Evaluation of Different Varieties of Garden Pea for …...Evaluation of Different Varieties of Garden Pea for Growth and Yield Attributes for Green Pod Production THESIS Submitted

Evaluation of Different Varieties of Garden Pea for

Growth and Yield Attributes for Green Pod Production

THESIS

Submitted to the

Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya,

Gwalior (M.P.)

In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

In

HORTICULTURE

VEGETABLE SCIENCE

by

KAMLESH PATIDAR

Department of Horticulture

Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Gwalior

R.A.K. College of Agriculture, Sehore (M.P.) 466001

2016

CERTIFICATE- I

This is to certify that the thesis entitled „„Evaluation of different

varieties of garden pea for growth and yield attributes for green pod

production‟‟ submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree

of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Horticulture (Vegetable Science) of Rajmata

Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Gwalior (M.P) is a record of the

bonafide research work carried out by Mr. KAMLESH PATIDAR under my

guidance and supervision. The subject of the thesis has been approved by the

Student‟s Advisory Committee and the Director of Instruction.

No part of the thesis has been submitted for any other degree or

diploma or has been published. All the assistance and help received during

the course of this investigation has been acknowledged by the scholar.

Signature

(Dr. K.N. Tambi)

Chairman of the Advisory Committee

MEMBERS OF STUDENT‟S ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Chairman (Dr. K.N. Tambi): ……………..…………………………………

Member (Dr. S.A. Ali): ………………….…………………………………

Member (Dr. A.N. Tikle): ………………….………………………………

CERTIFICATE- II

This is to certify that the thesis entitled „„Evaluation of different


production‟‟ submitted by Mr. KAMLESH PATIDAR, ID. no. 143m01 to the

Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Gwalior in partial

fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in

HORTICULTURE in the Department of VEGETABLE SCIENCE has been

accepted after evaluation by the External Examiner and approved by the

Student‟s Advisory Committee after an oral examination on the same.

Signature

(Dr. K.N. Tambi)

Chairman of the Advisory Committee

MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Chairman (Dr. K.N. Tambi) : ………………………………………………….....

Member (Dr. S.A. Ali): .……………………………...........................................

Member (Dr. A.N. Tikle): ….............................................................................

Head of the Department: …………………………………..……………………….

Dean of the College: ………………………………………………………………...

Director Instruction: ………………………………………………………………….

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I take it to be my proud privilege to avail this opportunity to express my

sincere and deep sense of gratitude to my learned advisor Dr. K.N. Tambi, Asst.

prof. Selection grade of the Department of Horticulture, for his stimulating

guidance, constructive suggestions, keen and sustained interest and incessant

encouragement bestowed during the entire period of investigation, as well as

critically going through the manuscript.

I am gratified to record sincere thanks to the members of the advisory

committee; Dr. S.A. Ali, Principle Scientist and head of Department of horticulture

(vegetable Science) and Dr. A.N. Tikle, Senior Scientist and Pigonepea breeder,

Department of Plant breeding. All the Scientist generous gestures and valuable

suggestions in planning and execution of this study.

I also feel great pleasure to express my heartfelt thanks to the Prof.

A.K. Singh, Hon‟ble Vice Chancellor of Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi

Vishwa Vidyalaya, Dr. S.S. Tomar. Dean faculty of Agriculture, Dr. H.S.

Yadav, Director of Research Services, and Dr. B.S. Baghel, Director

Instruction, Dr. (Smt.) S.B. Tambi, Dean, R.A.K. College of Agriculture, for

providing necessary facilities in carrying out this piece of research work.

Words can hardly register the sincere and heartfelt feeling, which I have

for Dr. S.R. Ramgiri, Dr. R. Khandwe , Dr. S.R.J. Singh, Smt. Versha Uieky , Sh.

C.S. Malviya, Sh. Jagdish Parmar, other staff members and Er. Rajesh Gupta Sir

(K.V.K. Mandsaur) for their kind co-operation and help as and when needed.

I feel delighted to acknowledge my friend and fellow Payal Patidar, Rohit

Chouhan, O.P. Malviya sir, Prinka mam, Sneha Solanki, Minakshi Girwal, R.C.

Patel, M.L. Siroliya sir, Sunder Borkar, Venki Jallaraph, Vicky Jangda sir, Rajesh,

Revindra, Sunil and Viya for their everlasting help and encouragement during the

course of investigation.

I feel short of words to express my gratitude to my parents Sh. Chenram

Patidar and Smt. Ramkunver Patidar, elder brother Sh. Vinod Patidar for their

utmost co-operation, sacrifice and encouragement during the course of this work.

Place – Sehore

Date - (Kamlesh Patidar)

Contents

S. No. Title Page range

1. Introduction 1-3

2. Review of Literature 4-15

3. Material and Methods 16-25

4. Results 26-37

5. Discussion 38-43

6. Summary, Conclusions and Suggestions for

Further Studies 44-46

Bibliography 47-52

Appendices i-ii

Vita

List of Tables

Table

Number Title

Page

number

3.1 Meteorological data noted during the crop season (Oct,

2015 to March, 2016) 17

3.2 Mechanical and chemical composition of experimental

field: 18

3.3 Previous crop history of the experimental field. 18

3.4 Skeleton of analysis of variance 25

4.1 Analysis of variance of plant height at different

successive stages of growth. 27

4.2 Plant height (cm) as influenced by different varieties of

pea at 30, 45, 60, 75 DAS and at maturity. 27

4.3 Mean sum of square of no. of branches per plant at

different successive stages of growth 28

4.4 Number of branches per plant as influenced by different

varieties of pea at 30, 45, 60, 75 DAS and at maturity. 28

4.5 Mean sum of square of Days to first flowering and Day‟s

first pod picking at different successive stages of growth. 29

4.6 Days to 1st flowering initiation and days pod picking as

influenced by different varieties of pea 29

4.7

Mean sum of square of Number of green pods per plant,

Green pod length (cm) and Number of green seed per

pod at different successive stages of growth.

31

4.8 Number of pod per plant, number of green seed per pod

and pod length (cm) of different varieties of pea 31

4.9 Mean sum of square of Green pod yield per plant (g),

Green seed yield per plant (g) and shelling% 32

4.10 Green pod yield per plant (g), Green seed yield per plant

(g) and shelling % of different varieties of pea 33

4.11

Mean sum of square of 10 green pod weight (g), green

pod yield per plot (kg) and Green pod yield per hectare

(q).

34

4.12

10 green pod weights (g), green pod yield per plot (kg)

and green pod yield per hectare (q) of different varieties

of pea.

34

4.13 Mean sum of square of Weight of 100 seed (g) and TSS

(°Brix) 35

4.14 100 green seed weight and TSS° Brix of different

varieties of pea 36

4.15 Economics of different varieties of garden pea 36

List of Figures

Figure

Number

Title

Page

Number

1 Meteorological data noted during the crop season

(Oct, 2015 to March, 2016) 17

2 Layout of the experimental field 19

3 Plant height (cm) as influenced by different

varieties of pea 27

4 Number of branches per plant as influenced by

different varieties of pea 28

5 Days to 1st flowering and days first pod picking

influenced by different varieties of pea 29

6

Number of pods per plant, pod length (cm) and

number of green seed per pod as influenced by

different varieties of pea

31

7

Green pod yield per plant (g), Green seed yield

per plant (g) and shelling % as influenced by

different varieties of pea

33

8 10 green pod weights (g) of different varieties of

pea

34

9 Green pod yield per plot (kg) as influenced by

different varieties of pea 34

10 Green pod yield quintal per hectare as influenced

by different varieties of pea 34

11 100 green seed weight (g) of different varieties of

pea 36

12 TSS (°Brix) of different varieties of pea 36

List of Symbols/Abbreviations

Symbol

Abbreviation

Stands for

/ - Per

@ - At the rate of

% - Per cent 0C - Degree Celsius

& - And

- ANOVA Analysis of variance

- CD Critical difference

- cm Centimeter

- CV Coefficient of variance

- cv. Cultivar

- DAP Di Ammonium Phosphate

- DAS Days After Sowing

- Df Degree of freedom

- et al. and other

- Fig. Figure

- g Gram

- ha Hectare

- i.e. That is

- Kg Kilogram

- m Meter

- m2 Meter square

- mg Milli Gram

- Min. Minimum

- ml Millilitre

- mm Milli Meter

- MT Million Tonne

- NS Non significant

- q Quintal

- RVSKVV Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya

- SEm Standard Error of Mean

- spp. Species

- Viz. Videlicet (Namely)

- N Nitrogen

- K Potassium

- q/ha quintal per hectare

- P Phosphorus

- R.H. Relative humidity

- Sig. Significant

- Max. Maximum

- M.S.S. Mean sum of square

- No. Number

CHEPTER-I

INTRODUCTION

Pea (Pisum sativum L.) belonging to the family Fabaceae

(Leguminosae). Pea is an important vegetable crop and has acquired a place

of prominence in diet of all sections of the society. Green pea consume as a

raw or cooking vegetable separate or mix with potato, cheese, cauliflower

and many other vegetables or as a conserved, frozen product; dry seed as

food; hay feed for animals and green fertilizer (Bozoglu et al., 2007).

Pea is grown mainly as a winter vegetable in the plains of north India

and as summer vegetable in the hills. In India area of pea is 433.6 thousand

ha and 3868.6 million tones production with productivity 8.9 tones/hectare. In

Madhya Pradesh, pea is covering an area of 56.1thousand ha and 474.2

thousand million tones production with 8.4 tones/hectare productivity (NHB,

2014).

Each 100 g edible portion of the green pea contains moisture 72.9 g,

protein 7.2 g, fiber 4.0 g, carbohydrates 15.9 g, energy 93 K cal, calcium 20

mg, phosphorus 139 mg, iron 1.5 mg, carotene 83 µg and dry pea contains

moisture 16.0 g, protein 19.7 g, fiber 4.5 g, carbohydrates 56.5 g, energy 315

K cal, calcium 75 mg, phosphorus 298 mg, iron 7.05 mg and carotene 39 µg

(Choudhary et al. 2009).

Immature ovule widely consumed as fresh succulent vegetable or dried

seed in soup have high percentages of protein, carbohydrate, vitamin and

minerals making it an important food ingredient for vegetarian population.

Based on maturity, it is grouped into three categories viz. variety taking less

than 40 days to flower (early), upto 55 days (medium) and late varieties taking

more than 55 days to flowering (Kalloo et al. 2005).

Pea cultivation is widespread in areas having a mild and warm climate,

because relatively high or low temperatures are the most important factors

limiting pea cultivation. A dry climate is also unsuitable for the plant,

particularly during flowering and pod development. Dry periods substantially

decrease yields. Yield can be increased by early sowing and the use of the

seeds of early flowering and maturing cultivars in production (Bozoglu et al.

2007).

The pea varieties are of three seed types‟ viz. round, dimpled and

wrinkled. Early cultivation of pea was for pulse purposes and mostly round

seeded varieties were grown mainly as a rainfed crop. The vegetable/garden

pea varieties are sweet in taste and hence are mostly wrinkled or dimpled

because of high sugar content. Peas are sown in rabi season from beginning

of October to the end of November in northern plains as the cool climate of

about four months is ideal for pea growing. The areas where there is slow

transition from cool to warm weather are ideal for pea growing. The optimum

temperature for seed germination is about 22oC. However, it can germinate

upto 5oC but at slow rate. Peas grow best at mean temperature of 13-18oC.

Pea is tolerant to frost at early stage of growth, at later stage the flowers and

pods are affected. The wrinkled seeded cultivars are more sensitive to high

temperature and a temperature of 30oC and above even for a day affects the

quality of pods (Singh and Singh, 2011).

Pods are harvest for fresh market by hand picking. Several pickings

are needed, as all pods do not mature at the same time. As the pods attain

marketing stage, they turn light green and become well filled up. Usually 3-4

pickings are made at 7-10 days interval.

The pea cultivars, cultivated by the vegetable growers in Madhya

Pradesh particularly are very low in yield and their quality. Indian pea varieties

do not compete with the varieties grown in the many other countries. The

productivity of pea in India is less than many other pea growing countries.

This could be attributed to the lack of suitable cultivars for different pea

growing regions in the country. Though many new varieties have been

developed in India through varietal development programme under different

SAU‟s and ICAR institutes. Varieties either introduced or developed during

very early continue to dominate its cultivation. Therefore, evaluation of

varieties for higher yield, suitable for different agro-climatic conditions is

necessary to enhance production and productivity of vegetable pea.

The present study undertaken to evaluate the performance of few

released varieties with following objectives.

Objectives:

1. To evaluate performance of different varieties of garden pea for

growth and yield attributes for green pod production.

2. To find out the suitability of pea varieties for green pod production.

3. To work out the economics of different varieties.

CHAPTER-II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The growth, yield and quality of garden pea, besides genetic factors

largely depend upon climate and management practices, such as time of

sowing, nutrients, irrigation, spacing, plant protection etc. The work carried out

by various scientists in India and abroad on the topic “Evaluation of different


production” and related aspects has been briefly reviewed and presented in

chronological order in this chapter under following headings:

2.1 growth attributed character of varieties:

Mishra and Yadav (1993) conducted a field trial to assess 30 pea

cultivars. They found that number of days to 50% flowering ranged from 37.5

in cv. EC 33866 to 59.6 in BCB-07-466. Number of days to maturity ranged

from 74.5 in EC 33866 to 97.9 in T-163. Seed yield ranged from 0.22 t/ha in

BCB-050 and BCB-026 to 0.95 t in Rachana.

