Research Article | Published: 01 September 2000

Phenotypic Plasticity and Growth Performance of Mulberry Seedlings

A. Tikader

Indian Journal of Forestry | Volume: 23 | Issue: 3 | Page No. 301-304 | 2000
DOI: https://doi.org/10.54207/bsmps1000-2000-J353M6 | Cite this article

Abstract

Growth performance of 550 mulberry seedlings was recorded at an interval of 90 and 120 days. All the parameters under study showed increase of growth after 120 days except intermodal distance and moisture percentage of leaf. Root weight (fresh and dry) was found increased maximum followed by dry weight of shoot, biomass and leaf weight at 120 days. The leaf area of seedlings from 2nd to 8th position showed higher value compared to other position of leaf which was in decending order from top of a seedling. The growth behaviour of seedlings for different parameters was worked out. Root and shoot weight ratio which is important parameters showed similar trend both for fresh and dry weights of root and shoot.

Keywords

Access Options

250/-

Buy Full Access in HTML Format

Instant access to the full article.

Get access to the full version of this article. Buy Full Access in HTML Format

References

1. Bhat, G. and Hittalmani, S. (1992). Clonal differences in mulberry (Morus spp.) for root growth parameters. Indian J. Seric., 31(1):5-8.

Google Scholar

2. Das, B.C. and Krishanaswami, S. (1965). Some observations on interspecific hybridization in mulberry. Ind. J. Seric., 4(1):1-8.

Google Scholar

3. Fischer, R.A. (1921). Some remarks on the methods formulated in recent article on the quantitative analysis of plant growth. Ann. Appl. Biol., 73:67-372.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7348.1921.tb05524.x

Google Scholar

4. Radford, P.J. (1967). Growth analysis formulae, their use and above. Crop Science, 7:171-175.  https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1967.0011183X000700030001x

Google Scholar

5. Racey, G.D.; Gleran, C. and Hutchison, R.e. (1983). The practically of top root rotation in nursery stock characterization. For. Chlon., 59:240-243.  https://doi.org/10.5558/tfc59240-5

Google Scholar

6. Roller, K.J. (1977). Suggestged minimum standards for containerized seedlings in Nova Scotia. Can For. Serv. Deptt. Environment Inf. Ref. M-X-69.

Google Scholar

7. Tikader, A. and Roy, B.N. (1998). Propagation efficiency of some exotic mulberry germplasm accessions (Morus spp.). Bull. Ind. Acad. Seric., 2(2): 69-76.

8. Tikader, A.; Vijayan, K.; Roy, B.N. and Pavan Kumar, T. (1996). Studies on propagation efficiency of mulberry (Morus spp.) at ploidy level. Sericologia, 6(2):345-349.

Google Scholar

9. Tikader, A.; Vijayan, K.; Datta, R.N.; Roy, B.N. and Pavan Kumar, T. (1997). Effect on ringing on the propagation of mulberry cuttings. Sericologia, 37(2):245-247.

Google Scholar

10. Williams, R.F. (1946). The physiology of plant growth with special reference to the concept of net assimilation rate. Ann. Bot., 10:41-72.  https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a083119

Google Scholar

About this article

How to cite

Tikader, A., 2000. Phenotypic Plasticity and Growth Performance of Mulberry Seedlings. Indian Journal of Forestry, 23(3), pp.301-304. https://doi.org/10.54207/bsmps1000-2000-J353M6

Publication History

Manuscript Published on 01 September 2000

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: