Comparison of sucker control chemicals effects on yield and quality of flue-cured tobacco
Subject Areas : Agroecology Journal
Reza Mohsenzadeh
1
(
Researcher of Tirtash ResearchCenter, Behshahr, Mazandaran, Iran.
)
Mohammad Reza Seraji
2
(
Education Center, Behshahr, Mazandaran, Iran.
)
Abbas Ali Nourinia
3
(
Faculty Member of Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center of Golestan province, Iran.
)
Keywords: Quality, flue-cured tobacco, topping, sucker,
Abstract :
Tobacco topping and sucker control provides an opportunity for plant to use its maximum potential for leaf development and higher quality and yield production. This study was conducted to determine the best suckercides and optimal amount of them for suckers control. This experiment was performed as a randomized complete block design with seven treatments and four replications in Tirtash Research and Education Center, Mazandaran, Iran. Treatments were prim plus levels (12.5, 15 and 17.5 ml per plant), fatty alcohol 15 ml per plant, fatty alcohol 15 ml with prime plus 17.5 ml per plant, topping and a control (no suckercide, no topped and no suckercide). Cured leaf yield, number of suckers, dry and green weight of suckers per plant, price of one kilogram tobacco and income per hectare, sugar and nicotine percent, burning time and fill capacity were recorded for all treatments. Results of analysis of variance showed significant differences of treatments for the studied traits except for qualitative characteristics. Fatty alcohol 15 ml with prime plus 17.5 ml per plant, prime plus 15 and prime plus 17.5 ml per plant were better treatments with 2925, 2890 and 2745 kg/ha cured leaf yield and 10654, 10418 and 10214 rails price for one kilogram tobacco, respectively.
Calvic M, Tursic, I. 1998. The effects of topping and chemical suckers control of flue-cured tobacco at three stages of floral development. Tutun.48: p. 7-9.
Crafts-Brander S J and Sutton, T G. 1994. Effect of maleic hydrazide on photosynthesis, carbohydrate metabolism, and senescence of burley tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.). Field Crop Research, 37: 129-135.
Crafts-Brander SJ, Collins M, Sutton T G and Burton, H R.1994. Effect of maleic hydrazide concentration on yield and dry matter partitioning in burley tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.). Field Crop Research, 37: 121-128.
Dadfar D.1981. Analytical methods for various substances in tobacco and smoke. Iranian company tobacco. Pp92.
Hodjati M, and Kia N.1981. The effects of chemical suckers control of flue-cured tobacco. Bult. of Research Tirtash Research and Education Center. 151-158.
Huang S W, Zhou X P, Wang B W, Kai-ming MO, Xiong X. 2005. Experiments on control effects of tobacco sucker with two type tobacco suckercides. Journal of Hunan Agricultural University. 12: 2-11.
Interlandi G, Tremola M G, Carotenuto, R. 2002. Limited effect of sucker control on yield of Italian style burley tobacco. II Tabacco,10: 31-35.
Long, R S, Jones J L, and Wilkinson, C A. 1990. Chemically topping mammoth cultivars of flue-cured tobacco. Journal Tobacco International. 192:48-50.
Mingwu C, Burton H R, Bush T G, and Crafts-Brander S J. 1995. Effects of application methods and rates maleic hydrazide on the composition of burley tobacco. Tobacco Science. 10: 9-17.
Mohsenzade, R. 2002. Harvesting technology and curing of Tobacco. Tirtash Research and Education Center.
Mesbah, R. 2007. Topping & suckering. Tirtash Research and Education Center.
Tso, T .C.1990. Production, physiology and biochemistry of tobacco plant. IDEALS, Inc. Beltsville, Maryland, USA.
Taylor Z G, Fisher L R, Jordan D L, Smith W D, and Wilcut J W. 2008.Management of axillary shoot growth and maleic hydrazide residues with diflufenzopyr in flue-curd tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum). Tobacco Science. 47:13-21.
Zulkifly M.Z, Wanzaki, M.W. 1990.Effects of rates and sucker control chemical combinations on the yield and quality of flue-cured tobacco(Nicotiana tabacum L.). Bul. Spéc. CORESTA , Symposium Kallithea, p.123.
Zamani P. 2010. Agronomy and curing of Tobacco. Beh andishan.
_||_