Ishtiaq et al. (1996) evaluated the exotic cultivars of pea as regard the

flowering and final harvesting cv. Am-I was found to be the earliest, which

took 44 and 129 days to flower and final harvesting. Almata took more days to

flowering (84.50) while Carvella took the longest period of time to final

harvesting (188 days).

Muhammad and Muhammad (2002) recorded the performance of 9

pea cultivar. The plant height at the time of first flowering (32.72 cm) was

maximum in the plants of P-I, while the minimum (14.63 cm) in Olympia. All

other cultivars were 'intermediate between the minimum and the maximum

plant height at the time of flowering (i.e. 14.63 to 32.72 cm). The maximum

final height (60.45 cm) was attained by the plants of P-I followed by 226-Y/B

(54.47 cm), while the minimum was recorded in Olympia (40.75 cm). The time

taken from germination to flower initiation revealed significant differences

among the cultivars. Samrina Zard took the maximum days (58.38) to first

flowering closely followed by 226- YIB (58.13 days) and P- 48 (57.25 days),

whereas P-42, Olympia, Meteor and AM-I took the minimum number of days

to start flowering (53.69 to 54.63).

Habib and Zamin (2003) recorded in different cultivars the number of

days taken to first harvesting. Minimum days (48) were taken by cultivar

Rondo and was declared as early, followed by climax with (62) days while

cultivar Navona took the maximum number of days (75).

Hussain et al. (2005) studied the performance of 5 pea cultivars

(Meteor, Dasan, Climax, DMR-20 and Kaghan local). Among the cultivars,

DMR-20 recorded the greatest average plant height (149.26 cm).

Kalloo et al. (2005) assessed the performance of forty-seven

genotypes of vegetable pea from four hundred twenty three lines based on

the plant growth, pod and seed morphological characteristics. These lines

were evaluated for plant, pod and seed morphological and biochemical traits.

Significant variability for all the traits was observed with the maximum

variation for plant height and yield per plant. First flowering node had positive

significant correlation with days to flower and plant height. Based on total

sugar (%) VR-56, VR-28 and VR-9 were in same group with Arkel and Azad

Pea-3.

Agrawal et al. (2006) noted the performance of 9 cultivars of pea

(Arkel, Lincoln, Pusa Pragati, Matar Ageta 6, VL-7, Azad Pea 3, Pant Sabji

Matar-3 and PMR 4). The number of days to first pod picking was lowest in

Matar Ageta 6 (42.6 days) and highest in Lincoln and PMR 4 (64-65 days).

The number of days to 50% flowering varied from 42.6 to 58.0 days.

Bozoglu et al. (2007) reported that maximum plant height in Vilmorin

(64.7cm) and Agromar (64.5) cultivar of garden pea.

Gupta and Singh (2007) noted that the mean for days to first flowering

and days to green pod picking was 52.99 and 85.94 respectively. The range

of mean value for days to first flowering was 33days in Punjab ageta -6 and

PMR-31 and in HUVP-3 90 days. Days to first green pod picking was in 69

days PSM-3, PMR-31 and Punjab ageta-6 and 103 days in HUVP-3 and

HUVP-3 × PSM-.4. The mean value for primary branches per plant was 3.06

and it ranges varied from 1.4 for PSM-3 to 5.5 for Early Felthum First × PSM-

4. Mean plant height was 85.70 cm and minimum plant height 42 cm in Early

Felthum First × PSM-4, Punjab ageta-6, PMR-31 and maximum 133cm in

stop × Arkel

Jan et al. (2007) studied the twenty five genotypes of garden pea for

their yield and quality attributes. Significant differences with respect to yield

and quality attributes were observed among the genotypes. Genotype JP-19

along with Azad Pea-4, Arkel, SH-GP-3, Pb-87 and SH-GP-6 bear first flower

at early node (between 6 and 8 nodes) and are to be considered early

maturing genotypes.

Alam et al. (2010) observed BARI Motor Shuti-1 gave superior plant

height (95.3 cm, 92.2 cm), pods per plant (16, 9), seeds per pod (8, 6) 1000

fresh seed weight (62.7 g, 57.4 g) and the highest green pod yield (11.44 t/ha

8.11 t/ha) over that of BARI Motor shuti-2 and BARI Motor shuti-3 during

2006-07 and 2007-08, respectively.

In the study of Singh and Singh (2011) Arkel showed maximum plant

height (48.14 cm) followed by Kashi Mukti and minimum in Kashi Uday

(44.78cm). Variety Kashi Mukti (2.86) produced maximum number of

branches per plant and followed by Arkel (1.98), Kashi udai (1.95) and Kashi

nandini (1.48).

Khan et al. (2013) observed Maximum plant height in Shareen (125.7

cm) against minimum plant height (65.57 cm) in genotype 2001-55.

Tiwari et al. (2014) recorded the maximum plant height in SP × VL-7

69.82cm, followed by SP× DVP-1 (65.05), Arkel (60.44cm), VL-10 (59.53cm)

and PSM-3 (57.67cm), minimum plant height recorded in VL-7 (57.30cm). The

mean values for day to first picking was maximum in Arkel (67.11 days)

followed by SP × DVP-1 (66.77 days), PSM-3 (61.00 days) and VL-7 (59.44

days).

2.2 Yield and yield attributed character of varieties:

Giri and Bhalerao (1984) conducted an experiment on three varieties

(EC 33866 or Harbhajan, BR 12 and L 116 or Hans) and two row spacing

(22.5 and 30.0 cm) with four phosphate levels (0, 30, 60, and 90 kg P2O5/ha).

Highest grain yield was obtained from pea var. L 116 followed by BR 12 and

both were significantly superior to EC 33866 (Harbhajan).

Zaman et al. (1987) studied various pea varieties and found significant

differences in their days to flowering, average number of seed/pod and the

fresh pod yield per hectare. Variety Alaska was found early which took 31

days to flower. Maximum number 9 seed/pod was noted in the variety

“Alderman”. However, the highest yield of pod 7.5 and 10.4 tones ha-1 were

obtained from the variety “Early protection” in 1980-81 and 1981-82

respectively.

Khokhar et al. (1988) evaluate that the cultivars,‟FC-3954‟ and

“Coronado” were early in maturity whereas “Minarette” “Perlette” and “Jof”

were late maturing. The cultivar, „Minarette” produced maximum number of

pods per plant and gave highest yield (20.36t/ha).

Ardelean et al. (1989) assessed the nine characters in 14 pea varieties

during 1986-88 in Turda, Romania. The best yielding early varieties were

Mingomark and Timpurie de Craiova (11.78 and 9.63 t/ha, respectively) and

the best late varieties were Isalnita110, Iweta, Gotinga and Vidra L1-18-83

(10.24, 9.81, 9.92 and 10.84 t/ha, respectively).

Poma and Zora (1993) tested four introduced varieties for their

adaptation to hilly environment for Sicily, all showed good adaptation. Belinda

was the best, showing highest yield per plant (5.6g) and 1000 seed weight

(20g). Its seed yield /unit area was 3.6 t ha-1 in 1989 and 4.2 t ha-1 in 1990.

Dhillon and Singh (1993) evaluated MA-6 new line for cultivation in the

sub mountainous regions and plains of northern India during 1983-89. It is an

improvement over Arkel and Harabona in that it can be as early as Harabona

but yields more than either, producing, according to location, 1.1- 4.8 t/ha

versus 0.5-3.0 t/ha for Arkel and 0.5-2.0 t/ha for Harabona. Plants are dwarf,

quick growing and erect and are ready for first picking within 7 weeks of

sowing. Pods are long, number 12-15 per plant, contain an average 6 seeds

and have a 44% shelling rate. Seeds have high dry matter, chlorophyll and

crude protein contents, leading to good processing. More than 50% of the

total green pods can be harvested in the first picking of Matar Ageta-6,

compared with 25% and 10% for Arkel and Harabona, respectively. Total yield

(first 3 pickings) over 33 trials, was 15% and 30% superior to Arkel and

Harabona.

Ishtiaq et al. (1996) tested the performance of exotic pea cultivars in

Peshawar Valley. They observed maximum pod size (8.535 cm) in Myfare,

whereas minimum pod size was recorded in cv. VIP. Cultivar Green Sward

produced maximum pod yield (5950 kg ha-1).

Ihsan-ul-Haq and Hussain (1997) conducted an experiment to screen

out suitable pea cultivars for spring cultivation at Chitral. Four cultivars,

Meteor, Climax, Green Feast and No.26 were tested. Cultivar Meteor gave

significantly higher yield (6745 kg ha-1), number of grains per pod (8.00) than

other cultivars.

Pani et al. (2001) found that 'KS 226' was better performing, stable and

suitable for green pod yield (15.3 tonnes/ha), pod length (9.3 cm), seeds/pod

(6.8) and 100-green seed weight (48.9 g) and suitable for unfavorable

environment for pod breadth (1.5 cm). 'VL 6' performed the best regarding

green pod yield (17.8 tonnes/ha) and seeds/pod (6.9) and was stable and

suitable for favorable environments. 'Azad P 1' was better performing and

stable for pod length (9.3 cm) and 100-green seed weight (59 g) and

responsive in unfavorable environments. 'Bonneville' was better performing

and stable for 100g seed weight (51.4 g) and suitable for favorable

environments, whereas 'RPM 34-2' was better performing and stable for

shelling (51.8%) and showed average response to change in environmental

conditions.

Chetia and Yadav (2002) determined the phenotypic stability of yield

and yield components in 39 high yielding pea varieties with different sowing

dates and in four different environments in Hisar, Haryana during 2000-01.

The significant differences were observed for all the characters among the

genotypes. Genotypes DMR 39, KPMRD 522, KPMR 256, DDR 50, LFP 283,

Pusa 10, DDR 55, Jayanti, HFP 4, HFP 9412, HFP 9917, Rachna, PH 1 and

PSST-2-15 were found to have high mean and a stable performance for grain

yield.

Javid et al. (2002) studied the sixty-eight pea genotypes both local and

exotic for 17 quantitative traits related to earliness, green pod yield, shelled

fresh yield and grain yield. Three genotypes (10303, 10603 and 10413) were

selected for better yield of green pods and fresh green seeds. Evaluation of

germplasm revealed elite lines for earliness and pea grain yield through

simple selection.

Muhammad and Muhammad (2002) evaluated that all the cultivars

except 226- Y/B produced nearly the same number of pods per plant. The

cultivar 226- Y/B and AM-I produced the minimum number of pods per plant

and also stood at par with each other. The maximum pod length Knight

exhibited (8.05 cm) followed by Olympia (7.76 cm) and statistically it remained

at par with Knight. The minimum pod length (6.28 cm) was recorded in

Meteor. The cultivar 226- Y/B had the maximum green pod weight (4.59 g).

The cultivars Knight, Meteor, Samrina lard, P-I and Olympia tended to stand

at par with 226- Y/B. The poorest performance was shown by the cultivars P-

48, AM-I and P-42, having only 3.51, 3.69 and 4.00 g of green pod weight

respectively. The maximum number of seeds per pod Knight (6.16) followed

by P- I, Meteor and Olympia, whereas the cultivar 226- Y/B produced the

lowest number of seeds per pod (4.91). This also stood at par with P-48, AM-

I, Samrina lard and P-42. Maximum green pod yield per plant was obtained

from the cultivars Knight (108.64 g), Meteor (105.00 g) and Samrina lard

(100.43 g). All these cultivars behaved statistically alike. Minimum green pod

yield per plant was obtained from the cultivars AM-I (79.25 g) and P-48 (83.00

g).

Habib and Zamin (2003) found that the Cultivar Rondo produced the

maximum pod length (9.25 cm) followed by Climax with (6.40 cm) while

Navona produced smallest pod with 5.65 cm. Cultivar Climax produced

maximum number of grains per pod (8.48), which is significantly different from

both Rondo (6.15) and Navona (5.6) number of grains per pod, respectively.

Maximum number of pods was produced by cultivar Rondo (16.8) followed by

Climax with (12.6). Highest yield (6.73 t ha-1) was produced by Rondo, which

was non-significant to Climax with (4.78 t ha-1) but both were significantly

different from Navona with lowest yield (2.07 t ha-1)

Kalloo et al. (2005) evaluated the number of pods per plant observe

minimum in VR-18 and VR-15 (7pod) and maximum number of pods 19 in

VR-10 with followed16 pods in Arkel and 8 pods in AP-3. The maximum

variation was observed for pod length 10.1cm in VR-7, followed by AP-3 9.0

cm, Arkel 7.6cm and VR-28 6.9cm.

Agrawal et al. (2006) evaluated the performance of 9 cultivars of pea

(Arkel, Lincoln, Pusa Pragati, Matar Ageta 6, VL 7, Azad Pea 3, Pant Sabji

Matar-3 and PMR-4). The number of pods per plant varied from 7.33 (Matar

Ageta-6) to 19.00 (PMR-4). The average pod weight ranged from 4.80 (Pusa

Pragati) to 6.07 g (PMR-4). Pod yield per plant was greatest in PMR-4 (92.67

g), followed by Lincoln (89.33 g), and lowest in Matar Ageta-6 (29.33 g).

