Comparative study on establishment and growth behaviour in different genotypes of acid lime under Durg district of Chhattisgarh

Introduction

Lime (Citrus aurantifolia Swingle) is an economically important citrus fruit crop of India, belonging to the family Rutaceae with a diploid chromosome number of 2𝑛 = 2𝑥 = 18. It is believed to have originated in tropical and subtropical Southeast Asia and is commonly known as Kagzi nimbu or Nimbu in India. Considerable genetic diversity and adaptability to varying environmental conditions have been reported in lime (Dubey et al., 2016; Lalramhluna et al., 2016) [1,2] . India is one of the leading producers of lime, where the crop is cultivated over 11.7 lakh hectares with a production of 177.7 lakh tonnes (Anon., 2026) [3] . In Chhattisgarh, citrus crops occupy about 0.54 thousand hectares with a production of 68.46 thousand tonnes (Anon., 2025) [4] . Acid lime fruits are nutritionally and commercially valuable due to their high vitamin C content, minerals, pectin and antioxidant properties. The fruits are consumed fresh and processed into juice, squash, lemonade, pickle, marmalade, citric acid and essential oil. Lime peel and peel products also have applications in soap and cosmetic industries (Debaje et al., 2011; Kumari et al., 2021) [5,6] . The fruit also possesses several traditional medicinal properties. About 100 g of fruit juice contains 80% water, 6.05 g acidity, 8.42% TSS and 22.86 mg vitamin C (Carolina et al., 2011) [7] . Successful establishment of an acid lime orchard depends greatly on early vegetative growth and survivability. Planting time is an important management factor because temperature, rainfall, relative humidity and soil moisture prevailing at planting influence root development, nutrient uptake, photosynthesis, cell expansion and overall plant establishment. Proper selection of planting time can therefore promote rapid establishment, vigorous vegetative growth and higher survival, whereas unfavourable conditions may cause moisture stress, poor growth and seedling mortality (Ladaniya et al., 2020; Lunagariya et al., 2022) [8,9] . Despite its wide adaptability, acid lime production is constrained by poor seedling establishment, slow early growth, variability among plants and limited availability of superior cultivars. Acid lime is commonly propagated through seeds and exhibits a high degree of nucellar embryony (39-60%); however, short seed viabil ity, poor germination and weak seedling growth remain important nursery and field constraints (Gupta, 1989; Evenari, 1949; Shant et al., 1973) [11,10,12] . Further, differences among cultivars in vegetative growth and adaptability necessitate systematic evaluation of their performance under different environmental conditions. Several acid lime cultivars, including Pramalini, Vikram, Jai Devi, Sai Sharbati and others, are cultivated in India. Cultivar performance varies with genetic constitution and environmental conditions. Vikram, for instance, is known for heavy fruiting, bunch-bearing habit and suitability for off-season production. Hence, identification of genotypes with superior early growth and survivability is essential for successful orchard establishment. Growth behaviour during the initial establishment phase provides valuable information for identifying vigorous and adaptable genotypes. Since acid lime exhibits distinct growth flushes and its vegetative development is strongly influenced by environmental conditions (Devi et al., 2011) [13] , evaluation of genotypes under different planting periods can help identify suitable genotype-planting time combinations. Therefore, the present investigation was undertaken to evaluate the growth behaviour and survivability of different acid lime genotypes under different planting times and to determine their interaction under the agro-climatic conditions of Chhattisgarh.

