Impact of nipping on soybean (Glycine max) plant architecture, nodulation and yield
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v59i3.5636Keywords:
Apical dominancy, Nipping, SoybeanAbstract
An investigation was carried out during the rainy (kharif) season of 2011 at Raipur, Chhattisgarh to exploit suppressive apical dominance phenomenon through nipping to increase soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] productivity. The experiment was laid in randomized block design with 3 replications. The treatments consisted of 7 nipping treatments, viz. nipping at 2-leaf stage, nipping at 4-leaf stage, nipping at 6-leaf stage, nipping at 2-leaf stage + nipping of lateral branches (15 days after 1 nipping), nipping at 4-leaf stage + nipping of lateral branches (15 days after 1 nipping), nipping at 6-leaf stage + nipping of lateral branches (15 days after 1 nipping) and control (without nipping). The same set of experiment was also conducted under pot culture in complete randomized design with 5 replication. Significantly higher number of branches, dry-matter accumulation and leaf-area index were obtained under nipping at 6-leaf stage + nipping of lateral branches (15 days after 1 nipping) than the other treatments. This was followed by nipping at 6-leaf stage. The number of nodules and dry weight of nodules were the maximum under nipping at 6-leaf stage + nipping of lateral branches (15 days after 1 nipping) followed by nipping at 6-leaf stage. Yield-contributing characters, viz. seed yield/plant, pods/plant, seeds/pod, 100-seed weight and seed yield, increased significantly under nipping at 6-leaf stage + nipping of lateral branches (15 days after 1 nipping) than other treatments.
References
Bangerth, F. 1992. Response of cytokinin concentration in the xylem exculpate of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) plants to decapitation and auxin treatment, and relationship to apical dominance. Planta 194: 439–42.
Berghage, R., Heins, R., Karlsson, M., Erwin, J. and Carlson, W. 1989. Pinching technique influences lateral shoot development in poinsettia. Journal American Society Horticultural Science 114: 909–11.
Kathireasan, G. and Duraisamy, K. 2001. Effect of clipping and diammonium phosphate spray on growth and seed yield of dhaincha (Sesbania aculeata). Indian Journal of Agronomy 46(3): 568–72.
Khan, H., Latif, A., Mahmood, S. and Khan, M.S.S. 2006. Effect of nipping at various stages on yield and yield components of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Journal of Research (Sciences), pp. 235–40.
Sarkar, R.K. and Pal, P.K. 2005. Effect of crop geometry, fertility levels and nipping on physiological parameters in relation to productivity of sesame. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 75(3): 143–47.
Singh, M.S. and Devi, K.S. 2006. Profitability of nipping in cultivation of pea (Pisum sativum)–an indigenous agro-technique in Manipur. Indian Journal of Agronomy 51(3): 206–08.
Sharma, A., Potdar, M.P., Pujari, B.T. and Dharmaraj, P.S. 2003. Studies on response of pigeonpea to canopy modification and plant geometry. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences 16: 1–3.
Weiss, D. and Shilo, R. 1988. Axillary bud inhibition induced by young leaves or bracts in Euphorbia pulcherrima willd. Annals of Botany 62: 435–40.
