Upload
vuonganh
View
217
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Reprint ISSN 1991-3036 (Web Version)
International Journal of Sustainable Crop Production (IJSCP)
(Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod.)
Volume: 11 Issue: 2 May 2016
Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2): 7-17 (May 2016)
EFFECT OF FOLIAR APPLICATION OF CHITOSAN ON GROWTH AND YIELD IN
TOMATO, MUNGBEAN, MAIZE AND RICE
M.T. ISLAM, M.M.A. MONDAL, M.S. RAHMAN, S. KHANAM, M.B. AKTER, M.A. HAQUE AND N.C. DAFADAR
An International Scientific Research Publisher
Green Global Foundation©
Web address: http://ggfjournals.com/e-journals archive
E-mails: [email protected] and [email protected]
7 Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2):May 2016
EFFECT OF FOLIAR APPLICATION OF CHITOSAN ON GROWTH AND YIELD IN TOMATO,
MUNGBEAN, MAIZE AND RICE
M.T. ISLAM*, M.M.A. MONDAL, M.S. RAHMAN, S. KHANAM, M.B. AKTER, M.A. HAQUE AND N.C. DAFADAR1
Crop Physiology Division, Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear Agriculture, Mymensingh;
1CSO, Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission, Dhaka.
*Corresponding author & address: Dr. Md. Tariqul Islam, E-mail: [email protected]
Accepted for publication on 25 April 2016
ABSTRACT
Islam MT, Mondal MMA, Rahman MS, Khanam S, Akter MB, Haque MA, Dafadar NC (2016) Effect of foliar application of chitosan on
growth and yield in tomato, mungbean, maize and rice. Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2), 7-17.
Pot and field experiments were conducted under sub-tropical condition (24075´ N and 90050´ E) to investigate the effect of foliar application of chitosan on morphological, growth and reproductive characters and its consequence on
fruit or grain yield of summer and winter tomato, summer mungbean, maize and, Aman and Boro rice. Chitosan was
sprayed @ 25, 50, 75 and 100 ppm for tomato and mungbean, 50, 75, 100 and 125 ppm for maize and 25, 50 and 75 ppm for rice. Chitosan was sprayed two times on tomato and mungbean at vegetative and flowering start phases.
Chitosan was sprayed three times on maize and rice at vegetative and flowering stages. Foliar application of chitosan
at vegetative stage enhanced plant growth and development which resulted increased in total dry mass production of tomato, mungbean, maize and rice. However, among the studied crops, foliar application of chitosan on rice had little
effect on growth and development. Application of chitosan increased the prime yield component, number of fruits or
pods or grain plant-1 and resulting increased fruit or grain yield of summer and winter tomato, summer mungbean, maize and rice. Among the concentrations, 75, 50, 100 and 50 ppm respectively for tomato, mungbean, maize and rice
had superiority for yield components and seed or fruit yield over other concentrations. Therefore, application of
chitosan @ 75, 50, 100 and 50 ppm, respectively for tomato, mungbean, maize and rice may be recommended for increasing yield.
Key words: chitosan, plant growth regulator, tomato, mungbean, maize, rice, yield
INTRODUCTION
Tomato (Lycopersicon esculenturn Mill.) is grown not only in Bangladesh but also in many countries of
the world for its taste and nutritional status. The crop performs better under an average monthly
temperature of 20-250C. But commercially, it may grow at temperature ranging from 15-27
0C (Haque et
al. 1999). In Bangladesh, congenial atmosphere remains for tomato production during November to March.
So, tomato is widely grown in Bangladesh usually in winter season (November-March). High temperature
during day and night above 320 and 21
0C, respectively was recorded as limiting factor to fruit set due to
impaired complex physiological processes in the pistil which results on floral or fruit abscission (Picken
1984) during summer season. However, the yield performance of summer tomato varieties is very poor. So,
it is urgent to increase tomato yield by proper management and cultural practices. Plant growth regulators are
one of the most important factors for increasing higher yield. Application of hormone has good management
effect on growth and yield of tomato. On the other hand, flower and fruit abortion are common phenomenon in
tomato (Imam et al. 2010). A large proportion of tomato reproductive structures abscise before reaching
maturity, which is the primary cause of lowering yield in summer season (Rahman et al. 1996; Mondal et al.
2011). Fruit yield of tomato can be increased through reducing reproductive abscission. Hormones regulate
abscission process and synthetic hormones may reduce abscission of flowers and ultimately increase in yield of
fruit crops (Imam et al. 2010; Rahman et al. 2015).
Mungbean, [Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek] is one of the most important pulses in south-east Asia. However, its
yield is much lower than that of other legume crops such as grasspea, chickpea and lentil due to large number of
flower and pod abortion is a common phenomenon in mungbean and abscission of a large proportion of
reproductive structures (69-90%) before maturity, would be the primary cause of lowering yield in mungbean
(Mondal et al. 2009). There are reports that application of growth regulators reduced abscission, increased yield
components thereby increased in yield of soybean (Nahar and Ikeda, 2002) and tomato (Imam et al. 2010).
Maize (Zea mays L.), after rice and wheat, is the most important cereal crop in South-East Asia. Maize is a
unique crop because of its high yield potentiality and versatile use, low cost per unit of production (Rashid
2009). Due to the high yield potentiality and versatile uses, almost year round growth ability and higher per
hectare yield than other cereals, area and production of maize is increasing day by day in South-East Asia (FAO
2010). Despite significant annual increase in fertilizer use, its yield has stagnated and even declined in some
cases. So far, different conventional approaches have been used to improve the yield of maize. These
approaches are not much effective in many cases in improving the yield or narrowing down the gap between
potential and farmer’s obtained yields. This situation forces us to use non-conventional approaches such as
biotechnology, genetic engineering and use of plant hormones. Application of plant growth regulator (PGR)
seems to be one of the important practices in view of convenience, cost and labor efficiency.
Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is one of the most important food crops in the world. Rice is consumed by more than
50% of the world’s population which provides 45-60% of the dietary calories (Yang and Zhang, 2010). The
ISSN-1991-3036 (Online)
Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2):7-17(May 2016)
Copyright© 2016 Green Global Foundation
www.ggfjournals.com
8 Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2):May 2016
yield of rice is an integrated result of various processes including canopy photosynthesis, conversion of
assimilates to biomass and partitioning of assimilates to grains (Jeng et al. 2006). Further, grain yield can be
defined as the product of yield sink capacity and filling efficiency. To increase yield further and to break the
yield ceiling, breeding efforts have expanded the yield sink capacity (the maximum size of sink organs to be
harvested) mainly by increasing the number of spikelets per panicle. As a result, cultivars with large panicles or
extra-heavy panicle types with numerous spikelets per panicle have become available such as the New Plant
Type of the IRRI, and hybrid and ‘super’ rice in China (Peng et al. 2008). These cultivars, however, frequently
do not exhibit their high yield potential due to their many unfilled grains (Yang et al. 2002; Yang et al. 2006;
Tang et al. 2009). There are reports that application of growth regulators reduced number of unfilled grains
thereby increased in yield of rice (Razzaque and Rahman, 2005; Berahim et al. 2014).
