Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Evaluation of Banana (Musa Spps.) for Growth, Yield, and Disease Reaction at Teppi, Southwestern Ethiopia

Evaluation of Banana (Musa Spps.) for Growth, Yield, and Disease Reaction at Teppi, Southwestern... INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FRUIT SCIENCE 2023, VOL. 23, NO. 1, 62–69 https://doi.org/10.1080/15538362.2023.2189959 RESEARCH ARTICLE Evaluation of Banana (Musa Spps.) for Growth, Yield, and Disease Reaction at Teppi, Southwestern Ethiopia Shamil Alo Sora and Merga Jibat Guji Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Tepi Agricultural Research Center, Tepi, Ethiopia ABSTRACT KEYWORDS Banana cultivars; yield; Banana belongs to the (Musaceae) family. It is a crop of immense economic Southwest Ethiopia; Black importance worldwide. The aim of this work was to evaluate the perfor- sigatoka; Tepi mance of Banana cultivars for yield and yield components. Nine banana cultivars and one standard check cultivar were compared in Tepi agricultural research center. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design with three replications. The analysis of variance showed that, for all phonological and vegetative traits except leaf width, significant varia- tion has been recorded. The combined analysis of the over seasons revealed significant difference due to cultivars and years for most of the characters tested. The over years combined analyses of variance revealed that there were significant differences (P < .05) among cultivars for all parameters con- sidered in the study. Among the cultivars, the highest yield (39.58 t/ha) was recorded for cultivar Ambowha Selle-3, but statistically on par with cultivars Dinke-1 (38.27), Williams-1 (38.17), Ambo-2 (38.02), William hybrid (37.88), and Paracido Alrey (37.14) t/ha. In contrast, the lowest yield was recorded for lady finger (33.81) which is statistically similar to Chinese dwarf (36.72) and Paracido Alrey (37.14) t/ha. Introduction Bananas (Musa spp.) belong to the Musaceae family. Banana is one of the most consumed tropical fruits around the world (Ahmed and Palta, 2010). It is important for economic development, food security, and nutrition (Alemu, 2017; Amen and Desalegn, 2018). Nutritionally, banana is a source of potassium, magnesium, copper, manganese, and vitamin C (Wall, 2006). Banana fruit can be utilized as a value-added supplement and is a fantastic source of nutrients for the human diet because of its important nutritional components, which include fiber, protein, minerals, and antioxidant chemicals. The nutritional value of many foods may be enhanced by adding banana fruit and flour supplements (Ahmed et al., 2020). In recent decades, its significance to the world’s food supply has considerably expanded (FAO, 2020). Agroecological conditions in Ethiopia are favorable for the production and cultivation of a variety of tropical, subtropical, and temperate fruits:- with the banana being the major one (Teklay et al., 2016). Commercially, banana is the leading fruit in global trade both by volume and value (Ahmed and Palta, 2015, 2016; Salvador et al., 2007). In Ethiopia, banana covers the largest area (56.79%) of the fruit crops followed by avocados which contributed 17.26% of the area. Bananas took up 63.49% of the fruit production and its production is mainly concentrated in southern nation nationalities and peoples followed by Oromia, Amhara, and Benishan Gul-Gumuz (CSA The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Central Statistical Agency, 2018). Despite its importance, the production and productivity of bananas have been constrained by different factors. Therefore, Ethiopia’s banana productivity is 8.23 tha-1 (CSA The Federal Democratic CONTACT Shamil Alo Sora shamilalo99@gmail.com Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Tepi Agricultural Research Center, Tepi P.O.Box. 34, Ethiopia © 2023 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FRUIT SCIENCE 63 Republic of Ethiopia Central Statistical Agency, 2018), which is significantly lower than the global average (22.6 tha-1). A few of the numerous issues include a lack of available improved varieties, pests and diseases, producers’ reliance on local varieties for a prolonged period of time, poor agronomic techniques, poor post-harvest management, and a lackluster market information system (Zinabu et al., 2019). Farmers in the main banana-growing regions use low-yielding, poor-quality banana cultivars that are also susceptible to diseases and pests that have been under production for a long time (Yoseph et al., 2014). Due to a lack of improved cultivars in the target area, small-scale farmers in south-western Ethiopia, notably in the Teppi area, were growing the local cultivar of bananas, which has a low yield. Hence, the need to introduce improved banana varieties to the target area is crucial to boost production and productivity. As a result, this study was designed to select the best performing banana varieties for the target area. Materials and Methods Study Area The field experiment was conducted for three crop cycles at Teppi Agricultural Research Center, in south western Ethiopia. Teppi is located at an elevation of 1200 meters above sea level. The research center receives an annual rainfall of 1559 mm with maximum and minimum temperatures of 29.7°C and 15.5°C, respectively. The soil of the experimental site is radish brown sandy clay loam classified as Nitosol with pH range of 5.6 to 6. Experimental Treatment and Design For this experiment, a total of 9 banana cultivars that were brought from the Melkassa Agricultural Research Center and 1 standard variety were employed. The experiment was set up using a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. The spacing of 2.5 m between rows and 2.5 m between plants was used. The planting hole with 60 cm depth and 60 cm width were prepared 3 months before planting and suckers of each cultivar were planted. Desuckering was used to remove undesirable suckers, and each pit was only allowed to support one sucker at a time. Important field management practices like sucker management, earthing up, propping, and other practices were followed as per recommendation. Data Collection and Analysis From the planting date through the harvest time, several parameters were recorded. The following is a list of the key parameters gathered: The number of fruits per bunch, bunch weight, and total yield per hectare were collected, along with phonological data such as days from planting to flowering and days from flowering to harvest. Growth parameters like plant height, pseudo stem girth, leaf number, length, and width, yield, as well as related data such as the number of fruits per bunch, bunch weight, and total yield per hectare were collected and the collected data were analyzed using a statistical analysis system (SAS). Results and Discussion The analysis of variance revealed significant variations in vegetative, yield, and yield component parameters among the varieties (P < .05) (Tables 1 and 2). This shows the existence of large variability among the varieties for the parameters considered. The individual and combined analysis of variance for yield and yield-related parameters revealed significant differences (P < .05) among varieties in all years. For all phonological and vegetative traits, significant variation has been recorded. The analysis of variance showed significant differences due to cultivars and years for most of the characters tested. 