Bozoglu et al. (2007) conducted an experiment to determine the

performance of 15 pea cultivars sown in autumn and spring. All the observed

characteristics showed statistical difference among cultivars. Pods per plant in

Lancet and Sprinter (11.3) and Sugar bon (11.1) were highest and Kelvendon

(5.5) was lowest. The 1000-seed weight ranged from Jof (290.0 g) to Sugar

Bon (149.6 g). Progress no: 9, G.Pearly, Vilmoren and Agromar were

statistically grouped with Jof. Bolero had the highest yield 2724 kg ha-1,

followed by Vilmeron 2614 kg ha-1 and Agromar 2239 kg ha-1. Lowest seed

yields obtain from E. Norli (1328 kg ha-1), Karina (1387 kg ha-1), G.Pearly

(1402 kg ha-1) and Kelvedon (1426 kg ha-1).

Gupta and Singh (2007) recorded that the highest pod length was

observed 9.4 cm in KS-168 and KS-168 × Punjab ageta-6 followed by NDVP-

9 and Azad pea-3× arkel (9.3 cm). Highest 100 g green pod weight was

observed in PSM-3 (777 g) followed by NDVP-12(734 g) and Azad pea-3 (710

g).

Jan et al. (2007) find out the genotypes NDVP-8, VRP-7, NDVP-104,

VL-3 and JP-19 were superior for yield and most of the yield attributing traits

and also had considerable amount of dry matter with protein contents.

Murtaza et al. (2007) noted the maximum number of pods per plant

was produced by Meteor (29.48) followed by that of the Greenfeast (25.82),

Climax (22.99) and Rondo (21.78). The varieties Meteor and Greenfeast were

significantly different with all other varieties, while Rondo and Climax were

non-significant from each other. The variety Climax produced the maximum

number of seeds per pod (7.92) followed by Meteor (7.26), Rondo (6.35) and

Greenfeast (5.47). Meteor produced highest biological yield (7637 Kg /ha)

which was significantly different from Greenfeast (6383 Kg /ha), Climax (5872

Kg /ha) and Rondo (4324 Kg/ ha). The highest green pod yield was obtained

from Meteor (5255 Kg /ha) followed by Greenfeast (4452 Kg/ ha), Climax

(3183 Kg/ ha) and Rondo (2767 Kg/ ha).

Gopinath et al. (2009) reported that among the garden pea varieties

Vivek Matar 9, Vivek Matar 8 and Azad pea 1 produced similar but

significantly higher pod yield compared to other varieties. Among the garden

pea varieties, Azad pea 1, Vivek Matar 8 and Vivek Matar 9 were found

suitable for organic cultivation.

Fikere et al. (2009) observed that the stability analysis of identified

genotypes IFPI-1523 (Genotype-1) and IFPI-2711(Genotype-4) for

commercial production in south Eastern Ethopia. Highly significant

correlations were found among stability parameter implying their closer

similarity and effectiveness in detecting stable genotype and they equal in

measuring stability. Hence, any one of this stability parameter could be used

to describe genotype stability.

Alam et al. (2010) found the higher yield in BARI motor shuti-1 due to

its genetic potentiality with the production of higher number of pods per plant,

seeds per pod and heavier seed size.

Sharma et al. (2010) evaluated eight different varieties of peas for

earliness, yield and quality attributes in 2007 and 2008. Highest pod yield of

521 q/ha was recorded from variety Palam Priya followed by variety E-6 which

gave a yield of 494 q/ha. These varieties were light green in colour with

preferred shape and size of pods. The varieties Bonneville, E-6 and AP-3

were early to mature as they took less time to harvest as 44.9, 45.0 and

48.4days, respectively. The cultivars VL-8, AP-1 and Palam Priya were late to

mature which took 67.3, 67.00 and 64.6 days to harvest. It is suggested that

these varieties of peas can be successfully grown for general cultivation under

intermediate conditions of Poonch.

Singh and Singh (2011) obtain maximum number of pods per plant

(7.67) followed by Kashi Nandini (5.53), Kashi Uday (5.41) and minimum in

Arkel (4.87). Number of seeds per pod maximum in Kashi Mukti (6.59)

followed by Kashi Uday (6.26) Kashi Nandini (5.98) and minimum in Arkel

(4.82).

Singh et al. (2012) studied on three cultivars (Arkel, PSM-3 and VL-7)

of vegetable pea. Results showed that the number of pod per plant was

significantly higher for VL-7 (8.33) compared to Arkel and PSM-3. Number of

seed per pod was significantly higher for PSM-3 (7.17) compared to VL-7

(6.17) and Arkel (6.17). Green pod yield per plot (1.5 kg) and per ha (149.67

q/ha) were significantly highest in PSM-3 with highest shelling percentage of

50%.

Chadha et al. (2013) observed that the different varieties of pea varied

from 35.67 (DPP-54) to 66.17% (DPPMWR) in 2011-12 and 24.64% (FC-2) to

57.08% (IC296678) in 2012-13 for pod shelling percentage, 2.68 (FC-2) to

15.45 (EC538008) in 2011-12 and 3.47 (Mr. Big) to 12.27 (EC 538008) in

2012-13 for pods per plant, 14.6g (KMMR-89) to 55.72g (IC267732) in 2011-

12 and 5.21g (KMMR-89) to 52.13g (EC538008) in 2012-13 for pod yield per

plant and 32.41g (KMMR-89) to 123.69q/ha (IC267732) in 2011-12, 26.33q/ha

(Lincoln) to 112.36q/ha (EC538008) in 2012-13and 22.04q/ha (KMMR-896) to

108.58 q/ha (EC538008)for pod yield (q/ha). The highest pod yield per

hectare was observed in EC538008 (108.58 q/ha), however, it was

statistically at par with Kukumseri-6(101.61 q/ha), IC 267732(101.07 q/ha),

DPPM-74 (92.84 q/ha) and DPP-54(91.96 q/ha).

Khan et al. (2013) conducted an experiment at Horticultural Research

Institute, NARC, Islamabad, Pakistan during autumn 2009-10 to evaluate the

performance of 13 peas genotypes for yield and drought tolerance under

rainfed conditions. Maximum pod yield was noted in 2001-55 (10.43 t/ha)

followed by FS-21-87 (9.52 t/ha). Genotypes 2001-55 also produced excellent

number of seeds per pod (8.56) and pod length (9.33 cm).

Mehmet et al. (2013) obtained the number of pod per plant ranging

from 9.83 (Bolero) to 20.17 (PS3053), number of seed per pod was from 3.25

(ultrello) to 5.00(PS3029-B),number of seed per plant was from 35.50(ultrello)

to 83.83 (PS3053) , 1000 seed weight was from 117.83g(PS4053-B) to

303.33g (ultrello) and seed yield was from 1406.67kg/ha (Bolro) to 2700.00

kg/ha (PS4021).

Mukherjee et al. (2013) evaluated the number of pods per plant which

was highest in GS 10 (26.66) and was closely followed by Darjeeling local

(25.31) and Early 6 (25.02). The cultivar GS 10 was found to be best because

of maximum value of yield attributing characters and gave significantly more

pod yield (78.64 q/ha) and was at par with Early 6 (76.25 q/ha) and Darjeeling

local (75.98 q/ha) whereas Arkel gave significantly lower yield than all other

cultivars under trial.

Tiwari et al. (2014) observed the maximum pod length in Arkel (8.61

cm) followed by SP × DVP-1 (8.49cm), SP× VL-7(8.45 cm), VL-7 (8.01cm)

and VL-10 (7.74cm). Minimum plant height was recorded in PSM-3 (7.56cm)

cultivar. The highest number of green ovule per pod SP × DVP-1(6.64)

followed by SP× VL-7(6.55), Arkel (6.49), VL-7 (6.14) and VL-10(5.72).

Minimum number of ovule recorded in PSM-3 (5.50). Shelling percentages is

highest in cultivar PSM-3(48.89) followed by VL-7 (48.79), Arkel (46.80), VL-

10(45.33), SP× VL-7(45.20) and minimum in SP × DVP-1(44.30). Maximum

green pod yield q ha-1 was obtained from the cultivars SP × DVP-1(70.28),

SP× VL-7(69.08), PSM-3 (60.67), VL-10 (56.02), VL-7 (54.75) and Minimum

green pod yield per plant was obtained from the cultivars Arkel (52.46).

Khichi et al. (2016) found that all the cultivars except PB-89 (16.43)

produced nearly the same number of pods per plant. The cultivar Palam Priya

(10.33) and JawaharMatar-2 (9.83) produced minimum number of green pods

per plant. The cultivar PB-89 had the maximum green pod weight (4.59 g).

The poorest performance was shown by the cultivars Arka Kartik 3.27 g green

pod weight respectively. The PB-89 exhibited maximum pod length (10.4 cm)

followed by Arka Kartik (9.1 cm) that was statistically at par with PB-89. The

minimum pod length (5.83 cm) was recorded in Jawahar Matar-2. Maximum

green pod yield/plant was obtained in the cultivars PB-89 (87.93 g), Palam

Triloki (75.45 g) and Ankur (68.42 g). All other cultivars behaved statistically

alike. Minimum green pod yield/plant was obtained in the cultivars Arka Kartik

(41.65 g) and Palam Priya (45.01 g).The cultivar PB-89 gave maximum seed

yield/plant (68.6 g) followed by Palam Triloki, Ankur and Palam Smool

whereas the cultivar Arka Kartik resulted in the lowest seed yield/ plant (24.34

g). This also stood at par with Palam Priya, Jawahar Matar-2 and Arkel.

These results show that the cultivar Arka Kartik is a poor variety to produce

adequate seed yield/plant.

2.3 Quality character of varieties:

Shridhar and Mani (1995) found that VL-7 produced highest green pod

yield compared to early check variety Arkel. They also observed that VL-7

matured 5 to 6 days earlier than Arkel and also possessed higher TSS, better

germination ability, 100 green grains weight and more sweetness than Arkel.

Kalloo et al. (2005) revealed that genotype VR-56 and VR-9 developed

by this organization are in same group with Arkel (5.1690%) and AP-3

(5.1840%) in term of non reducing sugar as well as in total sugar. The

minimum variation was observed for seed weight 0.43g in AP-1 to 0.58g in

VR-7 with followed Arkel (0.50g) and AP-3 (0.52g).

Murtaza et al. (2007) found that the variety Meteor gained maximum

hundred seed weight (49.57 g) which was significantly different from all the

other varieties. Rondo with HSW 44.71 g was ranked second followed by

Greenfeast (39.07 g) and Climax (37.44 g).

Singh and Singh (2011) studied Kashi Nandini which produced boldest

seed as evident by its 100 seed weight (24.74 g), which was significantly

higher than the 100 seed weight of other varieties.

Khan et al. (2013) found Maximum 100- seed fresh weight (49.50 g)

was noted in FS-21-87 followed by 2001-55 (46.00 g) and check Climax

(40.0g) against minimum in genotype DMR-4 (20.20 g) On the basis of overall

performances, genotypes 2001-55 and FS-21-87 are recommended for

further evaluation.

Tiwari et al. (2014) found highest TSS content was in Arkel (16.770)

followed by PSM-3 (16.610) and in VL-7 (15.670) and minimum was found in

SP × DVP-1 (14.500).

Khichi et al. (2016) observed highest TSS content in Palam Triloki

cultivar (17.67%) and Arkel (16.75) and minimum was in Jawahar Matar-2

(15.07%). Other varieties had TSS content at par with Palam Triloki. These

cultivars also behaved statistically alike.

2.4 Economics of varieties:

Peksen et al. (2004) tested 15 pea (Pisum sativum) cultivars for their

fresh pod yield and pod characteristics under Samsun, Turkey, ecological

conditions during the 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 growing seasons. The

highest fresh pod yield was obtained from Vilmoren (17840 kg ha-1), followed

by Lancet (14290 kg ha-1), Agromar AG 7306 (13 880 kg ha-1), Jumbo (13 830

kg ha-1), Sprinter (13 690 kg ha-1), Sugar Bon (12370 kg ha-1), Bolero (12800

kg ha-1) and Progress No. 9 (12300 kg ha-1). In addition to high fresh pod

yield, there are many other important factors such as low harvest cost, inflated

and long pods, large fresh seeds and fresh seed yield after shelling for

determining suitable cultivars.

Hussain et al. (2005) Observed that the highest number of pods per

plant (11.52), yield (9.395 t/ha) and gross income (Rs. 276156/ha), the

highest number of grains per pod (7.21) was observed in Climax.

Tiwari et al. (2014) revealed that among the six varieties/ genotypes

(SP X VL-7, SP X DVP-1, Arkel, VL-7, PSM-3, VL-10) of vegetable pea gave

significantly net return and B:C ratio (2.04) Variety/ genotype SP X DVP-1

gave the green pod yield along with highest net profit and B:C ratio.

CHAPTER-III

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The experiment entitled “Evaluation of different varieties of garden

pea for growth and yield attributes for green pod production” was conducted

during 2015-2016 at the Horticulture Research farm, R.A.K. College of

Agriculture, Sehore (M.P.). The methods employed during the course of

investigation and materials utilized have great significance in the

research programmers. The details of material used and techniques

employed in carrying out the investigation are described under the

following heads:

3.1 Experimental site

The present investigation was conducted at the Horticulture Research

farm, R.A.K. College of Agriculture, Sehore (M.P.), during Rabi season of

2015-16.

