PINAPLE CULTIVATION


CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

The pineapple is the leading edible member of the family Bromeliaceae which embraces about 2000 species, mostly epiphytic and many strikingly ornamental this plant is a terrestrial herb 0.75-1.5m high with a spread of 0.9 – 1.2m a very short, stout stem and a rosette of waxy, straplitic leaves, long pointed, 50 -180cm long, usually needle tipped and generally bearing sharp upcurved spines on the margins. Pineapple is a native of southern Brazil and Paraguay (Julia, 1987). In international trade, the numerous pineapple cultivars are grouped into four main classes> smooth cayenne, Red Spanish, Queen and Abacaxi despite much variation in the types within each class. Smooth cayenne has become of greatest importance world wide even though it is subject to disease and does not ship well (Morton 1987). This plant is near freedom from spines except for the middle at the leaf tip. The size varies from 1.8 to 4.5 kg (4-10lbs) cylindrical form shallow eyes, orange rind, yellow flesh, low fiber, Juicy and rich mildly acid flavour. A temperature range of 650 -950f (18.35-450c) is most favorable for it’s good performance the plant can tolerate cool might for short period. Ideally, rainfall would be about 1,143mm, though pineapple is draught tolerant. The best soil for pineapple culture is a well drained, sandy loam with a high content of organic matter and it should be friable for a depth of at least 60cm (2ft), and pH should be within a range of 4.5 to 6.5. Crowns, suckers and ratoons have all been commonly utilized for vegetative multiplication of the pineapple (Miami, 1987), Mulching is used to control weed in pineapple farm. The use of paper or plastic mulch and timely application of approved herbicides are the best means of preventing weed (Duane, 1993). Flowering may be delayed or uneven, and it is highly desirable to attain uniform maturity and also to control the time of harvest in order to avoid overproduction in the peak period ( Rohrbach, 1993). As far back as 1946, compressed acetylene gas, or a spray of calcium carbide solution were employed to expedite uniform blooming. A more advanced method is the use of hormone, a- naphthaleneacetic acid (ANA) which induces formation of ethylene. In recent years, B- hydroxyethyl hydrazine (BOH) came into use.

Crop fertilization is an important component of agricultural system. Nitrogenous fertilizers is essential for the increase of fruit size; this had been proved by fertilizer trials in Kenya. Nitrogen helps plant foliage to grow strong (Merrill, 2005).

Ash from woody biomass come from the mineral present in the structure of trees and shrubs in addition to any soil contamination present in the area the wood was burnt. However if ash is recycled in forest or agricultural ecosystems acidification associated with intensive biomass removal can be radically reduced (Biles, 2007).

Objectives

1. To determine the effect of different levels of nitrogen on the growth and development of pineapple.

2. To determine the effect of the applied Nitrogen fertilizer on the development of pineapple leaves

Justification

The use of single nitrogenous fertilizer like urea is out dating the use of N.P.K fertilizers, this is to know the exact quantity of nitrogen applied on a particular piece of land. The advantages of using fertilizers are much.

Statement of Problem

Pineapple cultivation is increasing every year. However, it is important that we rectify the problem of type of fertilizer to be used and the quantity to be applied in the soil.

Scope of the Study

Pineapple production will be by the use of Nitrogen fertilizer in the field of federal college of Agriculture Ishiagu.

Duration of Study

This project will last for seventeen (17) weeks.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