64 S. A. SORA M. JIBAT AND GUJI Table 1. ANOVA of mean phonological and vegetative parameters of banana cultivars combined over 3 years at Teppi, n = 90. Days to Days from flowering to Plant height Pseudo stem Leaf Leaf length Leaf width Cultivars flowering harvest (cm) girth (cm) number (cm) (cm) a b f d abc c abcd Ambo-3 327.94 128.77 163.94 64.26 9.50 140.50 62.98 ab bce ef abcd bcd c abc Dinke-2 321.35 124.66 166.69 67.13 9.03 141.41 63.49 abc a abc cd ab abc cd Williams 1 316.50 134.77 186.29 65.83 9.82 154.35 59.74 abcd cd def abcd cd ab bcd Dinke-1 309.65 123.55 169.04 67.77 8.46 163.45 61.524 abcd e ab abc abcd a abcd Ambo-2 308.92 111.33 191.24 69.25 9.26 166.49 62.57 abcd d abc abcd a ab abcd Ambowha 307.72 120.77 187.64 68.31 10.31 158.81 61.70 Selle 3 bcde bc cde d cd ab a Paracido 302.26 125.22 178.08 64.21 8.64 162.65 65.81 Alrey cde cd bc ab abcd bc d Chinese 296.07 122.11 182.49 70.61 9.159 150.77 59.19 Dwarf de d bcd bcd d a ab Lady finger 293.73 120.88 180.76 66.21 8.3 167.01 64.30 e e a a abcd a bcd Williams 286.88 112.55 197.97 70.81 9.269 167.55 60.54 hybrid Mean 307.10 122.46 180.41 67.44 9.17 157.30 62.18 Standard 21.75 4.52 12.45 4.81 1.25 14.96 4.40 error LSD (5%) 20.52 4.26 11.75 4.54 1.18 14.12 4.15 CV (%) 7.08 3.69 6.90 7.14 13.63 9.51 7.08 Table 2. ANOVA of mean yield and yield components of banana cultivars combined over 3 years at Teppi, n = 90. Fruit Bunch Hand number per Marketable fruit Fruit length diameter Number fruits Total yield Cultivars weight (kg) bunch weight (kg) (cm) (cm) per hand t/ha abc a abc ab ab b abc Ambo-3 23.33 8.38 21.25 12.59 3.09 13.02 37.338 bc a abc ab b b bc Dinke-2 21.68 8.25 21.28 12.74 3.03 13.10 34.691 ab a a ab a ab ab Williams 1 23.85 8.69 23.44 12.85 3.2 13.81 38.173 ab a a ab b ab ab Dinke-1 23.92 9.27 23.38 12.57 2.98 13.62 38.272 ab a abc a ab ab ab Ambo-2 23.76 8.86 21.30 13.21 3.11 13.33 38.020 a a abc ab ab ab a Ambowha 24.73 8.58 21.60 12.61 3.14 13.63 39.581 selle abc a abc ab ab a abc Paracido 23.21 8.91 21.71 12.85 3.09 14.47 37.140 Alrey abc a bc a ab ab abc Chinese 22.95 8.86 20.43 12.97 3.14 13.85 36.727 Dwarf c a c b ab b c Lady finger 21.13 8.87 18.94 11.99 3.05 13.05 33.813 ab a ab a ab ab ab Williams 23.67 8.76 22.36 13.13 3.14 13.41 37.884 hybrid mean 23.22 8.74 21.57 12.75 3.10 13.53 37.163 Standard 2.60 1.09 3.01 0.97 0.18 1.25 41.75 error LSD (5%) 2.46 1.03 2.84 0.91 0.17 1.18 3.939 CV (%) 11.23 12.56 13.97 7.63 5.90 9.27 11.23 The over years combined analyses of variance (Tables 1 and 2) revealed that there was significant difference (P < .05) among cultivars for all parameters considered in the study. Among the cultivars, the highest yield (39.58 t/ha) was recorded for cultivar Ambowha Selle 3, but statistically on par with cultivars Dinke-1 (38.27), Williams-1 (38.17), Ambo-2 (38.02), William hybrid (37.88), and Paracido Alrey (37.14) t/ha. In contrast, the lowest yield was recorded for lady finger (33.81) which is statistically similar with Chinese dwarf (36.72) and Paracido Alrey (37.14) t/ha (Table 2). When compared to the control, the cultivars Williams Hybrid, Amboweha Selle-3, and Ambo-2 had the tallest plants, while cultivars Dinke-1, Dinke-2, and Ambo −3 were shorter. All cultivars in the current investigation had plants with a small height (163.94 cm to 197.97 cm). Kinde (2021) noted the variation in cultivar-specific plant height. The pseudo stem girth size for Paracido Alrey ranged from 64.21 cm to 70.81 cm for Williams hybrid (Table 1). The difference in the plant girth could be probably due to the genetic variation among the cultivars. This result is in line with the findings of Njuguna INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FRUIT SCIENCE 65 et al. (2008) that reported stem girth ranging from 43 to 76.6 cm, 77 to 90 cm (Kamira et al., 2016) and 81.4 to 88.3 cm (Asmare et al., 2021). The number of functional leaves per plant varied between 8.3 and 10.31 for Lady Finger and Amboweha sell-3, respectively (Table 1). In the present study, the cultivars with vigor pseudo stem girth size had comparable leaf number with shorter cultivars. The time it took the cultivars to reach flowering and harvesting stages differed significantly. The cultivars Chinese Dwarf, Williams Hybrid, Lady Finger, and Paracido al Rey were the earliest to flower, whereas Ambo-3, Dinke-2, Williams-1, Dinke-1, and Ambo-2 compared to the others, it took the longest to flower and harvest. The cultivars with shorter flowering times also reached maturity earlier. This may be caused by the genome of banana cultivars and how the cultivars adapt to their environments. The current investigation supported the findings of Mohammed et al. (2014). Different banana cultivars had a considerable difference on the phonological parameters of the banana. The present study indicated that it took a long time (327.94 days) from planting to flowering for cultivar Ambo-3 and the shortest time (286.88 days) for the cultivar William hybrid. These findings are in line with earlier research (Asmare et al., 2021) which found that the cultivars Ambo-2 and Chinese dwarf had the longest and shortest times to shooting, respectively, of 316.8 days and 243.8 days. Days to flowering, days to maturity, and other morphological characteristics in the current study were significantly differed in the current study. Yoseph et al. (2014) and Binalfew and Damtew (2015) both reported similar findings. The results of the analysis of variance revealed that all cultivars had statistically non-significant values for the parameters mean hands per bunch, mean bunch weight, marketable fruit weight, mean fruit length, mean fruit diameter, mean number of fruits per hand, and total yield. Bunch weight showed significant difference among the ten Banana cultivars (Table 2). The cultivar Ambowha selle −3 yielded the most bunch weight, although they were not noticeably different from other cultivars except Dinke-2 and Lady