Chitosan is a natural biopolymer derived from chitin, a polysaccharide found in exoskeleton of shellfish such as
shrimp, lobster or crabs and cell wall of fungi is known to possess biological activity (Gornik et al. 2008). Very
few efforts were done to study the effect of chitosan on plant growth and development and its productivity
which mainly applied as to stimulate immunity of plants, to protect plants and food products against
microorganisms (bacteria and fungi) (Hadwiger et al. 2002; ChunYan et al. 2003; Devlieghere et al. 2004;
Patkowska et al. 2006; No et al. 2007; Gornik et al. 2008). Recently, some workers reported that chitosan
enhanced plant growth and development (Gornik et al. 2008; Abdel-Mawgoud et al. 2010; Mondal et al. 2012).
To the best of our knowledge, there has also been no previous report regarding the effects of foliar application
of chitosan on growth, reproductive characters and its consequence on yield in summer and winter tomato,
summer mungbean, maize and rice. Considering the above facts, the present research work was undertaken to
study the effect of chitosan on morph-physiological features, yield attributes and yield in maize, rice, mungbean
and tomato under sub-tropical (24075´ N and 90
050´ E) conditions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Summer tomato: The experiment was conducted at the pot yard of Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear Agriculture,
Mymensingh, during the period from February to May 2011 to investigate the response of different
concentrations of chitosan on tomato grown in summer season. BINA tomato-6 was used as planting material.
Five different concentrations of Chitosan viz., 0, 25, 50, 75 and 100 ppm were sprayed at two growth stages
(vegetative and reproductive stages) of tomato. In control, water was sprayed as per treatment. The chitosan was
sprayed by a hand sprayer at afternoon. Foliar applications were carried out until run off the solution. The pots
were filled with 12 kg sandy loam soil. Fertilizers were used as per fertilizer recommendation guide (BARC
2005). The experiment was laid out in completely randomized design with four replications. Each pot contained
one plant and denotes a replication. Twenty five days old seedlings were transplanted on 24 February, 2011.
Winter tomato: The field experiment was conducted at BINA sub-station Ishurdi during the period from
November 2012 to April 2013. Five concentrations viz. 0, 50, 75, and 100 ppm was sprayed at vegetative and
reproductive stage. The experiment was laid out in randomized complete block design with 3 replicates. The
unit plot size was 4 m × 3 m and spacing was 50 cm × 50 cm. Intercultural operations like irrigation, weeding,
mulching and pest control were followed as and when necessary for normal plant growth and development. The
morphological, reproductive and yield attributes were recorded during tomato harvest. Per cent fruit set to
flowers was calculated as follows: % fruit set = (Number of fruits plant-1
÷ Number of flowers plant-1
) × 100.
Harvesting was done at different dates depending on fruit ripening.
Mungbean: The first experiment was conducted at the pot yard of the Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear
Agriculture (BINA), Mymensingh, during the period from February to May 2011 to investigate the response of
different concentrations of chitosan in two summer mungbean varieties viz., Binamoog-7 and Binamoog-8. Five
different concentrations of chitosan viz., 0, 25, 50, 75 and 100 ppm were sprayed twice at two growth stages of
mungbean i.e Chitosan spayed @ 0, 25, 50, 75 and 100 ppm both at vegetative (25 days after sowing) and
flowering and fruiting stages (40 days after sowing). In control, water was sprayed as per treatment. Foliar
applications were carried out until run off the solution. The pots were filled with 12 kg sandy loam soil.
Fertilizers were used as per fertilizer recommendation guide (BARC 2005). The experiment was laid out in two
factor completely randomized design with four replications. Each pot contained two plants and denotes a
replication. Intercultural operations like irrigation, weeding, mulching and pest control were followed as and
when necessary for normal plant growth and development.
The second experiment was conducted at research farm of Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear Agriculture during
March to May 2013. Five different concentrations of chitosan viz., 0, 50, 75, 100, and 125 ppm were sprayed at
vegetative and reproductive stages of two mungbean varieties, Binamoog-7 and Binamoog-8. The experiment
was laid out in randomized complete block design with 3 replicates. The unit plot size was 2 m × 3 m and plant
spacing was 30 cm × 10 cm. Recommended cultural practices were done as when as necessary. The grain yield
was recorded on plot basis and converted in t ha-1
.
Islam et al.
9 Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2):May 2016
Maize: The first experiment was conducted at the farmer field, Mymensingh, Bangladesh, during the period
from December 2011 to April 2012 to investigate the response of grain yield to different concentrations of
Chitosan growth promotor. Quality protein maize-1 (QPM-1) was used as planting material. Five different
concentrations of Chitosan viz., 0, 50, 75, 100 and 125 ppm were sprayed three times at 40, 55 and 70 days after
sowing (DAS). In control, water was sprayed as per treatment. The experiment was laid out in a randomized
complete block design with three replications. The unit plot size was 4 m × 5 m. Plant spacing was 70 cm × 30
cm. Fertilizers such as urea, TSP, MP and gypsum were applied @ 285, 250, 180 and 40 kg ha-1
, respectively.
Urea was applied in three splits at 30, 50 and 70 DAS and other fertilizers were applied as basal dose during the
final land preparation. Other cultural practices such as weeding and pest control were done as and when
necessary for normal plant growth and development.
The second experiment was conducted at farmer’s field of Rangpur district during November 2012 to April
2013. The hybrid variety BARI Hybrid Maize-9 was used as planting material. Five different concentrations of
chitosan viz., 0, 50, 75, 100, and 125 ppm was sprayed four times starting from 20 days after sowing with 15
days interval. The experiment was laid out in randomized complete block design with 3 replicates. The unit plot
size was 3.9 m × 4.9 m and plant spacing was 70 cm × 30 cm. Recommended cultural practices were done as
when as necessary. The grain yield was recorded on plot basis and converted in tones ha-1
.
