Final SPH -JHS Coverpage 16-2 Jan 2021 single C O N T E N T S JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURAL SCIENCES Volume 16 Issue 2 June 2021 In this Issue i-ii Review Phytoremediation of indoor air pollutants: Harnessing the potential of 131-143 plants beyond aesthetics Shalini Jhanji and U.K.Dhatt Research Articles Response of fruit yield and quality to foliar application of micro-nutrients in 144-151 lemon [Citrus limon (L.) Burm.] cv. Assam lemon Sheikh K.H.A., Singh B., Haokip S.W., Shankar K., Debbarma R. Studies on high density planting and nutrient requirement of banana in 152-163 different states of India Debnath Sanjit Bauri F.K., Swain S., Patel A.N., Patel A.R., Shaikh N.B., Bhalerao V.P., Baruah K., Manju P.R., Suma A., Menon R., Gutam S. and P. Patil Mineral nutrient composition in leaf and root tissues of fifteen polyembryonic 164-176 mango genotypes grown under varying levels of salinity Nimbolkar P.K., Kurian R.M., Varalakshmi L.R., Upreti K.K., Laxman R.H. and D. Kalaivanan Optimization of GA3 concentration for improved bunch and berry quality in 177-184 grape cv. Crimson Seedless (Vitis vinifera L) Satisha J., Kumar Sampath P. and Upreti K.K. RGAP molecular marker for resistance against yellow mosaic disease in 185-192 ridge gourd [Luffa acutangula (L.) Roxb.] Kaur M., Varalakshmi B., Kumar M., Lakshmana Reddy D.C., Mahesha B. and Pitchaimuthu M. Genetic divergence study in bitter gourd (Momordica charantia L.) 193-198 Nithinkumar K.R., Kumar J.S.A., Varalakshmi B, Mushrif S.K., Ramachandra R.K. , Prashanth S.J. Combining ability studies to develop superior hybrids in bell pepper 199-205 (Capsicum annuum var. grossum L.) Varsha V., Smaranika Mishra, Lingaiah H.B., Venugopalan R., Rao K.V. Kattegoudar J. and Madhavi Reddy K. SSR marker development in Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench 206-214 using transcriptome sequencing and genetic diversity studies Gayathri M., Pitchaimuthu M. and K.V. Ravishankar Generation mean analysis of important yield traits in Bitter gourd 215-221 (Momordica charantia) Swamini Bhoi, Varalakshmi B., Rao E.S., Pitchaimuthu M. and Hima Bindu K. Influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation schedule on vegetative 222-233 performance of chrysanthemum (Dendranthema grandiflora Tzelev.) var. Marigold Vijayakumar S., Sujatha A. Nair, Nair A.K., Laxman R.H. and Kalaivanan D. Performance evaluation of double type tuberose IIHR-4 (IC-0633777) for 234-240 flower yield, quality and biotic stress response Bharathi T.U., Meenakshi Srinivas, Umamaheswari R. and Sonavane, P. Anti-fungal activity of Trichoderma atroviride against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. 241-250 Lycopersici causing wilt disease of tomato Yogalakshmi S., Thiruvudainambi S., Kalpana K., Thamizh Vendan R. and Oviya R. Seed transmission of bean common mosaic virus-blackeye cowpea mosaic strain 251-260 (BCMV-BlCM) threaten cowpea seed health in the Ashanti and Brong-Ahafo regions of Ghana Adams F.K., Kumar P.L., Kwoseh C., Ogunsanya P., Akromah R. and Tetteh R. Effect of container size and types on the root phenotypic characters of Capsicum 261-270 Raviteja M.S.V., Laxman R.H., Rashmi K., Kannan S., Namratha M.R. and Madhavi Reddy K. Physio-morphological and mechanical properties of chillies for 271-279 mechanical harvesting Yella Swami C., Senthil Kumaran G., Naik R.K., Reddy B.S. and Rathina Kumari A.C. Assessment of soil and water quality status of rose growing areas of 280-286 Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh in India Varalakshmi LR., Tejaswini P., Rajendiran S. and K.K. Upreti Qualitative and organoleptic evaluation of immature cashew kernels under storage 287-291 Sharon Jacob and Sobhana A. Physical quality of coffee bean (Coffea arabica L.) as affected by harvesting and 292-300 drying methods Chala T., Lamessa K. and Jalata Z Vegetative vigour, yield and field tolerance to leaf rust in four F1 hybrids of 301-308 coffee (Coffea arabica L.) in India Divya K. Das, Shivanna M.B. and Prakash N.S. Limonene extraction from the zest of Citrus sinensis, Citrus limon, Vitis vinifera 309-314 and evaluation of its antimicrobial activity Wani A.K., Singh R., Mir T.G. and Akhtar N. Event Report 315-318 National Horticultural Fair 2021 - A Success Story Dhananjaya M.V., Upreti K.K. and Dinesh M.R. Subject index 319-321 Author index 322-323 J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 222-233, 2021 This is an open access article d istributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommer cial-ShareAl ike 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, d istribution, and reproduction in any med ium, provide d the original author and source are credited. Original Research Paper Influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation schedule on vegetative performance of chrysanthemum (Dendranthema grandiflora Tzelev.) var. Marigold Vijayakumar S.1, Sujatha Anil Nair1, Nair A.K.2, Laxman R.H.3 and Kalaivanan D.4 1Division of Flower and Medicinal Crops, 2Division of Vegetable crops, 3Division of Basic sciences and 4Division of Natural Resources, ICAR – Indian institute of Horticultural Research, Bangaluru, Karnataka *Corresponding author Email : agrivijay483@gmail.com ABSTRACT The vegetative performance of chrysanthemum var. Marigold with respect to phenophase based irrigation and fertigation schedule was evaluated. In the vegetative phase, the maximum plant height (62.44 cm), number of secondary branches per plant (42.65), number of primary branches per plant (10.85), leaf area (3793.81 cm2) was recorded in the treatment combination. Whereas, the maximum average plant spread (47.98 cm) was in I1F4, number of leaves per plant (217.76) was in I3F1. Scheduling irrigation regime I3-(0.8 ER each at vegetative, bud and flowering phases) in combination with weekly application of (F4) 75:112.5:75 kg NPK/ha in three splits 40:20:20 % NPK (vegetative phase), 30:40:40 % NPK (bud phase) 30:40:40% NPK (flowering phase) through fertigation recorded maximum loose flower yield (26.27 t/ha) and this can be correlated with increased values for most of the vegetative parameters that directly influence the yield of the crop. Hence the above was observed best treatment over other treatment combinations with respect to vegetative parameters of chrysanthemum var. Marigold. Key words: Chrysanthemum var. Marigold, fertigation, irrigation, phenophase and vegetative performance. INTRODUCTION Chr ysa nt hemu m (D en dr an th em a gr an di fl or a Tzvelev.) is one of the important commercial flower crops in India as well as in the world. It is native of the Northern hemisphere, chiefly Europe and As ia . It belongs to fa mily Aster a cea e a nd is commonly called as the “Queen of the East”. Its flowers are valued for its long keeping quality, wide array of colours and different forms, which make it s uita ble for use in flor a l bouquets, flower arrangements and decorations. Chrysanthemum is the second most important flower crop after rose in India. The area under flower crops is 339000 ha with an overall production of 19.91 lakh tonnes. T he lea ding c hr ysa nthemu m gr owing sta te is Karnataka with an area of 5453 ha and production of 59.54 thousand tonnes of loose flowers in 2017- 18 after Tamil Nadu. Water and fertilizer are the two vital inputs for crop production. Apart from the economic considerations, it is also well known that the injudicious use of water and fertilizer can have f a r r ea c hing delet er iou s imp lic a t ions on the envir onment . T her ef or e, t he need a r is es f or technological options, which will help in sustaining the pr ec ious r es ou r c es a nd ma x imiz ing cr op production without any pernicious impact on the envir onment. Optimum plant nutrition is ver y essential in plant growth and development, if it is not in sufficient amount then it reduces the vigor of the plant and affects yield of flower crops by producing small leaves, light green or off-color foliage, fewer branches and poor flowering (Melvin a nd J a mes , 2 0 0 1) . E x ces s ive a p p lic a t ion of nutrients can cause adverse effects on plant growth, inc r ea s e t he p ot ent ia l f or env ir onment a l conta mina tion thr ough lea ching a nd wa ste of resources. Method of nutrient application to plants is also a key issue to get the optimum potential of the crop. Fertigation helps in reducing the wastage of nutrients through enhanced use efficiency of fertilizer besides providing flexibility in timing of 223 Influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation schedule J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 222-233, 2021 fertilizer application in relation to crop demand b a s ed on p henologic a l s t a ges of gr owt h (Papadopoulos, 1992). It also determines quantity of nut r ients , timing of a pp lic a t ion a nd most important component of water distribution (Ahmad and Khan, 2017). The amount of nutrient and water r equirement of a pla nt var ies a ccording to its phenophase and dispensation of water and nutrients can be scheduled accordingly. T he fer tiga tion scheduling should be based on plant, soil-air, plant wa t er r ela t ions a nd gr owt h s t a g e of p la nt (Sankaranarayanan, 2007). It is essential to work out an economically feasible and technologically efficient fertigation scheduling f or op timu m u s e of wa t er a nd nu t r ient s f or enhanced wa ter productivity with r efer ence to different growth and developmental stages. Hence, it is important to evaluate under phenophase based irrigation and fertigation treatments for improving vegeta tive per formance of chrysanthemum va r. Marigold under open field condition. MATERIAL AND METHODS The present