International Journal of Agricultural ciences Volume 9 Issue 2 June, 2013 499-503 REEARCH PAPER creening of different germplasms against floral malformation of mango in Eastern Bihar GIREEH CHAND, J.N. RIVAAVA*, UNIL KUMAR 1 AND R. KUMAR 2 Department of Plant Pathology, Bihar Agricultural University, abour, BHAGALPUR (BIHAR) INDIA (Email : j.n.srivastava1971@gmail.com) Abstract : Mango germplasm comprised of 51 varieties was evaluated for resistant/tolerance against panicle malformation at ub ropical Fruit Farm, Department of Horticulture, Bihar Agricultural University, abour, Bhagalpur. Out of these only Rumani was Resistant, 31 were tolerant, 5 were moderately tolerant and 9 were moderately susceptible. While Neelam was highly susceptible under the climatic condition of this region. Attack was highest in Neelam (50 %) followed by the Gulabkhas (31.2), Irvin (30 %) and Amrapali (27.4 %) and lowest in Lalmohan (1.3 %) followed by Latkampoo, Maldah (urajgarha), and Mulayamjam ( %) and Gaurjeet (1.8 %). he resistant and lowest affected varieties may be used for incorporating their immune/tolerance in the other commercial varieties through breeding programme. Key Words : Mango crop, Mangifera indica, Malformation, Germplasm View Point Article : Chand, Gireesh, rivastava, J.N., Kumar, unil and Kumar, R. (2013). creening of different germplasms against floral malformation of mango in Eastern Bihar. Internat. J. agric. ci., 9(2): 499-503. Article History : Received : 08.10.2012; Revised : 09.02.2013; Accepted : 1013 INRODUCION Mango ( Mangifera indica L.), is the king of fruit is designated as the national fruit of India. Besides delicious taste, excellent flavour and attractive fragrance, it is rich in vitamin A and C. he tree is hardy in nature and requires comparatively low maintenance costs. India has the richest collection of mango cultivars. he crop is of increasing significance because of its demand in the international market and worldwide expansion of mango production up to 27.9 mt of fruit during 2005 (Anonymous, 2006). Unfortunately this crop suffers from a number of diseases at all stages of its development i.e. right from nursery stage to grow-up plant. Among the major diseases of mango, mango malformation disease cause considerable damage to mango crop. Mango malformation, disease was first time reported from Darbhanga District of Bihar tate in 1891 by G. Watt. he disease is currently prevalent in almost all the mango growing country and is thus designated as the plant disease of international importance and previously considered to be a serious problem in the northern parts of the country, has now started to appear in central India too in severe form. It is well known, the mango malformation is the most serious disease, rendering mango cultivation non-lucrative in subcontinent and other regions of the world (Ahmad et al., 2002; Ploetz, 2001). Mango malformation caused by fungus Fusarium moniliforme var. ubglutinans, are proved (Freeman, 1999; Zheng and Ploetz, 2002). Recently, these isolates were described as members of a new species, F. mangiferae Britz, Wingfield and Marasas sp nov. (Britz et al., 2002). he casual organism of mango malformation grows well at lower temperature and higher relative humidity. he disease is quite common in both grafted and the seedling plants (Kumar and Chakrabarti, 1997). he symptoms manifest as bunchy top (B) in 4-5 month old seedlings in the nursery, vegetative malformation (VM) of twigs arising from axillary buds and malformation of inflorescence (MF). Normally floral malformation is more prevalent in bearing trees than vegetative malformation. Flowers in the malformed panicle are much * Author for correspondence 1 chool of Agricultural ciences and Rural Development, Nagaland University, MEDZIPHEMA (NAGALAND) INDIA 2 Department of Horticulture, Bihar Agricultural University, abour, BHAGALPUR (BIHAR) INDIA