Rice: The first experiment was conducted at the field Laboratory of Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear
Agriculture, Mymensingh, during the period from July to December 2010 to investigate the response of fine
grain rice to different concentrations of chitisan hormone under three growth stages. The two fine grain rice
varieties viz., BRRI dhan34 and Kalizira were used as planting materials. The experiment comprised of (a)
hormone spray at three growth stages of vegetative, booting and heading phase i.e. (i) chitosan spray one time at
tillering stage only (T1), 30 days after transplanting (DAT); (ii) chitosan spray two times both at tillering and
booting stages (T2), 30 and 55 DAT; and (iii) chitisan spray three times at tillering, booting and heading stages
(T3), 30, 55 and 70 DAT and (b) four levels of chitosan viz., 0, 25, 50 and 75 ppm. The experiment was laid out
in three factors randomized complete block design with three replications. The unit plot size was 4 m × 3 m.
Plant spacing was 20 cm × 15 cm. Fertilizers such as urea, TSP, MP and gypsum were applied @ 50, 60, 70 and
40 kg ha-1
, respectively. Urea was applied in two splits at 15 and 45 DAT and other fertilizers were applied as
basal dose during the final land preparation. Other cultural practices such as weeding and pest control were done
as and when necessary for normal plant growth and development.
The second experiment was conducted at the field Laboratory of Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear Agriculture,
Jamalpur, during the period from December 2010 to May 2011. Iratom-24 was used as planting material. The
experiment comprised of (a) hormone spray at three growth stages of vegetative, booting and heading phase i.e.
(i) chitosan spray one time at tillering stage only (T1), 30 days after transplanting (DAT); (ii) chitosan spray two
times both at tillering and booting stages (T2), 30 and 60 DAT; and (iii) chitisan spray three times at tillering,
booting and heading stages (T3), 30, 60 and 90 DAT and (b) four levels of chitosan viz., 0, 25, 50 and 75 ppm.
The experiment was laid out in two factors randomized complete block design with three replications. The unit
plot size was 4 m × 3 m. Plant spacing was 20 cm × 20 cm. Fertilizers such as urea, TSP, MP and gypsum were
applied @ 185, 150, 80 and 40 kg ha-1
, respectively. Urea was applied in three splits at 10, 30 and 50 DAT and
other fertilizers were applied as basal dose during the final land preparation. Other cultural practices such as
weeding and pest control were done as and when necessary for normal plant growth and development. The
collected data of eight experiments of four crops were analyzed statistically separately using the computer
package program, MSTAT-C and the mean differences were adjudged by Duncan’s Multiple Range Test
(DMRT).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Summer tomato: The influence of chitosan application at different concentrations on yield attributes and fruit
yield was significant (Table 1). Results showed that flower and fruit number, reproductive efficiency (RE) and
fruit yield were greater in chitosan applied plants than control plants. Results indicated that flower and fruit
number and fruit yield increased with increasing concentration of chitosan till 75 ppm followed by a decline.
This result indicates that application of chitosan @ 100 ppm may be toxic for plant growth and development
thereby fruit yield. The lowest number of fruits per flower cluster as well as RE was recorded in 100 ppm of
chitosan and the higher was recorded in 50 and 75 ppm of chitosan. These results indicate that application of
chitosan increased flower production as well as increased RE which resulted increase yield attributes and
thereby fruit yield.
The highest fruit yield was recorded in 75 ppm chitosan (614 g plant-1
) due to production of higher number of
fruits plant-1
with superior RE. In contrast, the lowest fruit yield was observed in control plants (393 g plant-1
)
due to inferior performance of yield attributes.
Effect of foliar application of chitosan on growth and yield in tomato, mungbean, maize and rice
10 Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2):May 2016
Table 1. Effect of different concentrations of chitosan on yield attributes and fruit yield of summer tomato
Chitosan
concentration (ppm)
Flowers
plant-1
(no.)
Fruits
plant-1
(no.)
Single fruit
weight (g)
Reproductive
efficiency (%)
Fruit yield
plant-1
(g)
0 24.8 b 8.17 d 47.8 a 33.1 c 393 d
25 25.9 b 10.8 bc 44.0 bc 41.5 ab 474 c
50 27.4 b 11.1 b 48.5 a 40.4 ab 534 b
75 31.8 a 13.3 a 46.4 ab 41.9 a 614 a
100 25.9 b 10.1 c 41.9 c 38.9 b 425 d
F-test ** ** ** ** ** In a column, figures bearing same letter (s) do not differ significantly at P ≤ 0.05 by DMRT;
* and ** indicate significance at 5% and 1% level of probability, respectively.
Winter tomato: The foliar application of chitosan had significant effects on yield attributes and fruit yield
except fruit size and plant height in winter tomato (Table 2). All the plants characters were greater in chitosan
applied plants than control plant. Results revealed that all the characters were increased with increasing
concentration of chitosan. The higher fruit yield was recorded in 75 and 100 ppm chitosan both per plant and per
hectare with being the highest in 100 ppm. The fruit yield was higher in 75 and 100 ppm due to increase number
of fruits with apparently larger fruit size. Therefore, 75 ppm chitosan may be applied to increase yield of both
summer and winter tomato.
Table 2. Effect of different concentrations of chitosan on morphological characters, yield attributes and fruit yield of
winter tomato
Concentration of
chitosan (ppm)
Plant
height (cm)
Branches
plant-1
(no)
Fruit
plant-1
(no)
Single fruit
weight (g)
Fruit weight
plant-1
(kg)
Fruit yield
(t ha-1
)
0 108.6 5.23 c 32.1 b 42.61 1.37 b 54.7 b
50 108.6 5.56 c 33.6 b 42.79 1.44 ab 57.5 ab
75 110.2 5.92 b 36.9 ab 43.02 1.59 a 63.5 a
100 110.0 6.50 a 37.5 a 43.06 1.60 a 63.8 a
F-test NS ** ** NS * * In a column, figures bearing same letter (s) do not differ significantly at P ≤ 0.05 by DMRT;
* and ** indicate significance at 5% and 1% level of probability, respectively.
Pot experiment of mungbean: The influence of chitosan application at different concentrations on yield
attributes and yield of mungbean was significant (Table 3). Results revealed that plant height, number of pods
plant-1
, seeds pod-1
, 1000-seed weight as well as seed yield plant-1
was greater in chitosan applied plants than in
control plants. Results further revealed that seed yield increased with increasing chitosan concentration till 50
ppm followed by a decline. This result indicates that application of chitosan @ 75 and 100 ppm may be toxic for
plant growth and development thereby seed yield. The highest seed yield (9.27 g plant-1
) was recorded in 50
ppm chitosan due to production of higher number of pods plant-1
. In contrast, the lowest seed yield was observed
in control plants (7.15 g plant-1
) due to inferior performance of yield attributes. For interaction, yield attributes
as well as seed yield was maximum in Binamoog-7 when chitosan was sprayed @ 50 ppm and the seed yield of
Binamoog-8 was maximum at 50 and 75 ppm concentrations of chitosan which showed about 30% higher seed
yield over control. Between the two varieties, the seed yield and yield related traits were superior in Binamoog-7
than Binamoog-8.