Pineapple (Ananas comosus) is among the most popular and nutritious tropical fruits grown in most tropical and sub-tropical countries where temperature are fairly moderate between 600 to 900 f ( Kenneth, 1993). The leaves may be all green variously striped with red, yellow and ivory down the middle or near the margins. At blooming time, the stem elongates and enlarges near the apex and puts forth a head of small purple or red flowers, each accompanied by a bract (Duane, 1993). Occasionally a plant may bear 2 to 3 heads, or as many as 12 fused together, instead of normal one (Bartholomew, 1993). If the flowers are pollinated, small hard seed may be present. Pineapple cultivars are grouped in four main classes, smooth cayenne, Red Spanish, Queen and Abacaxi, despite many variations in the type within each class (Lawal, 2003). The Queensland department of primary industries, after 20 years of breeding and testing, released a dual purpose cultivar named the Queensland cayenne. South Africans pineapple research station (S.P.R.S) East London, after 20 years of selecting and testing of smooth cayenne clones, has chosen four as superior especially for the canning industry. Some of the superior smooth cayenne variant or clones are Hilo, ‘ St Michael, Giant kew, Charlotte, Rothschild, Baron Rothschild. Pineapple requires a well drained, sandy loam with a high content of organic matter ( Taiwo, 2003). Soil that is not sufficiently acidic are treated with sulphur to achieve the desired level (Rohrbach, 1993). If there is impervious subsoil, drainage must be improved (Julia, 1987).

Propagation is achieved through the use of crowns, suckers and ratoons (Olaniyam et al, 2003). To a lesser degree, some growers have used “stumps” that is mother plant suckers that have already fruited seeds are used for breeding programmes and are usually the result of hand pollination (Paula et al., 1991). South African experiment with smooth cayenne have shown medium – size slips to be the best planting materials. Nest in order of yield were large crowns, medium- size suckers, medium- size crowns and large suckers. Trimming of basal leaves increases the yield (Tina, 2004).

However inducement is necessary, due to delay in pineapple flowering. Spraying of water solution of a- naphthaleneacetic acid (ANA) on the developing fruit has increased fruit size in ‘smooth cayenne’ in Hawail and Queensland. Trials with ‘sugar loaf’ showed calcium carbide and BOH are equally effective. Treatment is given when the plants are at six months old, 3 months before natural flowering time (Olajide et al., 2003). Ethylene treatment results in a square shouldered, shorter fruit maturing over a shorter period and ripening more uniformly. Food value per 100g of edible portion is as follows, moisture- 81.3 to 91.2g, Ether extract- 0.03 to 0.29g, crude fiber- 0.3 to 0.6g, Nitrogen -0.038 to 0.098g, Ash -0.21g, to 0.49g, calcium- 6.2 to 37.2mg, phosphorus- 6.6 to 11.9mg, Iron- 0.27 to 1.05mg, carotene – 0.003 to 0.055mg, Thiamine 0.048 to 0.138mg, Riboflavin – 0.011 to 0.04mg, niacin – 0.13 to 0.267mg, Ascorbic acid -27.0 to 165.2mg. This analysis of ripe pineapple is made in central. America. Unripe pineapple is not only inedible but poisonous, irritating the throat and acting as a drastic purgative (Bartholomew et al., 1993)

Nitrogen is essential to the increase of fruit size and total yield. Major responses have been observed to rates of nitrogen and potassium mainly in ‘Perola’ variety ( Paula et al., 1991, veloso et al., 2001) fertilizer trials in Kenya show that a total of 471.7 kg /ha in 4 applications during the first year is beneficial, whereas no advantage is apparent from added potassium and phosphorus. Queensland growers obtain high yields of ‘smooth cayenne’ from side dressing of NPK mixture 5 times a year. Nitrogen and phosphorus are the basis for determining healthy plant growth (Niang et al., 1997).

Ash from woody biomass comes from the minerals present in the structure of trees and in addition to any soil contamination (Cassidy et al., 2007). Properties of wood ash depends on a variety of factors including type of tree or shrub, part of tree or shrub (bark, wood other leaves), type of waste, combination with other fuel sources, type of soil and climate and condition of combustion ( Hubbard, 2007).

Ash from woody biomass, in general, stimulate microbial activities and mineralization in the soil by improving both the soil’s physical and chemical properties (Ashton et al., 2007). Wood ash has some nutritional value and ability to help neutralize acid soils (clapham et al., 1992) wood ash can be used in the garden as a soil addictive ( Demeyer et al., 2001).

CHAPTER THREE

MATERIALS AND METHOD

Location of Site

The experiment was conducted at students project site of federal college of Agriculture Ishiagu lies within longitude of 080 030 E and latitude of 060 250N in the savannah zone of south Eastern Nigeria. It has a rainfall of about 290c and 1350mm respectively. The period of dry season extends from November to March and rainy season falls between the months of April and October, the soil temperature of 10cm depth is about 30’ 20c + 20c. The pH ranges from 4.9-5.1.

