Influence of nano-urea and potassium on post-harvest parameters of tissue culture banana cv. Grand Naine

Introduction

Banana (Musa x paradisiaca), often referred to as the "Apple of Paradise," is a major fruit crop cultivated extensively in tropical and subtropical regions, providing both food security and economic value (Arthi et al., 2023) [1] . It is a mesophytic plant and requires abundant nutrients and soil moisture for good growth and development, leading to the production of a heavy bunch and quality fruits. In the banana plant system, nitrogen and potassium are key elements in banana nutrition. The earliest reference to the analysis of the banana plant SOP (full form) showed a high concentration of potassium in the plant. This observation has been continuous for many researchers all over the world (Twfors, 1967). Banana absorbs more nutrients per unit area than almost any other crop (Martin, 1984) [7] . Banana require more potassium for their growth, production and quality compared to nitrogen and phosphorus. Bananas are a potassium-loving crop; the farmers in India are applying potassium @ 8000 to 1600 kg ha -1 depending upon the availability of soil potassium. Muriate of potash (MOP) is commonly used as the source of potassium; chloride toxicity is often seen in bananas, hindering the crop growth, yield and quality (Nalina, 2002) [8] . Under the traditional farming system, the banana crop receives its last dose of fertilizers (nitrogen and potassium) at seven months after planting (just before the shooting) to support the requirement of nutrients until harvest, since a large quantity of photosynthates is to move from the source to the sink, i.e. developing bunches at this phase. Soil-applied fertilizers at this stage are often ineffective due to slow absorption, resulting in poor fruit development and reduced yield. Foliar application of nutrients has emerged as a promising strategy to overcome these limitations, providing rapid and targeted delivery of essential elements directly to the plant (kumari et al., 2026) [6] . Nano-fertilizers, with their reduced particle size and high surface area, further enhance penetration and nutrient use efficiency, offering an innovative approach to improve plant growth and productivity. Nano-based agricultural products, such as nanofertilizer, offer innovative solutions to enhance crop performance while minimising environmental impacts (Lal, 2008) [4] . In light of this, Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Limited (IFFCO) has created a new nano-fertiliser called IFFCO nano-urea (liquid) with the intention of replacing or minimising the negative impacts of the application of urea. This new fertiliser molecule has been evaluated on a variety of crops in various research institutes and state agricultural universities, as it has been discovered that the majority of crops are reacting well to nano-urea (Kumar et al., 2021) [3] Even though nitrogen and potassium are abundant in many banana-growing soils, the bulk of soil nitrogen and potassium is unavailable to plants due to both plant and environmental factors; therefore, additional application through foliar spray has been found beneficial. In high value crop like banana quality standards have become the most important factor influencing yield and farmers' income. The main aim of this study was to assess the Influence of nano-urea and potassium on the postharvest parameters of tissue culture banana cv. Grand naine

Materials and Methods

The study was conducted at the Horticultural Farm, Department of Horticulture and Post-harvest Technology, Palli-Siksha Bhavana (Institute of Agriculture), Visva-Bharati, Sriniketan, West Bengal (23°42′ N, 87°40′30″ E; 40 m above sea level) during the 2022-23 and 2023-24 cropping seasons. The site experiences a sub-humid, subtropical climate, with hot summers and moderately cool, short winters. The soil is red lateritic with a loamy sand texture, pH 4.97, EC 0.28 dS m⁻¹, organic carbon 0.6%, and available N, P, and K of 237.44, 17.13, and 114.68 kg ha⁻¹, respectively. The experiment employed a Randomized Block Design (RBD) with ten treatments and three replications. Tissue culture-derived banana plantlets (cv. Grand Naine) were transplanted in the month of August (2022) at 1.8 × 1.8 m spacing into 50 × 50 × 50 cm pits. Treatments included foliar applications of SOP (1.0%, 1.5%, 2.0%), nano-urea (0.2%, 0.3%, 0.4%), and their combinations (1.0% SOP + 0.2% nanourea, 1.5% SOP + 0.3% nano-urea, 2.0% SOP + 0.4% nanourea), with water as a control. The basal dose of fertilizers (200 g N, 160 g P, 200 g K per plant) was applied at planting and one and two months post-planting. Foliar sprays were applied at 3, 5, 7, and 9 months after planting, following standard agronomic practices and SOP as a source of potassium and IFFCO Nano urea as a source of nitrogen used in treatment. After harvesting, the selected three fingers from each treatment having true representation were analysed for post-harvest parameters, and the average was worked out and subjected to statistical analysis. The green life of the fruit was evaluated on the basis of visual observation. Fruit weight, pulp weight, and pulp weight were calculated by a weighing machine in gm. The following formula calculates the physiological loss in weight. PLW (%) = Initial weight (g) -Final weight (g) x 100 / Initial weight (g)

Statistical Analysis

The data recorded from the experiment were subjected to statistical analysis using the randomized block design (RBD) with three replications. Mean differences were evaluated using the F-test at the 5% level of significance. Whenever the F-test indicated significant differences among treatments, the Critical Difference (CD) at the 5% level of significance was calculated to facilitate pairwise comparison of treatment means.

Results and Discussion

The findings were considerably interpreted and listed in Tables 1 and 2 based on the observations recorded in the present research with the objective of effect of nano-urea and potassium on postharvest parameters. The data regarding green life, physiological loss in weight (PLW), fruit weight, pulp weight and peel weight showed a significant difference among the treatments in tissue culture plant and it's Ratoon.