Materials and Methods

The experiment was conducted at Instructional Farm Khudmudi, College of Horticulture and Research Station, Sankara-Patan, Durg (Chhattisgarh) during the year 2025-26. The investigation was framed in Factorial Randomized Block Design (FRBD) with three replications and Two Factors, For the Factor one Genotype (G) seven genotypes were taken viz, G 1 (Local Collection), G 2 (Vikram), G 3 (Pramalini), G 4 (NRCC-8), G 5 (NRCC-7), G 6 (Sai Sharbati) and G 7 (Jai Devi). While Factor two being Planting time (P) two Planting times were taken namely, P 1 (August) and P 2 (September). Their combination resulted with 14 treatments through which experiment was held. Those treatments were (T 1 ) Local Collection + August, (T 2 ) Local Collection + September, (T 3 ) Vikram + August, (T 4 ) Vikram + September, (T 5 ) Pramalini + August, (T 6 ) Pramalini + September, (T 7 ) NRCC-8 + August, (T 8 ) NRCC-8 + September, (T 9 ) NRCC-7 + August, (T 10 ) NRCC-7 + September, (T 11 ) Sai Sharbati + August, (T 12 ) Sai Sharbati + September, (T 13 ) Jai Devi + August and (T 14 ) Jai Devi + September. Before planting, the experimental field was well prepared. The land was ploughed once using a cultivator and then tilled twice with a rotavator in order to achieve a fine tilth and to get rid of any weeds, stubbles and crop residues. Following ploughing, the field was properly levelled to make it possible to apply uniform irrigation and drainage. Pits measuring 60 cm by 60 cm by 60 cm were dug at the recommended spacing. The pits were left open 15 days before planting so that the soil could be solarized by exposure to the sun, thus helping to reduce soil-borne diseases. On mid-August 2025 and again on mid-September 2025, healthy and uniform genotypes of acid lime were planted in the field. The pits were then filled with topsoil mixed with well-decomposed FYM before planting. While planting the acid lime plats, a row spacing of 3.0 metres and a plant spacing of 2.5 metres was adopted. Bunds and irrigation channels were kept in place between the plots to enable easy irrigation and to carry out intercultural operations. A light irrigation was applied right after planting to promote better root development and uniform growth. Thereafter, irrigations were given at regular intervals according to the soil moisture levels and the prevailing weather conditions. Attention was paid to keeping sufficient moisture in the root zone throughout the experimental period. Excess water was prevented by ensuring good drainage in the field. Observations were made regarding the growth parameters. The experimental data relating to the various growth parameters obtained during the study were subjected to statistical analysis by means of the method of analysis of variance (ANOVA) for a Two Factor Randomized Block Design (FRBD) as recommended by (Panse et al., 1967) [14] . The significant differences between the treatments were determined by referring to the critical differences at the 5% level of significance. Statistical analysis was performed using the OPSTAT portal, which is available on the CCS HAU website.

Result and Discussion

The data presented in table 1 revealed the difference between genotypes and planting times was found to be significant. Treatment (T 4 )

Vikram + September at 120 DAP recorded the maximum length of the first shoot (23.43 cm). This was followed by (T 9 ) NRCC-7 + August (23.20 cm). Whereas (T 1 ) Local collection + August recorded the minimum length of the first shoot (13.87 cm). Better utilization of available resources under optimum conditions may have promoted cell division and shoot elongation. Similar interaction effects on vegetative growth were reported in mango by Garcia et al. (2024) [15] , where cultivar × time interaction significantly influenced shoot growth. Similar findings were reported by Kholia et al. (2022) [16] in guava.

Number of primary branches

The significant values were obtained for number of primary branches. Where maximum number of primary branches (12.07) was recorded with (T 5 ) Pramalini + August at 120 DAP. This was followed by (11.84) with (T 9 ) NRCC-7 + August. Whereas (T 1 ) Local Collection + August recorded the minimum Number of primary branches (6.48). Considerable variability in the number of primary branches among different acid lime strains, indicating the existence of substantial genetic diversity for vegetative growth traits in acid lime Shambhulingappa et al. (2016) [17] . Early planting provides favourable temperature, humidity and soil moisture conditions which promote better vegetative growth and branch initiation who reported. Similar observations regarding the influence of planting time on vegetative growth parameters have been reported in guava by Dixit et al. (2019) [18] and Chandra et al. (1995) [19] .

Number of secondary branches

As per the obtained values Treatment (T 8 ) NRCC-8 + September at 120 DAP recorded the highest Number of secondary branches (10.18) followed by (9.96) with (T 12 ) Sai Sarbati + September. Whereas Local (T 2 ) Collection + September (5.02) recorded the lowest for the same. Number of secondary branches might be due to the specific climatic requirements of the variety and the genetic makeup of the cultivar; similar findings were recorded by Kumar et al. (2011) [20] in aonla. Higher secondary branching may be attributed to enhanced vegetative vigour, better nutrient utilization and increased emergence of lateral shoots. Similar genotypic variation in branching behaviour and canopy development has been reported in acid lime by Shambhulingappa et al. (2016) [17] .

Number of tertiary branches

The investigated parameter differs significantly with. Treatment (T 14 ) Jai Devi + September acquiring greater number of tertiary branches (7.93) followed by (T 10 ) NRCC-7 + September (7.79), whereas (T 1 ) Local Collection + August having least number of tertiary branches (3.25). This might be attributed to the production of complex organic compounds through photosynthetic activity, which play a vital role in the formation of new tissues and are involved in various metabolic processes. These processes ultimately promote better vegetative growth and development of the plants, resulting in an increased number of tertiary branches. Similar findings have also been reported by Kumar et al. (2009) [21] , Kotur et al. (1997) [22] and Mitra et al. (1990) [23] .