investigation conducted during two seasons i.e. 2018 & 2019, at the Division of Flowers and Medicinal Crops, ICAR-Indian Institute of Horticultural Research (ICAR-IIHR), Bengaluru. The experimental site is situated in eastern dry zone of Karnataka state at 130 7 ́north latitude, 770 29 ́ east longitudes and at an altitude of 890 meters above the mean sea level. The experiment was laid out in split plot design with fifteen treatment combinations along with three replications. The treatment consists of three main plot treatments at phenophases of vegetative phase i.e. I1 – (0.8, 1.0 and 1.2 ER at vegetative, bud and flowering phases, respectively), I2 - (0.6, 0.8 and 1.0 ER at vegetative, bud and flowering phases, respectively) and I3- (0.8 ER each at vegetative, bud and flowering phases) and five sub plot treatments (F1: 33. 3:33. 3:33. 3 % NPK (vegeta tive pha se), 33.3:33.3:33.3 % NPK (Bud phase) 33.3:33.3:33.3 % NPK (Flowering phase) @ 100:150:100 Kg NPK/ha (RDF), F2: 40:20:20 % NPK (vegetative phase), 30:40:40 % NPK (Bud phase ) 30:40:40% NPK (Flowering phase) @ 100:150:100 Kg NPK/ha (RDF), F3: 33.3:33.3:33.3 % NPK (vegetative phase), 33.3:33.3:33.3 % NPK (Bud phase ) 33.3:33.3:33.3 % NPK (Flowering phase @ 75:112.5:75 Kg NPK/ ha (75% RDF), F4: 40:20:20 % NPK (vegetative phase), 30:40:40 % NPK (Bud phase) 30:40:40% NPK (Flowering phase) @ 75:112.5:75 Kg NPK/ha (75% RDF), F5: Soil application of recommended dose of fertilizer (100:150:100 Kg NPK/ha) and F1-F4: 25% of fertilizer dose i.e. 100:150:100 and 75:112.5:75 kg NPK/ha was applied as basal dose. The previous day open pan evaporimeter observation was considered for scheduling the irrigation as per the treatment. The irrigation schedule was calculated by using following formula. The organic manure i.e. farmyard manure (20 t/ha) and basal application (Urea, DAP and MOP) was a pplied a s per the tr ea tments a s ea r lier to transplanting. Transplanting was followed with a spacing of 60 cm × 45 cm. The dose of fertilizers was applied based on treatments through fertigation in the form of water-soluble fertilizers (Urea, MAP and SOP). The fertigation was given at weekly intervals from thirty days after transplanting to 120 days. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The vegetative parameters viz., plant height (cm), number of primary and secondary branches per plant, average plant spread (cm) at flowering and leaf area (cm2) as influenced by phenophase based different irr iga tion and fertiga tion r egimes a re discussed below. T he pla nt height (cm) of chrysa nthemum wa s significa ntly influenced by differ ent levels of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation. Among interactions effects the maximum plant height (61.19 cm) was recorded in I3F4 and it was on par with I2F4 (59.19 cm) and I2F3 (59.10 cm) whereas, the minimum (41.10 cm) was recorded in the treatment combination I2F2 during the first year. The maximum plant height (65.30 cm), was recorded in I3F1 and it was on par with the treatments, I1F4 (64.50 cm), I2F4 (64.43 cm) and I3F4 (63.68 cm) whereas, the minimum (44.60 cm) was recorded in I1F2 during the second year. In pooled interaction, the maximum plant height (62.44 cm) was recorded in I3F4 and it was on par with the treatment I2F4 (61.81 cm) and the minimum (46.91 cm) was recorded in I1F2. (Table 1 & 2) (Fig.1). 224 Ta bl e 1 . In flu en ce o f ph en op ha se b as ed ir ri ga tio n an d fe rt ig at io n sc he du lin g on p la nt h ei gh t (c m ) an d nu m be r of p ri m ar y br an ch es o f ch ry sa nt he m um v ar . M ar ig ol d T re at m en ts P la nt h ei gh t (c m ) N um be r of p ri m ar y br an ch es p er p la nt I ye ar II y ea r P oo le d m ea n I ye ar II y ea r P oo le d m ea n I 1 51 .4 2 54 .4 8 52 .9 5 9. 64 9. 96 9. 80 I 2 52 .3 2 56 .3 0 54 .3 1 9. 74 9. 14 9. 44 I 3 48 .8 8 58 .9 7 53 .9 2 9. 43 9. 20 9. 32 SE . d 0. 65 0. 40 0. 38 0. 03 0. 08 0. 05 C D ( P= 0. 05 ) 1. 83 1. 11 1. 07 0. 10 0. 23 0. 14 F 1 51 .7 0 57 .5 0 54 .6 0 8. 71 9. 30 9. 00 F 2 44 .1 4 52 .4 0 48 .2 7 9. 77 9. 50 9. 63 F 3 55 .3 3 54 .7 6 55 .0 4 10 .1 3 9. 57 9. 85 F 4 58 .8 3 64 .2 0 61 .5 2 10 .6 1 10 .8 3 10 .7 2 F 5 44 .3 6 54 .0 5 49 .2 1 8. 80 7. 96 8. 38 SE . d 0. 66 0. 58 0. 40 0. 11 0. 11 0. 08 C D ( P= 0. 05 ) 1. 14 1. 20 0. 83 0. 22 0. 23 0. 17 Ta bl e 2. I nt er ac tio n ef fe ct o f ph en op ha se b as ed ir ri ga tio n an d fe rt ig at io n sc he du lin g on p la nt h ei gh t (c m ) of c hr ys an th em um v ar . M ar ig ol d T re at - I ye ar II y ea r P oo le d M ea n m en ts F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n I 1 51 .9 0 49 .2 1 56 .7 9 56 .1 0 43 .0 9 51 .4 2 53 .7 1 44 .6 0 55 .6 0 64 .5 0 54 .0 0 54 .4 8 52 .8 1 46 .9 1 56 .2 0 60 .3 0 48 .5 5 52 .9 5 I 2 55 .1 0 41 .1 0 59 .1 0 59 .1 9 47 .1 0 52 .3 2 53 .5 0 56 .7 0 51 .2 7 64 .4 3 55 .6 0 56 .3 0 54 .3 0 48 .9 0 55 .1 9 61 .8 1 51 .3 5 54 .3 1 I 3 48 .1 0 42 .1 0 50 .1 0 61 .1 9 42 .9 0 48 .8 8 65 .3 0 55 .9 0 57 .4 0 63 .6 8 52 .5 6 58 .9 7 56 .7 0 49 .0 0 53 .7 5 62 .4 4 47 .7 3 53 .9 2 M ea n 51 .7 0 44 .1 4 55 .3 3 58 .8 3 44 .3 6 57 .5 0 52 .4 0 54 .7 6 64 .2 0 54 .0 5 54 .6 0 48 .2 7 55 .0 4 61 .5 2 49 .2 1 SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) I 0. 