Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango

C H A P T E R

43 Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango R.A. Rama,*, M.A. Rahimb, M.S. Alamc a

ICAR-Central Institute for Subtropical Horticulture, Lucknow, India Department of Horticulture, Bangladesh Agriculture University, Mymensingh, Bangladesh c Horticulture Division, Bangladesh Institute of Nuclear Agriculture, Mymensingh, Bangladesh *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] b

O U T L I N E 1 Introduction

629

2 Nutritional value of fruit

630

3 Geographical distribution

631

4 Major cultivars

631

5 Physiological disorders and plant nutrition 632 5.1 Mango malformation: Causes and management 632 5.2 Spongy tissue: Causes and management 634 5.3 Fruit drop: Causes and management 634 5.4 Biennial bearing: Causes and management 634 5.5 Black tip: Causes and management 635 6 Diagnosis of nutrient constraints 6.1 Nutrient deficiency symptoms

635 635

6.2 Soil and leaf nutrient analysis

638

7 Optimum fertilizer requirement 7.1 Time and method of fertilizer application 7.2 Organic nutrient management 7.3 Integrated nutrient management 7.4 Foliar application of nutrients 7.5 Fertigation

639 640 640 641 643 643

8 Plant nutrition and shelf life of fruits

645

9 Future line of research

645

References

646

Further reading

650

1 Introduction Mango (Mangifera indica L.) is an evergreen tree of the family Anacardiaceae, grown extensively for its edible fruit. Mango trees grow to 35–40 m tall, with a crown radius of 10–15 m. The trees are long lived, as some specimens still fruit after 300 years. The genus Mangifera is one among the 73 genera belonging to the family Anacardiaceae in the order Sapindales. Mango (M. indica L.) has been cultivated for more than 5000 years, and a wide genetic diversity exist in this crop. The largest numbers of Mangifera species are found in the Malay Peninsula, the Indonesian archipelago, Thailand, Indochina, and the Philippines. Edible fruits are produced by at least 27 species in the genus. Mangoes are native to southern Asia, especially eastern India, Burma, and Andaman Islands. Its production predominates in dry and wet tropical low land areas 23°260 North and South of the equator, on the Indian subcontinent, Southeast Asia, and Central and South America (Litz, 1997) (Fig. 43.1). Mango the “King of Fruits” is the most popular fruit among millions of people in India and abroad. In terms of total fruit production on a global basis, mango is next to banana. For mango, India ranks first in area and production in the world. Mango covers an area of 4,946,000 ha with a production of 46.5 million tons in the world during the year of 2016 (Brandon Gaille, 2018). India occupies top position among mangogrowing countries of the world and produces 40.48% of the total world mango production (NHB, 2017). India’s A.K. Srivastava, Chengxiao Hu (eds.) Fruit Crops: Diagnosis and Management of Nutrient Constraints https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818732-6.00043-5

629

© 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

630

43. Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango

150°

120°

90°

60°

30°

0°

30°

60°

90°

120°

150°

180°

Mango regions of the world

75°

75°

A

60°

B

60°

C

J

30°

0°

30°

D

E

0° H G

30°

30° I

N 1000

F

60°

1000 2000 3000 4000

0

60°

scale in miles at equator 150°

120°

90°

60°

30°

0°

30°

60°

90°

120°

150°

180°

FIG. 43.1

Mango growing regions of the world. Data from Bains, G., Pant, R.C., 2003. Mango malformation: etiology and preventive measures. Physiol. Mol. Biol. Plants 9, 41–61.

contribution to the world’s mango production is highest, that is, 197.87 lakh metric tons from 22.63 lakh ha, and about 53,177.26 metric tons of mango is exported of approx. value of INR 44,554.54 lakhs (NHB, 2017). In spite of the highest area (22.63 lakh ha) and production of mango in the world, the mango productivity is very low (8.70 metric tons/ha).

2 Nutritional value of fruit Mango is rich in a variety of phytochemicals and nutrients that qualify it as a super fruit, a term used to highlight potential health value of certain edible fruits. A 100 g of mango has following composition: water 83.46 g, energy 60 kcal, protein 0.82 g, total lipid (fat) 0.38 g, carbohydrate 14.98 g, fiber, total dietary 1.6 g, total sugar13.66 g, Ca 11 mg, Fe 0.16 mg, Mg 10 mg, P 14 mg, K 168 mg, Na 1 mg, Zn 0.09 mg, vitamin C 36.4 mg, thiamin 0.028 mg, riboflavin 0.038 mg, niacin 0.669 mg, vitamin B6 0.119 mg, folate 43 mg, vitamin B12 0.00 mg, vitamin A 54 mg, vitamin A 1082 IU, vitamin E 0.90 mg, vitamin K 4.2 mg, saturated fatty acids 0.092 g, total monounsaturated fatty acids 0.140 g, and total polyunsaturated fatty acids 0.071 g (Source: USDA—National Nutriment database, 2019). Mango is considered highly nutrient exhaustive fruit crop. Nutrient removal by mango fruits has also been studied by Singh (1978) (Table 43.1). Krishnakumar et al. (1998) studied the nutrient removal through harvested fruits. The maximum removal of most of TABLE 43.1 Nutrient removal in kg by mango cv. Dashehari (Singh et al., 1962). Fruit’s part