Finger. The findings are consistent with those of Goncalves et al. (2018) and Sagar et al. (2017), who discovered bunch weight variations between different banana cultivars. Banana cultivars differ in bunch weight, according to Njuguna et al. (2008) and Kamira et al. (2016). Yield of banana was significantly influenced by cultivars (Binalfew and Damtew, 2015). The number of hands per bunch varied between 8.25 and 9.27 on average. The average number of hands, according to Goncalves et al. (2018) and Mattos et al. (2010), was 7 and 6, respectively, which is less than the finding of the present study. The current study’s findings revealed that the average number of fingers per hand ranged from 13.02 to 14.47 (Table 2). According to Mattos et al. (2010), there are 14 fingers on an average on each hand, which is consistent with our finding. There was no significant difference among banana cultivars in the mean finger weight, diameter, and length (Table 2). Various researches reported varietal differences in fruit size (Gaidashova et al., 2008; Mattos et al., 2010; Njuguna et al., 2008; Sagar et al., 2017; Uazire et al., 2008). The mean marketable and total fruit yields of different banana cultivars did not differ significantly from one another (Table 2). Genetic differences and environmental factors may contribute to variations in yields among cultivars (Fonsah et al., 2007). However, the type of genotype may play a more significant role in determining the yield potential of a banana cultivar (Njuguna et al., 2008). Correlation Analysis The correlation coefficients between growth parameters and yield components are displayed in Table 3. Days till flowering had a highly significant negative association (−0.513) with pseudo stem girth. A significant correlation between the number of leaves and the flowering date was observed (0.622). Days of flowering and pseudo stem girth showed a strong positive association (0.558). None of the other growth-related factors displayed a significant association with the yield components or among themselves. Marketable fruit weight (0.817), fruit length (0.290), and fruit diameter (0.308) all demonstrated a highly significant positive association with total yield. Bunch weight also had a highly significant positive correlation with total yield (1.00). Fruit length and bunch weight showed an 66 S. A. SORA M. JIBAT AND GUJI Table 3. Phenotypic correlations between growth parameters and yield components of banana cultivars. Parameters FLOWD DFH PH CIRC LN LL LW BWT HN MFWT FL FD NOFPH TY FLOWD 1 DFH −0.075 1 PH −0.041 −0.249* 1 CIRC −0.513** 0.059 0.230* 1 LN 0.622** −0.144 0.259* −0.305* 1 LL −0.046 −0.206 0.157 −0.014 0.024 1 LW −0.316* 0.116 −0.094 0.175 −0.324* 0.482** 1 BWT −0.164 −0.344* 0.273* 0.170 −0.127 0.044 0.186 1 HN 0.405** 0.096 0.034 −0.219* 0.178 0.220* −0.155 −0.092 1 MFWT −0.176 −0.284* 0.210* 0.204 −0.190 −0.024 0.114 0.817** −0.043 1 FL −0.617** 0.228* 0.061 0.558** −0.486** −0.050 0.332* 0.290* −0.360* 0.262* 1 FD 0.255* −0.294* 0.272* −0.176 0.290* 0.054 −0.171 0.308* 0.046 0.278* −0.001 1 NOFPH −0.255* −0.057 −0.022 0.157 −0.190 −0.055 0.044 0.223* −0.177 0.150 0.307* −0.083 1 TY −0.164 −0.344* 0.273* 0.170 −0.127 0.044 0.186 1** −0.092 0.817** 0.290* 0.308* 0.223* 1 REP = replication, FLOWD= days to 50% flowering, DFH= days to harvest, PH= plant height, CIRC= pseudo stem circumference, LN= leaf number, LL= leaf length, LW= leaf width, BWT= bunch weight, HN= hand number, MFWT= marketable fruit weight, FL= fruit length, FD= fruit diameter, NOFPH= number of fruits per hand, TY= total yield. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FRUIT SCIENCE 67 Disease progress rate graph 60 75 90 105 120 Days after disease occuring Ambo-3 Williams hybr id Lady finger Ch inese Dwarf Ambowha selle Williams 1 Paracido Alrey Dinke-1 Dinke-2 Ambo-2 Figure 1. Reaction of banana cultivars to Black Sigatoka (Mycosphaerella fijiensis ) disease progress curves at different times after disease symptoms observed on cultivars at Tepi, Ethiopia. extremely significant positive association (0.290) and fruit diameter (0.308). Different traits affected the yield of different banana cultivars in this study. Asmare et al. (2021) reported that characteristics that are linked to yield and are less influenced by the environment may be helpful for increasing banana yield. The correlation study revealed that the growth parameters were poor predictors of banana yield, as seen from the correlation coefficients. This finding is consistent with those of (Kumar et al., 2014) and (Asmare et al., 2021), who reported similar correlation studies on several banana cultivars. Disease Progress Rate Data on the response of cultivars to the disease under field conditions was recorded based on 0 to 5 rating scale. The disease development curves of Black Sigatoka leaf blight (severity versus days after a disease occurs) were drawn to compare the reaction of cultivars against the disease Figure 1. The curve revealed that disease severity developed increasingly starting from the onset to the final severity recorded during the study periods. The disease progress curves also indicated that the disease progress was not analogous for each cultivar evaluated. Disease severity in Ambo-2 genotypes followed relatively high progressive curves and exhibited the peak levels of Black Sigatoka disease severity. The Williams hybrid cultivar followed similar curves as Ambo-2 cultivar. However, disease progress curves of Dinke-2 cultivar progressed gradually and displayed the lowest stages of sigatoka disease severity at different days after disease occurrence. Whereas cultivars like Lady Finger, Chinese Dwarf, Ambowha selle-3, Williams 1, Paracido Alrey were intermediate between Ambo-2 and Dinke-2. Conclusion Bananas have a great deal of potential to increase household income, create more job opportunities, fight poverty, and ensure dietary security. To assure larger yields, better revenue, and a major contribution of banana farming to food security, nutritional security, and improved lives in the Disease severity (%) 68 S. A. SORA M. JIBAT AND GUJI nation, a set of constraints along banana production must be taken into account at the same time. Along with the previously released varieties, the best performing cultivars like Dinke-1 and Lady Finger ought to be multiplied and spread throughout the region. To increase banana yield and productivity, banana cultivars with high yields, excellent quality, and strong disease resistance must be released and popularized. In addition to variety enhancement, crop pre- and post-harvest handling should be given priority. Acknowledgments We would like to acknowledge the financial support provided by Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research and Teppi agricultural research centre. We highly appreciate and acknowledge the effort made by respective researchers, field assistants for their unreserved support and substantial contribution to accomplish this study. Authors’ Contributions Shamil Alo Sora initiated and executed the field experiment, managed and followed the field, collected data and wrote the draft manuscript. Merga Jibat Guji was the plant pathologist who co-executed the field work and collected disease- related data and peer reviewed the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. References Ahmed, Z.F.R., and J.P. Palta. 