65 1. 83 0. 40 1. 11 0. 38 1. 07 F 0. 66 1. 14 0. 58 1. 20 0. 40 0. 83 I at F 1. 22 2. 77 0. 99 2. 15 0. 73 1. 66 F at I 1. 14 2. 37 1. 01 2. 09 0. 69 1. 43 Vijayakumar et al J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 222-233, 2021 225 T re at - I ye ar II y ea r P oo le d M ea n m en ts F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n I 1 8. 79 9. 20 10 .8 0 10 .5 0 8. 90 9. 64 10 .6 0 9. 80 10 .2 0 11 .2 0 8. 00 9. 96 9. 70 9. 50 10 .5 0 10 .8 5 8. 45 9. 80 I 2 8. 93 10 .4 0 10 .0 0 10 .7 7 8. 60 9. 74 8. 10 9. 60 9. 60 10 .1 9 8. 19 9. 14 8. 52 10 .0 0 9. 80 10 .4 8 8. 40 9. 44 I 3 8. 40 9. 70 9. 60 10 .5 6 8. 89 9. 43 9. 20 9. 10 8. 90 11 .1 0 7. 70 9. 20 8. 80 9. 40 9. 25 10 .8 3 8. 30 9. 32 M ea n 8. 71 9. 77 10 .1 3 10 .6 1 8. 80 9. 30 9. 50 9. 57 10 .8 3 7. 96 9. 00 9. 63 9. 85 10 .7 2 8. 38 SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) I 0. 03 0. 10 0. 08 0. 23 0. 05 0. 14 F 0. 11 0. 22 0. 11 0. 23 0. 08 0. 17 I at F 0. 17 0. 36 0. 19 0. 42 0. 14 0. 30 F at I 0. 19 0. 39 0. 19 0. 40 0. 14 0. 30 Ta bl e 3. I nt er ac tio n ef fe ct o f ph en op ha se b as ed ir ri ga tio n an d fe rt ig at io n sc he du lin g on n um be r of p ri m ar y br an ch es p er p la nt o f ch ry sa nt he m um v ar . M ar ig ol d F ig . 1 . I nf lu en ce o f ph en op ha se b as ed i rr ig at io n an d fe rt ig at io n sc he du lin g on p la nt h ei gh t (c m ) Influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation schedule J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 222-233, 2021 226 The irrigation treatment I3- (0.8 ER each at vegetative, bud and flowering phases) in combination with F4 fertigation at 40:20:20 % NPK (vegetative phase), 30:40:40 % NPK (bud phase) 30:40:40% NPK (flower ing pha se) @ 75:112.5:75 kg NPK/ha2 recorded the maximum plant height (62.44 cm) in chrysanthemum var. Marigold. The increase in plant height with irrigation at I3 might be due to adequate moisture provided in the soil throughout the crop period. Adequate soil moisture resulted in greater development of meristematic tissues leading to higher rate of photosynthesis and assimilation in the plant system in marigold (Chawla, 2008). In the fertigation treatment F4, higher proportion of nitrogen fertilizer at vegetative phase might have increased the plant height because of the synergistic interaction of nitrogen with available endogenous auxin resulting in enhanced cell wall plasticity and increased cell elongation thus resulting in increase in the height of the plant. Further, during the bud and flowering phases, the sustained growth of the plant might have been the result of optimum application of nitrogen. The results from the present investigation could hence be attributed to the frequent and constant a pplica tion of optimum levels of fer tilizers a t appropriate intervals at crop phenophases, which increases the available nutrient status in the root rhizosphere at constant levels during all the phases thus increasing the uptake of nutrients rapidly, and further influencing the growth of the plant. Similar observations were earlier reported by Mamata et al. (2017) in marigold, Parya et al. (2017) in gerbera, Priyanka et al. (2017) in gladiolus and Satapathy et al. (2016) in ma r igold, Ja mil et al. (2016), Zawadzisnka and Janicka (2007) in amaryllis and viola respectively. The treatment I1F4 was on par with I3F4 for maximum (10.83), number of primary branches per plant (Table 1 & 3) and the maximum number of secondary branches per plant (42.65) was recorded in the treatment combination I3F4 and it was on par with I1F4 (41.44) and the minimum (17.75) was recorded in I1F5. The treatment I3F4 recorded the maximum number of seconda r y br a nches per pla nt (42. 65) in chrysanthemum var. Marigold. This increase in number branches might be mainly due to the increased irrigation scheduled favoring longer availability of soil moisture which leads to better growth and development of vegetative part of the plant. The greater availability of nutrient at optimum proportions at critical growth stages in the present fertigation treatment might have resulted in production of more number of branches per plant as observed by Siraj Ali (1998) in bird-of- paradise. Polara et al. (2015) recorded similar results in Afr ica n ma r igold. T hese findings a r e in conformation with the earlier results of Jawaharlal and Ganesh (2020) in chrysanthemum and Nagaraju et al. (2003) in rose (Table 4 & 5). The average plant spread was significantly influenced and showed linear