3.2 Climatic conditions of Sehore:

Sehore is situated in the western part of the Vindhyan Plateau in sub-

tropical zone at the 23º06' North latitude and 77º05‟ East longitudes at an

altitude of 498.77 meter above mean sea level in Madhya Pradesh. It has sub

tropical climate with maximum temperature of 44.0 ºC in the month of June

and minimum 5.92 ºC in the month of December. The average annual rainfall

varies from 1000 to 1200 mm, concentrated mostly from June to September.

The weekly meteorological data viz., rainfall, temperature, relative

humidity and number of rainy days during crop season were recorded from

meteorological observatory of RAK College of Agriculture, Sehore. The

meteorological data are presented in Table-3.1 and graphically show in Fig. 1.

The data indicated that the total rainfall received during crop growth period

was 41.5mm in 4 rainy days. There were no rains during standard weather

week no. 40 to 43, 45 to 48, 50 to 02, 04 to 08 and 10 to 12. The minimum

and maximum temperature during crop growth period varied from 5.920C to

20.470C and from 18.310C to 35.700C respectively. The relative humidity

ranged from 60.71% to 75.14%.

Table 3.1: Meteorological data noted during the crop season (Oct, 2015

to March, 2016)

Month Standard weather week No.

Week

Temperature

(C) Relative humidity

(%)

Rainfall (mm)

Number of rainy

days

Max. Min.

40 Sept 27-Oct 03 33.90 19.90 73.42 0 0

OCTOBER 41 Oct 04-Oct 10 34.98 19.37 74.57 0 0

42 Oct 11-Oct 17 34.28 19.05 73.85 0 0

43 Oct 18-Oct 24 34.24 20.47 73.71 0 0

44 Oct 25-Oct 31 27.84 17.92 67.42 20 1

Average 33.05 19.34 72.59

NOVEMBER 45 Nove01-Nove07 30.80 18.58 70.42 0 0

46 Nove08-Nove14 31.05 17.12 70.57 0 0

47 Nove15-Nove21 29.45 14.08 69.14 0 0

48 Nove22-Nove28 27.77 15.85 67.42 0 0

Average 29.77 16.41 69.39

December 49 Nove29-Dec05 28.42 13.62 68.00 1.5 1

50 Dec06-Dec12 27.08 11.38 66.57 0 0

51 Dec13-Dec19 22.58 6.77 62.14 0 0

52 Dec20-Dec26 21.72 5.92 61.28 0 0

Average 24.95 9.42 64.50

January 1 Dec27-Jan02 27.97 10.05 67.57 0 0

2 Jan03-Jan09 26.67 9.81 66.14 0 0

3 Jan10-Jan16 26.22 11.61 65.71 0 0

4 Jan17-Jan23 18.31 8.35 60.71 15 1

5 Jan24-Jan30 26.94 9.61 66.42 0 0

Average 25.22 9.89 65.31

February 6 Jan31-Feb06 26.78 11.45 66.42 0 0

7 Feb07-Feb13 26.97 11.68 66.28 0 0

8 Feb14-Feb20 29.98 16.97 69.42 0 0

9 Feb21-Feb27 29.57 12.21 69.28 0 0

Average 28.33 13.08 67.85

March 10 Feb28-Mar05 32.48 17.10 72.00 5 0

11 Mar06-Mar12 33.01 17.44 72.42 0 0

12 Mar13-Mar19 31.94 17.28 71.57 0 0

13 Mar20-Mar26 35.70 18.20 75.14 0 0

Average 33.28 17.51 72.78

Source: Meteorological observatory, R.A.K. College of Agriculture, Sehore (M.P)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Met

eoro

logi

cal d

ata

Standarad weather Week

Fig . 1: Meteorological data noted during the crop season (Oct, 2015 to March, 2016)

Rainfall (mm)

Number of rainy days

Temperature (Max.)0C

Temperature (Min.)0C

Relative Humadity (%)

3.3 Soil status and texture of the experimental field

The soil of the experimental field was medium black with good

drainage and uniform texture. Before transplanting, soil samples of the

field up to a depth of 15 cm were taken, randomly from the field, with

the help of soil auger. All the soil samples were mixed to prepare a

composite sample, which was then air dried, sieved through 2 mm

sieve and finally used for mechanical and chemical analysis. The

results are presented in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2: Mechanical and chemical composition of experimental field:

S. No. Composition Content Category Method used

A. Mechanical composition

1 Sand (%) 25 - Bouyoucos Hydrometer method (Piper, 1967) 2 Silt (%) 38 -

3 Clay (%) 37 -

4 Textural class Medium black

B. Chemical composition

S. No. Particulars Content Level Method adopted by

1. Organic carbon (%) 0.47 Low Walkey & Black method (1934)

2. Available nitrogen N (kg/ha)

152.6 Low Alkaline potassium permanganate method (Subbaih and Asija, 1956)

3. Available phosphorus P (kg/ha)

21.2 Medium Olsen‟s method (Olsen et al., 1954)

4. Avalable potassium K (kg/ha)

308.0 High Flame photometer (Jackson, 1967)

5. Soil pH 7.2 Normal pH meter (Jackson, 1967)

6. Electrical conductivity (mhos/cm)

0.5 ds/m

Normal Conductivity meter at 25ºC (Jackson, 1967)

Table 3.3: Previous crop history of the experimental field.

Year Season

Kharif Rabi

2012 -13 Brinjal Brinjal

2013-14 Cowpea Onion

2014-15 Chilli Onion

2015-16 Fallow Garden pea

3.4 Experimental design and layout

Location: Horticulture Research farm, R.A.K. College of Agriculture, Sehore (M.P.)

Name of crop : Pea (Pisum sativum L.)

Season : Rabi 2015-16

Design of experiment : RBD (Randomized Block Design)

Number of varieties : 9

Number of replications : 3

Total number of plot : 27

Spacing –Row to Row : 30 cm

Plant to Plant : 15 cm

Plot size - : 2.1 m × 1.5 m (3.15m2)

Distance between treatments : 0.5m

Distance between replications : 1.0 m

Total experimental area : 8.3 m x 17.5 m (145.25m2)

Date of sowing : 8th October 2015

3.5 Detail of experimental material

V1 : Azad Pea-3:- Recommended for cultivation U.P.

V2 : Kashi Nandini:- is an early maturing variety develops at IIVR,

Varanasi in 2006 through hybridization (P-1542×VT-2-1) followed by pedigree

selection. Recommended in cultivation J&K, H.P., Uttrakhand, Punjab, Tarai

region of U.P., Bihar, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala.

V3 : Kashi Samarth:- is late maturity variety development at IIVR

Varanasi. Resistant to powdery mildew. Yield 110-120 q/ha. It‟s

recommended for release and cultivation in the stat of U.P., Bihar, and

Punjab.

V4 : Kashi Uday (VRP 6):- is an early maturing cultivar developed through

pedigree method of breeding from the cross of Arkel×FC1 at IIVR, Varanasi.

It‟s recommended for cultivation in Uttar Pradesh.

V5 : Pusa Pragati:- Developed at IARI is an early maturing cultivar. It‟s

recommended for Cultivation All over India.

V6 : PSM-3 (Arkel×GC141):- developed at Pantnagar is similar to Arkel. It‟s

recommended for cultivation J&K, H.P., Hills of U.P., and Punjab, Tarai region

of U.P., Bihar and Jharkhand.

V7 : Arkel:- is introduce from England in 1970. It is an early maturing and

dwarf variety. It is highly susceptible to powdery mildew and rust. Pod harvest

in 50-55DAS. It‟s recommended for cultivation All over India.

V8 : VL-7:- It is an early maturing variety developed at VPKAS, Almora in

1995. Seed are wrinkled.

V9 : Bonneville:- is introduce from USA in 1970 and made popular by IARI.

It is suitable for mid season and late maturing cultivation. It‟s recommended

for cultivation all over India.

3.6 Agronomical operations

3.6.1: Field preparation

Field was ploughed with tractor drawn cultivator. After their cross

harrowing done followed by planking to make the field leveled.

3.6.2: Fertilizer application

Nitrogen, phosphorus and potash was applied at the rate of 25 kg/ha,

50 kg/ha and 30 kg/ha respectively. According to the treatment the full

quantity of the nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium were applied as basal at

the time of sowing. Other intercultural operations and crop management

practices were carried out in accordance with the recommended package of

practices.

3.6.3: Seed

Pure, healthy and good quality seed of pea varieties viz., Azad Pea-3,

Pusa Pragati, Kashi Samarth, Arkel, Kashi Uday, Kashi Nandini, PSM-3, VL-7

and Bonneville was obtained from Department of Vegetable Science, College

of Horticulture Mandsaur (M.P.).

3.6.4: Sowing of seed

Seed was sown in lines at a spacing of 30 x 15 cm and covered with

soil. Seeds were sown at a depth of 3-4 cm in soil.

3.6.5: Gap filling

The gap filling was carried out after 10 days of sowing18th October

2015.

3.6.6: Weeding

It was done twice manually at 25 and 45 days after planting.

3.6.7: Irrigation

Presowing irrigation was given. Thereafter, optimum soil

moisture was maintained in the field by irrigations as given below:

Irrigation Date

First Just after sowing

Second 10th November, 2015

Third 10th December, 2015

3.6.8: Plant protection measures

Seeds were treated with Mancozeb 75% WP before sowing. Use of

Dimethoate 30% EC (1.5ml/litre), Chlorpyriphos 20% EC (2ml/litre) + Neem oil

(5ml/litre) was done to control the insect pests. Prophylactic spray of

Mancozeb 75% WP (2g/litre) and Carbendazim (1g/litre) was done to check

the diseases.

3.6.9: Harvesting

Pods are harvest when pod attains marketable stage they turn light

green and become well filled up. Usually 3-4 pickings are made at 7-10 days

interval.

3.7: Experimental Material

The experimental materials comprised of nine diverse pea varieties viz

Azad Pea-3, Pusa Pragati, Kashi Samarth, Arkel, Kashi Uday, Kashi Nandini,

PSM-3, VL-7 and Bonneville.

Ro

ad

Carrot field

1.0 m 0.75 m

3.8: Observations Recorded

Five plants were randomly selected and tagged from each treatment

under each replication excluding the border plants. Observation data were

recorded of the tagged plants for the following attributes.

3.8.1: Growth attributes

(I) Plant height (cm) at 30, 45, 60, 75 DAS and at maturity

Plant height was measured in each treatment from ground level to the

tip of fully opened leaves of main stem with the help of meter scale at 30, 45,

60, 75 DAS and at maturity.

(II) Number of branches per plant at 30, 45, 60, 75 DAS and at maturity

Number of branches per plant was counted from tagged plants and

mean values were calculated at 30, 45, 60, 75 DAS and at maturity.

(III) Days to 1st flowering

The date when first open flower appeared on each tagged plant was

noted and days to first flower initiation from the date of sowing were counted

and average values were worked out.

(IV) Days to first pod picking

The date when first Pods are harvest when pod attains marketable

stage they turn light green and become well filled up each tagged plant was

noted and days to pod picking from the date of sowing were counted and

average values were worked out.

3.8.2: Yield attributes

(I) Number of Green pod per plant

Total number of green pods picked from the tagged plants were

counted under each plot and divided with the number of tagged plants to get

average number of pod per plant.

(II) Green pod length (cm)

Ten pods of each treatment were taken in each replication randomly for

measuring the pod length. The pod length was measured with the help of

meter scale and average values were worked out. The pod length was

expressed in centimeter.

(III) Number of seeds per pod

Ten pods were picked randomly from the harvested pods of each plot

and their seeds were counted. Thereafter, average values were worked out.

(IV) 10 green pod weight (g.) at picking stage

10 green pods were taken randomly from each plot and their weight

was worked out on digital balance and average value work out.

(V) Green pod yield per plant (g.)/plot (kg.)/ha (q.) at picking stage

Green pod was collected from five plants at picking stage in each plot

and their weight was worked out with weight balance. Thereafter their average

was calculated and expressed as average green pod yield per plant. Green

pod yield per plant was recorded in gram and per plot was recorded in

kilogram which was converted into quintal per hectare as given below.

Total green pod yield per plot (kg) x 10,000 Total green pod yield (q/ha) =

Net area of plot (m2) x 100

(VI) Green seed yield per plant (g.) at picking stage

Green seed was collected from five plants at picking stage in each plot

and their weight was worked out with weight balance. Thereafter their average

was calculated and expressed as average green seed yield per plant.

(VII) Shelling percentage (Green)

Shelling percentage was calculated with taking total weight of green

pods per plant and total weight of fresh green seed from these pods by

following formula:

Weight of green seed Shelling percentage% = x 100 Total weight of green pod

3.8.3: Quality attributes

(I) Weight of 100 green seed (g)

100 seeds were taken randomly from each plot and their weight was

worked out on digital balance. The average of seed weight was noted as test

weight or weight of 100 seed.

(II) TSS (0Brix)

The total soluble solid was determined by hand refrectometer, which was

recorded in ºBrix.

