect of foliar spraying of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium on yield and fruit quality of guava (Psidium guajava L.). Acta Horticulturae. 2007;735:433-440.
13. Lakpathi G, Rajkumar M, Chandrasekhar R. Effect of pruning intensities and fruit load on growth, yield and quality of guava (Psidium guajava L.) cv. Allahabad Safeda under high-density planting. International Journal of Current Research. 2013;5(12):4083-4090.
14. Malek F, Barker DA. Proton co-transport of sugars in phloem loading. Planta. 1977;135:297-299.
15. Mandal G, Kumar S, Kumar R, Singh R. Effect of drip irrigation and plant spacing on yield, quality and economic return of guava (Psidium guajava L.) grown in saline soil. Acta Horticulturae. 2007;735:427-432.
16. Mengel K, Kirkby EA. Principles of Plant Nutrition. Bern: International Potash Institute; 1987. p. 687.
17. Nadal M, Arola L. Effects of limited irrigation on the composition of must and wine of Cabernet Sauvignon under semi-arid conditions. Vitis. 1995;34:151-154.
18. NateshBeena B, Arvindakshan M, Valsalakumar RK. Effect of split application of fertilizers in banana (Musa AAB, Nendran). South Indian Horticulture. 1993;41:67.
19. Peoples TR, Koch DW. Role of potassium on carbon dioxide assimilation in Medicago sativa L. Plant Physiology. 1979;63:878-881.
20. Prakash S, Kumar V, Saroj PL, Sirohi SC. Response of yield and quality of winter guava to severity of summer pruning. Indian Journal of Horticultural Sciences. 2012;69(2):173-176.
21. Singandhupe RB, Rao GSN, Patil NG, Brahmanand PS. Fertigation studies and irrigation scheduling in drip irrigation system in tomato crop (Lycopersicon esculentum L.). European Journal of Agronomy. 2003;19:327-340.
22. Singh AK, Singh G. Influence of pruning date on fruit quality of guava (Psidium guajava L.). Journal of Applied Horticulture. 2001;3(2):100-102.
23. Tahir FM, Kamran H. Studies of physico-chemical changes due to fruit thinning in guava (Psidium guajava L.). Journal of Biological Sciences. 2002;2:744-745.
24. Tirkey T, Pandey SD, Agrawal S. Studies on the response of nitrogen levels and split application of N, P, K on growth, yield and quality of tissue culture raised banana cv. Dwarf Cavendish. The Orissa Journal of 2003;31(2):45-50.
25. Tisdale SL, Nelson W, Beaton JD. Soil Fertility and Fertilizers. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company; 1966. p. 754.