2010. Lysophosphatidylethanolamine, a natural phospholipid, may retard senescence and improve the shelf life of banana fruit. HortScience 45(8):S66. Ahmed, Z.F.R., and J.P. Palta. 2015. A natural lipid, Lysophosphatidylethanolamine, may promote ripening while reducing senescence in banana fruit. HortScience 50(7):1035–1040. doi: 10.21273/HORTSCI.50.7.1035. Ahmed, Z.F.R., and J.P. Palta. 2016. Postharvest dip treatment with a natural phospholipid along with lecithin may extend the shelf life of banana fruit. Postharvest Biol. and Technol. 113:58–65. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2015.10.016. Ahmed, Z.F., E.M. Taha, N.A. Abdelkareem, and W.M. Mohamed. 2020. Postharvest properties of unripe bananas and the potential of producing economic nutritious products. Int. J. Fruit Sci. 20(sup2):S995–1014. doi: 10.1080/ 15538362.2020.1774469. Alemu, M. 2017. Banana as a cash crop and its food security and socioeconomic contribution: The case of Southern Ethiopia. Arba Minch.J. Environ. Prot 8(3):319–329. doi: 10.4236/jep.2017.83024. Amen, D., and D. Desalegn. 2018. Analysis of socio-economic factors affecting banana production: Evidences from lowlands of uba debretsehay woreda, gamo gofa zone. SNNPRS. J. Econom. Sustain. Dev 9(9):1–7. Asmare, D., A. Wegayehu, K. Girma, A. Lemma, M. Tewodros, M. Awoke, K. Dereje, G. Endriyas, M. Masresha, A. Abraham, et al. 2021. Evaluation of banana (Musa spp.) cultivars for growth, yield and fruit quality. Ethiop. J. Agric. Sci 31(3):1–25. Binalfew, T., and M. Damtew. 2015. Evaluation the adaptability of dessert banana cultivars at Belese Valley, North Western Ethiopia. Afr. J. Agri. Res 10(30):2995–2999. doi: 10.5897/AJAR2014.9352. CSA (The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Central Statistical Agency). (2018). Agricultural sample survey 2017/ 2018; volume I, report on area and production of major crops, statistical bulletin 586. FAO. (2020). Banana market review. Fonsah, E.G., C.A. Adamu, B.N. Okole, and B.G. Mullinix. 2007. Field evaluation of Cavendish banana cultivars propagated either by suckers or by tissue culture, over six crop cycles in the tropics. Fruits 62(4):205–212. doi: 10. 1051/fruits:2007016. Gaidashova, S.V., F. Karemera, and E.B. Karamura. 2008. Agronomic performance of introduced banana varieties in lowlands of Rwanda. Afr. Crop Sci. J. 16(1):9–16. doi: 10.4314/acsj.v16i1.54321. Goncalves, Z.S., D.R.S. da Invenção, C.A.S. Ledo, C.F. Ferreira, and E.P. Amorim. 2018. Agronomic performance of plantain genotypes and genetic variability using Ward-MLM algorithm. Genet. Mol. Res. 17(1):gmr16039882. doi: 10. 4238/gmr16039882. Kamira, M., J. Ntamwira, C. Sivirihauma, W. Ocimati, P. van Asten, L. Vutseme, and G. Blomme. 2016. Agronomic performance of local and introduced plantains, dessert, cooking and beer bananas (Musa spp.) across different INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FRUIT SCIENCE 69 altitude and soil conditions in eastern democratic Republic of Congo. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 11(43):4313–4332. doi: 10. 5897/AJAR2016.11424. Kinde, L. 2021. Performance evaluation of banana varieties, through farmer’s participatory selection. Int. J. Fruit Sci. 21 (1):768–778. doi: 10.1080/15538362.2021.1930628. Kumar, P.R., S. Srivastava, K.K. Singh, C. Mathad, and P.S. Thin. 2014. Study of antioxidant and antimicrobial properties, phytochemical screening and analysis of sap extracted from banana (Musa acuminata) pseudostem. International Journal of Advanced Biotechnology and Research 5(4):649–658. Mattos, L.A., E.P. Amorim, V.B.O. Amorim, K.O. Cohen, C.A.S. Ledo, and S.O. Silva. 2010. Agronomical and molecular characterization of banana germplasm. Pesqui. Agropecu. Bras. 45(2):146–154. doi: 10.1590/S0100- 204X2010000200005. Mohammed, W., T. Tsgaw, and K. Yehula. 2015. Evaluation of Genetic Variation in Local and Introduced Desert Banana (Musa sp.) Genotypes for Morpho-physicochemical Traits. Science, Technology and Arts Research Journal 3(4):19– Njuguna, J., F. Nguthi, S. Wepukhulu, F. Wambugu, D. Gitau, M. Karuoya, and D. Karamura. 2008. Introduction and evaluation of improved banana cultivars for agronomic and yield characteristics in Kenya. Afr. Crop Sci. J. 16 (1):35–40. doi: 10.4314/acsj.v16i1.54333. Sagar, B.S., B. Raju, and B.R. Sahithya. 2017. Evaluation of banana genotypes under northern dry zone of Karnataka for yield and returns. Int. J. Cur. Microbiol. Appl. Sci. 6(6):255–262. doi: 10.20546/ijcmas.2017.606.031. Salvador, A., L. Arnal, A. Manterde, and J. Cuquerella. 2007. Reduction of chilling injury symptoms in persimmon fruit cv. ‘Rojo Brillante’ by 1-MCP. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 33(3):285–281. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2004.03.005. Teklay, T., K. Yeman, G. Selamawit, and W. Gebremedhin. 2016. Value chain analysis of banana in ‘Tekeze’ River Basin. North Ethiopia. J. Biol., Agri. Healthcare 6(21):34–40. Uazire, A.T., C.M. Ribeiro, B.M.C. Ruth, M. Pillay, G. Blomme, C. Fraser, C. Staver, and E. Karamura. 2008. Preliminary evaluation of improved banana varieties in Mozambique. Afr. Crop Sci. J. 16(1):17–25. doi: 10.4314/acsj.v16i1.54325. Wall, M.M. 2006. Ascorbic acid, vitamin a and mineral composition of banana (Musa spp) and papaya (Carica papaya) cultivars grown in Hawaii. J. Food Compos. Anal 19(5):434–445. doi: 10.1016/j.jfca.2006.01.002. Yoseph, T., W. Shiferaw, Z. Sorsa, T. Simon, A. Shumbullo, and W. Solomon. 2014. Adaptability study of banana (Musa Paradisiaca L var. Sapiertum) varieties at Jinka, Southern Ethiopia. Am. J. Agri. For 2(6):250–255. doi: 10.11648/j.ajaf. 20140206.13. Zinabu, A., T. Bikila, O. Temsgen, and A. Diriba. 2019. Review on the production and marketing of banana in Ethiopia. World J. Agri. Soil Sci. 2(1):1–9. doi: 10.33552/WJASS.2019.02.000529. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Fruit Science Taylor & Francis

Evaluation of Banana (Musa Spps.) for Growth, Yield, and Disease Reaction at Teppi, Southwestern Ethiopia

Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/evaluation-of-banana-musa-spps-for-growth-yield-and-disease-reaction-eSDv2grJ40

References (29)

Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
© 2023 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
ISSN
1553-8621
eISSN
1553-8362
DOI
10.1080/15538362.2023.2189959
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FRUIT SCIENCE 2023, VOL. 23, NO. 1, 62–69 https://doi.org/10.1080/15538362.2023.2189959 RESEARCH ARTICLE Evaluation of Banana (Musa Spps.) for Growth, Yield, and Disease Reaction at Teppi, Southwestern Ethiopia Shamil Alo Sora and Merga Jibat Guji Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Tepi Agricultural Research Center, Tepi, Ethiopia ABSTRACT KEYWORDS Banana cultivars; yield; Banana belongs to the (Musaceae) family. It is a crop of immense economic Southwest Ethiopia; Black importance worldwide. The aim of this work was to evaluate the perfor- sigatoka; Tepi mance of Banana cultivars for yield and yield components. Nine banana cultivars and one standard check cultivar were compared in Tepi agricultural research center. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design with three replications. The analysis of variance showed that, for all phonological and vegetative traits except leaf width, significant varia- tion has been recorded. The combined analysis of the over seasons revealed significant difference due to cultivars and years for most of the characters tested. The over years combined analyses of variance revealed that there were significant differences (P < .05) among cultivars for all parameters con- sidered in the study. Among the cultivars, the highest yield (39.58 t/ha) was recorded for cultivar Ambowha Selle-3, but statistically on par with cultivars Dinke-1 (38.27), Williams-1 (38.17), Ambo-2 (38.02), William hybrid (37.88), and Paracido Alrey (37.14) t/ha. In contrast, the lowest yield was recorded for lady finger (33.81) which is statistically similar to Chinese dwarf (36.72) and Paracido Alrey (37.14) t/ha. Introduction Bananas (Musa spp.) belong to the Musaceae family. Banana is one of the most consumed tropical fruits around the world (Ahmed and Palta, 2010). It is important for economic development, food security, and nutrition (Alemu, 2017; Amen and Desalegn, 2018). Nutritionally, banana is a source of potassium, magnesium, copper, manganese, and vitamin C (Wall, 2006). Banana fruit can be utilized as a value-added supplement and is a fantastic source of nutrients for the human diet because of its important nutritional components, which include fiber, protein, minerals, and antioxidant chemicals. The nutritional value of many foods may be enhanced by adding banana fruit and flour supplements (Ahmed et al., 2020). In recent decades, its significance to the world’s food supply has considerably expanded (FAO, 2020). Agroecological conditions in Ethiopia are favorable for the production and cultivation of a variety of tropical, subtropical, and temperate fruits:- with the banana being the major one (Teklay et al., 2016). Commercially, banana is the leading fruit in global trade both by volume and value (Ahmed and Palta, 2015, 2016; Salvador et al., 2007). In Ethiopia, banana covers the largest area (56.79%) of the fruit crops followed by avocados which contributed 17.26% of the area. Bananas took up 63.49% of the fruit production and its production is mainly concentrated in southern nation nationalities and peoples followed by Oromia, Amhara, and Benishan Gul-Gumuz (CSA The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Central Statistical Agency, 2018). Despite its importance, the production and productivity of bananas have been constrained by different factors. Therefore, Ethiopia’s banana productivity is 8.23 tha-1 (CSA The Federal Democratic CONTACT Shamil Alo Sora shamilalo99@gmail.com Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Tepi Agricultural Research Center, Tepi P.O.Box. 34, Ethiopia © 2023 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FRUIT SCIENCE 63 Republic of Ethiopia Central Statistical Agency, 2018), which is significantly lower than the global average (22.6 tha-1). A few of the numerous issues include a lack of available improved varieties, pests and diseases, producers’ reliance on local varieties for a prolonged period of time, poor agronomic techniques, poor post-harvest management, and a lackluster market information system (Zinabu et al., 2019). Farmers in the main banana-growing regions use low-yielding, poor-quality banana cultivars that are also susceptible to diseases and pests that have been under production for a long time (Yoseph et al., 2014). Due to a lack of improved cultivars in the target area, small-scale farmers in south-western Ethiopia, notably in the Teppi area, were growing the local cultivar of bananas, which has a low yield. Hence, the need to introduce improved banana varieties to the target area is crucial to boost production and productivity. As a result, this study was designed to select the best performing banana varieties for the target area. Materials and Methods Study Area The field experiment was conducted for three crop cycles at Teppi Agricultural Research Center, in south western Ethiopia. Teppi is located at an elevation of 1200 meters above sea level. The research center receives an annual rainfall of 1559 mm with maximum and minimum temperatures of 29.7°C and 15.5°C, respectively. The soil of the experimental site is radish brown sandy clay loam classified as Nitosol with pH range of 5.6 to 6. Experimental Treatment and Design For this experiment, a total of 9 banana cultivars that were brought from the Melkassa Agricultural Research Center and 1 standard variety were employed. The experiment was set up using a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. The spacing of 2.5 m between rows and 2.5 m between plants was used. The planting hole with 60 cm depth and 60 cm width were prepared 3 months before planting and suckers of each cultivar were planted. Desuckering was used to remove undesirable suckers, and each pit was only allowed to support one sucker at a time. Important field management practices like sucker management, earthing up, propping, and other practices were followed as per recommendation. Data Collection and Analysis From the planting date through the harvest time, several parameters were recorded. The following is a list of the key parameters gathered: The number of fruits per bunch, bunch weight, and total yield per hectare were collected, along with phonological data such as days from planting to flowering and days from flowering to harvest. Growth parameters like plant height, pseudo stem girth, leaf number, length, and width, yield, as well as related data such as the number of fruits per bunch, bunch weight, and total yield per hectare were collected and the collected data were analyzed using a statistical analysis system (SAS). Results and Discussion The analysis of variance revealed significant variations in vegetative, yield, and yield component parameters among the varieties (P < .05) (Tables 1 and 2). This shows the existence of large variability among the varieties for the parameters considered. The individual and combined analysis of variance for yield and yield-related parameters revealed significant differences (P < .05) among varieties in all years. For all phonological and vegetative traits, significant variation has been recorded. The analysis of variance showed significant differences due to cultivars and years for most of the characters tested. 