Effect of soil and foliar nutrient application on fruit retention, yield and quality of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Alphonso

Introduction

Mango (Mangifera indica L.) is the most important fruit crop of India, and Alphonso is the most commercially valued cultivar owing to its superior fruit quality and export demand. Despite its importance, productivity of Alphonso mango remains low, particularly in the Konkan region, due to excessive fruit drop and poor nutrient utilization efficiency. Nutrient management plays a pivotal role in flowering, fruit set, fruit retention and fruit development in mango. One time application of fertilizers often fails to meet the nutrient demand during critical phenological stages due to losses through leaching, fixation and poor root activity, especially in lateritic soils of Konkan. Split application of nutrients has been found to be an effective method to supply nutrients directly to metabolically active plant parts, thereby improving nutrient use efficiency and reducing physiological fruit drop. Previous studies have demonstrated the beneficial effects of foliar application of nitrogen, potassium and micronutrients on fruit retention and yield in mango. However, comparative information on different nutrient application strategies involving soil and foliar nutrition under Konkan conditions is limited. Therefore, the present investigation was undertaken to evaluate the effect of soil and foliar nutrient application on fruit retention, yield and quality of Alphonso mango.

Nutrient treatments

Four nutrient management practices were evaluated:  F1: RDF (N 1.5 kg, P 2 O 5 0.5 kg and K 2 O 1.0 kg per tree)  F2: RDF in split (N-30% P-40% K-20% after harvest, N 30% P-40% K-20% during fruit set, N-20% K-30% at marble stage, N-20% P-20% K-30% egg stage)  F3: RDF + foliar spray of Amrashakti (2.5%) at flowering, one month and two months after flowering  F4: RDF + KNO 3 (1%) foliar spray at pea, marble and egg stages

All other recommended cultural practices were followed uniformly. Observations were recorded on fruit retention, number of fruits per tree, fruit yield, physical and chemical quality parameters. Data of two years were pooled and statistically analysed using ANOVA.

Results

Fruit retention was significantly influenced by nutrient management practices. During first year maximum fruit retention 6.12% was found in F 4 which was at par with F 3 (6.11%) and F 2 (6.07%). During second year and pooled maximum fruit retention 7.34% and 6.71% was recorded in F 2 which was at par with F 4 (7.22 and 6.67% respectively) whereas, minimum fruit retention 3.98, 6.15 and 5.07% was found in control F 1 during first year, second year and pooled, respectively. Maximum fruit retention were recorded in F 2 compared to other treatment might be due to steady supply of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and micronutrients, which supports balanced vegetative and reproductive growth and prevents sudden nutrient depletion that can trigger fruit drop. Similar result recorded by Malshe et al., (2022) [10] in mango, Shinde et al., (2006) [14] in mango, Patra et al., (2003) [12] in guava and Khattab et al., (2011) [8] in pomegranate.

Number of fruits at harvest (per tree)

A significantly higher number of fruits 56.89 per tree was observed under F [1] in mango, Jain et al., (2020) [7] in sapota, Sarker and Rahim (2013) [13] in mango and Shyamal and Mishra (1989) [16] in mango. [6] in mango, Malshe et al., (2022) [10] in mango, Bibi et al., (2019) in mango and Sarker and Rahim (2013) [13] in mango.

Fruit weight was significantly influenced by nutrient management practices.

The effect of nutrient application was found significant on length of fruit (cm) in first year, second year and pooled. Maximum fruit length 9.48, 9.91 and 9.69 cm was recorded in F 2 which was at par with F 4 9.45, 9.89 and 9.67 cm during first year, second year and pooled, respectively. Whereas minimum fruit length 9.08, 9.37 and 9.23 cm was recorded in control F 1 during first year, second year and pooled, respectively.

The effect of nutrient application was found significant on width of fruit (cm) in first year, second year and pooled. Increasing fruit weight, length and width was found in F2 is might be due to split fertilizers ensured a steady supply of key macronutrients (N, P, and K) which enhance cell division, cell expansion and dry-matter accumulation leading to larger fruits. Uninterrupted nutrient and moisture availability supported sustained photosynthesis, stronger sink strength in developing fruits, might be improved carbohydrate translocation and balanced hormone regulation (auxin and cytokinin) all of which promote greater fruit enlargement. Similar result recorded by Bhosale et al., (2022) [1] in mango, Panwar et al., (2007) [11] in mango, Burondkar (2018) [3] in mango, Singh and Singh (2015) [15] in mango and Khattab et al., (2011) [8] in pomegranate.

Pulp: stone ratio

The significant difference was found for pulp: stone ratio in different treatment. Maximum pulp: stone ratio 5.13, 5.29 and 5.21 was found in F 2 which was followed by F 4 4.99, 5.10 and 5.05 during first year, second year and pooled, respectively. Whereas minimum pulp to stone ratio 4.60, 4.77 and 4.69 was recorded in control F 1 during first year, second year and pooled, respectively. Maximum pulp to stone ratio was found in F2 is might be due to split nutrient application ensures a continuous supply of nitrogen, potassium, calcium and boron that promotes sustained cell division and cell expansion in the mesocarp (pulp), while preventing nutrient stress that can restrict fruit flesh development. Similar result recorded by Sarker and Rahim (2013) [13] in mango, Thakur and Singh (2004) [17] in mango, Burondkar (2018) [3] in mango, Haldavnekar et al., (2018) in mango and Bhosale et al., (2022) [1] in mango.