GIREEH CHAND, J.N. RIVAAVA, UNIL KUMAR AND R. KUMAR enlarged and crowded with hypertrophied axes of the panicle. Malformed inflorescences/ panicle of different varieties were variable in respect of their shapes, sizes, growth and compactness, depending upon the cellular structure and physiology under environmental factors (Chakrabarti et al., 1990). Generally malformed inflorescences produce no fruit, or abort already stages (chloser, 1971) and is directly responsible for reduction in yield (Kumar et al., 1993; ingh et al., 1998). In the present study the incidence of floral malformation on a large number of mango cultivars was recorded over a period of 5 years with a view to identify the entries of future resistant breeding programme. MAERIAL AND MEHOD he experiment was conducted at the ub ropical Fruits (F) Farm, Department of Horticulture, Bihar Agricultural University, abour, Bhagalpur-813210 (Bihar), India. he bearing plants of 51 mango germplasms (both indigenous and exotic viz., Nazara Bombai, Karpuria, Kanchanlal, Jalmarai, Bagbahar, Baramasia, Latkampoo, Rarhi, Calcuttia Maldah, Dada Miyan, afed Bathua, Hathi Jhula, Kalapahar, Dudhia Maldah, Ambalbi, Gilas, Gulabkhas, Baramasia (Jamalpur), Rangraj, Police, Chapraha, Banglora, Ahra Baramasia, Zardalu, Lalmohan, anhakerbi, Gaurjeet, Anupam, Khatma Belkhar, Ratoul, Alphanso, Hansraj, Gangasagar, Calcuttia Bombai, Maldah (urajgarha), Maldah (Dholi-khoti), Gulabsagar, Kohitoor, Mulayamjjam, Rumani, Irvin, ensation, Amrapali,Bombai, Hemsagar, Mallika, Prabhashankar, Mahmood Bahar, Neelam, warnrekha and Kesar were selected for the study). he soil was silty loam, lightly compact, with range from 0.40-0.63% organic matter and ph range from 6.5-7.8. he rees spaced at 12 m between rows and plants were 5 to 8 m high depending upon the genotype. here were three general fungicide-insecticide sprays per year (first prior to blooming, second post fruit setting and third after fruit harvesting ) for plant protection but no pruning of malformed panicles was practiced in the progeny orchard during, prior year and study period to allow sufficient amount of inoculums under natural conditions. Observations were recorded 100 randomly selected panicles from all the four sides on the middle height of the canopy of the test plants. he plants were 20-25 years old. For each cultivar 4 replications were maintained. he percentage of malformed panicles was counted. he data for the five years were pooled and analysed using a Complete Randomized Block Design. REUL AND DICUION he five years average of incidence of malformation on different germplasms (able 1) showed that germplasm Rumani remained completely free from malformation (Immune/ Resistant). he average incidence of floral malformation was less than 5 per cent on germplasms tolerant viz., Nazara Bombai, Karpuria, Kanchanlal, Jalmarai, Bagbahar, Latkampoo, Rarhi, Calcuttia Maldah, Dada Miyan, afed Bathua, Kalapahar, Dudhia Maldah, Gilas, Baramasia (Jamalpur), Rangraj, Police, Chapraha, Lalmohan, anhakerbi, Gaurjeet, Anupam, Ratoul, Hansraj, Gangasagar, Calcuttia Bombai, Maldah (urajgarha), Maldah (Dholi-Khoti), Gulabsagar, Kohitoor, Mulayamjam and Keasr in all the years of experimentation. But in rest of the above mentioned germplasms although average incidence of malformation, was less than 5 per cent over 5 years, occasionally crossed the limit. he incidence of