Effect of foliar application of organic substances on flowering, fruiting and yield attributes of ber (Zizyphus Mauritiana Lamk.) cv Apple Ber

Introduction

Ber (Ziziphus mauritiana Lamk.), belonging to the family Rhamnaceae, is an important fruit crop of arid and semi-arid regions due to its hardiness, wide adaptability, low input requirement and ability to perform under marginal soil conditions. In India, ber is cultivated in several subtropical and tropical regions, including Maharashtra, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. The crop is valued for its sweet-sour fruits, which are rich in sugars, organic acids, vitamin C and minerals and are consumed fresh as well as processed into squash, juice, jam, murabba and dehydrated products. Apple Ber is a promising cultivar characterized by large, attractive and crispy fruits, with individual fruits generally weighing about 50-100 g. However, profuse flowering and considerable fruit drop are major constraints affecting fruit retention, yield and marketable production. Therefore, improvement of flowering, fruit set, fruit retention, yield and fruit quality is essential for increasing the productivity and profitability of Apple Ber. The excessive or imbalanced use of chemical fertilizers and growth regulators may cause environmental and soil-related concerns. Hence, the use of organic substances and biostimulants has gained importance in sustainable horticultural production. Biostimulants can improve nutrient uptake, physiological processes, flowering, fruit set, stress tolerance and fruit quality. Panchagavya and Jeevamrit are traditional cow-based formulations containing beneficial microorganisms and biologically active substances, while Amritpani may improve microbial activity and nutrient availability. Moringa leaf extract contains cytokinins, antioxidants, vitamins and minerals that can promote plant growth and productivity (Fuglie, 2000; Yasmeen et al., 2014) [1] . Seaweed extracts contain bioactive compounds, polysaccharides and micronutrients that enhance plant metabolism and stress tolerance (Khan et al., 2009) [2] . Humic acid improves root development, nutrient uptake and physiological efficiency, thereby supporting plant productivity (Nardi et al., 2002) [3] .

Material and Methods

The present experiment was conducted during 2025-2026 at the Dry Land Horticulture Farm, SKS College of Agriculture and Research Station, Surgi, Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, India, on eight-year-old plants of ber (Ziziphus mauritiana Lamk.) cv. Apple Ber planted at a spacing of 5 × 5 m. Thirteen treatments, viz., T 0 -Control (water spray), T 1 -Panchagavya (3%), T 2 -Panchagavya (5%), T 3 -Jeevamrit (5%), T 4 -Jeevamrit (10%), T 5 -Amrit Pani (3%), T 6 -Amrit Pani (5%), T 7 -Moringa leaf extract (4%), T 8 -Moringa leaf extract (6%), T 9 -Seaweed extract (3%), T 10 -Seaweed extract (5%), T 11 -Humic acid (1%) and T 12 -Humic acid (2%), were evaluated in Randomized Block Design (RBD) with three replications. Each treatment consisted of ten plants, making a total of 390 experimental plants. Foliar sprays were applied at pre-flowering, flowering, mustard and marble stages using a hand-operated knapsack sprayer.

The observations were recorded on initiation of flowering, days to 50% flowering, number of flowers per shoot, fruit set, fruit retention, fruit drop, fruit volume, fruit weight, pulp:stone ratio and yield. For flowering and fruiting observations, three uniform shoots were selected and tagged on each experimental plant. The number of days from treatment application to the appearance of the first flower was recorded and expressed in days. The number of days taken from treatment application to the stage when approximately 50 per cent of flowers had opened was recorded. Flowers on the selected tagged shoots were counted periodically during the flowering period and the average number of flowers per shoot was recorded.

Fruit set was calculated from the number of fruits formed in relation to the total number of flowers on the tagged shoots.

Fruit set (%) = ( Number of fruits set/Number of flowers ) × 100

Fruits retained up to harvest were recorded and expressed as a percentage of the initial number of fruits set.

Fruit retention (%) = ( Number of fruits retained at harvest/Initial number of fruits set ) × 100

The number of fruits dropped from fruit setting to harvest was recorded and expressed as a percentage of the initial number of fruits set.

Fruit drop (%) = ( Number of fruits dropped/Initial number of fruits set ) × 100

Fruit volume (cc)

Fruit volume was determined by the water displacement method and expressed in cubic centimetres (cc).

The weight of individual mature fruits was recorded using a weighing balance and expressed in grams (g).

Pulp: stone ratio

The pulp and stone were separated from representative fruits and weighed separately.

The ratio was calculated as:

Pulp:stone ratio = Weight of pulp

Weight of stone

Yield: The yield in tonnes per hectare (t ha -1 ) was calculated by multiplying the yield per plant (kg) by the number of plants per hectare and dividing the result by 1000.

The data obtained were subjected to analysis of variance appropriate for RBD, and treatment means were compared using Critical Difference (CD) at 5% level of significance. The SE(m) ± was also calculated for each parameter.

