Effect of different chemicals on yield and chemical parameters in Custard Apple (Annona squamosa L.) cv. Dharur-6

Introduction

The custard apple (Annona squamosa L.) is also known as Sugar apple, Sweet sop, Sitaphal and Sharifa. It originated in the tropical region of Tropical America and is a member of the Annonaceae family. In India, it is a significant dryland fruit. In India's tropical and warmer subtropical regions, custard apples can be grown.

There are 14 pairs of chromosomes in a custard apple (2𝑛 = 14). The genus Annona contains more than 100 species. The pulp of Annona squamosa is slightly granular, creamy yellow or white, sweet, with a pleasant flavour and low acidity. It is considered the sweetest of the annona fruits (FAO, 1990) [1] . The custard apple is extensively cultivated worldwide in tropical, semi-arid and arid regions for its succulent fruit. Custard apple fruit is mainly grown in Maharashtra's Marathwada, Vidarbha, and Western Maharashtra region. The important districts for this fruit are Solapur, Pune, Nagpur, Dhule, Ch. Sambhaji Nagar, Beed, Dharashiv, and others. In year 2024-2025 the crop covers 61,000 ha nationwide, producing 583,000 metric tons. While in Maharashtra, custard apple covers 25380 ha, producing 244680 metric tons. (APEDA, 2025) [2] The custard apple is primarily a cross-pollinated crop with bisexual hermaphrodite flowers; however, effective self-pollination is limited since stigma receptivity and pollen release occur at different times. In custard apple, flowering extend from spring to the end of rainy season. A medium-sized tree bears 1000 to 1500 flowers in a season, but only 2 % flowers set and bear fruits. During the rainy season, fruit-set takes place. By that time the temperature is lower and the relative humidity is high. Higher percentage of fruit-set by hand pollination has been reported by various workers (Bose et al., 2001) [3] . Custard apple bears the flowers during the period from April to August. However, no fruit set occurs during spring and summer, and it begins only in the rainy season due to favorable climatic conditions. Due to high temperature, low atmospheric humidity, lack of irrigation water and natural stresses resulted less number of flowers, poor fruit setting and low yield and degraded quality of fruit too. (Patel et al., 2010 and Chaudhari et al., 2016) [4] . The custard apple is a very good source of carbohydrates, proteins, fiber, minerals like calcium and iron, and vitamins, especially Vitamin C. Custard apple has good calorific value; that is, it gives 104 kcal per 100 grams of fruit. Furthermore, custard apple consists of 21.3 g of carbohydrates, 5.2 g of protein, 7.25 g of fiber, 60 mg of calcium, 80 mg of phosphorus, 105 mg of iron, 91 mg of Vit. C in 100g edible portion, and 70 to 80 % moisture content. (Nair et al., 2017) [5] . There are also encouraging results due the use of chemicals, such as a means of NAA, GA 3 in custard apple with respect to improvement in yield and chemical properties. However, research work on this aspect in custard apple is very scanty and sporadic. Being a hardy crop, its cultivation of is increasing in Maharashtra, considering the importance and future scope of this crop the present experiment was carried out.

Materials and Methods

The experiment was conducted during 2025-26 at the Custard Apple Research Station, Ambajogai, Dist. Beed, which is situated on an elevation of 631 m above the mean sea level between 18.75° North latitude and 76.37° East longitude. Eight-year-old custard apple trees with uniform growth were selected for the experiment. The trees were planted at a spacing of 4 m × 4 m. Thirteen treatments were evaluated in a Randomized Block Design (RBD) with two replications. Each treatment consisted of three plants, resulting in a total of 78 experimental plants. In June 2025, the experiment was started. Chemicals were applied in the form of foliar spray as per treatments. The treatment included T 1 i.e. Urea 0.5%, T 2 i.e. Urea 1.0%, T 3 i.e. Urea 1.5%, T 4 i.e. NAA 50 ppm, T 5 i.e. NAA 100 ppm, T 6 i.e. NAA 200 ppm, T 7 i.e. GA 3 30 ppm, T 8 i.e. GA 3 40 ppm, T 9 i.e. GA 3 50 ppm, T 10 i.e. CPPU 30 ppm, T 11 i.e. CPPU 40 ppm, T 12 i.e. CPPU 50 ppm and T 13 i.e. Control. The observations on average fruit weight (g), pulp weight (g), peel weight (g), seed weight (g), fruit yield per plant (kg/tree), fruit yield (t/ha), TSS (%), acidity (%), total sugar (%), reducing sugar (%), nonreducing sugar (%) were recorded. The data obtained on these various characters were subjected to RBD analysis and interpretation of the data was carried out in accordance to Panse et al. (1995) [6] .