Islam et al.
11 Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2):May 2016
Table 3. Effect of foliar application of chitosan on yield attributes and seed yield of mungbean cultivars
Treatments Plant
height (cm)
Pods
plant-1
(no)
Seeds
pod-1
(no)
1000-seed
weight (g)
Seed yield
plant-1
(g)
Yield increased
over control (%)
Variety
Binamoog-7 (V1) 29.8 b 30.5 a 10.7 b 29.71 b 8.74 a
Binamoog-8 (V2) 39.9 a 16.6 b 11.6 a 45.08 a 7.81 b
F-test ** ** ** ** **
Chitosan
concentration (ppm)
0 32.1 c 21.1 c 10.8 37.32 ab 7.15 c --
25 36.6 a 23.9 b 11.2 37.62 a 8.37 b 17.1
50 36.2 a 26.4 a 11.2 37.60 a 9.27 a 29.6
75 35.2 ab 23.3 b 11.2 37.65 a 8.45 b 18.2
100 34.4 b 23.1 b 11.4 36.80 b 8.16 b 14.1
F-test ** ** NS * **
Interaction of variety
and concentration
V1 × 0 ppm
V1 × 25 ppm
V1 × 50 ppm
V1 × 75 ppm
V1 × 100 ppm
V2 × 0 ppm
V2 × 25 ppm
V2 × 50 ppm
V2 × 75 ppm
V2 × 100 ppm
27.7 e
32.2 c
31.1 c
30.0 cd
28.3 de
36.5 b
41.0 a
41.3 a
40.5 a
40.5 a
27.5 c
31.8 b
35.3 a
28.3 c
29.5 c
14.6 f
16.0 ef
17.5 de
18.3 d
16.7 def
10.6 cd
10.8 bcd
10.4 d
11.0 bcd
10.8 bcd
11.0 bcd
11.6 ab
12.0 a
11.4 abc
12.0 a
29.43 cd
30.14 bc
30.50 b
29.90 bc
28.60 d
45.20 a
45.10 a
44.70 a
45.40 a
45.00 a
7.74 de
9.31 b
10.1 a
8.38 c
8.20 c
6.56 f
7.44 e
8.44 c
8.52 c
8.12 cd
---
20.3
30.4
8.30
5.90
---
13.4
28.6
29.9
23.7
F-test * ** * * **
CV (%) 4.25 6.09 4.75 1.59 4.45
In a column, figures bearing same letter (s) do not differ significantly at P ≤ 0.05 by DMRT; NS = Not significant; * and ** indicate
significance at 5% and 1% level of probability, respectively.
Field experiment of mungbean: The influence of foliar application of chitosan on most of the plant parameters
was significant except plant height, pod length and 1000-grain weight (Table 4). Result showed that all the plant
parameters were greater in chitosan applied plants than control plants. Result further revealed that the prime
yield contribute, number of pods plant-1
, increased with increasing concentration of chitosan till 50 ppm
followed by decline indicating high concentration of chitosan may be toxic for mungbean yield. The higher seed
yield both in per plant and per hectare were recorded in 25 and 50 ppm chitosan due to production of the higher
number of pods plant-1
. The third highest seed yield was recorded in 75 ppm chitosan with non-significant
different to 25 and 50 ppm chitosan. The lowest seed yield was recorded in control plants.
The interaction effect of variety and concentration of chitosan on morphological parameters and yield
components as well as seed yield was significant except pod length and 1000-seed weight (Table 5). The highest
seed yield in Binamoog-7 was recorded in 50 ppm whereas the highest seed yield in Binamoog-8 was recorded
in 25 ppm of chitosan. This result indicates that optimum concentration of chitosan for maximizing the yield
depends on variety.
Table 4. Effect of foliar application of chitosan on yield and yield attributes of mungbean
Concentration
of chitosan
(ppm)
Plant
height
(cm)
Branches
plant-1
(no)
Pods
plant-1
(no)
Pod
length
(cm)
1000-
seed
weight
(g)
Seeds
pod-1
(no)
Seed
weight
plant-1
(g)
Straw
weight
plant-1
(g)
Seed
weight
(Kg ha-1
)
0 41.99 0.70 b 13.87 d 7.42 39.46 10.0 c 4.29 d 6.75 c 1289 d
25 39.39 0.83 ab 17.70 b 7.40 39.62 10.5 ab 5.58 a 7.88 ab 1674 a
50 41.50 0.63 b 19.17 a 7.55 39.45 10.1 bc 5.58 a 7.99 a 1666 a
75 43.50 1.03 a 17.37 bc 7.44 39.54 10.9 a 5.46 b 7.57 b 1637 ab
100 39.11 0.70 b 16.67 c 7.58 39.63 10.6 a 4.96 c 7.50 b 1489 c
F-test NS * ** NS NS * ** * ** In a column, the figures with similar letter(s) do not differ significantly by DMRT at P ≤ 0.05;
*, ** indicates significant at 5% and 1% level of probability, respectively; NS, Not significant
Effect of foliar application of chitosan on growth and yield in tomato, mungbean, maize and rice
12 Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2):May 2016
Table 5. Interaction of variety and concentration of chitosan on yield and yield components of mungbean
varieties
Interaction Plant
height
(cm)
Branch
plant-1
(no.)
Pod
plant-1
(no.)
Pod
length
(cm)
1000-
seed
weight
(g)
Seeds
pod-1
(no.)
Seed
weight
plant-1
(g)
Straw
weight
plant-1
(g)
Seed
weight
(kg ha-1
) Variety
Conc.
