Paper · 2014

Effects of ethephon and potassium nitrate on off-season flower induction in mango

S. Maloba; Jane Ambuko; M. J. Hutchinson; et al.

14
claims
28
verbatim quotes
1
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Mango (Mangifera indica) fruit production in Kenya is seasonal with peak and off seasons – one of the contributing factors to postharvest losses. Off-season flower induction is a strategy that can be used to address mango seasonality. Manipulation of mango trees to produce an off-season crop can be achieved through application of flower induction chemicals. In the present study, the two flower induction chemicals, potassium nitrate (KNO 3 ) and ethephon were evaluated on two mango varieties: ‘Apple’ and ‘Ngowe’. The study was conducted in two agro-ecological zones (AEZs) of Kenya namely, Embu County (a high potential AEZ) and Makueni County (a low potential AEZ). The age of the trees used in the experiment were of similar size and vigor with an average age of 6 to 8 years. Potassium nitrate was applied at two concentrations (2 and 4%), while ethephon was applied at three concentrations (300, 600 and 1000ppm) and compared to a control (water). Prior to spraying, 100 terminal shoots were marked randomly on each tree for percentage flowering determination. After inflorescence development, 20 panicles per tree were marked randomly on each tree to monitor fruit set. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design with three replicates and three trees per treatment. Effect of the treatments was established from reproductive growth parameters including days to flowering and fruit set, number of panicles per tree and average fruit set per 20 panicles. Potassium (4%) increased percentage flowering (% of tagged shoots) in both ‘Ngowe’ and ‘Apple’ in both AEZs. In Embu, 4% KNO 3 resulted in 46% flowering in ‘Ngowe’ compared to 4% in ‘Apple’. On the contrary, in Makueni, the response was greater in ‘Apple’ (60%) compared to ‘Ngowe’ (27%). Response to ethephon increased with concentration with the 1000 ppm giving the best response; 22 and 28% flowering (% of tagged shoots) for Embu and Makueni, respectively, in ‘Ngowe’. In both AEZs and varieties, flowering was d” 3% in untreated controls. Time to flowering was significantly shortened by both KNO 3 and ethephon treatments with ‘Ngowe’ being more responsive than ‘Apple’. Significant treatment effect (pd” 0.05) was observed on fruit set with 4% KNO 3 and 1000 ppm ethephon resulting in the highest fruit set in both AEZs and varieties. The findings reveal the potential of KNO 3 and ethephon to induce off-season flowering in ‘Apple’ and ‘Ngowe’. Further studies are on course to optimize the treatments for commercial application.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 14

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Four percent potassium nitrate increased flowering in both mango varieties and zones.

Material
‘Ngowe’ and ‘Apple’e0
Treatment
Potassium (4%)e0
Outcome
percentage floweringe0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Potassium (4%) increased percentage flowering (% of tagged shoots) in both ‘Ngowe’ and ‘Apple’ in both AEZs.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1486–1594 · show in text ↑
t0

“mango”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In Embu, 4% KNO 3 yielded 46% flowering in Ngowe.

Material
‘Ngowe’e0
Treatment
4% KNO 3e0
Outcome
floweringe0
Value
46%e0
Comparator
‘Apple’e0
Setting
Embue0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In Embu, 4% KNO 3 resulted in 46% flowering in ‘Ngowe’ compared to 4% in ‘Apple’.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1595–1676 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In Embu, Apple had 4% flowering under 4% KNO 3.

Material
‘Apple’e0
Treatment
4% KNO 3e0
Outcome
floweringe0
Value
4%e0
Comparator
‘Ngowe’e0
Setting
Embue0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In Embu, 4% KNO 3 resulted in 46% flowering in ‘Ngowe’ compared to 4% in ‘Apple’.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1595–1676 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In Makueni, Apple had 60% flowering under 4% KNO 3.

Material
‘Apple’e0
Outcome
responsee0
Direction
greatere0
Value
60%e0
Comparator
‘Ngowe’e0
Setting
Makuenie0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“in Makueni, the response was greater in ‘Apple’ (60%) compared to ‘Ngowe’ (27%).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1694–1774 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In Makueni, Ngowe had 27% flowering under 4% KNO 3.

Material
‘Ngowe’e0
Outcome
responsee0
Value
27%e0
Comparator
‘Apple’e0
Setting
Makuenie0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“in Makueni, the response was greater in ‘Apple’ (60%) compared to ‘Ngowe’ (27%).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1694–1774 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flowering response increased with ethephon concentration.

Treatment
ethephone0
Outcome
Response to ethephone0
Direction
increasede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Response to ethephon increased with concentration with the 1000 ppm giving the best response”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1775–1867 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 1000 ppm ethephon, Ngowe flowering was 22% in Embu.

Material
‘Ngowe’e0
Outcome
floweringe0
Value
22e0
Setting
Embue0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“22 and 28% flowering (% of tagged shoots) for Embu and Makueni, respectively, in ‘Ngowe’.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1869–1958 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 1000 ppm ethephon, Ngowe flowering was 28% in Makueni.

Material
‘Ngowe’e0
Outcome
floweringe0
Value
28%e0
Setting
Makuenie0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“22 and 28% flowering (% of tagged shoots) for Embu and Makueni, respectively, in ‘Ngowe’.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1869–1958 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Untreated controls flowered at d” 3% across zones and varieties.

Treatment
untreated controlse0
Outcome
floweringe0
Value
d” 3%e0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In both AEZs and varieties, flowering was d” 3% in untreated controls.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1959–2029 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

KNO 3 significantly shortened time to flowering.

Treatment
KNO 3e0
Outcome
Time to floweringe0
Direction
shortenede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Time to flowering was significantly shortened by both KNO 3 and ethephon treatments with ‘Ngowe’ being more responsive than ‘Apple’.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2030–2162 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Ethephon significantly shortened time to flowering.

Treatment
ethephone0
Outcome
Time to floweringe0
Direction
shortenede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Time to flowering was significantly shortened by both KNO 3 and ethephon treatments with ‘Ngowe’ being more responsive than ‘Apple’.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2030–2162 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ngowe was more responsive than Apple in flowering time.

Material
‘Ngowe’e0
Outcome
responsivee0
Direction
moree0
Comparator
‘Apple’e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“‘Ngowe’ being more responsive than ‘Apple’.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2119–2162 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Four percent KNO 3 gave the highest fruit set in both zones and varieties.

Treatment
4% KNO 3e0
Outcome
fruit sete0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significant treatment effect (pd” 0.05) was observed on fruit set with 4% KNO 3 and 1000 ppm ethephon resulting in the highest fruit set in both AEZs and varieties.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2163–2327 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

One thousand ppm ethephon gave the highest fruit set in both zones and varieties.

Treatment
1000 ppm ethephone0
Outcome
fruit sete0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Mangifera indica
Mangifera indica · TaxonBilljones94 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significant treatment effect (pd” 0.05) was observed on fruit set with 4% KNO 3 and 1000 ppm ethephon resulting in the highest fruit set in both AEZs and varieties.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2163–2327 · show in text ↑
t0

“Mango”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 76–81 · show in text ↑

(2-chloroethyl)phosphonic acid · phenology · Mangifera indica (mango)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

(2-chloroethyl)phosphonic acid · yield · Mangifera indica (mango)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 10 positive, 1 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

potassium · phenology · Mangifera indica (mango)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.