3.9 Computation of Economics of different varieties

Several economic indices are available to evaluate the profitability of

cropping systems. No single index is capable of giving good comparison of

different treatments and so a number of indices are used together to assess

the economic viability of the system. Since the price of farm products changes

from year to year and season to season and also place to place, the

profitability of the system also changes accordingly. The procedures used for

working out economics of different varieties under consideration was as

suggested by Yang et al. (1989)

3.9.1 Gross Monetary Returns (Rs/ha)

Gross returns are the total monetary value of economic produce and

byproducts obtained from the crop raised in the different varieties are

calculated based on the local market prices.

3.9.2 Cost of Cultivation (Rs/ha)

Cost of cultivation is the total expenditure incurred for raising crop in a

treatment. The cost included for this purpose consists of own or hired human

labour, owned or hired bullock labour, value of seed, manures, fertilizers,

pesticides and irrigation charges etc. A poor farmer may choose a practice

with lesser cost of cultivation though it gives lesser profit, because of limited

resources.

3.9.3 Net Monetary Returns (Rs/ha)

It is computed by subtracting cost of cultivation from gross returns. It is

good indicator of suitability of a cropping system since this represents the

actual income of the farmer. Monetary returns for different treatments were

calculated with the help of prevailing market rates of produce and different

inputs used in the experiments.

Net Monetary Returns = Gross return – Cost of cultivation

3.9.4 Benefit cost ratio

It is the ratio of gross returns to cost of cultivation. It is expressed as

returns per rupee invested. This index provides an estimate of the benefit a

farmer derives for the expenditure he incurs in adopting a particular cropping

system. Any value above 2.0 is considered safe as the farmer gets Rs. 2 for

every rupee invested.

Benefit cost ratio = Gross return / Cost of cultivation

3.10: Statistical analysis

The Skeleton of ANOVA as per design is as given in Table below:

Table 3.4: Skeleton of analysis of variance.

S.V. D.F. SS MSS F cal. F tab.

Replication 2 RSS RMS RMS/EMS 3.63

Treatment 8 TSS TMS TMS/EMS 2.59

Error 16 ESS EMS

Total 26

The critical difference (C.D.) was calculated to assess the significance of

difference between treatments, whenever the results were found significant

through „F‟ test, CD at 5 % level of significance was determined. S.Em. and

CD were calculated using the following formula.

S Em = EMS R

CD = S Em x 2 x t5% (edf)

Where

EMS : Error mean sum of squares

R : Number of replications

t5% : Table value at error degree of freedom

S.Em. : Standard error of mean

CD : Critical difference

CHAPTER-IV

RESULTS

This chapter deals with the analysis of data recorded on various

growth, yield and quality parameters of garden pea varieties of the experiment

entitled “Evaluation of different varieties of garden pea for growth and yield

attributes for green pod production.” The data of various observations

recorded during experimentation were subjected to statistical analysis in order

to find out the significance of different varieties by using the analysis of

variance technique. The experimental findings are interpreted along with the

corresponding tables and figures as follows:

4.1 Growth Parameters

Growth of pea was evaluated in respect of plant height, number of

branches per plant, days to first flower initiation and days to first pod picking.

Observations of plant height and number of branches per plant were taken at

30, 45, 60, 75 DAS (Day after sowing) and at maturity. Observation of days to

first flowering was taken when flower start anthesis and days to first pod

picking was taken when appropriate time of pod harvesting in each treatment.

The data recorded at different stages of growth are presented as follows.

4.1.1 Plant height (cm):

The mean plant height of different varieties presented in table 4.2, fig. 3

and analysis of variance in table 4.1 showed significant variation in plant

height of garden pea varieties in all successive stages of growth. Maximum

plant height 19.47, 39.13, 51.20, 55.87 and 56.53 cm was found in variety

Kashi Samarth at 30, 45, 60, 75DAS and at maturity respectively. It was

followed by Pusa Pragati and Bonneville which was at par in descending

order with each other. Minimum plant height 14.53, 33.20, 46.47, 50.33 and

50.73 cm in Arkel and 15.73, 33.47, 46.40, 50.35 and 50.69 in Kashi Nandini

was recorded at 30, 45, 60, 75 DAS and at maturity respectively. The varieties

VL-7 (51.16), PSM-3(51.16) Kashi Uday (51.42) and Azad Pea-3 (50.00)

shown maximum plant height at maturity stage were at par with each other. At

30DAS stage also the four varieties shown plant height at par to each other.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Azad Pea-3 Kashi Nandini Kashi Samarth Kashi Uday Pusa Pragati PSM-3 Arkel VL-7 Bonneville

Fig. 3: Plant height (cm) as influenced by different varieties of pea.

30 DAS 45 DAS 60 DAS 75DAS At maturity

Table 4.1: Analysis of variance of plant height at different successive

stages of growth.

S.V. D.F. Mean sum of square

30

DAS 45

DAS 60

DAS 75DAS

At maturity

Rep. 2 2.69 0.65 2.17 2.37 1.41

Treat. 8 7.73* 10.15* 8.24* 9.43* 10.32*

Error 16 1.45 1.79 1.06 0.85 0.55

* Significant at 5% level

Table 4.2: Plant height (cm) as influenced by different varieties of pea at

30, 45, 60, 75 DAS and at maturity.

Varieties Plant height (cm)


V1- Azad Pea-3 17.67 35.80 47.70 51.58 52.00

V2 - Kashi Nandini 15.73 33.47 46.40 50.35 50.69

V3- Kashi Samarth 19.47 39.13 51.20 55.87 56.53

V4- Kashi Uday 16.43 35.67 47.22 51.30 51.42

V5- Pusa Pragati 18.87 37.20 49.80 53.07 53.93

V6 PSM-3 16.20 35.03 47.13 50.53 51.16

V7 –Arkel 14.53 33.20 46.47 50.33 50.73

V8 -VL-7 16.27 35.07 47.20 51.13 51.16

V9 –Bonneville 18.20 36.67 49.23 52.47 52.54

Mean 17.04 35.69 48.04 51.85 52.24

S.Em± 0.98 1.09 0.84 0.75 0.59

CD at 5% 2.95 3.28 2.53 2.26 1.77

4.1.2 Number of branches per plant:

Analysis of variance presented in table 4.3, and the mean of varieties

presented in table 4.4 and fig 4 respectively. The result revealed significant

influenced of varieties on number of branches per plant at 30, 45, 60 and 75

DAS but there is no significant difference in between stage 75DAS and at

maturity.

Variety Kashi Samarth recorded maximum number of branches per

plant 1.18, 1.97, 2.69, 2.90 and 2.94 at 30, 45, 60, 75 DAS and at maturity

respectively. It was followed by Pusa Pragati, Bonneville and Kashi Nandini.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5


Fig. 4: Number of branches per plant as influenced by different varieties of pea.


The minimum number of branches 0.97, 1.16, 1.84, 1.91 and 1.92 were found

with Arkel at 30, 45, 60,75DAS and at maturity, respectively.

. Table 4.3: Mean sum of square of no. of branches per

plant at different successive stages of growth.


30

DAS 45

DAS 60

DAS 75DAS

At maturity

Rep. 2 0.006 0.0006 0.095 0.015 0.007

Treat. 8 0.029* 0.222* 0.435* 0.312* 0.308*

Error 16 0.008 0.013 0.050 0.011 0.002


Table 4.4: Number of branches per plant as influenced by different

varieties of pea at 30, 45, 60, 75 DAS and at maturity.

Varieties Number of branches per plant (cm)


V1- Azad Pea-3 1.10 1.45 1.54 2.03 2.10

V2 - Kashi Nandini 1.08 1.53 2.43 2.53 2.54

V3- Kashi Samarth 1.18 1.97 2.69 2.90 2.94

V4- Kashi Uday 0.87 1.43 2.03 2.18 2.19

V5- Pusa Pragati 1.05 1.94 2.60 2.73 2.74

V6 PSM-3 0.93 1.72 2.27 2.40 2.41

V7 –Arkel 0.97 1.16 1.84 1.91 1.92

V8 -VL-7 0.99 1.80 2.33 2.41 2.42

V9 –Bonneville 0.93 1.85 2.55 2.57 2.58

Mean 1.01 1.65 2.25 2.41 2.43

S.Em± 0.08 0.10 0.18 0.09 0.04

CD at 5% 0.23 0.29 0.55 0.26 0.13

4.1.3 Days to first flowering:

Analysis of variance presented in table 4.5 and the mean of varieties

presented in table 4.6 and fig 5 respectively. The result revealed significant

influence of varieties on days to first flower initiation.

Earliest first flower initiation was recorded in variety Arkel (39.13)

followed by PSM-3 (40.20), Kashi Nandini (41.13) and VL-7(41.47) at par with

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


Fig. 5: Days to 1st flowering and days first pod picking influenced by different varieties of pea.

Days to first flowering Day’s first pod picking

each other. Maximum days were taken by the variety Bonneville (51.23) which

was followed by Kashi Samarth (46.90). There was significant difference

between Kashi Samarth and Bonneville.

Table 4.5: Mean sum of square of Days to first flowering and Day‟s first

pod picking at different successive stages of growth.


Days to first flowering Days first pod picking

Rep. 2 0.86 0.73

Treat. 8 43.41* 35.66*

Error 16 0.99 1.67


Table 4.6: Days to 1st flower initiation and days pod picking as

influenced by different varieties of pea

Varieties Days to first flowering Day‟s first pod picking

V1- Azad Pea-3 42.07 71.87

V2 – Kashi Nandini 41.13 71.07

V3- Kashi Samarth 46.90 75.17

V4- Kashi Uday 44.40 74.93

V5- Pusa Pragati 43.33 74.00

V6 PSM-3 40.20 67.73

V7 –Arkel 39.13 67.20

V8 –VL-7 41.47 71.47

V9 –Bonneville 51.37 77.57

Mean 42.07 72.33

S.Em± 0.81 1.06

CD at 5% 2.44 3.17

4.1.4 Day‟s first pod picking:

The data of varieties presented in table 4.6, fig 5 and analysis of

variance in 4.5. The recorded data for day‟s first pod picking was significantly

influenced by varietal character.

Minimum Day‟s to first pod picking (67.20) was recorded in variety

Arkel which was at par to PSM-3 (67.73). Maximum Days to first pod picking

(77.57) was recorded in Bonneville. It was followed by Kashi Samarth (75.17)

and Kashi Uday (74.93) and at par with each other.

4.2 Yield Parameters and Yield:

4.2.1 Number of green pods per plant:

The mean number of green pods per plant at picking stage of different

varieties is given in table 4.8, fig 6 and analysis of variance is given in table

4.7

The highest number of green pods per plant was found in variety Kashi

Samarth (17.84) which was followed by Pusa Pragati (16.33), Kashi Uday

(16.32) and Kashi Nandini (16.10) compared to each other varieties and at

par to each other. Lowest number of green pods was observed under Arkel

(13.10).

4.2.2 Green pod length (cm):


presented in table 4.8 and fig 6, showed significant variation of pod length of

garden pea varieties.

Maximum green pod length was recorded in variety Pusa Pragati

(8.82cm), followed by Azad Pea-3 (8.69 cm), Kashi Samarth (8.64 cm) and

PSM-3 (8.17) compared to each other varieties and are at par with each

other. Minimum pod length (7.35) was recorded in Kashi Uday. It was followed

by Arkel (7.45) and statistically both are at par.

4.2.3 Number of green seed per pod:

The mean number of green seed per pod of varieties presented in table

4.8, fig 4.4 and analysis of variance is given in table 6 indicated significant

effects of varieties on number of seed per pod.

Maximum number of seed per pod was received in variety Pusa

Pragati (7.33) followed by Azad Pea-3 (7.03), Kashi Samarth (6.97) and PSM-

3(6.47) compared to each other varieties. Remaining varieties exhibited

significant difference in the order of Bonneville (6.37), Kashi Nandini (6.27),

VL-7 (6.20) and Arkel (6.17). Minimum number of seed per pod was (6.10)

observed in Kashi Uday which was followed by Arkel.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20


Fig. 6: Number of pods per plant, pod length (cm) and number of green seed per pod of different varieties of pea.

Number of green pods per plant Green pod length (cm) Number of green seed per pod

Table 4.7: Mean sum of square of Number of green pods per plant,

Green pod length (cm) and Number of green seed per pod at different

successive stages of growth.


Number of green pods per plant

Green pod length

Number of green seed per pod

Rep. 2 0.0004 0.17 0.08

Treat. 8 6.32* 0.99* 0.605*

Error 16 0.79 0.16 0.14

* Significant at 5% level Table 4.8: Number of pods per plant, pod length (cm) and number of

green seed per pod of different varieties of pea.

Varieties Number of green

pods per plant

Green pod

length (cm)

Number of green

seed per pod

V1- Azad Pea-3 15.40 8.69 7.03

V2 - Kashi Nandini 16.10 7.61 6.27

V3- Kashi Samarth 17.84 8.64 6.97

V4- Kashi Uday 16.32 7.35 6.10

V5- Pusa Pragati 16.33 8.82 7.33

V6 PSM-3 14.53 8.17 6.47

V7 –Arkel 13.10 7.45 6.17

V8 -VL-7 14.97 7.68 6.20

V9 –Bonneville 13.83 7.71 6.37

Mean 15.38 8.01 6.55

S.Em± 0.73 0.33 0.31

CD at 5% 2.18 0.98 0.92

4.2.4 Green pod yield per plant (g):

The data was analyzed statistically and the analysis of variance

presented in table 4.9 and the mean of varieties presented in table 4.10, fig 7

revealed significant influence of varieties on green pod yield per plant.