increase with irrigation regime and with optimum dosage of water-soluble fertilizers through fertigation. Among interactions effect the maximum average plant spread (53.23 cm) was recorded in the treatment combination I1F4 followed by the treatment I1F3 (45.76 cm) and the minimum (31.60 cm) was recorded in the treatment combination of I1F5 during the first year. The maximum average plant spread (49.33 cm) was recorded in the treatment combination I3F1 followed by I2F3 (44.87 cm) and the minimum (30.80 cm) was recorded in the treatment combination I1F2 during the second year. In pooled interaction, the maximum average plant spread (47.98 cm) was recorded in the treatment combination I1F4 followed by the treatment I1F3 (43.61 cm) and the minimum (32.23 cm) was recorded in the treatment combination of I3F2 (Table 4 & 6). It was recorded that irrigation regime I1- (0.8, 1.0 and 1.2 ER at vegetative, bud and flowering phases, respectively) in combination with fertigation at 40:20:20 % NPK (vegetative phase), 30:40:40 % NPK (bud phase) 30:40:40% NPK (flowering phase) @ 75:112.5:75 kg NPK/ha registered maximum average plant spread (47.98 cm). This result clearly showed that higher amount of nitrogen supplied at vegetative phase along with higher soil moisture levels leads to increased vegetative growth of chrysanthemum var. Marigold. According to Paul et al. (1996) the plant spread could be attributed to the frequent application of fertilizers with constant supply of nutrients, at regular intervals for better growth which would have resulted in reduced nutrient losses by leaching and efficient use of nutrients through fertigation compared to soil application. This is in accordance with the findings of Deshmukh and Wavhal (1998) in china aster and Ahirwal et al. (2012) in African marigold. The ma ximum number of lea ves (235.03) was recorded in the treatment combination I1F4 and it was Vijayakumar et al J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 222-233, 2021 227 T re at m en ts N um be r of s ec on da ry b ra nc he s A ve ra ge p la nt s pr ea d N um be r of l ea ve s pe r pl an t (c m ) pe r pl an t I ye ar II y ea r P oo le d m ea n I ye ar II y ea r P oo le d m ea n I ye ar II y ea r P oo le d m ea n I 1 29 .1 8 30 .6 5 29 .9 1 42 .3 2 39 .6 7 41 .0 0 22 1. 93 13 6. 89 17 9. 40 I 2 32 .4 2 27 .2 7 29 .8 5 36 .7 1 41 .0 4 38 .8 8 22 0. 26 14 1. 43 18 0. 82 I 3 30 .9 7 29 .2 9 30 .1 3 35 .6 9 40 .4 8 37 .4 3 21 8. 84 15 6. 34 18 7. 59 SE . d 0. 78 0. 61 0. 06 0. 34 0. 13 0. 58 1. 23 1. 99 3. 20 C D ( P= 0. 05 ) 1. 41 1. 20 0. 12 0. 95 0. 26 1. 62 2. 60 4. 02 6. 98 F 1 30 .0 6 34 .0 6 32 .0 6 37 .1 3 43 .8 7 40 .5 0 22 4. 07 15 9. 64 19 1. 86 F 2 26 .3 2 23 .4 4 24 .8 8 38 .2 6 35 .2 6 36 .7 6 22 0. 74 13 6. 21 17 8. 47 F 3 31 .5 0 27 .3 0 29 .4 0 40 .5 4 40 .9 2 40 .7 3 21 4. 97 14 3. 18 17 8. 57 F 4 42 .1 2 39 .8 6 40 .9 9 42 .9 8 41 .8 1 42 .3 9 22 5. 88 15 4. 83 19 0. 36 F 5 24 .3 0 20 .6 8 22 .4 9 34 .3 0 38 .4 5 36 .3 7 21 7. 97 13 0. 57 17 3. 77 SE . d 0. 89 0. 60 0. 55 0. 53 0. 96 0. 79 0. 26 0. 27 0. 05 C D ( P= 0. 05 ) 1. 54 1. 19 1. 02 1. 10 2. 03 1. 64 0. 45 0. 55 0. 10 Ta bl e 4. I nf lu en ce o f ph en op ha se b as ed ir ri ga tio n an d fe rt ig at io n sc he du lin g on v eg et at iv e pa ra m et er s of c hr ys an th em um v ar . M ar ig ol d Influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation schedule J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 222-233, 2021 228 T re at - I ye ar II y ea r P oo le d M ea n m en ts F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n I 1 26 .8 2 26 .5 9 31 .7 8 42 .0 4 18 .6 9 29 .1 8 37 .2 4 28 .4 2 29 .9 3 40 .8 4 16 .8 1 30 .6 5 32 .0 3 27 .5 0 30 .8 5 41 .4 4 17 .7 5 29 .9 1 I 2 36 .4 8 27 .0 5 31 .9 9 39 .9 1 26 .6 7 32 .4 2 29 .1 5 29 .1 7 17 .2 8 37 .8 4 22 .9 1 27 .2 7 32 .8 2 28 .1 1 24 .6 4 38 .8 8 24 .7 9 29 .8 5 I 3 26 .8 8 25 .3 1 30 .7 2 44 .4 0 27 .5 5 30 .9 7 35 .7 8 12 .7 4 34 .7 0 40 .8 9 22 .3 3 29 .2 9 31 .3 3 19 .0 2 32 .7 1 42 .6 5 24 .9 4 30 .1 3 M ea n 30 .0 6 26 .3 2 31 .5 0 42 .1 2 24 .3 0 34 .0 6 23 .4 4 27 .3 0 39 .8 6 20 .6 8 32 .0 6 24 .8 8 29 .4 0 40 .9 9 22 .4 9 SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) I 0. 78 1. 41 0. 61 1. 20 0. 06 0. 17 F 0. 89 1. 54 0. 60 1. 19 0. 55 1. 02 I at F 1. 34 2. 68 1. 01 2. 07 0. 89 1. 76 F at I 1. 33 2. 66 1. 00 2. 06 0. 90 1. 75 Ta bl e 5. I nt er ac tio n ef fe ct o f ph en op ha se b as ed ir ri ga tio n an d fe rt ig at io n sc he du lin g on n um be r of s ec on da ry b ra nc he s pe r pl an t of c hr ys an th em um v ar . M ar ig ol d T re at - I ye ar II y ea r P oo le d M ea n m en ts F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n I 1 38 .4 0 42 .6 3 45 .7 6 53 .2 3 31 .6 0 42 .3 2 40 .4 6 30 .8 0 41 .4 6 42 .7 3 42 .9 0 39 .6 7 39 .4 3 36 .7 1 43 .6 1 47 .9 8 37 .2 5 41 .0 0 I 2 37 .5 0 35 .2 3 38 .7 3 37 .2 0 34 .9 0 36 .7 1 41 .8 2 41 .4 7 44 .8 7 39 .2 3 37 .8 3 41 .0 4 39 .6 6 38 .3 5 41 .8 0 38 .2 1 36 .3 6 38 .8 8 I 3 35 .5 0 30 .9 3 37 .1 3 38 .5 0 36 .4 0 35 .6 9 49 .3 3 33 .5 3 36 .4 3 43 .4 7 33 .1 0 40 .4 8 42 .4 2 32 .2 3 36 .7 8 40 .9 9 34 .7 5 37 .4 3 M ea n 37 .1 3 38 .2 6 40 .5 4 42 .9 8 34 .3 0 43 .8 7 35 .2 7 40 .9 2 41 .8 1 38 .4 5 40 .5 0 36 .7 6 40 .7 3 42 .3 9 36 .3 8 SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) I 0. 