(ppm)
Bin
amo
og
-7 0 44.22 a 1.10 b 14.87 e 6.56 31.82 9.40 f 4.19 g 6.59 1259 h
25 41.00 abc 1.23 b 20.13 b 6.82 32.03 10.73 bc 5.11 d 6.84 1534 e
50 42.67 ab 1.00 b 22.07 a 6.72 31.90 9.86 ef 5.41 c 7.00 1623 d
75 44.56 a 1.76 a 18.60 c 6.43 32.03 10.33 cde 5.11 d 6.79 1533 e
100 44.00 ab 1.10 b 18.87 c 6.74 32.17 10.00 de 5.07 d 6.26 1524 e
Bin
amo
og
-8 0 39.56 bc 0.30 c 12.87 f 8.28 47.10 1060 cd 4.40 f 6.91 1321 g
25 37078 cd 0.43 c 15.27 de 8.13 47.20 10.27 cde 6.04 a 6.92 1814 a
50 40.33 abc 0.30 c 16.27 d 8.38 47.01 10.47 cd 5.76 b 6.98 1690 c
75 42.45 ab 0.30 c 16.13 d 8.45 47.04 11.40 a 5.80 b 6.35 1741 b
100 34.22 d 0.30 c 14.47 e 8.42 47.09 11.20 ab 4.84 e 7.25 1453 f
F-test * * ** NS NS * NS * In a column, the figures with similar letter(s) do not differ significantly by DMRT at P ≤ 0.05;
*, ** indicates significant at 5% and 1% level of probability, respectively; NS, Not significant
Maize: Chitosan concentration had significant effect on plant height, biological yield, harvest index, yield
components and seed yield in maize except number of cobs plant-1
(Table 6). Results revealed that all the plant
parameters were greater in chitosan applied plants than control plants except 50 ppm chitosan. The highest plant
height (218 cm), biological yield (278.0 g plant-1
), yield attributes (except 100-seed weight) and seed yield
(132.7 g plant-1
and 6.32 t ha-1
) was recorded in 100 ppm followed by 125 ppm and 75 ppm. The seed yield was
higher in 100 ppm chitosan might be due to increase number of seeds cob-1
. In contrast, the lowest above
mentioned parameters was recorded in control plants where no chitosan was sprayed. Further, the highest 100-
grain weight and harvest index was recorded in 125 ppm chitosan indicating dry matter partitioning to economic
yield was better in 125 ppm concentration than the other concentrations. However, the grain and biological yield
was lower in 125 ppm than 100 ppm chitosan indicating application of chitosan @ 125 ppm may be toxic for
maize production.
Table 6. Effect of different levels of chitosan on some morphological characters, yield attributes and seed yield
in maize cv. QPM-1 conducted in 2011-2012
Concentration
Plant
height
(cm)
Biolo-
gical
yield
plant-1
(g)
Cobs
plant-1
(no)
Cob
length
(cm)
Seeds
cob-1
(no)
100-
seed
weight
(g)
Seed
weight
plant-1
(g)
Seed
yield
(t ha-1
)
Harvest
index
(%)
0 190.0 c 235.5 c 1.00 15.8 b 456.2 b 22.94 d 107.6 bc 5.10 c 45.69 ab
50 188.0 c 229.3 c 1.00 15.6 b 436.2 c 23.31 cd 95.52 c 4.64 d 41.66 b
75 211.0 b 258.8 b 1.14 16.8 a 450.0 b 24.08 bc 117.3 ab 5.59 bc 45.48 ab
100 218.0 a 278.0 a 1.14 17.4 a 511.7 a 23.95 b 132.7 a 6.32 a 47.74 a
125 212.0 ab 255.6 b 1.14 17.0 a 460.7 b 25.08 a 125.0 a 5.95 ab 48.91 a
F-test ** ** NS * * * ** ** **
CV (%) 3.43 7.81 7.73 4.67 5.94 4.07 9.77 5.55 5.76 In a column figures having same letter (s) do not differ significantly at P ≤ 0.05; *, ** indicates significant at 5% and 1% level of
probability; NS = Not significant
The influence of foliar application of chitosan on most of the plant parameters was significant except plant
height and days to maturity (Table 7). Result showed that yield components such as number of cobs plant-1
,
number of seeds cob-1
, 1000-seed weight and dry matter partitioning to economic yield (HI) were the highest in
75 ppm resulting the highest seed yield both in per plant and per hectare followed by 50 ppm chitosan. The yield
components were inferior in 100 ppm and 125 ppm as compared to 75 ppm might be due to toxic concentration
for maize. In contrast, the lowest yield was recorded in control plant due to inferior performance in yield
components. However, chitosan had no effect on plant height and days to maturity. So, chitosan may be applied
thrice @ 75 or 100 ppm for increased grain yield.
Islam et al.
13 Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2):May 2016
Table 7. Effect of different levels of chitosan on some morphological characters, yield attributes and seed yield
in maize cv. BARI Maize-9 conducted in 2012-2013
Concentration
of chitosan
(ppm)
Plant
height
(cm)
Cobs
plant-1
(no.)
Seeds
Cob-1
(no.)
1000-seed
weight
(g)
Seed
weight
plant-1
(g)
Straw
weight
plant-1
(g)
Seed
yield
(t ha-1
)
Harvest
index
(%)
Days
to
maturity
0 212.7 1.33 b 383.1 c 283.2 c 184.1 c 133 c 8.76 c 27.43 c 154
50 216.2 1.56 b 439.9 a 301.6 ab 225.1 b 154.2 b 10.71 b 32.80 b 156
75 214.1 1.78 a 425.6 ab 313.2 a 248.5 a 148.5 bc 11.83 a 35.30 a 156
100 216.4 1.78 a 416 b 314.5 a 221.5 b 198.2 a 10.54 b 33.40 b 156
125 217.7 1.67 a 387.4 c 295.6 bc 211.4 b 155.3 b 10.60 b 32.87 b 154
F-test NS * * * * ** ** ** NS In a column, the figures with similar letter (s) do not differ significantly by DMRT at P ≤ 0.05;
* and ** indicate significant at 5% and 1% level of probability, respectively.
Aman rice: The influence of chitosan application at different growth stages was not significant in most of the
plant parameters except number of effective tillers hill-1
and panicle length (Tables 8 & 9). The number of
effective tillers hill-1
and panicle length were greater in T2 treatment (when hormone was sprayed two times both
at tillering and booting stages) than the other treatments. However, hormone concentration had tremendous
effect on morphological parameters, yield attributes and yields in fine grain aromatic rice except plant height
and panicle length (Tables 8 & 9). Results revealed that all the plant parameters were greater in hormone applied
plants than control plants. Results showed that number of effective tillers hill-1
, number of filled grains panicle-1
,
1000-grain weight and grain yield were increased with increasing hormone concentration till 50 ppm followed
by a decline. These results indicate that application of chitosan @ 75 ppm or above may be toxic for plant
growth and development there by yield. The grain yield was the highest in 50 ppm chitosan due to increased
number of effective tillers hill-1
and filled grains panicle-1
. For interaction effect, results showed that yield
attributes as well as yield was the highest when chitosan was sprayed @ 50 ppm at two growth stages of tillering
and booting in both the varieties. But the increment of grain yield in hormone applied plants was not highly
distinct different over control. Further experimentation is needed for confirmation of the results.