64 S. A. SORA M. JIBAT AND GUJI Table 1. ANOVA of mean phonological and vegetative parameters of banana cultivars combined over 3 years at Teppi, n = 90. Days to Days from flowering to Plant height Pseudo stem Leaf Leaf length Leaf width Cultivars flowering harvest (cm) girth (cm) number (cm) (cm) a b f d abc c abcd Ambo-3 327.94 128.77 163.94 64.26 9.50 140.50 62.98 ab bce ef abcd bcd c abc Dinke-2 321.35 124.66 166.69 67.13 9.03 141.41 63.49 abc a abc cd ab abc cd Williams 1 316.50 134.77 186.29 65.83 9.82 154.35 59.74 abcd cd def abcd cd ab bcd Dinke-1 309.65 123.55 169.04 67.77 8.46 163.45 61.524 abcd e ab abc abcd a abcd Ambo-2 308.92 111.33 191.24 69.25 9.26 166.49 62.57 abcd d abc abcd a ab abcd Ambowha 307.72 120.77 187.64 68.31 10.31 158.81 61.70 Selle 3 bcde bc cde d cd ab a Paracido 302.26 125.22 178.08 64.21 8.64 162.65 65.81 Alrey cde cd bc ab abcd bc d Chinese 296.07 122.11 182.49 70.61 9.159 150.77 59.19 Dwarf de d bcd bcd d a ab Lady finger 293.73 120.88 180.76 66.21 8.3 167.01 64.30 e e a a abcd a bcd Williams 286.88 112.55 197.97 70.81 9.269 167.55 60.54 hybrid Mean 307.10 122.46 180.41 67.44 9.17 157.30 62.18 Standard 21.75 4.52 12.45 4.81 1.25 14.96 4.40 error LSD (5%) 20.52 4.26 11.75 4.54 1.18 14.12 4.15 CV (%) 7.08 3.69 6.90 7.14 13.63 9.51 7.08 Table 2. ANOVA of mean yield and yield components of banana cultivars combined over 3 years at Teppi, n = 90. Fruit Bunch Hand number per Marketable fruit Fruit length diameter Number fruits Total yield Cultivars weight (kg) bunch weight (kg) (cm) (cm) per hand t/ha abc a abc ab ab b abc Ambo-3 23.33 8.38 21.25 12.59 3.09 13.02 37.338 bc a abc ab b b bc Dinke-2 21.68 8.25 21.28 12.74 3.03 13.10 34.691 ab a a ab a ab ab Williams 1 23.85 8.69 23.44 12.85 3.2 13.81 38.173 ab a a ab b ab ab Dinke-1 23.92 9.27 23.38 12.57 2.98 13.62 38.272 ab a abc a ab ab ab Ambo-2 23.76 8.86 21.30 13.21 3.11 13.33 38.020 a a abc ab ab ab a Ambowha 24.73 8.58 21.60 12.61 3.14 13.63 39.581 selle abc a abc ab ab a abc Paracido 23.21 8.91 21.71 12.85 3.09 14.47 37.140 Alrey abc a bc a ab ab abc Chinese 22.95 8.86 20.43 12.97 3.14 13.85 36.727 Dwarf c a c b ab b c Lady finger 21.13 8.87 18.94 11.99 3.05 13.05 33.813 ab a ab a ab ab ab Williams 23.67 8.76 22.36 13.13 3.14 13.41 37.884 hybrid mean 23.22 8.74 21.57 12.75 3.10 13.53 37.163 Standard 2.60 1.09 3.01 0.97 0.18 1.25 41.75 error LSD (5%) 2.46 1.03 2.84 0.91 0.17 1.18 3.939 CV (%) 11.23 12.56 13.97 7.63 5.90 9.27 11.23 The over years combined analyses of variance (Tables 1 and 2) revealed that there was significant difference (P < .05) among cultivars for all parameters considered in the study. Among the cultivars, the highest yield (39.58 t/ha) was recorded for cultivar Ambowha Selle 3, but statistically on par with cultivars Dinke-1 (38.27), Williams-1 (38.17), Ambo-2 (38.02), William hybrid (37.88), and Paracido Alrey (37.14) t/ha. In contrast, the lowest yield was recorded for lady finger (33.81) which is statistically similar with Chinese dwarf (36.72) and Paracido Alrey (37.14) t/ha (Table 2). When compared to the control, the cultivars Williams Hybrid, Amboweha Selle-3, and Ambo-2 had the tallest plants, while cultivars Dinke-1, Dinke-2, and Ambo −3 were shorter. All cultivars in the current investigation had plants with a small height (163.94 cm to 197.97 cm). Kinde (2021) noted the variation in cultivar-specific plant height. The pseudo stem girth size for Paracido Alrey ranged from 64.21 cm to 70.81 cm for Williams hybrid (Table 1). The difference in the plant girth could be probably due to the genetic variation among the cultivars. This result is in line with the findings of Njuguna INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FRUIT SCIENCE 65 et al. (2008) that reported stem girth ranging from 43 to 76.6 cm, 77 to 90 cm (Kamira et al., 2016) and 81.4 to 88.3 cm (Asmare et al., 2021). The number of functional leaves per plant varied between 8.3 and 10.31 for Lady Finger and Amboweha sell-3, respectively (Table 1). In the present study, the cultivars with vigor pseudo stem girth size had comparable leaf number with shorter cultivars. The time it took the cultivars to reach flowering and harvesting stages differed significantly. The cultivars Chinese Dwarf, Williams Hybrid, Lady Finger, and Paracido al Rey were the earliest to flower, whereas Ambo-3, Dinke-2, Williams-1, Dinke-1, and Ambo-2 compared to the others, it took the longest to flower and harvest. The cultivars with shorter flowering times also reached maturity earlier. This may be caused by the genome of banana cultivars and how the cultivars adapt to their environments. The current investigation supported the findings of Mohammed et al. (2014). Different banana cultivars had a considerable difference on the phonological parameters of the banana. The present study indicated that it took a long time (327.94 days) from planting to flowering for cultivar Ambo-3 and the shortest time (286.88 days) for the cultivar William hybrid. These findings are in line with earlier research (Asmare et al., 2021) which found that the cultivars Ambo-2 and Chinese dwarf had the longest and shortest times to shooting, respectively, of 316.8 days and 243.8 days. Days to flowering, days to maturity, and other morphological characteristics in the current study were significantly differed in the current study. Yoseph et al. (2014) and Binalfew and Damtew (2015) both reported similar findings. The results of the analysis of variance revealed that all cultivars had statistically non-significant values for the parameters mean hands per bunch, mean bunch weight, marketable fruit weight, mean fruit length, mean fruit diameter, mean number of fruits per hand, and total yield. Bunch weight showed significant difference among the ten Banana cultivars (Table 2). The cultivar Ambowha selle −3 yielded the most bunch weight, although they were not noticeably different from other cultivars