34 0. 95 0. 13 0. 26 0. 58 1. 62 F 0. 53 1. 10 0. 96 2. 03 0. 79 1. 64 I at F 0. 89 1. 93 2. 53 5. 59 1. 36 2. 99 F at I 0. 92 1. 90 2. 54 5. 24 1. 37 2. 84 Ta bl e 6. I nt er ac tio n ef fe ct o f ph en op ha se b as ed ir ri ga tio n an d fe rt ig at io n sc he du lin g on a ve ra ge p la nt s pr ea d (c m ) of c hr ys an th em um v ar . M ar ig ol d Vijayakumar et al J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 222-233, 2021 229 on par with I1F1 (229.61) and the minimum number of leaves per plant (205.01) were recorded in I1F5 during the first year. The maximum number of leaves per plant (215.50) was recorded in the treatment combination I3F1 and it was on par with I2F2 (192.21), I1F3 (171.61) and I3F4 (175.90) whereas, the minimum (89.61) was recorded in I1F2 during the second year. In pooled interaction the maximum number of leaves per plant (217.76) were recorded in the treatment combination I3F1 and it was on par with I2F2 (208.41), I1F3 (195.96), I1F4 (197.22) and I3F4 (198.75) whereas, the minimum (154. 61) wa s r ecor ded in I 1F 2 (Table 4 & 7). The treatment I3F4 registered maximum number of leaves per plant and maximum leaf area (2404.74 cm2) was recorded in I1F4 and it was on par with I3F4 (2352.18 cm2) and the lowest (1308.31 cm2) was recorded in I3F1 during the vegetative phase (Tables 8 & 9) (Fig. 2a, 2b & 2c). In the present study, the increase in number of leaves and leaf area could be Fig. 2. Influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation scheduling on leaf area (cm2) at vegetative phase Fig. 2.a. Influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation scheduling on leaf area (cm2) at vegetative phase during first year Fig. 2.b. Influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation scheduling on leaf area (cm2) at vegetative phase during second year Fig. 2.c. Pooled influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation scheduling on leaf area (cm2) at vegetative phase Influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation schedule J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 222-233, 2021 230 L ea f ar ea ( cm 2 ) a t ve ge ta ti ve p ha se T re at - I ye ar II y ea r P oo le d M ea n m en ts F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n I 1 22 9. 61 21 9. 60 22 0. 31 23 5. 03 20 5. 01 22 1. 93 12 4. 21 89 .6 1 17 1. 61 15 9. 40 13 9. 60 13 6. 89 17 6. 91 15 4. 61 19 5. 96 19 7. 22 17 2. 31 17 9. 40 I 2 22 2. 60 22 4. 61 20 8. 60 22 1. 00 22 4. 30 22 0. 26 13 9. 21 19 2. 21 10 4. 21 12 9. 20 14 2. 30 14 1. 43 18 0. 91 20 8. 41 15 6. 41 17 5. 10 18 3. 30 18 0. 82 I 3 22 0. 01 21 8. 00 21 3. 00 22 1. 60 22 1. 60 21 8. 84 21 5. 50 12 6. 80 15 3. 71 17 5. 90 10 9. 80 15 6. 34 21 7. 76 17 2. 40 18 3. 36 19 8. 75 16 5. 70 18 7. 59 M ea n 22 4. 07 22 0. 74 21 4. 97 22 5. 88 21 7. 97 15 9. 64 13 6. 21 14 3. 18 15 4. 83 13 0. 57 19 1. 86 17 8. 47 17 8. 57 19 0. 36 17 3. 77 SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) SE . d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) I 1. 23 2. 60 1. 99 4. 02 3. 20 6. 98 F 0. 26 0. 45 0. 27 0. 55 0. 05 0. 10 I at F 4. 27 9. 08 23 .2 6 52 .4 1 12 .3 9 27 .7 9 F at I 4. 58 9. 45 22 .2 8 45 .9 8 11 .9 9 24 .7 6 Ta bl e 7. I nt er ac tio n ef fe ct o f ph en op ha se b as ed ir ri ga tio n an d fe rt ig at io n sc he du lin g on n um be r of l ea ve s pe r pl an t of c hr ys an th em um v ar . M ar ig ol d Ta bl e 8. I nf lu en ce o f ph en op ha se b as ed i rr ig at io n an d fe rt ig at io n sc he du lin g on l ea f ar ea ( cm 2 ) a t ve ge ta ti ve p ha se o f ch ry sa nt he m um v ar . M ar ig ol d T re at m en ts I ye ar II y ea r P oo le d m ea n I 1 16 40 .8 0 23 73 .7 4 20 07 .2 7 I 2 12 86 .4 2 23 62 .9 7 18 24 .6 8 I 3 13 45 .8 8 25 75 .2 8 19 60 .5 8 SE . d 8. 89 45 .5 2 5. 30 C D ( P= 0. 05 ) 24 .6 8 10 1. 36 10 .5 0 F 1 11 02 .6 7 23 19 .6 8 17 11 .1 8 F 2 13 34 .6 5 24 08 .4 3 18 71 .5 4 F 3 15 69 .7 3 23 88 .7 5 19 79 .2 4 F 4 17 78 .7 9 28 51 .5 1 23 15 .1 5 F 5 13 36 .0 0 22 18 .2 7 17 77 .1 4 SE . d 20 .8 1 26 .4 4 13 5. 35 C D ( P= 0. 05 ) 42 .9 6 59 .0 2 27 9. 33 Vijayakumar et al J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 222-233, 2021 231 Ta bl e 9. I nt er ac tio n ef fe ct o f ph en op ha se b as ed ir ri ga tio n an d fe rt ig at io n sc he du lin g on le af a re a (c m 2 ) a t ve ge ta tiv e ph as e of c hr ys an th em um v ar . M ar ig ol d T re at - I ye ar II y ea r P oo le d M ea n m en ts F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4 F 5 M ea n I 1 14 30 .3 4 16 98 .0 0 17 94 .1 9 18 96 .3 4 13 85 .1 5 16 40 .8 0 27 92 .2 7 21 98 .0 3 18 57 .8 0 29 13 .1 3 21 07 .4 7 23 73 .7 4 21 11 .3 1 19 48 .0 2 18 26 .0 0 24 04 .7 4 17 46 .3 1 20 07 .2 7 I 2 89 7. 