Table 8. Effect of hormone application stages and concentrations on plant characters of fine grain aromatice rice
(mean of two varieties)
Treatments Plant
height (cm)
Effective tillers
hill-1
(no.)
Panicle length
(cm)
Straw yield
(t ha-1
)
Frequency of hormone application
T1 (One spray at tillering stage) 155.0 7.50 c 26.2 ab 4.80
T2 (Two spray at tillering and booting stages) 153.5 9.20 a 26.6 a 4.95
T3 (Three spray at tillering,
booting and heading stages) 155.4 8.50 b 25.6 b 4.88
F-test NS ** * NS
Hormone concentration (ppm)
0 152.4 7.87 c 25.5 4.64 b
25 154.9 8.40 b 26.1 4.97 a
50 155.2 8.93 a 26.3 4.95 a
75 155.9 8.40 b 26.5 4.95 a
F-test NS * NS **
Interaction of hormone application
frequency and concentration
T1 × 0 ppm
25 ppm
50 ppm
75 ppm
T2 × 0 ppm
25 ppm
50 ppm
75 ppm
T3 × 0 ppm
25 ppm
50 ppm
75 ppm
151.7
156.2
155.0
157.0
152.0
154.0
154.2
153.8
153.6
154.4
156.4
157.0
6.80 g
7.80 ef
7.80 ef
7.60 f
8.60 cd
9.00 bc
9.80 a
9.40 ab
8.20 de
8.40 d
9.20 b
8.20 de
25.6 bc
25.8 abc
26.0 abc
27.3 ab
26.3 abc
26.4 abc
27.4 a
26.3 abc
24.7 c
26.1 abc
25.5 c
25.9 abc
4.50 e
4.80 bcd
5.10 ab
4.80 cd
4.70 de
5.15 a
4.95 a-d
5.00 a-d
4.72 de
4.95 a-d
4.80 cd
5.05 abc
F-test NS ** * *
CV (%) 3.05 3.74 3.41 4.20 In a column, figures bearing same letter (s) do not differ significantly at P ≤ 0.05 by DMRT;
NS = Not significant; * and ** indicate significance at 5% and 1% level of probability, respectively
Effect of foliar application of chitosan on growth and yield in tomato, mungbean, maize and rice
14 Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2):May 2016
Table 9. Effect of hormone application stages and concentrations on yield attributes and yield of fine grain
aromatice rice
Treatments
Filled
grains
panicle-1
1000-grain
weight (g)
Grain yield (t ha-1
) Yield
increased
over
control
BRRI
dhan34 Kalizira Mean
Frequency of hormone
application
T1 (One spray at tillering stage) 170.4 10.51 2.75 2.61 2.68
T2 (Two spray at tillering and
booting stages)
164.8 10.59 2.82 2.52 2.67
T3 (Three spray at tillering,
booting and heading stages)
166.3 10.56 2.86 2.49 2.68
F-test NS NS NS NS NS
Hormone concentration
(ppm)
0 160.6 b 10.21 b 2.62 b 2.42 c 2.55 b ---
25 169.3 ab 10.64 a 2.85 a 2.60 ab 2.73 a 7.10
50 173.8 a 10.77 a 2.91 a 2.62 a 2.77 a 8.63
75 164.9 ab 10.58 a 2.84 a 2.50 bc 2.67 a 4.71
F-test * ** ** ** *
Interaction of hormone application
frequency and concentration
T1 × 0 ppm
25 ppm
50 ppm
75 ppm
T2 × 0 ppm
25 ppm
50 ppm
75 ppm
T3 × 0 ppm
25 ppm
50 ppm
75 ppm
163.2
176.0
174.8
167.7
158.5
164.0
174.5
162.2
160.1
168.0
172.2
164.8
10.28
10.40
10.76
10.60
10.36
10.88
10.60
10.52
10.00
10.64
10.96
10.63
2.60 bc
2.87 ab
2.80 ab
2.73 abc
2.53 c
2.80 ab
3.00 a
2.93 a
2.73 abc
2.89 a
2.93 a
2.87 ab
2.53 abc
2.67 a
2.67 a
2.55 abc
2.33 c
2.67 a
2.60 ab
2.47 abc
2.40 bc
2.47 abc
2.60 ab
2.47 abc
2.57 b
2.77 a
2.74 a
2.64ab
2.53 b
2.74 a
2.80 a
2.70 a
2.55 b
2.68 a
2.77 a
2.67 a
---
7.78
6.61
2.72
---
8.30
10.7
6.72
---
5.10
8.63
4.70
F-test NS NS * * * ---
CV (%) 6.87 2.90 5.08 4.85 5.43 ---
In a column, figures bearing same letter (s) do not differ significantly at P ≤ 0.05 by DMRT; NS = Not significant; * and **
indicate significance at 5% and 1% level of probability, respectively.
Boro rice: The influence of foliar application of chitosan at three growth stages was significant in most of the
plant parameters except plant height and number of filled grain panicle-1
(Table 10). The grain yield, 1000-grain
weight and harvest index were greater in T2 treatment (when chitosan was sprayed two times both at tillering
and booting stages) than the other treatments. There was non-significant different in filled grains panicle-1
but
yield was greater in T2 than the other two spray times due to increased grain size. The harvest index was also
higher in T2 treatment (50.9%) indicating dry matter partitioning to economic yield was better when chitosan
was sprayed two times both at tillering and booting stages.
Chitosan concentration had significant effect on filled grain number, grain and straw yield but had non-
significant influence on plant height and number of effective tillers hill-1
(Table 10). Results revealed that all the
plant parameters were greater in chitosan applied plants than control plants. The higher grain yield was recorded
in 25 and 50 ppm with being the highest in 50 ppm (6.50 t ha-1
) due to increased grains panicle-1
and the lowest
was recorded in control (5.89 t ha-1
). The grain yield as well as harvest index was lower in 75 ppm than 25 and
50 ppm chitosan indicating application of chitosan @ 75 ppm may be toxic for boro rice production. For
interaction effect, results showed that grain yield was the highest (7.0 t ha-1
) when Chitosan was sprayed @ 50
ppm at two growth stages of tillering and booting and also showed good dry matter partitioning to economic
yield (51.5%). The highest yield increment over control was also observed in the treatment combination of T2 ×
50 ppm chitosan (13.3%). So, chitosan may be applied @ 50 ppm at two growth stages of tillering and booting
for increased grain yield of boro rice.
Islam et al.
15 Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2):May 2016
Table 10. Effect of chitosan application stages and concentrations on yield attributes and grain yield of boro rice
cv. Iratom-24
Treatments
Plant
height
(cm)
Effectiv
e tillers
hill-1
(no.)