Experimental Materials

Pineapple suckers was obtained from college pineapple research farm for the experiment.

Land Preparation

The land for the experiment was slashed, ploughed, harrowed and ridged.

Table 1

Treatment Number Quantity of Nitrogen Applied

1 control

2 85kg/ha N

3 179kg/ha N

4 225kg/ha N

5 340kg/ha N

Other Agronomic Practices

The following quantities of nitrogen was applied 85kg /ha, 170kg /ha, 255kg/ha and 340kg/ha respectively. And a basal application of 43kg/ha phosphorus from single super-phosphorus fertilizer with 200kg /ha of potassium from wood ash and control treatment without nitrogen fertilizer each of the treatments was replicated 3 times. Weeding was done 4 weeks after planting, second weeding at 8 WAP, third weeding at 12 WAP and fourth weeding at 16 WAP. One sucker per hole was planted on the beds with a spacing of 50cm x 50cm.

Field Layout and Design

The land area of 57.5m2 ( 0.00575 ha) was used for the project. The layout was a randomized complete block design with 5 treatments. There were 15 plots, each measured 1m x1.5m with 1m between blocks and 1minter-plot space.

T1

T4

T2

T5

T3

1.5m

1m1m

BK1

1m

T2

T3

T1

T4

T5

BK2












T4


T2


T5





T1






T3




BK3

Figure 1. Field Layout

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Table 2 Plant Height at 13, 15 And 17 WAP


Treatment 13 WAP 15 WAP 17 WAP

Control 3.3 3.9 5.3

85kg/ha N 4.9 8.3 9.8

170kg /ha N 4.3 6.9 8.8

255kg /ha N 3.9 5.9 7.4

340kg /ha N 4.8 7.1 8.5

L.S.D (0.005) N.S N.S N.S

From table 2 above, plant height taken at 13 WAP showed that treatment 2 (85kg /ha N) had a non- significant plant height of 4.9cm.

The plant height at 15WAP showed that treatment 2(85kg/ha N ) produced a non-significant plant height of 8.3cm. The plant height at 17 WAP indicated that the treatment 2 (85kg/ha N) gave a non-significant plant height of 9.3cm followed by 8.8cm that resulted from 170kg /ha N. control gave the least plant height of 5.3cm.

Table 3 Number of Leaves at 13 WAP 15 WAP and 17 WAP.


Treatment 13 WAP 15 WAP 17 WAP

Control 17 21 23

85kg/ha N 19 28 30

170kg /ha N 19 25 26

255kg /ha N 17 25 26

340kg /ha N 18 29 30

L.S.D (0.005) N.S N.S N.S

From table 2, showed that non –significant leaf number of 19 came from treatment 2 (85kg /ha N) and treatment 3 (170kg /ha N) at 17 WAP. Similarly treatment 2 (85kg /ha N) and treatment 5 (340kg/ha N) gave 30 leaves, followed by 26 leaves from treatment 3 (170kg /ha N) and treatment 4 (255kg/ha N) which did not vary significantly from one another. Control produced 23 leaves.

Table 4 Leaf Area at 13 WAP, 15 WAP and 17 WAP.


Treatment 13 WAP 15 WAP 17 WAP

Control 121.97 166.5 178.3

85kg/ha N 160.8 209.5 217

170kg /ha N 169.9 181.8 199.7

255kg /ha N 156.3 212.9 217.7

340kg /ha N 162.4 231.1 246.3

L.S.D (0.005) N.S N.S N.S

As shown in table 4, at 13 WAP a non- significant leaf area of 169.9cm2 was recorded from treatment 3 (170kg/ha N) followed by treatment 5 ( 340kg/ha N) that has a leaf area of 162.4cm2

Leaf area at 15 WAP indicated that treatment 5 (340kg/ha N) had a leaf area of 231.1cm2, followed by 212.9cm2 that resulted from treatment 4(255kg/ha N) and the control gave a leaf area of 166.5cm2.