The perusal of data indicated that there exists a significant difference among treatments. The highest green life (12.00 days and 11.67 days) was recorded in T 8 -1.5% SOP + 0.3% nanourea, followed by T 9 (10.77 days and 10.67 days) in tissue culture and ratoon crop, whereas the lowest green life (6.67 days and 8.00 days) was found in T 10 control (Tables 1 and2). Sandhya et al., (2018) [10] reported that an increase in green life may be due to the potassium element responsible for cytokinin concentration in plants, but in general, cytokinin delays the senescence process; hence, the green life of the fruit has increased. The result of the present investigation is in close conformity with the findings of Pujari et al., (2010) [9] .

The data revealed that there is a significant difference among the treatments. The minimum physiological loss in weight (11.00% and 13.33%) was recorded in T 8-1.5% SOP + 0.3% Nano-urea, followed by T 9 (12.58%and 14.17%) in tissue culture and ratoon crop, whereas maximum physiological loss in weight (19.00% and 19.50%) was registered in T 10 -control (Tables 1 and2). The increase in the evapo-transpiration changes with the progress of the storage period might be responsible for the high PLW of fruits. The decrease in weight loss by the application of calcium may be due to its role in the maintenance of fruit firmness, retardation of respiratory rates, as well as transpiration and delayed senescence, which was reported by Bhatt et al. (2012) [2] ; Kumar et al. (2008) [5] .

The maximum fruit weight at the ripe stage (138.00 g and 132 g) was obtained T 8-1.5% SOP + 0.3% Nano-ureafollowed by T 9 (125.33g and 122g)in tissue culture and ratoon crop whereas minimum fruit weight (78.33 g and 62.00 g) was recorded in T 10 -control (Table 1 and2). The decrease in weight loss, thereby maintaining fruit weight by the application of calcium, may be due to its role in the maintenance of fruit firmness, retardation of respiratory rates, as well as transpiration, which will influence the fruit weight. These results are in conformity with Bhatt et al., (2012) [2] and Sandhya et al., (2018) [10] .

The maximum pulp weight (104.67g and 96.50g) and peel weight (33.33 g and 35.50 g) was observed in T 8 followed by T 9 (96.0g and 46g) at ripe stage in tissue culture plant and ratoon crop, respectively, whereas minimum pulp weight (58.33 g and 46.00), followed by T 9 (28.33g and 34g) and peel weight (20.00 g and 16.00g) at ripe stage was found in T 10 -control (Table 1 and2). The maximum amount of pulp content might be due to foliar application of potassium might have made rapid synthesis of metabolites, particularly carbohydrates and their translocation to the fruits, causing relatively greater pulp content, whereas calcium and magnesium influenced peel weight, similar results reported by Singh et al. (2010) [11] ; Sandhya et al., (2018) [10] .

Conclusion

The plants treated with foliar spray of nano-urea and SOP water soluble on post-harvest parameters of banana cv. Grand Naine under the lateritic zone of West Bengal. T 8 1.5% SOP + 0.3% nano-urea proved to be the best. The treatment T 8 had influenced fruit postharvest parameters of banana, and thereby helps farmers to get an enhanced income in the banana cv. Grand Naine under the lateritic zone of West Bengal.

Future scope

The future studies need to be carried out on a combination of secondary nutrients and micronutrients on banana.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgmentThe authors would like to thank the Department of Horticulture and Post-harvest Technology, Palli Siksha Bhavana (Institute of Agriculture), Visva-Bharati, for providing all necessary facilities to carry out the work.

References

1. Arthi LR, Shakila A. Effect of micronutrients on the growth and yield of banana (Musa spp.) cv. Red Banana. International Journal of Plant & Soil Science. 2023;35(11):143-146. https://doi.org/10.9734/ijpss/2023/v35i112955
2. Bhatt A, Mishra NK, Mishra DS, Singh CP. Foliar application of potassium, calcium, zinc and boron enhanced the yield, quality and shelf life of mango. Horticulture Flora Research Spectrum. 2012;1(4):300-305.
3. Kumar Y, Singh T, Raliya R, Tiwari KN. Nano fertilizers for sustainable crop production, higher nutrient use efficiency and enhanced profitability. Indian Journal of Fertilisers. 2021;17(11):1206-1214.
4. Lal R. Promise and limitations of soils to minimize climate change. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 2008;63(4):113A-118A. https://doi.org/10.2489/63.4.113A
5. Kumar AR, Kumar N, Jeyakumar P. Effect of post-shooting spray of sulphate of potash (SOP) on yield and quality of banana cv. Robusta (AAA Cavendish). Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences. 2008;4(6):655-659.
6. Kumari P, Mandal G, Choudhary R, Kumar U. Synergistic effect of foliar spray of sulphate of potash and nano urea on yield and quality of banana. Journal of Advances in Biology & Biotechnology. 2026;29(1):346-353. https://doi.org/10.9734/jabb/2026/v29i13532
7. Martin. Influence of potassium nutrition on physiological functions and production of plantains in tropical region. In: Proceedings of the 10th Colloquium of the International Potash Institute; 1984; Abidjan, Ivory Coast. p. 233-248.
8. Pujari CV, Marbhal SK, Pawar RD, Badgujar CD. Effect of bio-regulators and different levels of N and K on finger size, yield of banana cv. Grand Naine (AAA). Asian Journal of Horticulture. 2010;5(2):453-457.
9. Sandhya GC, Hipparagi K, Sadanand K, Mushrif K, Ganur A, Sampath PM. Influence of post-shooting sprays of nitrogen and potassium on quality attributes of banana cv. Grand Naine. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Science. 2018;7(3):3368-3375.
10. Singh DK, Ghosh SK, Paul PK, Suresh CP. Effect of different micronutrients on growth, yield and quality of papaya (Carica papaya) cv. Ranchi. Acta Horticulturae. 2010;851:351-356.
11. Twyford LT. Nutrition: a review of principles and practice. Journal of Science and Food Agriculture. 1947;18:177-183.