malformation on the other germplasms ranged from 5.2 to 10 per cent mainly on the germplasms like Hathi Jhula,Banglora, Mallika, Mahmood Bahar and zardalu were found moderately tolerant. en varieties including Baramasia, Ambali, Ahra Baramasia, Khatma Belkhar, Alphanso, Bambai, Hemsagar, Prabhashankar, warnarekha, and ensation were found moderately susceptible. he average intensity of malformed inflorescences in the case of above germplasms falls between 12 to 18.4 per cent. he malformation susceptibility was highest in Germplasm Neelam (50 %), which showed compact inflorescence. Cultivar Gulabkhas was at par with Irvin and cultivars which showed higher malformation percentage of 31.20 and 30 per cent, respectively fallowed by Amarpali (27.40%). hese cultivars were found to be the most susceptible to mango malformation in Eastern Bihar. Floral malformation of mango is common in Bhagalpur gives malformed panicles with mostly male flowers, resulting in reduced crops and this disorder has a high incidence on scarred shoots and is more prevalent in certain cultivars like Gulabkhas and Amrapali (Majumdar and Diware, 1989). he variation in disease intensity among the varieties i.e. Nazara Bombai, Karpuria, Kanchanlal, Jalmarai, Bagbahar, Baramasia, Latkampoo, Rarhi, Calcuttia Maldah, Dada Miyan, afed, Bathua, Hathi Jhula, Kalapahar, Dudhia Maldah, Ambalbi, Gilas, Gulabkhas, Baramasia (Jamalpur), Rangraj, Police, Chapraha, Banglora, Ahra Baramasia, Zardalu, Lalmohan, anhakerbi, Gaurjeet, Anupam, Khatma, Belkhar, Ratoul, Alphanso, Hansraj, Gangasagar, Calcuttia Bombai, Maldah (urajgarha), Maldah (Dholi-khoti), Gulabsagar, Kohitoor, Mulayamjjam, Rumani (Immune/Resistant), Irvin, ensation, Amrapali, Bombai, Hemsagar, Mallika, Prabhasankar, Mahmood bahar, Neelam, warnrekha, and kesher might be attributed to the interaction of the host variety to pathogen. he variation in malformation incidence might be due to several factors like growth habit, physiology and cellular structure. Besides this, a natural defensive metabolite against mango malformation i.e. Mangiferin is also present in some cultivars, which reduces the incidence of malformation (Chakrabarti et al., 1997). Furthermore, the trees of the same variety growing at 500
CREENING OF DIFFEREN GERMPLA AGAIN FLORAL MALFORMAION OF MANGO able 1 : Incidence of malformation on different mango germplasms r. Malformed panicles (%) during Germplasms No. 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. Nazara Bombai Karpuria Kanchanlal Jalmarai Bagbahar Baramasia Latkampoo Rarhi Calcuttia Maldah Dada Miyan afed Bathua Hathi Jhula Kalapahar Dudhia Maldah Ambalbi Gilas Gulabkhas Baramasia (Jamalpur) Rangraj Police Chapraha Banglora Ahra baramasia Zardalu Lalmohan anhakerbi Gaurjeet Anupam Khatma Belkhar Ratoul Alphanso Hansraj Gangasagar Calcuttia Bombai Maldah (urajgarha) Maldah (Dholi-khoti) Gulabsagar Kohitoor Mulayam am Rumani Irvin ensation Amrapali Bambai Hemsagar Mallika Prabhashankar Mahmood Bahar Neelam warna Rekha Kesher 2 4 1 1 3 4 1 3 1 2 1 1 5 1 2 1 4 1 2 1 3 47.0 1 3 1 4 1 1 2 160 1 2 1 27.0 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 19.0 1 1 1 2 1 2 Average malformed panicles (%) 3.5 3.3 18.6 5.4 1 4.5 31.2 4.7 7.3 17.8 7.0 1.3 1.8 15.6 3.6 19.4 2.2 3 12.4 27.4 1 19.0 7.0 16.5 9.0 5 1 4.5 Ranking.E.+ C.D. (P=5) =Did Not Flower, Different letters with the means denote significant difference at P=5; separated according to Ducan s Multiple est. Criteria for ranking: Intensity: (i) 0% (Immun e /Resistant), (ii) 1-5% (olerant), (iii) 6-10% (Moderately olerant), (iv) 11-25% (Moderately usceptible), (v) 26-50% (usceptible), (vi) above 50% (Highly usceptible) M M M I/ M M H 501