Filled
grains
panicle-1
(no.)
1000-
grain
weight
(g)
Grain
yield
(t ha-1
)
Straw
yield
(t ha-1
)
Harvest
index
(%)
Yield
increased
(+)/decrease
d (-) over
control (%)
Frequency of hormone
application
T1 (One spray at
tillering stage) 72.5 10.88 b 98.2 28.7 ab 6.08 b 6.59 a 47.9 b ---
T2 (Two spray at
tillering and
booting stages)
74.4 10.73 b 97.4 29.1 a 6.53 a 6.29 b 50.9 a + 7.40
T3 (Three spray at
tillering, booting
and heading
stages)
73.4 11.92 a 99.0 27.9 b 6.08 b 6.67 a 47.6 b 0.00
F-test NS * NS * ** ** *
Chitosan concentration(ppm)
0 73.0 11.34 92.0 c 27.5 b 5.89 c 6.49ab 47.5 ---
25 73.6 11.06 102.3 a 29.2 a 6.42 ab 6.44 b 49.9 + 9.00
50 73.7 11.35 101.5 a 28.2 b 6.50 a 6.75 a 49.0 + 10.3
75 73.5 10.95 97.0 b 29.4 a 6.12 bc 6.39 b 48.8 + 3.90
F-test NS NS ** ** ** *
Interaction of application
frequency and concentration
T1 × 0 ppm
25 ppm
50 ppm
75 ppm
T2 × 0 ppm
25 ppm
50 ppm
75 ppm
T3 × 0 ppm
25 ppm
50 ppm
75 ppm
71.6
72.5
73.5
72.4
73.9
74.7
74.4
74.9
73.5
73.7
73.4
73.2
11.20 b
10.40 b
10.70 b
11.20 b
10.53 b
10.40 b
11.07 b
10.93 b
12.30 a
12.37 a
12.27 a
10.73 b
95.0 cd
105.0 ab
103.0 ab
90.0 d
91.0 cd
94.0 cd
106.6 a
98.0 bc
90.0 d
108.0 a
95.0 cd
103.0ab
27.3 c
29.0 bc
28.6 bc
29.9 ab
27.1 c
30.9 a
28.4 bc
30.0 ab
28.2 bc
27.7 c
27.5 c
28.2 bc
5.95 bc
6.42 ab
6.42 ab
5.54 c
6.18 b
6.43 ab
7.00 a
6.53 ab
5.74 c
6.42 ab
6.08 bc
6.30 b
6.83 ab
6.65 abc
6.60 abc
6.30 c
6.13 c
6.15 c
6.60 abc
6.29 c
6.52 bc
6.52 bc
7.05 a
6.60abc
46.5 bc
49.1abc
49.3abc
46.8 bc
50.2 ab
51.1 a
51.5 a
50.9 a
45.9 c
49.6abc
46.3 bc
48.8abc
---
+ 7.90
+ 7.90
- 6.89
---
+ 4.00
+ 13.3
+5.66
---
+ 11.8
+ 5.92
+ 9.75
F-test NS ** ** * * * *
CV (%) 2.91 4.76 5.40 3.57 5.44 4.16 4.49 In a column, figures bearing same letter (s) do not differ significantly at P ≤ 0.05 by DMRT; DAT = Days after transplanting; Ns = Not
significant; * and ** indicate significance at 5% and 1% level of probability, respectively.
DISCUSSION
Chitosan has been mainly described to stimulate immunity of plants, to protect plants and food products against
microorganisms (bacteria and fungi). However, these studies intended to focus on growth and productive
responses of tomato, mungbean, maize and rice plants. In these study, recorded parameters of both morpho-
physiological and yield components responded positively to the application of chitosan although fruits or grains
production, the prime yield attribute was not highly significantly affected, there was a tendency for a positive
response.
However, TDM was greater in chitosan applied plants than control plants might be due to increase LA. These
results indicate that application of chitosan at early growth stages had effect on growth and development in
tomato, mungbean, maize and rice. Application of carboxymethyl chitosan increased key enzymes activities of
nitrogen metabolism (nitrate reductase, glutamine synthetase and protease) which enhanced plant growth and
development, thereby increased TDM in rice as reported by Ke et al. (2001). Similar phenomenon may have
happened in the present experiments and resulting increased TDM in chitosan applied plants than control plants
in field crops. These results have conformity with El-Tantawy (2009) who reported that plant growth and
development enhanced by the application of chitosan in tomato. Mondal et al. (2012) applied chitosan on okra
and reported that leaf number increased by chitosan application that supported the present experimental results.
Further, RE increased in chitosan applied plants (especially tomato and mungbean) for decreased flower
Effect of foliar application of chitosan on growth and yield in tomato, mungbean, maize and rice
16 Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2):May 2016
abortion. Again, higher RE in chitosan applied plant might be resulting from the translocation of sufficient
assimilate to the flowers (Nahar and Ikeda, 2002).
The fruit yields of tomato both per plant and per hectare were higher in 75 ppm of chitosan due to increase
production of fruits plant-1
than the other treatments (Tables 1 & 2). Similarly, the seed yields of mungbean and
rice both per plant and per hectare were higher in 50 ppm of chitosan due to increase production of pods or
grains plant-1
and higher number of seeds pod-1
or panicle-1
than the other treatments (Tables 3, 4, 9, 10). The
grain yields of tomato both per plant and per hectare were higher in 100 and 125 ppm of chitosan due to increase
production of cobs plant-1
, higher number of seeds cob-1
and bolder seed size than the other treatments (Tables 7
& 8). In contrast, the lowest seed yield was recorded in control plants might be due to inferiority in yield
attributes of tomato, mung, maize and rice. Again, fruits cluster-1
for tomato, seeds cob-1
for maize increased in
chitosan applied plants than control plants might be due to increase RE (tomato) and cob size (maize) thereby
increase seed yield in tomato or maize. Chibu et al. (2002) reported that application of chitosan at early growth
stages increased plant growth and development thereby increased seed yield in rice and soybean. Similar results
were also observed by other two workers (Vasudevan et al. 2002; Rehim et al. 2009) in maize and bean.
CONCLUSION
Foliar application of chitosan at vegetative stage enhances plant growth and development which resulting
increased fruit or seed yield in tomato, mungbean, maize and rice. However, among the studied crops, foliar
application of chitosan on rice had little effect on growth and development. Among the concentrations, 75, 50,
100 and 50 ppm respectively for tomato, mungbean, maize and rice had superiority for plant growth, yield
components and seed yield over other concentrations. Therefore, application of chitosan @ 75, 50, 100 and 50
ppm respectively for tomato, mungbean, maize and rice may be recommended for cultivation.