N

P2O5

K2O

CaO

MgO

Ash

Whole fruit/1000 kg

1.23

0.60

2.14

0.91

0.52

6.27

Flesh/668 Kg

0.66

0.31

1.12

0.16

0.22

2.57

Peel/204 Kg

0.25

0.14

0.68

0.47

0.20

2.57

Kernel/54 kg

0.25

0.12

0.25

0.055

0.066

0.60

Seed coat/74 kg

0.067

0.025

0.10

0.22

0.029

0.53

4 Major cultivars

631

the nutrients was recorded in Khas-ul-khas, Goamankur, and Alphonso varieties. The minimum removal was from Totapuri and Willard varieties. The bulk of the nutrients were removed through the edible portion of epicarpmesocarp followed by kernel and endocarp portions. The average removal of the different nutrients from every tonne of harvested fruits was found to be 1363.64, 100.54, 1454.41, 1143.70, 123.10, 28.03, 8.31, 24.03, and 12.44 g each of N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Fe, Mn, Zn, and Cu, respectively. According to studies by Fowomola (2010), mango seed contained sodium 21.0 mg/100 g), potassium (22.3 mg/100 g), calcium (113.3 mg/100 g), magnesium (94.8 mg/100 g), iron (11.9 mg/ 100 g), and zinc (1.1 mg/100 g), nutritionally so promising indeed.

3 Geographical distribution Gradually, mango moved from its center of origin in Indo-Burma (Myanmar) region to all the mango-growing countries. The mango seeds traveled with humans from Asia to the Middle East, East Africa, and South America in beginning around AD 300–400. In the beginning, it moved to the southeast Asia and the Malay Archipelago, and by the 7th century, it reached China. The Persians are said to have carried it to East Africa around the 10th Century AD. Muslim missionaries took mango to the Mindanao and the Sulu of the Philippines in the beginning of the 15th century. During the end of the 15th century and beginning of the 16th century, the mango entered into the Philippines from India through Spanish. The mango spread from south and southeast Asia over the tropical and subtropical areas of the world as a result of the Portuguese and Spanish voyages from the end of the 15th century onward. Mango was carried to Africa during the 16th century and later found their way abroad through Portuguese ships to Brazil in the 1700s. Portuguese brought mango from Goa to South Africa and from South Africa to Brazil in the beginning of the 18th century. From Africa, the Portuguese brought it to the West Indies also; however, it was commonly grown in the East Indies before the earliest visits of the Portuguese. The mango was taken to Santo Domingo of Barbados in the West Indies in the middle of the 18th century (Singh et al., 1991) and from Bourbon to Santo Domingo in 1782. In 1742, the mango was successfully introduced to Barbados from Rio de Janeiro by the traders from Portugal. Early in the 19th century, it reached Mexico from the Philippines and the West Indies. The mango reached Jamaica from Barbados in 1782 and Hawaii from Mexico in 1809. Afterward, it began popping up all over the world. In the 16th century, a special technique employing grafting was developed for propagating the mango. During 17th century, the Portuguese planted mango in coastal areas of both East and West Africa, but the acceptance by the Africans was slow and spread into the interior was erratic. Mango trees were present in a few interior market towns in West Africa, when European explorers arrived in the late 19th century, but most of the spread came later. The earliest known successful introduction of mango to the new world was to Bahia in Brazil in about 1700 with plantings elsewhere along the Brazilian coast soon after. With the first permanent plantation, the mango reached Florida from India in 1861 as cv. Mulgoa. In 1882, this cultivar was subsequently introduced in Florida from India. From Bombay (now Mumbai, India), the mango was introduced into Egypt in 1825 from where it was introduced into Israel in 1929, and thereafter, the commercial varieties were introduced in Israel from South Africa, Indonesia, Florida (United States), and India. The most important mango cultivars of India, like Alphonso, Dashehari, Langra, and Chausa, are selections that were made at the time of Akbar (AD 1542–1605) and therefore have been propagated vegetatively for several hundred years.