except Dinke-2 and Lady Finger. The findings are consistent with those of Goncalves et al. (2018) and Sagar et al. (2017), who discovered bunch weight variations between different banana cultivars. Banana cultivars differ in bunch weight, according to Njuguna et al. (2008) and Kamira et al. (2016). Yield of banana was significantly influenced by cultivars (Binalfew and Damtew, 2015). The number of hands per bunch varied between 8.25 and 9.27 on average. The average number of hands, according to Goncalves et al. (2018) and Mattos et al. (2010), was 7 and 6, respectively, which is less than the finding of the present study. The current study’s findings revealed that the average number of fingers per hand ranged from 13.02 to 14.47 (Table 2). According to Mattos et al. (2010), there are 14 fingers on an average on each hand, which is consistent with our finding. There was no significant difference among banana cultivars in the mean finger weight, diameter, and length (Table 2). Various researches reported varietal differences in fruit size (Gaidashova et al., 2008; Mattos et al., 2010; Njuguna et al., 2008; Sagar et al., 2017; Uazire et al., 2008). The mean marketable and total fruit yields of different banana cultivars did not differ significantly from one another (Table 2). Genetic differences and environmental factors may contribute to variations in yields among cultivars (Fonsah et al., 2007). However, the type of genotype may play a more significant role in determining the yield potential of a banana cultivar (Njuguna et al., 2008). Correlation Analysis The correlation coefficients between growth parameters and yield components are displayed in Table 3. Days till flowering had a highly significant negative association (−0.513) with pseudo stem girth. A significant correlation between the number of leaves and the flowering date was observed (0.622). Days of flowering and pseudo stem girth showed a strong positive association (0.558). None of the other growth-related factors displayed a significant association with the yield components or among themselves. Marketable fruit weight (0.817), fruit length (0.290), and fruit diameter (0.308) all demonstrated a highly significant positive association with total yield. Bunch weight also had a highly significant positive correlation with total yield (1.00). Fruit length and bunch weight showed an 66 S. A. SORA M. JIBAT AND GUJI Table 3. Phenotypic correlations between growth parameters and yield components of banana cultivars. Parameters FLOWD DFH PH CIRC LN LL LW BWT HN MFWT FL FD NOFPH TY FLOWD 1 DFH −0.075 1 PH −0.041 −0.249* 1 CIRC −0.513** 0.059 0.230* 1 LN 0.622** −0.144 0.259* −0.305* 1 LL −0.046 −0.206 0.157 −0.014 0.024 1 LW −0.316* 0.116 −0.094 0.175 −0.324* 0.482** 1 BWT −0.164 −0.344* 0.273* 0.170 −0.127 0.044 0.186 1 HN 0.405** 0.096 0.034 −0.219* 0.178 0.220* −0.155 −0.092 1 MFWT −0.176 −0.284* 0.210* 0.204 −0.190 −0.024 0.114 0.817** −0.043 1 FL −0.617** 0.228* 0.061 0.558** −0.486** −0.050 0.332* 0.290* −0.360* 0.262* 1 FD 0.255* −0.294* 0.272* −0.176 0.290* 0.054 −0.171 0.308* 0.046 0.278* −0.001 1 NOFPH −0.255* −0.057 −0.022 0.157 −0.190 −0.055 0.044 0.223* −0.177 0.150 0.307* −0.083 1 TY −0.164 −0.344* 0.273* 0.170 −0.127 0.044 0.186 1** −0.092 0.817** 0.290* 0.308* 0.223* 1 REP = replication, FLOWD= days to 50% flowering, DFH= days to harvest, PH= plant height, CIRC= pseudo stem circumference, LN= leaf number, LL= leaf length, LW= leaf width, BWT= bunch weight, HN= hand number, MFWT= marketable fruit weight, FL= fruit length, FD= fruit diameter, NOFPH= number of fruits per hand, TY= total yield. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FRUIT SCIENCE 67 Disease progress rate graph 60 75 90 105 120 Days after disease occuring Ambo-3 Williams hybr id Lady finger Ch inese Dwarf Ambowha selle Williams 1 Paracido Alrey Dinke-1 Dinke-2 Ambo-2 Figure 1. Reaction of banana cultivars to Black Sigatoka (Mycosphaerella fijiensis ) disease progress curves at different times after disease symptoms observed on cultivars at Tepi, Ethiopia. extremely significant positive association (0.290) and fruit diameter (0.308). Different traits affected the yield of different banana cultivars in this study. Asmare et al. (2021) reported that characteristics that are linked to yield and are less influenced by the environment may be helpful for increasing banana yield. The correlation study revealed that the growth parameters were poor predictors of banana yield, as seen from the correlation coefficients. This finding is consistent with those of (Kumar et al., 2014) and (Asmare et al., 2021), who reported similar correlation studies on several banana cultivars. Disease Progress Rate Data on the response of cultivars to the disease under field conditions was recorded based on 0 to 5 rating scale. The disease development curves of Black Sigatoka leaf blight (severity versus days after a disease occurs) were drawn to compare the reaction of cultivars against the disease Figure 1. The curve revealed that disease severity developed increasingly starting from the onset to the final severity recorded during the study periods. The disease progress curves also indicated that the disease progress was not analogous for each cultivar evaluated. Disease severity in Ambo-2 genotypes followed relatively high progressive curves and exhibited the peak levels of Black Sigatoka disease severity. The Williams hybrid cultivar followed similar curves as Ambo-2 cultivar. However, disease progress curves of Dinke-2 cultivar progressed gradually and displayed the lowest stages of sigatoka disease severity at different days after disease occurrence. Whereas cultivars like Lady Finger, Chinese Dwarf, Ambowha selle-3, Williams 1, Paracido Alrey were intermediate between Ambo-2 and Dinke-2. Conclusion Bananas have a great deal of potential to increase household income, create more job opportunities, fight poverty, and ensure dietary security. To assure larger yields, better revenue, and a major contribution of banana farming to food security, nutritional security, and improved lives in the Disease severity (%) 68 S. A. SORA M. JIBAT AND GUJI nation, a set of constraints along banana production must be taken into account at the same time. Along with the previously released varieties, the best performing cultivars like Dinke-1 and Lady Finger ought to be multiplied and spread throughout the region. To increase banana yield and productivity, banana cultivars with high yields, excellent quality, and strong disease resistance must be released and popularized. In addition to variety enhancement, crop pre- and post-harvest handling should be given priority. Acknowledgments We would like to acknowledge the financial support provided by Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research and Teppi agricultural research centre. We highly appreciate and acknowledge the effort made by respective researchers, field assistants for their unreserved support and substantial contribution to accomplish this study. Authors’ Contributions Shamil Alo Sora initiated and executed the field experiment, managed and followed the field, collected data and wrote the draft manuscript. Merga Jibat Guji was the plant pathologist who co-executed the field work and collected disease- related data and peer reviewed the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. References Ahmed, Z.F.R., and J.P. Palta. 