The table 1 reveals effect on diameter of shoot which was maximum under the treatment (T 5 ) Pramalini + August (5.31 mm) at 120 DAP. This was followed by (T 10 ) NRCC-7 + September (5.05 mm), whereas minimum diameter of shoot (3.15 mm) was under (T 1 ) Local

Collection + August planting. The increase in shoot diameter might also be due to increased cell division and cell enlargement in actively growing shoots (Choudhary et al., 2026) [24] in guava, who observed significant differences in shoot diameter. The improvement in shoot diameter might be attributed to the enhanced microbial activity and improved nutrient uptake, which promoted cell division and cell elongation, thereby resulting in vigorous shoot growth and increased shoot thickness in acid lime by Kumar et al. (2026) [25] .

The resulted data for height of plant was found to be significant. The treatment (T 8 ) NRCC-8 + September at 120 DAP recorded the maximum height of plant (61.89 cm) followed by (T 9 ) NRCC-7 + August (60.95 cm), while minimum height of plant (42.00 cm) was recorded for (T 1 ) Local Collection + August planting. The superior genotype recorded maximum plant height, which may be attributed to its inherent genetic potential, better adaptability and higher growth vigour. Similar genotypic variation in plant height was reported in acid lime by Kamatyanatti et al. (2016) [26] and Nagarjuna et al. (2025) [27] .

The superior genotype planted at the optimum planting time recorded maximum plant height due to the combined effect of genetic potential and favourable environmental conditions (Bharty et al., 2022) [28] in cape gooseberry.

The table 1 revealed the difference between genotypes and planting times according to their survival percentage, as the treatment (T 6 ) Pramalini + September at 120 DAP recorded the highest survival percentage (96.64%) followed by (95.73%) survival in treatment (T 3 ) Vikram + August planting. while (T 1 ) Local Collection + August showed lowest survival (78.92%). Monitoring survival rates can provide insights into the optimal timing for jamun plantation, aiding in maximising survival percentages and overall crop success Priyanka et al., (2024) [29] . Early planting provided suitable environmental conditions for rapid acclimatisation and reduced transplanting shock, resulting in a greater survival percentage. Similar findings were reported in jackfruit by Jayaram et al. (2024) [30] .

Conclusion

The conclusion can be drawn as the NRCC-7 recorded the maximum first shoot length and tertiary branches, Pramalini recorded the maximum primary branches and shoot diameter, Sai Sharbati recorded the maximum secondary branches, NRCC-8 recorded the maximum plant height and Vikram recorded the highest survival percentage. September planting generally resulted in better growth and survival than August planting. Among the interactions, Vikram + September recorded maximum shoot length, NRCC-8 + September recorded maximum secondary branches and plant height, while Pramalini + September recorded the highest survival percentage. Overall, NRCC-8, NRCC-7, Vikram and Pramalini performed better, with September planting times being more favourable for acid lime establishment under the Chhattisgarh plain zone.