4 Major cultivars Mango, a tropical fruit, is now largely cultivated under subtropical conditions. In other words, it is considered as a pan tropical fruit. Presently, the mango is being cultivated commercially or in the backyard or as a mixed plantation in 89 countries of the world. The major mango-growing countries are India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Florida and Hawaii (United States), Australia, Brazil, Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia, Fiji Islands, Egypt, Israel, South Africa, Sudan, Somalia, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Niger, Nigeria, Zaire, Madagascar, Mauritius, Venezuela, Mexico, West Indies Islands, Cambodia, etc. Reportedly, in India alone, there are more than 1000 types of mango, out of which only 30 are well known. The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) facility on Old Cutler Road in Coral Gables, Florida, has about 400 varieties of mango and is one of the largest depositories of mango plant cultures in the world. The USDA collection was originally believed to have over 500 varieties of mango germplasm, but genetic testing showed several duplicates. Reviews of older varieties of mangoes were based upon the competition available at the time. Most of the varieties of mango available in grocery stores in the United States can trace their lineage to the Haden mango tree, a tree planted by Jack Haden

632

43. Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango

in 1902 in Coral Gables, Florida (Haden itself can be traced back to Mulgoba, which is misspelled Mulgoba in the United States and has its origin in Tamil Nadu, India). The BAU-GPC, the largest fruit repository in Bangladesh, also preserved about 350 varieties of mango (Rahim, 2018). Popular cultivars grown in different parts of the world are given later (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mango_cultivars): 1. India: Alphonso, Amrapali, Banganapalli, Himsagar, Langra, Fazli, Bangalora, Dashehari, Chausa, Mallika, Bombay Green, Badami, Raspuri, Kesar, Neelam, Swarnarekha, Baneshan, Lakshmanbhog, Vanraj, Mankurad, Mulgoa, Kishen Bhog, Ambika, Arunika, Arunima, Arka Aruna, Arka Anmol, Arka Neelkiran, Arka Puneet, Neeleshan, Neelgoa, Neeluddin, Swarn Jehangir, Ratna, Khasulkhas, Totapuri Red Small, Zardalu, Rajapuri, Jamadar, Swaranarekha, Gulab Khas, Pairi, Janardhan Pasand, Sukul, Mlada, Zardalu, etc. 2. China: Ivory, Dajhonmonag, Carabao, Nang Klangwan, Dashehari, Okrong, Irwin, Haden. 3. Thailand: Nam Doc Mai, Ngar Chan, Ok Rong, Keow Savoey, Pimsen mum. 4. Pakistan: Almaas, Anwar Ratol, Chok Anan, Sindhri, Fajri Kalan, Dashehari, Gulab Khas, Langra, Siroli, Zafran, Sindhri, etc. 5. Mexico: Ataulfo, Haden, Irwin, Keitt, Manila, Palmer, Sensation, Tommy Atkins, Van Dyke, Ostien. 6. Indonesia: Arumanis, Dodol, Gedong, Golek, Madu, Manalagi, Haden, Tommy Atkins, Keitt. 7. Brazil: Bourban, Carlota, Coracao, Espada, Itamaraca, Maco, Magoda, Rosa, Tommy Atkins, Pravin, Dixon, Florigon, Davis Haden. 8. Bangladesh: Khirsapat, Langra, Ashwina, Fazli, Gopalbhog, etc. 9. Philippines: Carabao, Manila Super, Pico. 10. Nigeria: Cotonou, Opioro, Benue, Sheri, Julie, Peter, Kerosene, Calabar. 11. United State: Anderson, Angie, Bennet Alphonso, Beverly, Coconut Cream, Cogshall, Edward, Fascell, Ford, Glenn, Jakarta, Julie, Mahachanok, Momi K, Pina Colada, Ruby, Sunset, Van Dyke, Fairchild, Fascell, Florigon, Ford, Gary, Gold Nugget, Golden Lippens, Graham, Hatcher, Van Duke, Palmer, Irwin, Golden Nuggets, Brooks, Davis Haden, Glen, Fascell, Lipens, Parvin, Smith, Zill, etc. 12. Australia: Brooks, Haden, Irwin, Keitt, Kensington Pride, Kent, Palmer. 13. Sri Lanka: Green Willard, Malwana. 14. South Africa: Heidi, Sensation, Tommy Atkins, Valencia Pride, Zill, Amelie, Haden, Fascell. 15. Kenya: Boubo, Ngowe, Batawi. 16. Egypt: Alphonso, Bullock’s Heart, Hindi Be Sennara, Langra, Mabrouka, Pairie, Taimur, Zebda.