36 11 54 .9 0 11 45 .8 0 19 86 .5 0 12 47 .5 4 12 86 .4 2 25 30 .4 7 21 18 .1 0 27 94 .0 3 23 90 .5 7 19 81 .6 7 23 62 .9 7 17 13 .9 2 16 36 .5 0 19 69 .9 2 21 88 .5 4 16 14 .6 1 18 24 .6 8 I 3 98 0. 32 11 51 .0 4 17 69 .2 0 14 53 .5 3 13 75 .3 1 13 45 .8 8 16 36 .3 0 29 09 .1 7 25 14 .4 3 32 50 .8 3 25 65 .7 0 25 75 .2 8 13 08 .3 1 20 30 .1 1 21 41 .8 2 23 52 .1 8 19 70 .5 1 19 60 .5 8 M ea n 11 02 .6 7 13 34 .6 5 15 69 .7 3 17 78 .7 9 13 36 .0 0 23 19 .6 8 24 08 .4 3 23 88 .7 5 28 51 .5 1 22 18 .2 7 17 11 .1 8 18 71 .5 4 19 79 .2 4 23 15 .1 5 17 77 .1 4 SE .d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) SE .d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) SE .d C D ( P= 0. 05 ) I 8. 89 24 .6 8 45 .5 2 10 1. 36 5. 30 10 .5 0 F 20 .8 1 42 .9 6 26 .4 4 59 .0 2 13 5. 35 27 9. 33 I at F 33 .4 5 70 .7 2 37 .8 6 65 .4 1 23 .4 9 50 .0 1 F at I 36 .0 5 74 .4 1 35 .7 8 71 .3 6 23 .5 1 57 .8 9 Influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation schedule J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 222-233, 2021 232 Ahirwar, M.K., Ahirwar, K. and Megha, Sukla. 2012. Effect of pla nt densities, nitr ogen a nd phosphorus levels on growth, yield and quality of African marigold. Annals of Plant and Soil Research, 14(2):153- 155. Ahmad, A., and Khan, S. 2017. Water and energy sca r city for a gr icultur e: Is ir r iga tion modernization the answer. Irrigation and Drainage, 66: 34-44. Chawla, S.L. 2008. Effect of irrigation regimes and mulching on vegetative growth, quality and yield of flowers of African marigold. Thesis, Doctor of Philosophy in Hor ticultur e, Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and Technology, Udaipur. Deshmukh, A.S., Shinde, P.P. and Jadhav, S.B. 1996. Fertigation under drip irrigation for sugarcane. In: All India Seminar on Modern Irrigation Techniques, Proceedings (June). pp. 217-219. Deshmukh, R. and Wahal, N. 1998. Effect of iron on growth and flowering of aster. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural University, 23(2): 99-101. Hatwar, G.P. Gondane, S. V. Urkude, S.M. and Gahukar, O.V. 2003. Effect of micronutrients on growth and yield of chilli. Soil and Crops, 13:123-1254. Ja leel, C. A. , P. Ma niva nna n, B. Sa nka r, A. Kishorekumar, R. Gopi, R. Somasundaram and REFERENCES R. Panneerselvam. 2007. Induction of drought str ess toler a nce by ketocona zole in Catharanthus roseus is mediated by enhanced antioxidant potentials and secondary metabolite accumulation. Colloids Surf. B: Biointerfaces, 60: 201-206 Jamil, M. K. J., Ahman, M. M. I. R., & Ossain, M. M. O. H. 2016. Response of N, P and K On The Growth and Flowering of Hippeastrum (Hippeastrum hybridum Hort.). Journal of Agriculture, 41(1), 91–101. Jawaharlal, M and Ganesh, S. 2020. Studies on the effect of fer tiga tion in gr eenhouse chrysanthemum. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, Sp.9(2): 254-259. Karam, F., Lahoud, R., Masaad, R., Kabalan, R., Breidi, J., Chalita, C., Rouphael, Y. 2007. Evapotranspiration, seed yield and water use efficiency of drip irrigated sunflower under full and deficit irrigation conditions. Agricultural Water Management 90(3), 213– 223. Kaushik, H., Singh, J.P., Mohan, B., Rajbeer and Nathiram. 2013. Effect of inorganic fertilize (nitrogen) and bio-fertilizer (Azospirillum) on growth and flowering in African marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) cv. Pusa Narangi Ga inda . International Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 9(1):189-192. Khan, M.M., Sujatha, K., Krishna, R., Manohar, M., Kariyanna, A. A., Farooqui and Shivshankar. attributed to Application of higher proportion of nitrogen fertilizer and optimum irrigation regimes at vegetative phase might have increased the number of leaves and leaf area. It may be due to the fact that the vegeta tive gr owth increa sed with nitr ogen application and hence nitrogen is an essential part of nucleic acid, which plays a vital role in promoting vegetative growth. The present results were also in line with the reports of Maharnor et al. (2011) and Polara et al. (2014) in African marigold, Karam et al. (2007) in sunflower and Jaleel et al. (2009) in Catharanthus. Rawat and Mathpal (1984), Paul et al. (1996) and Khan et al. (1996) in various crops. CONCLUSION In the vegetative phase of chrysanthemum var. Marigold, the irrigation treatment I3-(0.8 ER each at vegetative, bud and flowering phases) in combination with fertigation treatment F4 at 40:20:20 % NPK (vegetative phase), 30:40:40 % NPK (bud phase) 30:40:40% NPK (flowering phase) @ 75:112.5:75 kg NPK/ha was found