At 17 WAP treatment 5 (340kg/ha N) gave the highest leaf area of 246.3cm2 followed by treatment 4 (255kg/ha N) and treatment 2 (85kg/ha N) that has 217cm2. Control gave the least leaf area of 178.3cm

Conclusion and Recommendation

The result of this study showed that non-significant plant height of 9.3cm came from treatment 2 (85kg /ha N) followed by treatment 3 (170kg/ha N) with 8.8cm.Control gave a plant height of 5.3cm at 17 WAP. The leaf number at 13 WAP showed that non-significant leaf number of 19 came from treatment 2 (85kg/ha N) and treatment 3 (170kg /ha N) respectively, followed by 29 leaves from treatment 5 (340kg/ha N) at 15 WAP. Also 30 leaves came from each of treatment 2 (85kg /ha N) and treatment 5 (340kg /ha N) at 17 WAP, which did not vary significant from one another. Non- significant leaf area of 246.3cm2 came from treatment 5 (340kg/ha N), while control produced a non- significant leaf area of 178.3cm2 which was the least at 17 WAP.

It was recommended that this work should be repeated before valid conclusion could be made.

References

Agho. M.O (2000) Integrated biology towards sustainable development

“planning lecture” the Agricultural society of Nigeria (A.S.N), 36th

Annual conference A.B.U, Bauchi page 86

Anderson J.M and Ingram J.S (1993) Tropical soil biology and fertilizer. A

handbook of methods, CA.B International U.K

Arvidsson. H, Vestin. T, Lundkvist H (2001) Ground and field vegetation

after recycling crushed wood ash to forest sites, shogforst Report (No-

2 the forest Research Institute of Sweden, Uppsala) pages 19-20

Batholomew.C, Duane P. and Kenneth .G, Rogrbach J (1993), first

international pineapple symposium. Acta horticultureae Number 334.

Clarholm. M (1998), wood ash to counteract potential phosphorus and

Potassium Limitations in the Norway spruce forest subjected to air

pollution scand. Journal. For Res. Suppl Vol.2. pages 67-75

Collins. J.I, (1949) History, taxonomy and culture of the pineapple.

Economic botany 3 (4) :335.

Diebel, J, Meginnis .G, Pughani. J, Shetron. S, and Jurgensen. M, (1992).

The environmental fate of wood ash applied to soils. 5th Annual

National Biofuels conference, Boston pages 359-368.

Demeyer. A, Voundi. N.J, Verloo. M.G (2001) characteristics of wood ash

and influence on soil properties and nutrient uptake.

Etiegni L. Campbell. A, Mahler. R. (1991) Evaluation of woodash disposal

on Agricultural land potential as a soil addictive and liming agent.

Commun. Soil Sci. plant. Anal Vol.22 pages 243-256.

Hubbard. W, Biles. C, May field. S, Ashton (2007) sustaiuable forestry for

bioenergy and biobased products UK.

Julia. F, Morton.J, Miami. F.L, (1987)fruits of warm elimate Hiawii.

Loh.J, Breene.W.M, (1981). The thermal factorability loss of Edible plant

tissue. Journals of texture studies 12 (4): 457 pineapple.

Niang. A, Reche.H, place.F, lluyomale. O.N, Akintoye.H A (2003) Guide to

improved nursery practices of pineapple. NIHORT. Ibadan

NIHORT (1983-1986); Advance in fruits and vegetable research . A

Communication Publication to mark the 10th Anniversary of NIHORT

Ibadan pages 20-22

Olajide. L.O, Olaniya A.A, lluyomade. O.M Akintoye. H.A (2003). Guide to

improved Nursery Practices in pineapple. Published by National

horticultural research institute, Ibadan

Rodin. J.O, coal son. D.M, Silverstein R.M, leeper. R.W (1966) Volatile

flavour and aroma component of pineapple. Journals on food science

30:668.

Singleton .V.L, Gortner. W.A (1965) chemical and physical development of

pineapple fruit food research 30:19.