5 Physiological disorders and plant nutrition A number of physiological disorders in mango have been reported. An attempt has been made to analyze different physiological disorders of mango from plant nutrition point of view. These are as follows:

5.1 Mango malformation: Causes and management Malformation is one of the most important problems of mango and a serious threat to mango production in northern India and other mango-growing countries (tropical and subtropical) of the world (Crane and Campbell, 1994). It is described as a disease (Varma et al., 1974; Misra and Singh, 2002) and a physiological disorder (Majumdar et al., 1970). It was first reported about 120 years back from Darbhanga district of Bihar, India, by Maries (Watt, 1891), though it remained a debatable issue for researchers over the last 6–7 decades. Broadly three distinct types of symptoms are described by various workers. These are bunchy top of seedlings, vegetative malformation, and floral malformation. Later, these were grouped under two broad categories, namely, vegetative and floral malformation (Fig. 43.2) (Varma, 1983). The malformed tissues contain more carbohydrates and nitrogen than normal ones (Mallik, 1963) and higher C/N ratio (Pandey et al., 1973), leading to greater percentage of staminate flowers on malformed panicles (Majumder and Sinha, 1972) and suppression in development of flower and fruit set (Pandey et al., 1973). Vegetative malformation is more commonly observed on young seedlings (Nirvan, 1953). The seedlings produce small shootlets bearing small scaly leaves with a bunch like appearance on the shoot apex. Hence, the apical dominance is lost, and the seedling remains stunted, and numerous vegetative buds sprout producing hypertrophied growth, which constitutes vegetative malformation. According to Pandey et al. (1973), vegetative malformation is supported by internal metabolic process in the shoots of two varieties of mango, namely, Bombay Green (highly susceptible) and

5 Physiological disorders and plant nutrition

633 FIG. 43.2 Showing vegetative (left) normal panicle (below) and floral mango malformation (right) and normal panicle (below).

Bhadauran (free from malformation). Like healthy shoots, malformed shoots also showed high C:N ratio, conducive toward the synthesis of floral stimulus, resulting in initiation and further development of flowers and fruits. Floral malformation, on the other hand, is the malformation of panicles. The primary, secondary, and tertiary rachises become short, thickened, and hypertrophied. Such panicles are greener and heavier with increased crowded branching. These panicles have numerous flowers that remain unopened and are predominantly male and rarely bisexual (Singh et al., 1961; Schlosser, 1971; Hiffny et al., 1978). 5.1.1 Macronutrients nutrition Shoots carrying malformed panicles had lower (Pandey et al., 1973, 1977) and higher (Mishra, 1976) levels of nitrogen than the healthy tissues, due to varietal response and varying soil conditions, as the former report pertains to the cv. Bombay Green under Delhi conditions and later to the cv. Dashehari under Ludhiana conditions. Enhanced nitrogen application was observed to curtail malformation, whereas addition of P and K increased the incidence significantly (Kanwar and Kahlon, 1987). However, Bindra and Bakhetia (1971) did not find any reduction in the malady by N, P, and K (9:3:3) treatment and concluded that the disorder is not associated with nutritional imbalance. However, these may influence the incidence of the malady. Singh et al. (1983) observed lower amount of Ca in malformed tissue than healthy ones and suggested that calcium deficiency may not be directly responsible, although it may predispose the tissue to become more prone to the incidence of this disorder. This however needs further investigations. The combined effect of potassium sulfate as soil application and monocrotophos as trunk injection has managed the incidence quite effectively. Results of 10-year-old trial of NPK fertilization on panicle malformation in mango cv. Dashehari indicated that increasing nitrogen doses reduced panicle malformation, whereas the effect of phosphorus and potassium was just the reverse (Minessey et al., 1971; Abou El-Dahab, 1975). Partial control of the disease was achieved in India by spraying the malformed parts with mangiferin-Zn2+ and mangiferin-Cu2+ chelates (Chakrabarti and Ghosal, 1989). 5.1.2 Micronutrient nutrition A very little difference has been observed in the mineral constituent of healthy and malformed tissue, although micronutrient deficiency, particularly iron and zinc, has been reported to be associated with the causation of malformation (Abou El-Dahab, 1975; Martin-Preveli et al., 1975; Minessey et al., 1971; Singh and Rajput, 1976). However, Pandey and Pandey (1997) observed that zinc sulfate alone or in combination with NAA could not reduce malformation in cv. Amrapali. Soil treatment with Bayfolan (containing N, P, K, Mn, Fe, Cu, Mg, B, Zn, Ca, and Mo) at 100 mL/tree in 22-year-old

634

43. Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango

trees of mango cv. Taimour also did not affect the extent of malformation (El-Beltagy et al., 1980). Malformation could not be managed with B, Ca, Cu, Fe, Mg, Mn, K, Na, and Zn or their chelates (Rajan, 1986; Ram, 1991; Saeed and Schlosser, 1972). Chander et al. (1998) observed 56.7% reduction in malformation with foliar spray of cobalt sulfate at 1000 ppm followed 49%–36% reduction with cobalt sulfate at 1250 ppm 43.28% reduction with and zinc sulfate at 12,000 ppm (43.28%). The nutrient deficiency was, therefore, not considered as the primary cause of mango malformation (Singh and Rathore, 1983).