Maximum green pod yield per plant was obtained under the cultivar

Kashi Samarth (89.87 g), Pusa Pragati (87.9 g) and Kashi Uday (86.27 g) are

at par with each other. Minimum green pod yield per plant was obtained from

the cultivars Arkel (66.33 g) and Bonneville (67.60 g). Both these cultivars

also stood at par with each other. The cultivars VL-7, PSM-3 and Azad Pea-3

were at par to each other with Arkel and Bonneville.

4.2.5 Green seed yield per plant:

The mean data of varieties shown in table 4.10, fig 7 and analysis of

variance is given in table 4.9. The presented data perceived impact of

varieties on green seed yield per plant.

Maximum green seed yield per plant was recorded in variety Kashi

Samarth (45.89 g) which was significantly superior over all other varieties. It

was followed by Kashi Nandini (40.71 g), Kashi Uday (38.39 g), Pusa Pragati

(34.02), Azad Pea-3 (33.75) and Arkel (33.71 g). Lowest green seed yield per

plant was noted under VL-7 (26.09 g), PSM-3 (24.37 g) and Bonneville

(23.94).

4.2.6 Shelling percent (%):

The data of shelling percentages is shown in table 4.10, fig. 7 and the

ANOVA was given in table 4.9.

Maximum shelling percentage was found in variety Kashi Samarth

(51.07%) followed by Arkel (50.81%) and Kashi Nandini (50.47%) statistically

at par to each other. Other varieties Azad Pea-3 (46.57%), Kashi Uday

(44.50%), Pusa Pragati (38.68%), VL-7 (37.54%), PSM-3 (35.71%), and

Bonneville (35.39%) showed significant difference to Kashi Samarth. The

minimum shelling percentage was recorded in Bonneville (35.39%).

Table 4.9: Mean sum of square of Green pod yield per plant (g), Green

seed yield per plant (g) and shelling%.

S.V. D.F.

Mean sum of square

Green pod yield

per plant(g)

Green seed yield

per plant(g) Shelling%

Rep. 2 4.56 5.07 2.66

Treat. 8 276.43* 172.35* 133.04*

Error 16 4.48 3.11 3.33


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Fig. 7: Green pod yield per plant (g), Green seed yield per plant (g) and shelling % as influenced by different varieties of pea.

Green pod yield per plant(g) Green seed yield per plant(g) Shelling%

Table 4.10: Green pod yield per plant (g), Green seed yield per plant (g)

and shelling % of different varieties of pea.

Varieties Green pod yield

per plant(g)

Green seed yield

per plant(g) Shelling%

V1- Azad Pea-3 72.48 33.75 46.57

V2 - Kashi Nandini 80.63 40.71 50.47

V3- Kashi Samarth 89.87 45.89 51.07

V4- Kashi Uday 86.27 38.39 44.50

V5- Pusa Pragati 87.9 34.02 38.68

V6 PSM-3 68.23 24.37 35.71

V7 –Arkel 66.33 33.71 50.81

V8 -VL-7 69.5 26.09 37.54

V9 –Bonneville 67.6 23.94 35.39

Mean 76.53 33.43 43.42

S.Em± 1.73 1.44 1.49

CD at 5% 5.18 4.32 4.47

4.2.7 10 green pod weight (g):

The data given in table 4.12, fig 8 and ANOVA is shown in table 4.11.

Maximum 10 green pods weight was observed in Kashi Samarth (52.79 g)

followed by Pusa Pragati (52.36 g), Kashi Uday (52.27 g), Bonneville (52.12

g), Arkel (49.78 g) and Kashi Nandini (49.41) all are at par with each other

statistically. Variety Kashi Samarth (52.79 g) was significantly superior over

Azad pea-3 (46.38 g), VL-7 (46.60 g) and PSM-3 (46.85 g). Minimum weight

of 10 green pods (46.38 g) was noted in Azad pea-3.

4.2.8 Green pod yield per plot (kg):

Green pod yield per plot (kg) has shown in table 4.12, fig 9 and

analysis of variance presented in table 4.11, revealed significant influenced of

varieties on green pod yield per plot.

Kashi Samarth variety was shown the maximum pod production per

plot (5.80 kg) which was followed by Pusa Pragati (5.68 kg) and Kashi Uday

(5.60 kg). All three varieties are at par with each other. Rests of the varieties

were shown significant difference with Kashi Samarth in green pod

production. Lowest green pod yield per plot (4.31 kg) noted in Arkel followed

by Bonneville (4.39)

42

44

46

48

50

52

54


10

gre

en

po

d w

eig

ht

Fig. 8: 10 green pod weights (g) as influenced by different varieties of pea

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7


Gre

en

po

d y

ield

pe

r p

lot

(kg)

Fig. 9: Green pod yield per plot (kg) as influenced by different varieties of pea

149.1

166.14

184.13177.68 180.32

141.16 136.72143.19 139.26


Gre

en

po

d y

ield

(q

/ha)

Fig. 10: Green pod yield quintal per hectare as influenced by different varieties of pea

Green pod yield (Q/ha)

4.2.9 Green pod yield per hectare (q):

The data recorded for the pod yield per plot of different varieties

converted into pod yield per hectare was presented in table 4.12, fig 10 and

analysis of variance presented in table 4.11.

Maximum green pod yield per hectare was found with variety Kashi

Samarth (184.13 q) which was followed by Pusa Pragati (180.32 q) and Kashi

Uday (177.68 q). Minimum green pod yield per hectare was noted in Arkel

(136.52 q) followed by Bonneville (139.26 q). It is revealed from data that the

varieties Kashi Samarth, Pusa Pragati and Kashi Uday were high yielding,

while Arkel, Bonneville, PSM-3 and VL-7 low yielding. But Azad Pea-3 and

Kashi Nandini varieties had produce moderate yield compared to all other.

Table 4.11: Mean sum of square of 10 green pod weight (g), green pod

yield per plot (kg) and Green pod yield per hectare (q).


10 green pod

weight(g)

Green pod yield

per plot (kg)

Green pod

yield (Q/ha)

Rep. 2 3.07 0.026 26.60

Treat. 8 21.67 1.123* 1131.91*

Error 16 3.77 0.046 46.99

* Significant at 5% level Table 4.12: 10 green pod weights (g), green pod yield per plot (kg) and

green pod yield per hectare (q) of different varieties of pea.

Varieties 10 green pod

weight(g)

Green pod yield

per plot (kg)

Green pod

yield (Q/ha)

V1- Azad Pea-3 46.38 4.7 149.10

V2 - Kashi Nandini 49.41 5.23 166.14

V3- Kashi Samarth 52.79 5.8 184.13

V4- Kashi Uday 52.27 5.6 177.68

V5- Pusa Pragati 52.36 5.68 180.32

V6 PSM-3 46.85 4.45 141.16

V7 –Arkel 49.78 4.31 136.72

V8 -VL-7 46.6 4.51 143.19

V9 –Bonneville 52.12 4.39 139.26

Mean 49.84 4.96 157.52

S.Em± 1.58 0.18 5.60

CD at 5% 4.75 0.53 16.78

4.3: Quality parameter

4.3.1 Weight of 100 seed (g) at picking stage:

The data recorded for the Weight of 100 seed (g) of different varieties

was presented in table 4.14, fig 11 and analysis of variance presented in table

4.13

Maximum 100 seed weight was observed in Kashi Samarth (54.30 g)

followed by Bonneville (53.43 g) both are at par with each other. Other

varieties Azad Pea-3 (50.73 g), PSM-3 (50.07 g), Pusa Pragati (50.0 g), VL-7

(49.07 g), Kashi Uday (48.63 g), Arkel (47.40 g) and Kashi Nandini (44.40 g)

showed significant difference to Kashi Samarth. Lowest weight of 100 seed

was noted in Kashi Nandini (44.40 g).

4.3.2 TSS (°Brix) at picking stage


presented in table 4.14, fig 4.12, revealed significant influence of varieties on

TSS.

Highest TSS was found in variety Bonneville (17.16) which was

followed by Arkel (17.03) both are at par to each other. Variety Bonneville was

significantly superior in quality over Pusa Pragati (16.72), PSM-3 (16.64),

Kashi Uday (16.62), Kashi Nandini (16.55), Kashi Samarth (16.44), Azad Pea-

3 (16.34) and VL-7 (15.66). Lowest TSS was observed under VL-7 (15.66).

Table 4.13: Mean sum of square of Weight of 100 seed (g) and TSS

(°Brix)

S.V. D.F.

Mean sum of square

Weight of 100 seed TSS (°Brix)

Rep. 2 1.29 0.02

Treat. 8 26.71* 0.55*

Error 16 1.12 0.03


0

10

20

30

40

50

60


Fig. 11: 100 green seed weight (g) of different varieties of pea

100 green seed weight

14.5

15

15.5

16

16.5

17

17.5


Fig. 12: TSS (°Brix) of different varieties of pea.

TSS° Brix

Table 4.14: 100 green seed weight (g.) and TSS (°Brix) of different

varieties of pea.

Varieties 100 green seed weight TSS° Brix

V1- Azad Pea-3 50.73 16.34

V2 - Kashi Nandini 44.40 16.55

V3- Kashi Samarth 54.30 16.44

V4- Kashi Uday 48.63 16.62

V5- Pusa Pragati 50.00 16.72

V6 PSM-3 50.07 16.64

V7 –Arkel 47.40 17.03

V8 -VL-7 49.07 15.66

V9 –Bonneville 53.43 17.16

Mean 49.78 16.57

S.Em± 0.87 0.16

CD at 5% 2.60 0.49

4.4: Economics:

Higher money value and less cost of cultivation are desirable traits for

getting higher return. Hence the economics of the treatment was worked out.

The data pertaining to economics of different varieties is depicted in table 4.15

and cost of cultivation incurred in various varieties is presented in Appendix I.

Table 4.15: Economic of different varieties of garden pea.

Variety Yield Gross return

Cost of cultivation

Net return

C:B ratio

V1- Azad Pea-3 149.1 223650.00 52181.00 171469.00 1:4.29

V2 - Kashi Nandini 166.14 249210.00 54581.00 194629.00 1:4.57

V3- Kashi Samarth 184.13 276195.00 53781.00 222414.00 1:5.14

V4- Kashi Uday 177.68 266520.00 52981.00 213539.00 1:5.03

V5- Pusa Pragati 180.32 270480.00 52981.00 217499.00 1:5.11

V6 PSM-3 141.16 211740.00 53381.00 158359.00 1:3.97

V7 –Arkel 136.72 205080.00 52181.00 152899.00 1:3.93

V8 -VL-7 143.19 214785.00 50981.00 163804.00 1:4.21

V9 –Bonneville 139.26 208890.00 50581.00 158309.00 1:4.13

It is revealed form the data that a significantly maximum green pod

yield of 184.13 q/ha was obtained in pea variety Kashi Samarth and received

net return of Rs 222414.00 per ha with cost benefit ratio 1:5.14 followed by

Pusa Pragati pod yield 180.32 q/ha and net return of Rs 217499.00 per ha

with cost benefit ratio of Rs 1:5.11. The lowest pod yield 136.72 q/ha and net

return of Rs 152899.00 per ha along with cost benefit ratio 1:3.93 recorded in

Arkel.

The rate per kg pea pods is shown in Appendix I. (Average rates are

taken for calculation of cost of cultivation i.e. for gross return.)

CHAPTER-V

DISCUSSION

The results obtained under the experiment entitled “Evaluation of

different varieties of garden pea for growth and yield attributes for green pod

production” are discussed in this chapter with the support of relevant literature

available in India & abroad and presented in different heads.

5.1 Growth parameters

Observations on plant height and number of branches per plant were

recorded at 30, 45, 60, 75 DAS and at maturity. The findings pertaining to

growth parameters viz., plant height, number of branches per plant, Days to

first flowering and Day‟s first pod picking indicated significant influence of

varieties of garden pea.

There was increase in growth parameters with advancement of

growth stage. Maximum plant height was recorded in variety Kashi Samarth

which was followed by Pusa Pragati at all the stages under study. Minimum

plant height was observed in variety Arkel at all the stages under study.

Similar results have also been reported by previous workers Bozolu et al.

(2007), Hussain and Badshah (2002), Hussain et al. (2005). Different

responses to plant height might be due to genetic characteristic of genotypes

and adaptability to a particular environment. Since the genotypes Arkel and

PSM-3 were earlier in flowering, so these had little time for attaining

vegetative growth, reserved food materials diverted to sex expression,

resulting in dwarfishness. The dwarf plant which could not benefit from

prevailing climatic condition showed less adaptability in tested area. These

finding save corroborated with those reported by Ishtiaq et al. (1996), Khan et

al. (2013).

Varieties showed significant variation with regard to number of

branches per plant in garden pea. Variety Kashi Samarth recorded maximum

number of branches per plant. It was followed by Pusa Pragati, Bonneville,

and Kashi Nandini in descending order. The minimum number of branches

was found in Arkel. More time to flowering in some genotypes with more

number of branches is an indication of more vegetative growth due to climatic

condition. It was observed that some genotypes had determinate type growth

and their plant bloomed and exhausted simultaneously, hence these had less

branches per plant as have been observed by Hussain and Badshah (2002).