2010. Lysophosphatidylethanolamine, a natural phospholipid, may retard senescence and improve the shelf life of banana fruit. HortScience 45(8):S66. Ahmed, Z.F.R., and J.P. Palta. 2015. A natural lipid, Lysophosphatidylethanolamine, may promote ripening while reducing senescence in banana fruit. HortScience 50(7):1035–1040. doi: 10.21273/HORTSCI.50.7.1035. Ahmed, Z.F.R., and J.P. Palta. 2016. Postharvest dip treatment with a natural phospholipid along with lecithin may extend the shelf life of banana fruit. Postharvest Biol. and Technol. 113:58–65. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2015.10.016. Ahmed, Z.F., E.M. Taha, N.A. Abdelkareem, and W.M. Mohamed. 2020. Postharvest properties of unripe bananas and the potential of producing economic nutritious products. Int. J. Fruit Sci. 20(sup2):S995–1014. doi: 10.1080/ 15538362.2020.1774469. Alemu, M. 2017. Banana as a cash crop and its food security and socioeconomic contribution: The case of Southern Ethiopia. Arba Minch.J. Environ. Prot 8(3):319–329. doi: 10.4236/jep.2017.83024. Amen, D., and D. Desalegn. 2018. Analysis of socio-economic factors affecting banana production: Evidences from lowlands of uba debretsehay woreda, gamo gofa zone. SNNPRS. J. Econom. Sustain. Dev 9(9):1–7. Asmare, D., A. Wegayehu, K. Girma, A. Lemma, M. Tewodros, M. Awoke, K. Dereje, G. Endriyas, M. Masresha, A. Abraham, et al. 2021. Evaluation of banana (Musa spp.) cultivars for growth, yield and fruit quality. Ethiop. J. Agric. Sci 31(3):1–25. Binalfew, T., and M. Damtew. 2015. Evaluation the adaptability of dessert banana cultivars at Belese Valley, North Western Ethiopia. Afr. J. Agri. Res 10(30):2995–2999. doi: 10.5897/AJAR2014.9352. CSA (The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Central Statistical Agency). (2018). Agricultural sample survey 2017/ 2018; volume I, report on area and production of major crops, statistical bulletin 586. FAO. (2020). Banana market review. Fonsah, E.G., C.A. Adamu, B.N. Okole, and B.G. Mullinix. 2007. Field evaluation of Cavendish banana cultivars propagated either by suckers or by tissue culture, over six crop cycles in the tropics. Fruits 62(4):205–212. doi: 10. 1051/fruits:2007016. Gaidashova, S.V., F. Karemera, and E.B. Karamura. 2008. Agronomic performance of introduced banana varieties in lowlands of Rwanda. Afr. Crop Sci. J. 16(1):9–16. doi: 10.4314/acsj.v16i1.54321. Goncalves, Z.S., D.R.S. da Invenção, C.A.S. Ledo, C.F. Ferreira, and E.P. Amorim. 2018. Agronomic performance of plantain genotypes and genetic variability using Ward-MLM algorithm. Genet. Mol. Res. 17(1):gmr16039882. doi: 10. 4238/gmr16039882. Kamira, M., J. Ntamwira, C. Sivirihauma, W. Ocimati, P. van Asten, L. Vutseme, and G. Blomme. 2016. Agronomic performance of local and introduced plantains, dessert, cooking and beer bananas (Musa spp.) across different INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FRUIT SCIENCE 69 altitude and soil conditions in eastern democratic Republic of Congo. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 11(43):4313–4332. doi: 10. 5897/AJAR2016.11424. Kinde, L. 2021. Performance evaluation of banana varieties, through farmer’s participatory selection. Int. J. Fruit Sci. 21 (1):768–778. doi: 10.1080/15538362.2021.1930628. Kumar, P.R., S. Srivastava, K.K. Singh, C. Mathad, and P.S. Thin. 2014. Study of antioxidant and antimicrobial properties, phytochemical screening and analysis of sap extracted from banana (Musa acuminata) pseudostem. International Journal of Advanced Biotechnology and Research 5(4):649–658. Mattos, L.A., E.P. Amorim, V.B.O. Amorim, K.O. Cohen, C.A.S. Ledo, and S.O. Silva. 2010. Agronomical and molecular characterization of banana germplasm. Pesqui. Agropecu. Bras. 45(2):146–154. doi: 10.1590/S0100- 204X2010000200005. Mohammed, W., T. Tsgaw, and K. Yehula. 2015. Evaluation of Genetic Variation in Local and Introduced Desert Banana (Musa sp.) Genotypes for Morpho-physicochemical Traits. Science, Technology and Arts Research Journal 3(4):19– Njuguna, J., F. Nguthi, S. Wepukhulu, F. Wambugu, D. Gitau, M. Karuoya, and D. Karamura. 2008. Introduction and evaluation of improved banana cultivars for agronomic and yield characteristics in Kenya. Afr. Crop Sci. J. 16 (1):35–40. doi: 10.4314/acsj.v16i1.54333. Sagar, B.S., B. Raju, and B.R. Sahithya. 2017. Evaluation of banana genotypes under northern dry zone of Karnataka for yield and returns. Int. J. Cur. Microbiol. Appl. Sci. 6(6):255–262. doi: 10.20546/ijcmas.2017.606.031. Salvador, A., L. Arnal, A. Manterde, and J. Cuquerella. 2007. Reduction of chilling injury symptoms in persimmon fruit cv. ‘Rojo Brillante’ by 1-MCP. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 33(3):285–281. doi: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2004.03.005. Teklay, T., K. Yeman, G. Selamawit, and W. Gebremedhin. 2016. Value chain analysis of banana in ‘Tekeze’ River Basin. North Ethiopia. J. Biol., Agri. Healthcare 6(21):34–40. Uazire, A.T., C.M. Ribeiro, B.M.C. Ruth, M. Pillay, G. Blomme, C. Fraser, C. Staver, and E. Karamura. 2008. Preliminary evaluation of improved banana varieties in Mozambique. Afr. Crop Sci. J. 16(1):17–25. doi: 10.4314/acsj.v16i1.54325. Wall, M.M. 2006. Ascorbic acid, vitamin a and mineral composition of banana (Musa spp) and papaya (Carica papaya) cultivars grown in Hawaii. J. Food Compos. Anal 19(5):434–445. doi: 10.1016/j.jfca.2006.01.002. Yoseph, T., W. Shiferaw, Z. Sorsa, T. Simon, A. Shumbullo, and W. Solomon. 2014. Adaptability study of banana (Musa Paradisiaca L var. Sapiertum) varieties at Jinka, Southern Ethiopia. Am. J. Agri. For 2(6):250–255. doi: 10.11648/j.ajaf. 20140206.13. Zinabu, A., T. Bikila, O. Temsgen, and A. Diriba. 2019. Review on the production and marketing of banana in Ethiopia. World J. Agri. Soil Sci. 2(1):1–9. doi: 10.33552/WJASS.2019.02.000529.

Journal

International Journal of Fruit ScienceTaylor & Francis

Published: Dec 31, 2023

Keywords: Banana cultivars; yield; Southwest Ethiopia; Black sigatoka; Tepi

There are no references for this article.