5.2 Spongy tissue: Causes and management Spongy tissue (ST) in mango cannot be detected, unless the mango is cut open. The area affected will appear white and soft, like a sponge. Several studies have shown that spongy tissue formation in mangoes is caused by the shift of the seed to germination mode inside the fruit where it absorbs nutrients from the surrounding fleshy part of the fruit, making it appear white and spongy. Hence, as the fruit ripens, the patch affected by this malady can be seen clearly. Severaj (1998) indicated that spongy tissues had low total carotene, sugars, sucrose, sugar-acid ratio, K, Ca, and Na and higher acidity; glucose-fructose ratio; and N, P, Mg, Zn, and Fe contents compared with healthy tissues. Harvesting the fruit at three-fourth matured stage and storage low temperature reduces the disorder. Mulching in basin has shown promising results in the prevention of spongy tissue effect. Shivashankar and Sumathi (2014) reported the preharvest application of the nutrient mix containing macro- and micronutrients or sea water on developing fruits between 60% and 70% maturity stage effectively reduced the incidence of spongy tissue to <5% compared with 54.3% in control, besides improving the shelf life and fruit quality of Alphonso mango. The study also demonstrated that treatment of fruits before reaching 60% maturity or after crossing 70% maturity was not as effective in reducing spongy tissue incidence.

5.3 Fruit drop: Causes and management The low fruit set in mango is ascribed to self incompatibility and numerous problems encountered in pollination, fertilization, and low temperature during flowering. A significant advantage was found in hand pollination with foreign pollen over self-pollination. Recurring flowering is the emergence of new flowering panicle at the base of old flowering panicle due to prolonged cold climate. This results in fruit drop from old panicle. As GA inhibits the flowering in mango, use of GA has been suggested to control recurring flowering. The deficiency of nutrients and growth regulators also causes flower and fruit drop of varying degrees at various stages. Auxin is known to play an important role in control of flower and fruit drop. Boron deficiency impairs the floral development, pollen germination, and pollen tube growth. Potassium is known to improve yield and quality of mango. The foliar spray of GA3 (50 ppm) at full-bloom stage significantly reduced the recurring flowering in Alphonso mango. Foliar spray of urea (2%), NAA (20 ppm), and micronutrient mixture (50 ppm) at peanut stage and 10 days after first spray produced significantly higher fruit yield of Alphonso mango over untreated control. The soil application of recommended dose of yard farm manure (50 kg/tree), N (1 kg/tree), P (0.5 kg P2O5/tree), and K (1.0kg K2O/tree) through sulfate of potash, with three foliar sprays of 0.9% K2S04 at peanut, marble, and egg stages increased flowering, fruit set, yield, and quality of “Alphonso” mango. The foliar application of Alar (B-nine) 100 ppm or NAA 20 ppm at pea stage of fruit was observed effective in controlling fruit drop in mango. Management of fruit drop was effectively done in cv. Banganapalli with the application of micronutrient mixture consisting of zinc, boron, manganese, and molybdenum (Rameshwar and Kulkarni, 1979).

5.4 Biennial bearing: Causes and management The term biennial, alternate, or irregular bearing generally signifies the tendency of mango trees to bear a heavy crop in 1 year (on-year) and very little or no crop in the succeeding year (off-year). Most of the commercial varieties of north India, namely, Dashehari, Langra, and Chausa, are biennial bearers, while south Indian varieties like Totapuri Red Small, Bangalora, and Neelum are known to be regular bearers. When a tree produces heavy crop in one season, it gets exhausted nutritionally and is unable to put forth new flush, thereby failing to yield in the following season. Sahithya et al. (2018) described the flowering phenomenon in mango as a complex one. Normally, it crops heavily in 1 year (on-year) and bears less or no crop the following year (off-year). Thus, the rhythm of bearing in mango is not strictly “alternate” but “irregular” or “erratic.” Draining out of CHO and N reserves during on-year is known to lead to a lean crop in the off-year, as they are important for fruit bud initiation, that is, high C/N ratio helps for fruit bud initiation. As per physiological studies in regular and irregular varieties of mango, it was observed that mesophyll cells in leaves of the regular mango varieties are more uniform and highly efficient in CO2 utilization.

6 Diagnosis of nutrient constraints

635

The problem has been attributed to the causes like genetical, physiological, environmental, and nutritional in nature. For overcoming biennial bearing, deblossoming is recommended to reduce the crop load in the on-year, so that it is balanced in the off-year. Rao (1998) used four approaches to manage the problem with the intention of promoting flowering directly on fruited shoots. All these methods helped in developing appreciable crop in varying degree in the expected “off’ year.” The different methods were as follows: (i) application of spray of 1% each of KH2P04 and urea after harvesting of on-year crop helped in the prevention of occurrence of dormancy in fruited shoots and consequently promoted development of new fruiting shoots and flowering on them, (ii) sprays of 2000 ppm paclobutrazol or 100 ppm TIBA during October-November period following harvest of on-year crop resulted in the promotion of flowering directly on fruited shoots, (iii) moderate NAA-deblossoming in on-year reflected on development of moderate cropping in off-year, and (iv) pruning of fruited shoots promoted lateral flowering in off-year.