GIREEH CHAND, J.N. RIVAAVA, UNIL KUMAR AND R. KUMAR same location differed significantly among themselves for the incidence of mango malformation. his might be due to the fact that disease causes systemic infection. he availability of more sugar contents in Irvin, Gulabkhas and Amrapali might be favourable for proliferation of pathogen (F. Mangiferae) and thus make it more susceptible for the attack of mango malformation. he results of this study are in line with the findings of Ram et al. (1990), harma and Badiyala (1990), Mishra (2004) and Hafiz et al. (2008) who reported that Chausa, Dusehri and Langra showed a high percentage of malformed panicles. Furthermore, Om et al. (1987) reported that majority of mango cultivars were susceptible and were not tolerant to mango malformation. Variation in the disease intensity among varieties having the lowest, medium and the highest levels might be attributable to the interaction of the host genotype to the pathogen. he malformation incidence is influenced by several factors like tree growth habit (time of flushing), physiology, rate of transpiration and cellular structure. he present investigation thus identified 4 germplasms with constant low disease incidence. he disease resistance capacity of these germplasms may be further confirmed by artificial inoculation test (Chand and Chakrabarti, 2000) and thereafter these may be included in the resistant breeding programme. Conclusion: hese results indicate mango accessions for disease incidence to panicle malformation under Eastern Bihar ecological conditions. Further studies are needed into the inheritance of malformation to facilitate its use as a character that is used in selecting parental stock. Based on the result of screening of mango germplasms for panicle malformation, the 51 mango cultivars tested. Keeping in view the results of present study it can be assumed that if disease free cultivars i.e. Rumani (completely free from malformation i.e. Immune) are used in breeding programme and crossed with a susceptible cultivar (high disease incidence) cultivars like Neelam, Gulabkhash, Irvin and Amrapali or other commercial cultivars, it may be included in the resistant breeding programme. he five years average of incidence of malformation on different germplasms showed that germplasms Nazara Bombai, Karpuria, Kanchanlal, Jalmarai, Bagbahar, Latkampoo, Rarhi, Calcuttia Maldah, Dada Miyan, afed Bathua, Kalapahar, Dudhia Maldah, Gilas, Baramasia (Jamalpur), Rangraj, Police, Chapraha, Lalmohan, anhakerbi, Gaurjeet, Anupam, Ratoul, Hansraj, Gangasagar, Calcuttia Bombai, Maldah (urajgarha), Maldah (Dholi-Khoti), Gulabsagar, Kohitoor, Mulayamjam and Keasr remained tolerant against malformation. he average incidence of floral malformation was less than 5 per cent on germplasms viz., Karpuria, Kanchanlal, Jalmarai, Bagbahar, Latkampoo, Rarhi, Dada Miyan, afed Bathua, Kalapahar, Dudhia Maldah, Gilas, Baramasia (Jamalpur), Rangraj, Police, Chapraha, Banglora, Lalmohan, anhakerbi, Gaurjeet, Anupam, Ratoul, Hansraj, Gangasagar, Calcuttia Bombai, Maldah (urajgarha), Gulabsagar, Kohitoor and Mulayamjam in all the years of experimentation. But in rest of the above mentioned germplasms although average incidence of malformation, was less than 5 per cent over 5 years, occasionally crossed the limit. he incidence of malformation on the remaining germplasms ranged from 5.2 to 50 per cent mainly on the 18 germplasms i.e. Baramasia, Hathi Jhula, Ambalvi, Baramasia (Jamalpur), Banglora, Ahra (Baramasia), Zardalu, Khatma Belkhar, Alphanso, Irvin, sensation Amrapali Bombai, hemsagar, mallika, Prabhasankar, Mahmood