Variation could be due to genetic variability of different germplasm. Similar

results were elucidated by Wadan et al. (1993).

Varieties showed significant variation with regard to days to first flower

initiation and days taken to first pod picking in garden pea. Earliest first flower

initiation and days taken to first pod picking was observed in Variety Arkel

which was followed by PSM-3, Kashi Nandini, and VL-7. Maximum days taken

to first flower initiation and days taken to first pod picking was observed in

variety Bonneville which was followed by Kashi Samarth under the study. The

cultivars taking minimum number of days to flowering are comparatively early

maturing than other cultivars, from the farmers point of view such cultivars

seem more desirable because early flowering means early crop maturity. The

cultivars Bonneville, Kashi Samarth and Kashi Uday stood at par while Arkel,

PSM-3 and Kashi Nandini also behaved statistically alike. These results are

supported with those of Makasheva (1983). Pea cultivars have a sufficiently

wide range of duration of vegetative period and their consequent phases

(flowering, maturation etc.). The duration of vegetative period corresponds to

agro-climatic peculiarities of the area of their cultivation. Similar results have

also been reported by Amjad & Amjun (2002).Days to flowering has positive

relation with days to first pod picking. These results are supported with those

of mishra and Yadav (1993), Quasim et al. (2001), Agarwal et al. (2006) and

Gupta and Singh (2007).

5.2 Yield parameters and yield

Different varieties of garden pea were studied with respect to number

of green pods per plant, green pod length, Number of seed per pod, Green

pod yield per plant, Green seed yield per plant, shelling percentage, 10 green

pods weight, Green pod yield per plot as well as green pod yield per

hectare(q/ha).

There was significant difference among varieties of garden pea with

respect to number of green pod per plant. Maximum number of green pod per

plant was found in variety Kashi Samarth which was followed by Pusa Pragati,

Kashi Uday and Kashi Nandini. The lowest number of pods was observed

under Arkel. Number of pods per plant related to plant height. Vigorous

varieties produced more pods while number of pods decreased with decrease

in plant height, which might be attributed to genetic makeup of the plants.

Some researchers observed number of pods per plant as the most useful

yield component. These findings are in agreement with Javaid et al. (2002)

and Khan et al. (2013).

Different varieties of garden pea exhibited significant difference in

green pod length. Longest green pod length was found in variety Pusa

Pragati. It was followed by Azad Pea-3, Kashi Samarth and PSM-3 with non

significant difference. Minimum pod length was recorded in Kashi Uday. In

general, pod size is a varietal character, but it is also affected by vigour of

plant. Greater availability of nutrients especially during pod formation and

development stages of more vigorous pea varieties might have translocated

maximum of its reserved food material towards pod formation and

development. Similar result was also reported by Shah et al. (1990), Arshad

et al. (1998) and Khan et al. (2013).

Number of green seed per pod indicated significant effect of different

varieties of garden pea. Maximum number of green seed per pod was

recorded in variety Pusa Pragati which was followed by Azad Pea-3, Kashi

Samarth and PSM-3 with non significant difference. Minimum number of seed

per pod was observed with Kashi Uday. Pod length has positive relationship

with number of seed per pod. These results are similar to those of Arshad et

al. (1998) who observed that numbers of seeds are correlated with pod

length. The more is the pod length, the more is number of seeds and vice

versa. The possible reason of less number of seeds per pod may be that

environment was not suitable at the time of pollination and fertilization. These

findings are in agreement with Ali et al. (2002a) and Quasim et al. (2001).

Green pod yield per plant revealed maximum values with Kashi

Samarth which was followed by Pusa Pragati and Kashi Uday. Minimum

Green pod yield per plant was observed under Arkel. Since green pod yield

per hectare was calculated on the basis of yield per plant and number of

plants per hectare, therefore, it followed the same pattern of significance as

the green pod yield per plant. Yield is a complex character determined by the

interaction of many heritable characters with soil, climate and agronomic

conditions. These findings are in agreement with Makasheva, (1983).

Maximum yield requires maximum vegetative growth during crop

establishment. Similar findings have been reported by Muehlbauer and

McPhee, (1997) and Alam et al. (2010).

Maximum green seed yield per plant was recorded in variety Kashi

Samarth which was significantly superior over all other varieties. It was

followed by Kashi Nandini, Kashi Uday, Pragati and Azad Pea-3. Lowest

green seed yield per plant was observed under Bonneville. Similar results

have also been reported by Khan et al. (2013).

Different varieties of garden pea exhibited significant difference in

shelling percentage. Highest shelling percentage was observed in variety

Kashi Samarth which was followed by Arkel and Kashi Nandini with at par

performance. Minimum shelling percentage was recorded in Bonneville.

Similar findings have also been reported by Chaudhary et al. (2004) and

Agarwal et al. (2006).

Different varieties of garden pea exhibited significant difference in 10

green pods weight. Maximum green pod weight was found in case of variety

Kashi Samarth. It was followed by Pusa Pragati, Kashi Uday and Bonneville.

Minimum 10 green pods weight was recorded with Azad Pea-3. This variation

might be due to the inherent potential of cultivars and their interaction with soil

and climatic conditions. Similar result also been reported by Khichi et al.

(2016) and Amjad and Anjum (2002).

Green pod yield per plot revealed maximum values with Kashi Samarth

followed by Pusa Pragati and Kashi Uday. Minimum green pod yield per plot

was observed in Arkel which followed by Bonneville. Maximum yield requires

maximum vegetative growth during crop establishment. Similar findings have

been reported by Muehlbauer and McPhee, (1997) and Alam et al. (2010).

Green pod yield per hectare revealed maximum values with Kashi

Samarth followed by Pusa Pragati and Kashi Uday. Minimum green pod yield

per hectare was observed in Arkel which followed by Bonneville. More yields

in different genotypes may be due to optimum plant survival, long and more

number of seeds per pod, which ultimately contributed significantly towards

final yield. The performance of a cultivar mainly depends on interaction of

genetic makeup and environment. These findings are in agreement with

Arshad et al. (1998). Similar results have also been reported by Natarajan and

Arumugam (1983) who observed that positive association of grain yield with

plant height, pods per plant.

5.3 Quality parameter

Quality of pea seed was studied with respect to weight of 100 seed and

TSS results showed significant influenced of varieties on quality in green pea.

Weight of 100 seed indicated significant difference in pea varieties.

Among varieties, maximum test weight was observed in Kashi Samarth

followed by Bonneville with non significant difference. Minimum weight of 100

seed was noted with Kashi Nandini. The results suggest a strong relationship

between source and sink and maximum translocation of food material from

vegetative to reproductive portion in good environmental condition which

cause higher seed weight. Similar result also been reported by Ali et al.

(2002b). The rate of acclimatization of genotypes may be considered the

possible cause of this variation. Moreover, this variation might be due to

genetic variability of different genotypes. These findings are in agreement with

Hatam and Amanullah (2001), Murtaza et al. (2007) and Singh and Singh (2011).

Highest TSS was found with variety Bonneville which was followed by

Arkel with non significant difference. Lowest TSS was observed under VL-7.

Similar results have also been reported by Tiwari et al. (2014) and Khichi et al.

(2016).

5.4 Economics of different varieties:

Higher money value and less cost of cultivation are desirable traits for

getting higher returns. Hence economics of the varieties was work out.

It is revealed from the data obtained that the significantly maximum

green pod yield was obtained in garden pea variety Kashi Samarth and it

gave highest yield (184.13 q/ha) cost benefit ratio 1:5.14 it followed by Pusa

Pragati was found the green pod yield (180.32 q/ha) and cost benefit ratio of

Rs 1:5.11, while lowest pod yield (136.19 q/ha) and cost benefit ratio 1:3.93

found in variety Arkel. The maximum gross and net return with highest benefit:

cost ratio (1:5.14) was obtained in Kashi Samarth and Pusa Pragati (1:5.11) it

means these varieties have potential to give good returns to the farmers. The

results are in agreement with Hussain et al. (2005) and Tiwari et al. (2014).

CHAPTER-VI

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION FOR FURTHER

STUDIES

A field experiment entitled “Evaluation of different varieties of garden

pea for growth and yield attributes for green pod production” was conducted

at Horticulture research farm, College of Agriculture, Sehore during Rabi

2015-16. Nine pea varieties were tested in randomized block design with

three replications. The findings obtained from the investigation are

summarized as follows:

Summary

6.1 Growth parameters

. Growth of pea was studied with respect to plant height and number of

branches per plant at 30, 45, 60, 75 DAS and at maturity. The findings

pertaining to growth parameters viz., plant height, number of branches per

plant, days to first flowering and days to first pod picking indicated significant

influence of varieties of pea.

Growth parameters showed increase with advancement of growth stage.

Variety Kashi Samarth exhibited maximum plant height and number of

branches per plant at all the stages under study. Minimum plant height and

number of branches per plant were found with Arkel.

Varieties showed significant variation with regard to days to first flower

initiation in pea. Earliest first flower initiation was observed in variety Arkel

which was followed by PSM-3 and Kashi Nandini. Maximum days to first

flower initiation were taken in Bonneville which followed by Kashi Samarth

under the study. There was significant difference with regard to days to first

pod picking. Arkel took minimum days to first pod picking under the study. It

was at par to PSM-3. Maximum days taken to first pod picking were noted in

Bonneville which followed by Kashi Samarth under the study.

6.2 Yield parameters and yield

Pea varieties were evaluated with respect to number of green pods per

plant, green pod length, Number of seed per pod, Green pod yield per plant,

Green seed yield per plant, shelling percentage, 10 green pods weight, Green

pod yield per plot as well as green pod yield per hectare(q/ha).

There was significant difference among varieties with respect to number

of green pod per plant. Maximum number of pod per plant was found in

variety Kashi Samarth which was followed by Pusa Pragati. The lowest

number of pods was observed under Arkel. Varieties showed significant

difference in green pod length. Longest pod was found in case of variety Pusa

Pragati which was followed Azad Pea-3 and Kashi Samarth. Minimum pod

length was recorded with Kashi Uday. Number of seed per pod indicated

significant effect of varieties. Maximum number of seed per pod was recorded

in variety Pusa Pragati which was followed by Azad Pea-3. Minimum number

of seed per pod was observed with Kashi Uday. Maximum green pod yield per

plant was recorded in Kashi Samarth followed by Pusa Pragati. Minimum

green pod yield per plant was observed under Arkel. Maximum green seed

yield per plant was found with variety Kashi Samarth which was followed by

Pusa Pragati and Kashi Uday. Minimum green seed yield per plant was

registered under Bonneville. There was significant difference among varieties

for shelling percentage. Highest shelling percentage was observed under

Kashi Samarth which was followed by Arkel and Kashi Nandini with at par

performance. Minimum shelling percentage was recorded with Bonneville.

There was significant difference among varieties for 10 green pod weight.

Highest 10 green pod weight per plant was observed under Kashi Samarth

which was followed by Pusa Pragati. Minimum 10 green pod weight was

recorded with Azad Pea-3. Maximum green pod yield per plot was found with

variety Kashi Samarth followed by Pusa Pragati and Kashi Uday. Minimum

green pod yield per plot was registered under Arkel. Maximum green pod yield

per hectare was found with variety Kashi Samarth which was followed by

Pusa Pragati and Kashi Uday. Lowest green pod yield per hectare was

observed in Arkel.

6.3 Quality attributes

Pea seed quality was tested for parameters viz., weight of 100 seed

and TSS. Weight of 100 seed denoted significant difference in varieties.

Maximum test weight was found in Kashi Samarth followed by Bonneville with

non significant difference. Minimum test weight was noted with Kashi Nandini.

Results showed significant influence of varieties on TSS in garden pea. TSS

was highest in variety Bonneville which was followed by Arkel with non

significant difference. Lowest TSS was noted with VL-7.

6.4 Economics of different varieties:

Varieties showed significant variation with regard to economics of

different varieties of garden pea. C:B ratio was highest in variety Kashi

Samarth which was followed by Pusa Pragati. Lowest C:B ratio was noted

with Arkel.

Conclusion

It may be concluded from the findings of the present study that among

nine varieties, Kashi Samarth showed the highest growth and yield attributes

with regard to green pod yield which was followed by Pusa Pragati and Kashi

Uday. Kashi Samarth also showed better performance with respect to green

seed quality. Variety Arkel was earliest which was followed by VL-7 and Azad

Pea-3.

Suggestion for further work

These findings are based on one year data hence the experiment should

be repeated for 2-3 years for drawing the conclusion.

These varieties may be tested at different dates of sowing to determine

the appropriate time of sowing in the agro-climatic conditions of the

region.

Quality of pods may also be tested to assess the effect of location on

pea varieties during further trials.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agarwal, A.; Gupta, S. and Ahmed. A. (2006). Performance of garden pea

(Pisum sativum) cultivars in high altitude cold desert of Ladakh. Indian

J. of Agric. Sci. 76 (12) : 713-715

Agarwal, A.; Gupta, S. and Ahmed, Z. (2006). Performance of garden pea

(Pisum sativum) cultivars in high-altitude cold desert of Ladakh. J.

Agric. Sci., 76(12): 713-715.