5.5 Black tip: Causes and management Black tip is a serious disorder, particularly in the cultivar Dashehari. This disorder of mango is caused by gases (i.e., SO2, ethylene, and carbon monoxide) emanating from nearby brick kilns in northern India (Ram, 1989). The affected fruits become unmarketable and reduce the yield to a considerable extent. The damage to the fruit gets initiated right at marble stage with a characteristic yellowing of tissues at distal end. Gradually, the color intensifies into brown and finally black. At this stage, further growth and development of the fruit are retarded, and black ring at the tip extends toward the upper part of the fruit. Black tip disorder has generally been detected in orchards located in the vicinity of brick kilns. The black-tip disorder in Dashehari mango (M. indica L.) generally occurs in the vicinity of brick kilns (Pal and Chadha, 1980). Hence, an index was worked out to quantify the intensity of black tip in a given orchard or locality, considering the degree of damage on individual tree. The results were interpreted with special reference to the number of brick kilns and their distance and direction from orchards. Khader et al. (1988) studied the intensity of the disorder (>75%) with a black tip index of 2.78–2.84. The disease intensity was severe as long as the distance remained within 2 km distance of mango orchards in north-south direction, and 5–6 km away from the brick kilns may reduce incidence of black tip to a greater extent (Srivastava, 1963). The incidence of black tip can be minimized by spraying borax (1%) or other alkaline solutions like caustic soda (0.8%) or washing soda (0.5%). The first spray of borax should be done positively at pea stage followed by two more sprays at 15 days’ interval.

6 Diagnosis of nutrient constraints The problems of mineral nutrition of fruit trees are different than those of field crops due to a variety of reasons: (i) large size of the tree, (ii) deep and extensive root system that penetrates the subsoil, (iii) methods of propagation, (iv) soil factors, and (v) its long perennial life. Moreover, the fruits are harvested, while the vegetative parts continue to grow. Mango is reported to recover from long period of undernourishment of mango trees due to suboptimum fertilization.

6.1 Nutrient deficiency symptoms In field conditions, appearance of deficiency symptoms is a complex phenomenon that changes with age, season, rootstock, reproductive stage of the shoot, and type of soil and fertilizer management (Rajput et al., 1987). Deficiency symptoms in mango are the result of complex phenomenon associated with many factors, namely, age of tree, position of shoots, season, rootstock, reproductive stage of the shoots, soil type, nutrient management practices, and moisture level in the soil (Rajput et al., 1987). Some previous studies (Sen et al., 1947; Krishnamurthi and Randhawa, 1959) attempted to develop deficiency symptoms through pot studies. Agarawala et al. (1989) suggested that, for determination of B concentration, top young leaves should be sampled and, for Zn and Mn, young and middle leaves should be taken for analysis. They developed the deficiency of Mn, Zn, and B in 2-year-old seedlings of Dashehari in sand culture. The N, P, K, Ca, Mg, and S concentration in seedling mango were 0.63%, 0.03%, 0.24%, 0.81%, 0.10%, and 0.32%, respectively, displaying deficiency symptoms (Kumar and Nauriyal, 1977). A 27.5 mg/kg Zn in leaves was designated as critical limit for Zn deficiency (Nijjar et al., 1976). A range of various symptoms (Fig. 43.3) involved and management strategies (Table 43.2) are further described.

636

43. Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango

FIG. 43.3 Morphologically defined nutritional disorders in mango. Source: http://agritech.tnau.ac.in/horticulture/plant_nutri/mango_cal.html; ICARCentral Institute of Subtropical Horticulture, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

637

6 Diagnosis of nutrient constraints

TABLE 43.2

Description of deficiency symptoms, management, and response parameters in mango.

Nutrient deficiency symptom

Management strategy

Response parameters

References

N deficiency: Irregular bearing, yellowing of leaves, stunted shoot growth, yellow twigs, smaller fruit size, and immature fruit drop

Dose of N fertilizer (100 g/plant/year of age) or urea 2% spray at fortnightly interval

Ascorbic acid, total soluble solids, and fruit acidity in Dashehari and Langra

Singh et al. (1979) and Chandra (1988)

P deficiency: Reduced plant growth, premature dropping of leaves, partial dieback at tip of younger leaves, necrosis, and premature abscission of leaves

Single superphosphate or foliar application 0.5% orthophosphoric acid thrice or spray of 0.5% orthophosphoric acid with 2% urea

Fruit yield, fruit size, fruit set acidity, ascorbic acid, sugar, and total soluble solids in Chausa

Reddy and Majumdar (1983) and Singh (1975)

K deficiency: Scorching of leaf margin from tip to downward; reduced growth; vigor of leaves; white, yellow, or orange chlorotic spots on leaves; poor root growth, fruit quality; dieback along with tip burn on small leaves