bahar, Neelam and warnrekha. Acknowledgements he authors are thankful to the Director Research, Bihar Agricultural University, abour, Bhagalpur (Bihar) for providing necessary facilities and the ICAR, New Delhi for the financial grant for conducting the trial. REFERENCE Ahmad, F., Hafiz, I. A., Asi, A. A., Ahmad,. and Khan, M. (2002). Mango varietal susceptibility to malformation and its control. Asian J. Plant ci., 1 (2) :158-159. Britz, H., Emma,., teenkamp, eresa, A., Coutinho, Brenda, D., Wingfield, Marasas, W.F.O. and Wingfield, M.J. (2002). wo new species of Fusarium section Liseola associated with mango malformation. Myclogia, 94: 722-730. Chakrabarti, D.K., Kumar, R., Kumud,. and Kumar,. (1997). Interaction among Fusarium moniliforme, riolichus casei and Mangiferin as related to Malformation of Mangifera indica. ropical Agric., 74:317-320. Chakrabarti, D.K., ingh, A. and ingh, K. (1990). Physiological and biochemical changes induced in accumulated mangiferin in Mangifera indica. L., J. Hort. ci., 65: 731 737. Chand, G. and Chakrabarti, D.K. (2000). echnique to reproduce malformation symptoms in Mango (Mangifera indica L.) J. Mycol. Pl. Pathol., 30(2):296. Freeman,., Manimon, M. and Pinkas, Y. (1999). Use of GU ransformans of fusarium sub- glutinans for determining etiology of mango malformation disease. Phytopathol., 89: 456-461. Hafiz, I. A., Ahmad,., Abbasi, N. A., Anwar, R., Chatha, Z. A. and Grewal, A.G. (2008). Intensity f panicle malformation in mango (Mangifera indica L.) varieties. Pak. J. Agric. ci., 45(4) : 418-423. Kumar, J., ingh, U.. and Beniwal,.P.. (1993). Mango malformation: One hundred years of research Annu. Rev. Phytopathol., 31:217-232. Kumar, R. and Chakrabarti, D.K. (1997). echniques to reproduce floral malformation of mango. In: Indian phytopath. oc. Golden Jubilee Int. Conf. IARI, New Delhi, Nov.10-15, 1997, Abstract p. 413. 502
CREENING OF DIFFEREN GERMPLA AGAIN FLORAL MALFORMAION OF MANGO Majumdar, P.K. and Diware, D.V. (1989). tudies on horticultural aspects of mango malformation. Proc. 2 nd Intenationalymposium on mango. Bangalore, India 20-24 May. Acta Hort., 231:840-845. Mishra,.P. (2004). Reaction of Different Mango Varieties/ Hybrids to Floral Malformation. Indian J. Mycology & Plant Pathol., 34(1): 113-116. Om, P., Raoof, M.A. and Prakash, O. (1987). Incidence of malformation in mango cultivars. Indian J. Plant Pathol., 5(1):14-18. Ploetz, R.C. (2001). Malformation: a unique and important disease of mango, Mangifera indica L. In: B.A. ummerell, J.F. Leslie, D. Backhouse, W.L. Bryden, L.W. Burgess (Eds.) Fusarium: Paul E. Nelson Memorial ymposium. t. Paul, MN: AP Press: pp. 233-247. Ram, R. B., ingh, B.P. and ingh,.p. (1990). tudies on malformation of mango inflorescence with reference to varieties and age of the tree. Hort. J., 3(1-2) : 31-36. chlosser, E. (1971). Mango malformation: Incidence of bunchy top on mango seedling, in West Pakistan. FAO Plant Protec. Bull., 19(2) : 41-42. harma, I.M. and Badiyala,.D. (1990). Incidence of mango malformation in different locations of Himachal Pradesh. Indian J. Mycol. & Plant Pathol., 20(2) : 179-181. ingh, V.K., aini, J.P. and Misra, A.K. (1998). Mango malformation in relation to physiological parameters under elevated temperature. Indian J. Plant Physiol., 3: 231 233. Zheng, Q. and Ploetz, R. (2002). Genetic diversity in the mango malformation pathogen and development of a PCR assay. Plant. Pathol., 51(2):208-216. WEBLIOGRAPHY Anonymous.2006.http://apps.fao.org/lim500/nphwrap. plfaoadatabase/production.crops.primary &Domain=UA. Rome. Food and Agricultural Organization of United Nation. 503