References

1. Dubey AK, Sharma RM, Awasthi OP, Srivastav M, Sharma N. Genetic diversity in lime (Citrus aurantifolia Swingle) and lemon (Citrus limon L. Burm.) based on quantitative traits in India. Agroforestry Systems. 2016;90(3):447-456.
2. Lalramhluna P, Prasad VM. Effect of different levels of indole-3butyric acid on growth, development, survival and establishment of air-layered lemon (Citrus limon L. Burm.) cv. Assam lemon. International Journal of Life Sciences. 2016;4(2):599-603.
3. Anonymous. National Horticulture Board First Advance Estimate. 2026.
4. Anonymous. Directorate of Horticulture and Farm Forestry, Chhattisgarh. 2025.
5. Debaje PP, Shinde ED, Ingale HV. Effect of plant growth regulators and nutrients on quality of Acid lime (Citrus aurantifolia Swingle). The Asian Journal of Horticulture. 2011;6(1):253-255.
6. Kumari S, Sharma A, Salgotra R, Sharma M, Singh P. Morphological studies of acid lime (Citrus aurantifolia Swingle) genotypes of North-Western regions of India. Biological Forum - An International Journal. 2021;13(2):1020-1032.
7. Carolina NR, Lucia MJ. Nutritional value of organic acid lime juice (Citrus latifolia T.), cv. Tahiti. Ciencia e Tecnologia de Alimentos. 2011;31:918-922.
8. Ladaniya MS, Marathe RA, Das AK, Rao CN, Huchche AD, Shirgure PS, Murkute AA. High density planting studies in acid lime (Citrus aurantifolia Swingle). Scientia Horticulturae. 2020;261:108935.
9. Lunagariya RJ, Jat RK, Solanki SM. Effects of seed soaking and growing media on germination and survivability of Acid Lime (Citrus aurantifolia Swingle). International Journal of Plant and Soil Science. 2022;34(23):1720-1728.
10. Evenari M. Germination inhibitors. The Botanical Review. 1949;15:153-194.
11. Gupta OP. Effect of gibberellic acid on seed germination in lime (Citrus aurantifolia Swingle). Progressive Horticulture. 1989;21(3:4):246-248.
12. Shant PS, Rao SN. Effect of gibberellic acid on seed germination and seedling growth of acid lime. Progressive Horticulture. 1973;5(3):63-65.
13. Devi HL, Sarkar SK, Dhanabati L, Majhi D. Flushing-flowering behavior and regulation in acid lime: A critical review and research interventions. Journal of Crop and Weed. 2011;7(2):87-90.
14. Panse VG, Sukhatme PV. Statistical Methods for Agricultural Workers. 2nd Edition. Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New Delhi, India; 1967.
15. Garcia E, Smith M, Campbell J. The effects of planting density, training system and cultivar on vegetative growth and fruit production in young mango (Mangifera indica L.) trees. MDPI Horticulturae. 2024;10(9):937.
16. Kholia A, Pal R, Sharma G, Pandey AK. Effect of time of grafting and scion varieties on success of graftage in guava (Psidium guajava L.). Current Horticulture. 2022;10(2):34-39.
17. Shambhulingappa N, Patil DR, Kulapati H, Patil SN, Babu P, Nadaf AM, Kiran Kumar KC. Studies on variability of growth and yield component in seedling strains of acid lime (Citrus aurantifolia Swingle). Advances in Life Sciences. 2016;5(4):14011408.
18. Dixit P, Kumar A, Prakash S, Kumar M, Kumar V, Shukla S, Kumar M, Kumar U. Effect of time, techniques and environment of propagation on performance of guava (Psidium guajava L.). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2019;89(3):415-419.
19. 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(2):110-113.
20. Kumar S, Chittiraichelvan R, Karunakaran G. Performance of aonla cultivars for yield and physico chemical properties under Coorg conditions. Indian Journal of Horticulture. 2011;68:268-69.
21. Kumar D, Pandey V, Anjaneyulu K, Vishal N. Optimization of major nutrients for guava yield and quality under east coastal conditions. Indian Journal of Horticulture. 2009;66(1):18-21.
22. Kotur SC, Ramkumar, Singh PH. Influence of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium on composition of leaf and its relationship with fruit yield in Allahabad Safeda guava (Psidium guajava) on an Alfisol. The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 1997;67(12):568-570.
23. Mitra SK, Bose TK. The Fruits of India-Tropical and Sub-tropical, TK Bose and SK Mitra. Naya Prakash, Calcutta. 1990:286301.
24. Choudhary U, Patel RK, Singh H, Tiwari JN, Kumar P, Sahil A. Studies on growth and yield of shoot pruning in guava (Psidium guajava L.) cv. Lalit and Shweta. International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research. 2026;10(3):172-176.
25. Kumar M, Sharma TR, Sharma R, Bisen BP, Kuldeep DK, Bhooriy MS. Impact of varying nutrient levels and bio-inoculants on the growth and physiological responses of Acid Lime (Citrus aurantifolia). International Journal of Research in Agronomy. 2026;9(3):18-21.
26. Kamatyanatti M, Nagre PK, Ramteke V, Baghel MM. Evaluation of acid lime (Citrus aurantifolia Swingle) genotypes during Hasth Bahar for growth, yield and quality attributes. The Ecoscan. 2016;9:277-283.
27. Nagarjuna D, Srinivasa Reddy M, Devi Priya A, Naveen S. Evaluation of Acid Lime (Citrus aurantifolia) Varieties in Lateritic Soil Conditions of Andhra Pradesh. The Journal of Research ANGRAU. 2025;53(5):01-04.
28. Bharty S, Dwivedi DH, Ram RB, Lata R. Effect of different dates of planting and genotypes on vegetative growth and yield characters of Cape gooseberry (Physalis peruviana L.) under Lucknow conditions. The Pharma Innovation Journal. 2022;11(12):912915.
29. Priyanka, Singh D, Wesley CJ. Influence of planting dates on survival and growth parameters of two jamun cultivars. Journal of Advances in Biology and Biotechnology. 2024;27(6):831-837.
30. Jayaram H, Singh P, Verma D. Effects of different planting time on survival and growth parameters of different jackfruit varieties at Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh. International Journal of Biochemistry Research and Review. 2024;8(Sp):85-92.