Foliar spray 2% KCL at fortnightly, 1 kg muriate of potash, sulfate of potash along with 2 kg urea and 6 kg superphosphate, spray 0.50% KNO3 + 1.0% NaH2PO4

Fruit size and quality in Banarsi Langra and Alphonso

Singh and Tripathi (1978) and Ravishankar et al. (1989)

Ca deficiency: Abnormal growth of leaves, some limes dipping death of bud, tip pulp, distinguished by softening of tip of fruit soft nose in Tommy Atkins

Gypsum 50 kg/ha, preharvest dip in CaCl2, spray of 0.60% CaCl2

More calcium in the peel and flesh, reduction in weight loss and lower respiration in Tommy Atkins, reduced internal breakdown in Alphonso, delayed ripening and improved fruit quality in Dashehari

Young (1957), Malo and Campbell (1978), Galan et al. (1984), Gunjate et al. (1979), and Singh et al. (1993)

Mg deficiency: Premature defoliation of leaves, yellowish brown chlorosis, green wedge down the central port of leaf, leaf rounded margin

MgSO4 5–10 kg/ha, foliar spray 2% MgSO4 2% at fortnightly

Reduction in fruit drop, better fruit size and fruit quality

Singh et al. (1962)

Zn deficiency: Twigs die back, flower panicles with little leaf symptoms, leaves irregular shape drooping spikes, small and narrow leaf with margins bent upward or downward, reduced internodal length, twigs with crowded leaves like rosette appearance

0.50% Foliar spray and zinc sulfate 0.50 kg/tree or foliar spray ZnSO4 0.5% plus 10 g urea/1 water twice at 15 days

Fruit quality, sugars, ascorbic acid, total soluble solids in Langra, Dashehari

Rajput et al. (1975), Nijjar et al. (1976), Bahadur et al. (1998), Singh and Rajput (1976), and Daulta et al. (1981)

Fe deficiency: Plant leaves losses green color and turn white (bleaching), size of leaves reduced, leaves dry from tip downward, calcium-induced iron chlorosis is very common

Two sprays at fortnight interval with ferrous sulfate 2.5 g/L or foliar application 0.2% FeSO4 solution or 0.2% Fe(NO3)2 and 1–5 mg/L iron sequestrene

Increase in chlorophyll fruit set, fruit yield, and fruit quality

Kadrnan and Gazit (1984)

B deficiency: Fruits become brown in color, soft flesh, and watery, which cracks down to the center, lusterless leathery leaves with thickened veins

Application of 0.40%–0.60% boric acid at bud swelling stage

Vegetative growth, length and breadth of the panicle, fruit retention, total sugar, ascorbic acid, acidity and total soluble solids, in Dashehari varieties and Langra varieties

Singh (1977), Rath et al. (1980), Singh and Dhillon (1987), and Coetzer et al. (1991)

Cu deficiency: Weak terminal shoots followed by defoliation, dieback of branches, on the top of long drooping or shaped branches

Spray of copper sulfate (250 g/ 10 years old tree) or 0.30% copper oxychloride at fortnightly interval

Improvement in fruit set, fruit drop, and fruit yield in Dashehari variety

Agarwala et al. (1991)

638

43. Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango

6.2 Soil and leaf nutrient analysis The assessment of nutritional status of mango has some obstacles, as this species has phonological variable cycles that influence the absorption and translocation of minerals. On the other hand, there are few studies that address the nutritional requirements or quantifying nutrient uptake by mango tree in different stages of development (Faria et al., 2016). Soil or leaf analysis-based nutrient constraint diagnosis is comparatively better option to identify nutritional disorders and determine the nutritional requirement in perennial fruit crops including mango. Conventionally, diagnostic tools of identifying nutrient constraints comprise leaf analysis, soil analysis, juice analysis, and to some extent metalloenzyme-based biochemical analysis all have been under continuous use and refinement (Srivastava, 2013a,b). Combined use of leaf and soil analysis provides comparatively better diagnosis for nutrient requirement (Srivastava et al., 2001, 2006). Productivity of the plant depends essentially on the nutrient balance and the biological activity. There are definite limitations with the leaf analysis application that is largely dependent upon composition of index leaves or any other plant parts. Faria et al. (2016) reported that nutrient content with lower mobility in the plant, namely, Ca, B, Fe, and Mn, increased in Tommy Atkins mango leaves from flowering to fruiting with the return of irrigation at 100% crop evapotranspiration, while the levels of N, P, K, and Mg known as high mobility nutrients in plant decreased. Oosthuyse (1997) sampled leaves on fruit-bearing terminal shoots on trees of the mango cultivars Zill, Tommy Atkins, Sensation, Heidi, and Kent in the months of October, November, and December 1996 and January 1997, which were taken for analysis of N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Zn. These nutrients increased during the rapid phase of fruit growth and decreased during the later stages of fruit development. The variation in Ca, K, N, and Mn was most marked. Based on survey of different bearing orchards in Lucknow, India, Thakur et al. (1980) observed deficiency of Zn in mango cv. Dashehari at the time of flowering in most of the orchards. Thakur et al. (1981a) surveyed micronutrient concentrations of Dashehari in Lucknow, India, and observed that most of the orchards were Zn deficient, while Cu, Mn, and Fe concentrations of mango leaves were in optimum range and significantly higher in leaves sampled during the off-year (bearing a lean crop) compared with the on-year (bearing a heavy crop) of alternately bearing trees. Singh et al. (1998) surveyed 50 orchards representing different mango-growing areas in Surguja district of Madhya Pradesh (Northern hill zone), India. It was observed that the deficiency of phosphorus and calcium was more widespread than nitrogen and potassium. However, magnesium and iron were not found deficient in any of the mango orchards surveyed. Rao and Mukherjee (1989) surveyed high and low yielding orchards of varieties, namely, Fazli, Himsagar, Langra, Gopalbhog, Bombai, and Aswina in West Bengal, India, which showed deficient level of leaf nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. Reddy et al. (1998) surveyed 25 mango orchards in states of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and Tamil Nadu with Banganpally, Alphonso, and Totapuri varieties indicated higher fruit yield of these orchards associated with higher leaf N, P, and K concentration. Survey of 22 orchards representing four cultivars of mango (Dashehari, Langra, Chaura, and Fazli) was reported by Chaudhary et al. (1985), which showed large-scale potassium deficiency symptoms.