There was significant difference among treatments for spongy tissue incidence in mango cv. Alphonso. Minimum spongy tissue incidence 6.56, 5.33 and 5.94% was recorded in F 2 which was followed by F 4 7.22, 5.89 and 6.56% during first year, second year and pooled, respectively. Whereas maximum spongy tissue incidence 12.00, 8.89 and 10.44 was found in control F 1 during first year, second year and pooled, respectively. Minimum spongy tissue incidence was recorded in F 2 is might be due to Split doses of nutrients especially calcium, potassium and boron maintained continuous availability during fruit development, strengthening cell walls and improving membrane integrity, which reduced internal breakdown associated with spongy tissue. Similar result recorded by Majumder and Sharma (1990) in mango, Burondkar and Gunjate (1993) [4] in mango and Singh and Singh (2015) [15] in mango.

Conclusion

The study clearly resulted that the soil application of RDF in split (N-30% P-40% K-20% after harvest, N-30% P-40% K 20% during fruit set, N-20% K-30% at marble stage, N-20% P-20% K-30% egg stage) (F 2 ) proved to be the most effective for fruit retention, yield and quality parameters and can be recommended for sustainable and profitable cultivation of Alphonso mango in the Konkan region.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementThe authors are thankful to the College of Horticulture, Dr. BSKKV., Dapoli, and Chhatrapati Shahu Maharaj National Research Institute (SARTHI) for facilitating guidance and funds, respectively to conduct the investigation.

References

1. Bhosale SS, Dhakare BB, Jadhav SB, Kulkarni SS, Joshi VR. Study the effect of nutrient application in split doses on yield characters under high density planting of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Kesar. The Pharma Innovation Journal. 2022;11(6):920-924.
2. Bibi F, Ahmad I, Bakhsh A. Effect of foliar application of nutrients on mango yield and quality. Open Agriculture. 2019;4:1-7.
3. Burondkar MM. Nutrient and water management for improved mango productivity. Scientia Horticulturae. 2018;64(8):432-436.
4. Burondkar MM, Gunjate RT. Effect of nutrient application on fruit retention and yield in mango. Acta Horticulturae. 1993;341:239-246.
5. Haldavnekar PC, Baviskar SB, Raut RA. Effect of micronutrients on yield and physicochemical composition of Alphonso mango. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 2018;7(5):24472449.
6. Jadhav S, Salvi VG, Deshmukh U, Jadhav SC. Yield and quality of Alphonso mango as influenced by foliar application of nutrients. The Pharma Innovation Journal. 2019;8(10):14-18.
7. Jain KS, Malshe KV, Sawant PS, Khandekar RG. Effect of graded doses of fertilizers on flowering and yield attributes in sapota cv. Kalipatti. International Journal of Chemical Studies. 2020;8(3):1814-1816.
8. Khattab M, Magda SE, Ayman SH, Arafa SA. Growth and productivity of pomegranate trees under different irrigation levels: vegetative growth and fruiting. Journal of Horticultural Science and Ornamental Plants. 2011;3(2):194-198.
9. Majumder D, Sharma DK. Role of mineral nutrition in improving fruit retention of mango. Indian Journal of Horticulture. 1990;12(4):345-349.
10. Malshe KV, Salvi BR, Salvi VG. Influence of post flowering foliar nutrient application on yield and quality attributes of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Alphonso under south Konkan conditions. Journal of Eco-friendly Agriculture. 2022;17(1):62-64.
11. Panwar R, Singh SK, Singh CP, Singh PK. Mango fruit yield and quality improvement through fertigation along with mulch. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2007;77(10):680-684.
12. Patra RK, Das BC, Hasan MA. Flowering behaviour and fruit yield of guava cv. Sardar as influenced by different soil covers. Research on Crops. 2003;4(3):383-387.
13. Sarker BC, Rahim MA. Mulching and irrigation effects on soil environment, growth and yield of mango. Journal of Agroforestry and Environment. 2013;7(1):85-90.
14. Shinde AK, Dabke DJ, Jadhav BB, Kandalkar MP, Burondkar MM. Effect of dose and source of potassium on yield and quality of 'Alphonso' mango (Mangifera indica L.). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2006;76(4):213-217.
15. Singh R, Singh G. Influence of irrigation and mulching on mango fruit quality and physiological disorders. Journal of Horticultural Sciences. 2015;44(7):669-675.
16. Syamal MM, Mishra KA. Effect of NPK on growth and fruiting of mango. Acta Horticulturae. 1989;231:276281.
17. Thakur SK, Singh P. Studies on fertigation of mango cv. Amrapali. Annals of Agricultural Research. 2004;25(3):415-417.