Alam, M. K.; Uddin, M. M.; Ahmed, M.; Latif

M. A. and Rahman M. M. (2010)

Growth and green pod yield of garden pea varieties under different

nutrient levels. J. Agrofor. Environ. 4 (1): 105-107.

Ali, I.; Rub, A. and Ali, S.A. (2002a). Performance of pea germplasm for

seed yield and yield components under Peshawar conditions. Sarhad.

J. Agric. 18(1): 39-43.

Ali, I.; Rub, A. and Hussain, S. A. (2002b). Screening of pea germplasm for

growth, yield and resistance against powdery mildew under the agro-

climatic conditions of Peshawar. Sarhad J. Agric. 18(2): 177-181.

Amjad, M. and Anjum, M.A. (2002). Perfomence of nine pea cultiver under

faisalabad conditions. Pak. J.Agri. Sci. 39, 16-19

Ardelean, M.; Maties, M.; Chetan, L. and P. Bologa (1989). Variability in

several quantitative characters in garden pea varieties and its value for

breeding. Buletinul Institutulai Agronomic cluj Seria Agricultura, 43: 55-

60.

Arshad, M.; Hussain, S. A.; Ali, S. A. N.; Muhammad, N. and Ziaullah.

(1998). Screening of pea (Pisum sativum L.) cultivars in Kohat valley.

Sarhad J. Agric. 14(6): 559-562.

Baginsky, C.; Faiguenbaum H. and Kraru, C. (1994). Pre and post harvest

evaluation of six pea cultivars. Hort. Abst. 064-07081.

Bozoglu, H. E.; Peksen, A.; Peksen and A. Gulumser, (2007). Determination

of the yield performance and harvesting periods of fifteen pea (Pisum

sativum L.) cultivars sown in autumn and spring. Pak. J. Bot. 39(6):

2017-2025.

Chadha, S.; Rameshwar; Saini, J.P. and Sharma, S (2013), Performance of

Different Varieties of Pea (Pisum Sativum L.) under Organic Farming

Conditions in Mid Himalayas. International J. Agric. and Food Sci.

Tech., 4(7): 733-738.

Chaudhary, H.; Soft, A. A. and Venna, M. K. (2004). Genetic variability in pea

under temperate environment of Kashmir. (in) Book of Abstracts. First

Indian Horticulture Cbngress on Improving Productivity; Quaiity, Post-

harvest Management and Trade in Horticultural Crops, JARI, New

Delhi, 6-9 November 2004, p 55.

Chetia, S. K. and Yadav, R. K. (2002). Phenotypic stability of yield and its

components in pea (Pisum sativum L.). Res. Crop., 3 (3): 606-614.

Dhillon, G. S. and Singh, M. (1993). Matar Ageta-6 an early and high yielding

garden pea. Indian Horticulture, 37(4): 16-17.

Fikere, M.; Tadesse, T.; Gebeyehu, S. and Hundie, B. (2010).Agronomic

performances, disease reaction and yield stability of field pea (Pisum

sativum L.) genotypes in Bale Highlands, Ethiopia. Australian J. Crop

Sci., 4 (4): 238-246.

Giri, A. N. and Bhalerao, S. S. (1984). A note on response of rainfed pea

varieties to row spacing and phosphate levels. Indian Journal of

Agronomy, 29(3): 386-387.

Gopinath, K. A.; Saha, S.; Mina, B. L.; Pande, H.; Kumar, N.; Shrivastva A. K.

and Gupta, H. S. (2009). Yield potential of garden pea (Pisum sativum

L.) varieties and soil properties under organic and integrated nutrient

management systems. Agron. Soil Sci., 55 (2): 157-167.

Gupta, A. J. and Singh, Y. V. (2007). Evaluation of garden pea (Pisum

sativum) genotypes for earliness, yield and quality attributes. Haryana

J. Hortic. Sci., 36(1&2) 106-110.

Habib, N. and Zamin, M. (2003). Off-Season Pea Cultivation in Dir Kohistan

Valley. Asian J.Plant.Sci. 2:283-285.

Hatam, M. and Amanullah. (2001). Grain yield potential of garden peas

(Pisum sativum L.) germlpasm. J. Biol. Sci. 1(4): 242-244.

Hussain S. A.; Hussain, M.; Qasim, M. and B. Hussain. (2005). Performance

and economic evaluation of pea varieties at two altitudes in Kaghan

Valley. Sarhad J. Agric. 21(4): 587-589.

Hussain, S. A. and N. Badshah. (2002). Study on the adaptive behaviour of

exotic pea (Pisum sativum L.) varities under local condition of

Peshawar. Asian J. Plant Sci. 1(5): 567-569.

Ihsan-ul-Haq, H.R. and Hussain, S.A. (1997). Screening of suitable pea

cultivars for springing cultivation at Chitral. Sarhad J. Agric., 13: 31-34.

Ishtiaq, M., Ahmad, Z. and Shah, A. (1996). Evaluation of exotic cultivars of

pea in Peshawar valley. Sarhad J. Agric., 13: 425-431

Ishtiaq, M.; Ahmad, Z. and A. Shah. (1996). Evaluation of exotic cultivars of

pea in Peshawar valley. Sarhad J. Agric. 12(4): 425-431.

Jan, B. A.; Narayan, R. and Shahnaz Mufti (2007). Evaluation of garden pea

genotypes for their yield and quality attributes in Kashmir valley. Env.

Ecol., 25: 848-853

Javaid, A.; Ghafoor and Anwar, R. (2002). Evaluation of local and exotic pea

(Pisum sativum) germplasm for vegetative and dry grain traits. Pak. J.

Bot. 34(4): 419-427.

Kalloo, G.; Rai, M.; Singh, J.; Verma, A. and Kumar, R. (2005). Morphological

and biochemical variability in vegetable pea (Pisum sativum L.).Veg.

Sci., 32 (1): 19-23.

Khan, T.N.; Ramzan, A.; Jillani, G.; and Mehmood, T. (2013) Morphological

performance of peas (pisum sativum L.) genotypes under rainfed

conditions of potowar region. J. Agric. Res., 51(1): 51-60.

Khichi,P.; Chandan, P.M.; Chauhan, J.; Srinivas, J. and Bhagat, M. (2016)

Varietal evaluation of garden pea under semi-arid conditions of

Vidharba region. International J. Farm. Sci. 6(1): 20-24.

Khokhar, K.M.; Khan, M.A.; Hussain, S.I.: Mohmood, T. and Rehman, H.U.

(1988). Comperative evalution of some foreign and local pea cultivars.

Pak. J. Agric. Res. 9(4): 549-551

Makasheva, R.Kh. (1983). The Pea. Oxonian Press Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi,

India. 78-107

Mehmet, A. A. and Ceyhan, E. (2013). Determination of agriculture charaters

of pea (pisum sativum L.) Genotype. J.Animal and veterninary

Advance. 12(7):798-802

Mishra, R. K. and Yadav, R. K. (1993). Performance of prominent varieties of

peas, under irrigated and late sown condition for Bilaspur region of

Madhya Pradesh. Adv. Plant Sci., 6(2): 370-371.

Muehlbauer, E.J. and McPhee, K.E. (1997). Peas In The Physiology of

Vegetable Crops (Ed. H.C. Wein). CAB International, Wallingford, UK.

429-459.

Muhammad, A. and Muhammad, A. A. (2002) performance of nine pea

cultivars under Faisalabad conditions Pak. J Agri. Sci . 39:16-19.

Mukherjee, D.; Sharma, B.R. and Mani, J.K. (2013). Influence of different

sowing dates and cultivars on growth, yield and disease incidence in

garden pea (Pisum sativum) under mid hill situation. Indian Journal of

Agricultural Sciences 83 (9): 918–923,

Murtaza, G.; Asghar, R.; Ahmad, S. and Majid, S. A. (2007). The yield and

yield components of pea (Pisum sativum L.) as influenced by salicylic

acid Pak. J. Bot., 39(2): 551-559,

Natarajan, S. and Arumugam, R. (1983). Evaluation of pea (Pisum sativum

L.) cultivars of Kodiakanal hills. South Indian Horticulture. 31(1) : 7-10.

NHB (2014). National Horticulture Database, National Horticulture Board,

Govt. of India, Gurgaon, India.www.nhb.gov.in

Olsen, S. R.; C V. Cole and L. A. Dean (1954). Estimation of available

phosphorus in soil by extraction with sodium carbonate. USDA

Circular No.939, Washington, p.15.

Pani, R.S.; Krishnaprasad, V.S.R. and Rai, M. (2001) Stability of yield and its

components in garden pea (Pisum sativum). Indian Journal of

Agricultural Sciences 71(11): 701-703

Peksen, E.; Peksen, A.; Bozoglu, H. and Gulumser, A. (2004). Comparison of

fresh pod yield and pod related characteristics in pea (Pisum

sativum L.) cultivars sown in autumn and spring under Samsun

ecological conditions. Turk. J. of Agric. For., 28 (5): 363-370.

Piper, C.S., (1967), Soil and Plant Analysis. Hans Publishers, Bombay, p.638.

Poma, I. and Zora, D. (1993). First result on the possibility of introducing field

pea in western Sicily: Biological/agronomic evaluation of some

genotypes. Sementi Elette, 39: 23-27.

Qasim, M.; Zubair, M. and Wadan, D. (2001). Evaluation of exotic cultivars of

pea in Swat valley. Sarhad J. Agric. 17(4): 545-548.

Ranalli, P.; Giordano, I.; Ziliotto, U.; Lomabrcho, G. M.; Pirami, V.; Lahoz, E.;

Bcuonaccorso, V.; Talluri, P.; Bottozzi, P.; Lucque, G.; Rosoe, D.;

Ruaro, G.; Casrini, B. and Del-Re, P. (1992). Yield potential of pea for

dry seed in different Italian environments. Sementi-Elette 38(2): 15-43

Sharma T R. (1999). Combining ability and heterosis in garden pea (Pisum

sativum) in the cold desert Himalayan region. Ind. J. of Agric. Sci. 69

(5): 386-8.

Sharma, N.; Jamwal, S.S. and Gupta, S. S. R. (2010). Performance of

different varieties of peas (Pisum sativum var hortense) under

intermediate zone of Jammu Region. Env. Ecol., 28 (2A): 1183-1185.

Shridhar and Mani, V. P. (1995). Breeding garden pea against stress

conditions for north-western hills. Veg. Sci., 22 (1): 48-51.

Singh, J. P.; Singh, D. and Tewari, A. (2012). A comparative study on yield

and contributing traits of vegetable pea cultivars under Tarai region of

Uttarakhand. Pantnagar J. Res., 10(2): 259-260

Singh, R. and Singh, P.M. (2011). Effect of sowing dates and varieties on

yield and quality of garden pea seed. Veg. Sci. 38(2):184-187

Subbiah, B.V. and Asija, G.L.(1956). A rapid procedure for the determination

of available N in soils. Curr. Sc. 25: 256-260.

Tiwari, R.; Lalit, B. and Dev, R. (2014) Effect of date of sowing on growth and

yield of vegetable pea genotypes under rain-fed mid-hill conditions of

Uttarakhand. Indian J. Hort., 71(2):288-291

Wadan, D.; Khan, M. and Majeed, A. 1993. Performance of pea cultivars in

various agro climatic conditions of Swat. Sarhad J. Agric. 9(2): 139-

143.

Walkley and Black, C. A. (1934). Method of plant and soil analysis part II.

Pub. Amer. Sco. Agron. Madison, Wiscorsin, USA, pp. 1367 – 1373.

Yadav, A.K.; Chauhan, S.K.; and Shroti, S.K. (2012). Effect of sowing dates

and nitrogen levels on yield and economics of vegetable pea-wheat-

maize cropping system in central part of Uttar Pradesh. Ann. Pl. Soil

Res. 14(2):159- 162

Yang, W.M.; Chung, S.J. and Yang, S.Y. (1989). Abstracts of

Communications Papers. Korean Soc. Hort. Sci. 7: 54-55.

Zaman, M.K.; Qureshi, B.H. and Majeed, A. (1987). Comparative performance

of 10 varieties of pea under mid hill conditions of Swat. Sarhad J. Agric.

3: 303-307

VITA

The author of this thesis, Mr. Kamlesh Patidar S/o Shri Chenram

Patidar and Smt. Ramkunver Patidar was born on the 30th day of December

1991 at Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh. He passed his higher secondary

school examination from Govt. L.B.S. School of Excellence, Mandsaur (M.P.)

with 73.00% in the year 2009.

He took admission for B.Sc. (Horti.) in the College of Horticulture,

Mandsaur, Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Gwalior

(M.P.) in the year 2010-14. He has successfully completed his graduation with

7.32 out of 10 point scale in the year 2014.

For further study, he got admission in M.Sc. Horticulture (Vegetable

Science). at college of Agriculture, Sehore (M.P) where successfully

completed entire course requirement for master‟s degree with OGPA 7.51 out

of 10 point scale.

For the partial fulfilment of the master‟s degree “Evaluation of

different varieties of garden pea for growth and yield attributes for green

pod production”. This was successfully conducted by him and being

submitted in the form of this thesis.

Documents

Evaluation of Different Varieties of Garden Pea for …...Evaluation of Different Varieties of Garden Pea for Growth and Yield Attributes for Green Pod Production THESIS Submitted