adequate to cater the demand of water as well as nutrient requirement for vegetative phase of chrysanthemum var. Marigold. This can be correlated with the maximum loose flower yield (26.27 t/ha) registered by the same treatment. Further better plant growth as recorded during the investigation is indicative of better uptake of nutrients which in turn are involved in basic reaction of photosynthesis and in synthesis of metabolites required for plant growth with above irrigation and fertigation schedule. Hence it is concluded that the above treatment combination I3F4 wa s registe red as the be st tre atment to imp rov e the vegetative growth of chrysanthemum var. Marigold. Vijayakumar et al J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 222-233, 2021 233 1996. Fertigation studies in Horticultural crops In: Proc. All India Seminar on MIT, Bangalore, Ed Khan, M. M., pp. 178-186. Maharnor, S.I., Chopde, N., Thakre, S. and Raut, P.D. 2011. Effect of nitrogen and pinching on growth and yield of African marigold. Asian Journal of Horticulture, 6(1): 43-45. Ma mta Kuma wa t, S. K. , Kha ndelwa l, M. R. , Choudhary, P.K., Kumawat, G. Sharma and Paru Panwar. 2017. Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth, flowering and yield of Afr ica n ma r igold (Tagetes erecta L. ). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 6(8): 60-65. Marchner, H. 1983. Introduction to the mineral nutrition of plants. Handbook Plant Physiology, 154: 31 - 38. Marschner, H. and Cakmak, I. 1986. Mechanism of phosphorus-induced zinc deficiency in cotton. II. Evidence for impaired shoot control of phosphorus uptake and translocation under zinc deficiency. Physiologia Plantarum, 68: 491-496. Melvin, R.K. James, J.K. 2001. Fertilizing shade and ornamental trees, MSU Extension Forestry Bulletin, Bozeman. Nagaraju, C.G., Reddy, T.V. and Madaiah, D. 2003. Effect of plant density, irrigation and oil cakes on growth, production and quality of field gr own rose cultivar Landor a. Journal of Ornamental Horticulture, 6(3): 172-179. Pafli, G. 1965. Relations between abundant N supply and amino acid concentration on leaves of rice plants. Plant and Soil, 23: 275- 284. Papadopoulos, I. 1992. Phosphorus fertigation of trickle-irrigated potato. Fertilizer Research, 31: 9-13. Parya, C. 2017. Effect of integrated plant nutrient system for gerbera flower production under protected cultivation. Journal of Applied Horticulture, 19(2), 139-142. Paul, J., Joseph, J. and Kabeer, A. 1996. Fertilizer irrigation - an overview. In proceedings of All India Seminar on MIT, Bangalore, 196-204. Paul, J., Joseph, J. and Kabeer, A. 1996. Fertilizer irrigation - an overview. In proceedings of All India Seminar on MIT, Bangalore, 196-204. Polara, N.D., Gajipara, N.N. and Barad, A.V. 2014. Effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on nutrient content and uptake in different varieties of Afr ica n ma r igold (Tagetes erecta L. ). International Quarterly Journal of Life Sciences, 9(1):115-119. Priyanka Tirkey, Lagamanna R Kullur and VM Prasad. 2017. Effect of organic and Inorganic source of N.P.K on growth and yield parameters of gladiolus (Gladiolus grandiflorus) cv. Jester. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 6(5): 1004-1006. Rawat, P.S. and Mathpal, K.N. 1984. Effect of micronutrients on yield and sugar metabolism of some of the vegetables under Kumaon hill conditions. Scientific Culture, 50: 243-244. Sa nka r a na r a ya na n. 2007. Integr a ted wa ter management system for better fibre quality and high production. TMC Annual Report, 2006- 2007. Satapathy, S.P., Toppo, R., Dishri, M., and Mohanty, C. R. 2016. Impact of integrated nutrient management (INM) on flowering and corm pr oduction in gla diolus. Biometrics & Biostatistics International Journal, 4(7): 296 298. Singatkar, S.S., Swant, R.B., Ranpise, S.A. and Wavhal, K.N. 1995. Effects of different levels of N, P and K on growth and flower production of ga illa r dia . Jour na l of Ma ha r a shtr a Agriculture University, 20(3): 392-394. Siraj Ali, M.S. 1998. Effect of singral and nitrophoska fertilizers on growth, flowering and mineral composition of bird-of-paradise (Strelitzia reginae Ait. ) pla nts. Indian Journal of Horticulture, 55(3): 257-262. Terangpi, H. and Paswan, L. 2003. Effect of NPK on growth and flowering of Gerbera. Journal of Ornamental Horticulture. 6(1): 71-72. Zawadzisnka, A., & Janicka, D. 2007. Effects Of Compost Media On Growth and Flowering Of Parviflorous Garden Pansy (Viola Wittrockiana Gams. Acta Agrobotanica, 60(2): 161–166. (Received on 05.09.2021, Revised on 23.09.2021 and Accepted on 15.01.2022) Influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation schedule J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 222-233, 2021 00 Contents.pdf 11 Vijaykumar.pdf 19 Lamesssa.pdf 20 Divya.pdf 21 Wani.pdf 23 Index and Last Pages.pdf