Results and Discussion

Average fruit weight (g): The results regarding average fruit weight are presented in Table 1. It showed that maximum fruit weight was recorded in treatment T 9 (375.57) which was followed by treatment T 8 (372.35), T 5 (371.43), and T 4 (368.26). While minimum fruit weight was recorded in control T 13 (351.10). This might be due to cell division in the initial stage and later due to faster cell expansion associated with the influx of water and metabolites into the fruits which cause an overall increase in weight of fruit. The result is in agreement with the finding reported by Kulkarni et al. (1995) [7] ; Memane et al. (2013) [8] ; Laila et al. (2018) [9] in Custard apple. Pulp weight (g): The data with respect to pulp weight presented in Table 1. Showed that maximum pulp weight was recorded in treatment T 9 (185.20) was followed by treatment T 8 (183.20), T 5 (182.80), T 4 (179.80) and T 12 (178.00). Minimum pulp weight was recorded in control T 13 (169.20). Fruit pulp weight may rise as a result of cell enlargement and multiplication, improved water absorption, higher storage of sugar and other food reserves, and an increase in the volume of intercellular spaces. Additionally, increased accumulation and transfer of excess metabolites from other plant parts toward growing fruits may be the cause of increase in pulp content (Barkule et al., 2018) [10] . The results are in agreement with the findings reported by Kulkarni (1991) [11] , Memane et al., (2013) [8] , Laila et al., (2018) [9] in Custard apple. ). Increased water absorption and the mobilization of sugar and minerals in the mesocarp's expended cells and intracellular spaces might be the cause of this. The result is in confirmation with the finding of Kulkarni et al., (1991) [11] , Memane et al., (2013) [8] , Laila et al., (2018) [9] in Custard apple.

The data regarding seed weight as affected by different treatments are presented in Table 1. Analysis revealed that the treatments had a non-significant effect on seed weight. Minimum seed weight was recorded in T 9 (30.55), followed by T 8 (30.95) and T 7 (31.46). The maximum seed weight was recorded in T 13 (32.74).

The results regarding fruit yield per plant are presented in Table 1. Maximum fruit yield per plant was observed in treatment T 5 (21.05) which was followed by treatment T 9 (20.78), T 4 (20.01), T 8 (19.36) and T 6 (17.51). Minimum fruit yield was observed in control T 13 (11.35). Increase in the yield might be due to the increased number of fruits per plant which directly corresponds to the increased fruit set. The results are in agreement with the findings reported by Kulkarni et al. (1996); Patel et al., (2010) [4] and Thorat et al., (2018) [12] in Custard apple.

The results regarding fruit yield as affected by different chemical treatments are presented Table 1. Maximum fruit yield was observed in treatment T 5 (13.15) which was followed by treatment T 9 (12.99), T 4 (12.51), T 8 (12.10) and T 6 (10.97). While minimum fruit yield was seen in treatment control T 13 (7.10). Increase in yield under these chemicals was associated with increase in the number of fruits, low percentage of fruit drop, more fruit retention and increased fruit size and weight. The above results were in agreement with those of Patel et al., (2010) [4] ; Prajapati et al., (2016) [13] and Chaudhari et al., (2016) [14] in Custard apple.

TSS (°Brix):

The results regarding TSS are presented in Table 2. Maximum TSS was observed in treatment T 9 (24.98) which was at par with T 8 (24.72), T 4 (24.46), and T 5 (24.10) respectively. While minimum TSS was recorded in control T 13 (21.48). Increase in the total soluble solids by gibberellins might be due to quick metabolic transformation of starch and pectin into soluble compounds and rapid translocation of sugars from the leaves to the developing fruits. The results are in agreement with the findings reported by Prajapati et al., (2016) [13] ; Chaudhari et al., (2016) [14] ; Thorat et al., (2018) [12] in Custard apple. [15] ; Pujari et al. (2021) [16] and Rathod et al., (2024) [17] in Custard apple. Total sugar (%): The results regarding total sugar are presented in Table 2. Maximum total sugar was observed in treatment T 9 (21.17) which was at par with T 8 (20.88), T 4 (20.81) and T 11 (20.15) respectively. While minimum total sugar was recorded in treatment control T 13 (16.83). Significant enhancement in total sugar content of fruits might be due to mobilization of soluble carbohydrates in fruits, under the influence of applied GA 3 (Leopold, 1955) [18] . The results of present findings are in line with Prajapati et al. (2018); Mostafa et al. (2018) [15] ; Bidave et al., (2019) [19] ; Pujari et al. (2021) [16] and Rathod et al., (2024) [17] in Custard apple.

The data presented in Table 2 with respect to reducing sugar showed that maximum reducing sugar was recorded in treatment T 9 (19.14) which was statistically at par with T 8 (18.94), T 4 (18.91) and T 12 (18.50). While minimum reducing sugar was recorded in treatment control T 13 (15.44). This could be due to raising the activity of enzyme such as amylases which hydrolyse the complex polysaccharides into simple sugars. It has been shown that auxin and GA 3 speed up the transfer of metabolites from other plant sections to growing fruits. The results are in agreement with the findings reported by Chaudhari et al. (2016) [14] in Custard apple. Non-reducing sugar (%): The results pertaining to non-reducing sugar are presented in Table 2. Maximum non-reducing sugar was recorded in treatment T 9 (2.03) which was at par with T 8 (1.94) and T 4 (1.90) followed by T 5 (1.69) and T 6 (1.65). While minimum nonreducing sugar was recorded in treatment control T 13 (1.39). This might be due to increase the activity of the enzymes such as amylase which hydrolase complex polysaccharides into simple sugar. The results are in agreement with the findings reported by Kulkarni et al. (1996) in Custard apple.

Conclusion:

The present investigation clearly revealed that application of different chemicals had a considerable influence on yield and chemical parameters of custard apple cv. Dharur-6. Among treatments, GA3 @ 50 ppm (T9) proved to be superior for improving average fruit weight, pulp weight, TSS, total sugar, reducing sugar and non-reducing sugar along with minimum seed weight per fruit. While NAA@ 100 ppm (T5) showed highest fruit yield per plant as well as fruit yield.

References

1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Utilization of tropical food fruits and leaves. FAO Food and Nutrition Paper. 1990;47:10-14.
2. Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority. Production of horticulture crops: Custard apple. 2025.
3. Bose TK, Mitra SK, Sanyal D, editors. Fruits: Tropical and subtropical (Vol. 1, 3rd ed.). Calcutta: Naya Udyog; 2001.
4. Patel NM, Patel DK, Patel MM. Effect of cultural and chemical treatments on fruit set and fruit yield of custard apple. The Asian Journal of Horticulture. 2010;5(2):498-502.
5. Nair R, Agrawal V. A review on the nutritional quality and medicinal value of custard apple-an underutilized crop of Madhya Pradesh, India. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2017;6(9):1126-1132.
6. Panse VG, Sukhatme PV. Statistical methods for agricultural workers. ICAR, New Delhi; 1995.
7. Kulkarni SS, Desai UT, Masalkar SD, Desale SB. Effect of cultural and chemical treatments on yield and physicochemical characteristics of custard apple. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural University. 1995;21(3):474-475.
8. Laila YM, Kotb HRM. Effect of brassinosteroids and gibberellic acid on parthenocarpic fruit formation and fruit quality of sugar apple (Annona squamosa L.). Middle East Journal of Agriculture Research. 2018;7(4):1341-1351.
9. International Journal of Research in Agronomy https://www.agronomyjournals.com 26180618, 2026, 9(9), Downloaded from https://www.doi.org/10.33545/2618060X.2026.v9.i9m.6630 by International Journal of Research in Agronomy on [02/10/2026]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://www.agronomyjournals.com) for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
10. Barkule SR, Patel BN, Baghele RD. Effect of 28-homobrassinolide, CPPU, GA3 and humic acid on quality and shelf-life of sapota (Manilkara achras) cv. Kalipatti. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2018;Special Issue 6:962-967.
11. Thorat UK, Dheware RM, Jadhav AR. Influence of growth regulators on yield and economics of custard apple (Annona squamosa L.) cv. Balanagar. International Journal of Economic Plants. 2018;5(3):149-150.
12. Prajapati RD, Laua HN, Solanki PD, Parekh NS. Effect of plant growth regulators on flowering, fruiting, yield and quality parameters of custard apple (Annona squamosa L.). Ecology, Environment and Conservation Paper. 2016;22:177-179.
13. Chaudhari JC, Patel KD, Yadav L, Patel UI, Varu DK. Effect of plant growth regulators on flowering, fruit set and yield of custard apple (Annona squamosa L.) cv. Sindhan. Advances in Life Sciences. 2016;5(4):1202-1204.
14. Mostafa LY, Hatem RM. Effect of brassinosteroids and gibberellic acid on parthenocarpic fruit formation and fruit quality of sugar apple (Annona squamosa L.). Middle East Journal of Agriculture Research. 2018;7:1341-1351.
15. Pujari CV, Memane YS, Desale SB. Improving the fruit set in custard apple (Annona squamosa L.) by using growth regulators. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2021;10(1):237-242.
16. Rathod SK, Jadhav GG, Deshmukh RN, Laharia PG, Lalge PM. Effect of different growth substances on fruit set, yield and quality of custard apple (Annona squamosa L.). International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research. 2024;8(Special Issue 10):910-915.
17. Leopold AC. Auxins and plant growth. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press; 1955.