REFERENCES
Abdel-Mawgoud AMR, Tantawy AS, El-Nemr MA, Sassine TN (2010) Growth and yield response of
strawberry plants to chitosan application. European J. Sci. Res. 39: 170-177.
BARC (2005) Fertilizer Recommendation Guide. 2005. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC). p.
66.
Berahim Z, Ismail MR, Halimi MS, Mondal MMA, Panhwar QA, Islam MR (2014) Effectiveness of different
phytohormones on grain filling and yield of rice under drought stress. J. Food, Agric. and Environ., 12(2), 697-
700.
Chibu H, Shibayama H, Arima S (2002) Effects of chitosan application on the shoot growth of rice and soybean.
Japanese J. Crop Sci. 71: 206-211.
ChunYan L, GuoRui M, WenYing H (2003) Induction effect of chitosan on suppression of tomato early blight
and its physiological mechanism. J. Zhejiang Univ. Agric. Life Sci. 29: 280-286.
Devlieghere F, Vermeulen A, Debevere J (2004) Chitosan: antimicrobial activity, interactions with food
components and applicability as a coating on fruit and vegetables. Food Microb. 27: 703-714.
El-Tantawy EM (2009) Behavior of tomato plants as affected by spraying with chitosan and aminofort as
natural stimulator substances under application of soil organic amendments. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 12: 1164-1173.
FAO (2010) Production Year Book of 2014 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Rome, Italy. No. 69, p.
154.
Gornik, K, Grzesik M, Duda BR (2008) The effect of chitosan on rooting of gravevine cuttings and on
subsequent plant growth under drought and temperature stress. J. Fruit Ornamental Plant Res. 16: 333-343.
Hadwiger LA, Klosterman SJ, Choi JJ (2002) The mode of action of chitosan and its oligomers in inducing
plant promoters and developing disease resistance in plants. pp. 452-457. In: K Suchiva, S Chandrkrachang, P
Methacanon, MG Peter (eds), Advances in Chitin Science, Bangkok.
Haque MA, Hossain AKMA, Ahmed KU (1999) A comparative study on the performance of different varieties
of tomato. II. Varietal response of different seasons and temperature in respect of yield and yield components.
Bangladesh Hort. 26: 39-45.
Imam MH, Mondal MMA, Prodhan AKMA, Malek MA, Islam MO (2010) Effect of foliar application of
miyobi hormone on morphophysiological attributes and yield in summer tomato. J. Agrofor. Environ. 4: 197-
200.
Jeng TL, Tseng TH, Wang CS, Chen CL, Sung JM (2006) Yield and grain uniformity in contrasting rice
genotypes suitable for different growth environments. Field Crops Res., 99(1), 59-66.
Islam et al.
17 Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 11(2):May 2016
Ke L, XiangYang L, LiSha P (2001) Effects of carboxymethyl chitosan on key enzymes activities of nitrogen
metabolism and grain protein contents in rice. J. Hunan Agric. Univ. 27: 421-424.
Mondal MMA, Akter MB, Razzaque AHM (2011) Effect of seasonal seeds on growth and yield in tomato
genotypes. Int. J. Expt. Agric. 2: 12-16.
Mondal MMA, Malek MA, Puteh AB, Ismail MR, Ashrafuzzaman M (2012) Effect of foliar application of
chitosan on growth and yield in okra. Australian J. Crop Sci. 6: 918-921.
Mondal MMA, Rahman MA, Akter MB (2009) Flower production and yield in mungbean. Bangladesh J. Crop
Sci., 20: 181-185.
Nahar BS, Ikeda T (2002) Effect of silver-sheet and figaron on flower production, abscission of reproductive
organ, yield and yield components in soybean. J. Agron. Crop Sci., 188: 193-200.
No HK, Meyers SP, Prinyawiwatkul W, Xu Z (2007) Applications of chitosan for improvement of quality and
shelf life of foods: a review. J. Food Sci. 72: 87-100.
Patkowska E, Pieta D, Pastucha H (2006) The effect of biochikol 020 pc on microorganisms communities in the
rhizosphere of Faba bean plants. Polish Chitin Soc. Monog. 11: 171-178.
Peng S, Khush GS, Virk P, Tang Q, Zou Y (2008) Progress in ideotype breeding to increase rice yield potential,
Field Crops Res., 108(1), 32-38.
Picken AJE (1984) A review of pollination and fruit set in tomato. J. Hort. Res. 31: 1778-1784.
Rahman MS, Haque MA, Mostofa MG (2015) Effect of GA3 on biochemical attributes and yield of summer
tomato. J. Biosci. and Agril. Res. 3(2), 73-78.
Rahman MS, Islam MM, Islam MT, Begum S, Begum K, Uddin MN (1996) Adaptive performance of selected
tomato lines in different seasons of Bangladesh. Bangladesh J. Nuclear Agric., 12: 73-78.
Rashid MM (2009) A hand book of agricultural technology. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute,
Gazipur-1701, Bangladesh, pp. 352-356.
Razzaque AHM, Rahman MS (2005) Effect of IAA on yield and yield contributing characters of aman rice
under irrigated and moisture stress conditions. J. Bangladesh Agril. Univ. 3(2), 239-242.
Rehim HAA, Hegazy EA, El-Barbary AM (2009) Radiation modification of natural polysaccharides for
application in agriculture. Polymer 50: 1952-1957.
Tang T, Xie H, Wang Y, Lu B, Liang J (2009) The effect of sucrose and abscisic acid interaction on sucrose
synthase and its relationship to grain filling of rice. J. Expt. Bot., 60: 2641-2652.
Vasudevan P, Reddy MS, Kavitha S, Velusamy P, PaulRaj RSD, Purushothaman SM, Priyadarisini VB,
Bharathkumar S, Kloepper JW, Gnanamanickam SS (2002) Role of biological preparation in enhancement of
rice seedling growth and yield. Current Sci. 83:1140-1143.
Yang J, Peng S, Zhang Z, Wang Z, Visperas RM, Zhu Q (2002) Grain and dry matter yields and partitioning of
assimilates in japonica/indica hybrids. Crop Sci., 42: 766-772.
Yang J, Zhang J (2010) Grain filling problem in ‘super’ rice. J Expt. Bot., 61(1), 1-5.
Yang J, Zhang J, Wang Z, Liu K, Wang P (2006) Post-anthesis development of inferior and super spikelets in
rice in relation to abscisic acid and ethylene. J Expt. Bot., 57(1), 149-160.
Effect of foliar application of chitosan on growth and yield in tomato, mungbean, maize and rice