APPENDIX 1

Table 1: mean plant Height at 13 WAP

Treatment R1 R2 R3 Ex X

T1 3.9 4 4.6 12.5 4.2

T2 5.9 7.6 8.9 22.4 7.5

T3 7.4 5.8 6.7 19.9 6.6

T4 4.7 5.9 6.6 17.2 5.7

T5 7.2 6.6 6.6 20.4 6.8

Ex 29.1 29.9 33.4 92.4

X 5.8 5.9 6.7 18.5

Correction factor = Ex2 = (92.4)2

N 15 = 8537.76 = 569.18

15

Anova Table

Source D.F S.S M.SS F. cal F.TAB (5%)

Treatment (5-1) =4 19.5 4.88 0.87

Block 3-1 = 2 2.10 1.05 0.19 4.82

Error 4x2 =8 45.08 5.64

Total 15-1 =14 27.68 1.98

SS total = E y 2 ij –cf = 3.92 + 42 + 4.62 +5.92 ---- 6.62 –cf

= 596.86 – 569.18

= 27.68

SS treatment = 12.52 + 22.42 +19.92 +172 + 20.42 - cf

3

= 1766.03 – 569.18

3

= 588.67 – 569.18

= 19.5

SS block = 29.12 + 29.92 + 33.42 – cf

5

= 2856.38 -569.18

5

= 571.28 – 569.18

=2.10

SS Error = SS total – SS block +SS treatment

= 27.68 -2.10 +19.5

= 45.08

APPENDIX 1I

Table 1: mean number of leaves at 17 WAP

Treatment R1 R2 R3 Ex X

T1 18 21 22 61 20.3

T2 24 25 85 134 44.7

T3 26 21 23 70 23.3

T4 17 25 24 66 22

T5 25 26 26 77 25.7

Ex 110 118 180 408

X 22 23.6 36 81.6

Correction factor = Ex2 = (408)2

N 15 = 11097.6

Anova Table

Source D.F S.S M.SS F. cal F.TAB (5%)

Treatment (5-1) =4 1189.7 297.4 0.55

Block 3-1 = 2 587.2 293.6 0.55 4.82

Error 4x2 =8 4292.9 536.6

Total 15-1 =14 3690.4 263.6

SS total = E y 2 ij –cf = 182 + 212 + 222 +242 ---- 262 –cf

= 14788 – 11097.6

= 3690.4

SS treatment = 612 + 1342 +702 +662 + 772 - cf

3

= 36862 – 11097.6

3

= 1189.7

SS block = 1102 + 1182 + 1802 – cf

5

= 58424 -11097.6

5

= 587.2

SS Error = SS total – SS block +SS treatment

= 3690.4 -587.2. +1189.7

= 4292.9

APPENDIX 1II

Table 1: mean leaf area at 17 WAP

Treatment R1 R2 R3 Ex X

T1 167 197 171 535 178.3

T2 222 213 216 651 217

T3 170 199 230 599 199.7

T4 201 222 230 653 217.7

T5 214 168 257 739 246.3

Ex 974 1099 1104 3177

X 194.8 219.8 220.8 635.4

Correction factor = Ex2 = (3177)2

N 15 = 672888.6

Anova Table

Source D.F S.S M.SS F. cal F.TAB (5%)

Treatment (5-1) =4 7563.7 1890.9 0.87

Block 3-1 = 2 2170 1085 0.50 4.82

Error 4x2 =8 17408.1 2176

Total 15-1 =14 12014.4 858.2

SS total = E y 2 ij –cf = 1672 + 1972 + 1712 +2222 ---- 2572 –cf

= 684903 – 672888.6

= 12014.4

SS treatment = 5352 + 65125992 +6532 + 7392 - cf

3

= 680452.3 – 672888.6

= 7563.7

SS block = 9742 + 10992 + 11042 – cf

5

= 675058.6 – 672888.6

=2170

SS Error = SS total – SS block +SS treatment

= 12014.4 -2170 +7563.7

= 17408.1

More by this Author


Comments

No comments yet.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working