Results and Discussion

Significant differences in flowering initiation were observed among the treatments following the application of different organic substances (Table 1 & Fig 1). The earliest flowering (38.56 days) was recorded in T 1 (Panchagavya @ 3%), followed by T 2 (Panchagavya @ 5%) (39.22 days), whereas the latest flowering (52.11 days) was observed in T 0 (Control). The early initiation of flowering under Panchagavya may be attributed to improved nutrient availability and enhanced physiological activity, which favoured reproductive development. Similar effects were reported by Yadav et al. (2018) [4] .

Days to 50% flowering

Application of different organic substances at varying concentrations influenced the number of days required to attain 50% flowering (Table 1 & Fig 1). The minimum days to 50% flowering (45.00 days) were recorded in T 1 (Panchagavya @ 3%), whereas T 0 (Control) exhibited the maximum days (60.33 days). The reduction in days to 50% flowering under Panchagavya @ 3% may be attributed to the availability of essential nutrients, beneficial microorganisms and growth-promoting substances, which enhance physiological activity and promote early floral initiation. (Sreenivasa et al., 2010 and Raut et al., 2014) [5] .

Number of flowers per shoot

Different organic substances significantly influenced the number of flowers per shoot. The maximum number was recorded in T 1 (Panchagavya @ 3%) (14820.0), followed by T 2 (Panchagavya @ 5%) (14495.0), while the minimum was recorded in T 11 (Humic acid @ 1%) (12410.0). The higher flower production with Panchagavya may be attributed to its nutrients, beneficial microorganisms and growth-promoting substances (Table 1 &Fig 2).

The fruit set percentage varied considerably among the treatments receiving different organic substances and their concentrations. The maximum fruit set (45.00%) was recorded in T 1 (Panchagavya @ 3%), followed by T 2 (Panchagavya @ 5%) with 44.50%, whereas the minimum fruit set (12.20%) was observed in T 0 (Control). The higher fruit set under Panchagavya may be attributed to improved nutrient uptake, enhanced pollen viability, fertilization and carbohydrate accumulation, resulting in better reproductive efficiency (

A noticeable variation in fruit retention was observed due to the application of different organic substances at various concentrations (Table 2 & Fig 3). The maximum fruit retention (26.50%) was recorded in T 1 (Panchagavya @ 3%), followed by T 2 (25.00%), whereas the minimum fruit retention (9.50%) was observed in T 0 (Control). The improvement in fruit retention may be attributed to better nutritional status, enhanced photosynthetic activity and efficient translocation of assimilates towards developing fruits, which may reduce premature fruit abscission. (Yadav et al., 2018) [4] and Meena et al., 2018).

Distinct variation in fruit drop was recorded in response to the application of different organic substances (Table 2 & Fig 3). The minimum fruit drop (73.50%) was recorded in T 1 (Panchagavya @ 3%), followed by T 2 (Panchagavya @ 5%) (75.00%) and T 4 (Jeevamrit @ 10%) (75.10%), whereas the maximum fruit drop (90.50%) was observed in T 0 (Control). The reduction in fruit drop under Panchagavya may be attributed to improved nutrient uptake and enhanced physiological activity, resulting in better fruit retention. Similar effects of organic nutrient management on fruit retention were reported by Panna et al. (2024) [6] in ber.

Fruit volume (cc)

Significant differences in fruit volume were observed among the treatments following the application of different organic substances (Table 3 & Fig 4). The maximum fruit volume (61.46 cc) was recorded in T 1 (Panchagavya @ 3%), followed by T 2 (Panchagavya @ 5%) (59.34 cc) and T 4 (Jeevamrit @ 10%) (55.02 cc), whereas the minimum fruit volume (31.82 cc) was recorded in T 0 (Control). The increase in fruit volume under Panchagavya may be attributed to improved nutrient availability and efficient translocation of assimilates towards developing fruits. Similar improvement in fruit growth under organic nutrient application was reported by Meena et al. (2025) [7] in ber.

Significant differences in fruit weight were observed among the treatments following the application of various organic substances (Table 3 & Fig 4). The maximum fruit weight (56.55 g) was recorded in T 1 (Panchagavya @ 3%), followed by T 2 (55.52 g), whereas the minimum fruit weight (31.51 g) was observed in T 0 (Control). The in-crease in fruit weight may be attributed to enhanced nutrient availability, photosynthetic activity and efficient translocation of assimilates towards developing fruits.

Pulp: stone ratio

It is evident from the results obtained under the present investigation that the application of different organic substances significantly influenced the pulp:stone ratio (Table 3 & Fig 4). Among the evaluated treatments, the highest pulp:stone ratio (11.34) was observed in T 1 (Panchagavya @ 3%), whereas T 0 (Control) exhibited the lowest pulp:stone ratio (8.08). The increase in pulp:stone ratio may be attributed to enhanced nutrient availability, photosynthetic activity and efficient translocation of assimilates towards developing fruits, resulting in greater pulp development relative to stone formation.

The obtained data in respect of fruit yield revealed significant differences among the treatments (Table 3 & Fig 4). The maximum yield (22.24 t ha -1 ) was recorded in T 1 (Panchagavya @ 3%), followed by T 2 (Panchagavya @ 5%) (20.36 t ha -1 ) and T 4 (Jeevamrit @ 10%) (18.57 t ha -1 ), whereas the minimum yield (3.55 t ha -1 ) was observed in T 0 (Control). The higher yield under Panchagavya may be attributed to its favourable influence on flowering, fruit set, fruit retention and fruit development, along with improved nutrient availability and assimilate translocation. Similar enhancement in yield under organic nutrient management was reported by Bohane et al. (2016) [8] .

Conclusion

It can be concluded that Panchagavya @ 3% (T 1 ) was the most effective treatment for improving flowering, fruiting, physical fruit parameters and yield of ber cv. ). Thus, Panchagavya @ 3% may be considered a promising organic treatment for improving productivity of Apple Ber under the agro-climatic conditions of Chhattisgarh.

Authors have declared that they have no known competing financial interests or non-financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementsI extend my deepest gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Abhay Bisen, Associate Professor, Department of Fruit Science, SKS College of Agriculture and Research Station, Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, India for his unwavering support and guidance throughout my research journey. I also thank and acknowledge to Dr. G.L. Sharma, HOD, Department of Fruit Science, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidalaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India for providing necessary facilities for this study.

References

1. Fuglie LJ. The Miracle Tree: Moringa oleifera: Natural Nutrition for the Tropics. Church World Service, Dakar, Senegal; 2000.
2. Khan W, Rayirath UP, Subramanian S, Jithesh MN, Rayorath P, Hodges DM, Critchley AT, Craigie JS, Norrie J, Prithiviraj B. Seaweed extracts as biostimulants of plant growth and development. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation. 2009;28:386-399.
3. Nardi S, Pizzeghello D, Muscolo A, Vianello A. Physiological effects of humic substances on higher plants. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 2002;34:1527-1536.
4. Yadav A, Kumar V, Singh D. Effect of organic nutrient management on flowering, fruiting, yield and quality attributes of ber (Ziziphus mauritiana Lamk.). International Journal of Chemical Studies. 2018;6(5):1234-1238.
5. Sreenivasa MN, Naik N, Bhat SN. Beejamrutha and Jeevamrutha: Traditional organic inputs for sustainable agriculture. International Journal of Plant Protection. 2010;3(1):1-6.
6. Panna VK, Sharma SP, Deshmukh UB, Asati BS, Nishad D, Thakur C, Sahu S. Effect of foliar application of PGR and nutrient on fruit drop, growth, quality and yield of ber (Ziziphus mauritiana Lamk.) cv. Apple Ber under Chhattisgarh plain condition. International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research. 2024;8(10):513-516.
7. Meena R, Kumar M, Suman M, Kaur G. Effect of integrated bioformulations and canopy management practices on reproductive and quality of pomegranate (Punica granatum L.) cv. Bhagwa. International Journal of Agricultural Invention. 2025;10(2):19-28.
8. Bohane L, Tiwari R, Gautam KK. Integrated nutrient management in ber (Zizyphusmauritiana Lamk.) cv. Gola under Malwa Plateau conditions of Madhya Pradesh. Indian Journal of Horticulture. 2016;73(1):128-132.
9. Ahir MP, Patel HC, Patel KD, Patel MM. Effect of seaweed extract and organic nutrient sprays on fruit quality and yield attributes of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. Kesar. International Journal of Chemical Studies. 2022;10(1):156-160.
10. Gangadhar K, Kumar P, Reddy BMC. Effect of organic and inorganic nutrient management on fruit quality attributes of ber (Ziziphus mauritiana Lamk.). International Journal of Chemical Studies. 2019;7(4):2455-2459.
11. Raut VU, Diware DV. Effect of pruning time and severity on growth and development of ber (Ziziphus mauritiana Lamk.). Journal of Soils and Crops. 2005;15(1):60-63.
12. Sau S, Mandal P, Sarkar T, Das K, Datta P. Influence of bio-fertilizer and liquid organic manures on growth, fruit quality and leaf mineral content of mango cv.Himsagar. Journal of Crop and Weed. 2017;13(1):132-136.
13. Tripathi VK, Kumar S, Kumar A. Effect of organic nutrient sources and biostimulants on growth, yield and quality attributes of strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.). International Journal of Chemical Studies. 2019;7(3):2450-2455.
14. How to cite this article: Deshlahre P, Bisen A, Sharma GL, Jain V, Ogarey S, Gavel T, et al. Effect of foliar application of organic substances on flowering, fruiting and yield attributes of ber (Zizyphus Mauritiana Lamk.) cv Apple Ber. International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research. 2026;SP10(10):118-122. doi: https://www.doi.org/10.33545/26174693.20 26.v10.i10Sb.10265