6.2.1 Leaf nutrient indices The nutrient contents in mango leaves vary throughout the growth cycle and may be grouped into two distinct stages, the first between harvesting and initiation of new flowering, period in which there are nutrients accumulation, and second during the period of development of fruit to the harvest, when there is reduction in nutrient levels in leaves (Srivastava, 2013c). The knowledge of periods of greater demands in the plants shows the stage at which nutrients must be supplied or be available for them (Faria et al., 2016). Establishment of absolute figures of normal, deficient, or excess nutrient level is not real, unless the dynamic aspect of leaf nutrient concentration is considered, especially when various nutrient interactions produce resonance within close space of tissue composition (Srivastava et al., 2014). Tertiary diagrams and nutrient ratios are early representation of interacting nutrients in the tissue compositional space (Srivastava, 2013d). Time of leaf sampling suitable for leaf analysis in mango has been reported to vary a great deal, from 6 to 8 months in Dashehari (Devrani and Ram, 1978), 8–10 months in Atkins (Koo and Young, 1972), 5–12 months from nonfruiting branches in Langra (Kumar and Nauriyal, 1977; Thakur et al., 1981a,b), and 6–7-month-old leaves from nonfruiting branches in Chausa (Chadha et al., 1980). Joshi et al. (2016) observed a decline in soil nutrients and rise of leaf nutrients during preflowering, flowering, and fruit developmental stages indicating that, during reproductive stages, supply of nutrient through leaves would be more effective and efficient than soil. Nachegowda et al. (1998) studied the leaf nutrient status of mango varieties, namely, Mallika, Alphonso, Dashehari, Langra, Bombay Green, Fazli, Khas-ul-khas, Pairi, Goamankur, Totapuri, and Willard grown on Nekkare rootstock. Varieties differed

639

7 Optimum fertilizer requirement

TABLE 43.3

Critical limits of nutrients based pot culture. Nutrients Macronutrients (%)

Micronutrients (mg/kg)

Sr. No.

N

P

K

Ca

M

S

Fe

Mn

Zn

Cu

1.

1.0

0.10

0.50

1.50

0.15

0.50

–

–

–

–

2.

1.23

0.06

0.54

1.71

0.91

0.12

171

66

25

12

Source: (1) Kumar, S., Nauriyal, J.P., 1977. Nutritional studies on mango—tentative leaf analysis standards. Indian J. Hortic. 34, 100–106; (2) Bhargava, B.S., Chadha, K.L., 1988. Leaf nutrient guide for fruit and plantation crops. Fert. News 33, 21–29.

significantly in their leaf nutrient status. The leaf N, P, and K concentrations were highest in Mallika (1.62%), Willard (0.11%), Dashehari (0.57%), and Khas-ul-khas (0.47%) varieties. Raghupati et al. (2005) reported that nutrient concentration in “Totapuri” cultivar of mango leaf as affected by the application of varying levels of N, P, or K. The Diagnosis and Recommendation Integrated System (DRIS) ratio norms were developed from high yielding population, while diagnosis of nutrient imbalance was made through low yielding plants. Involvement of several nutrients in a single PC indicated that it was not possible to diagnose nutrient imbalance of any particular nutrient in isolation in fruit crops like mango. The nutrient concentration variation in mango leaf appeared to be an overall orchard phenomenon rather than individual tree phenomenon. DRIS indices suggested by Naik and Bhatt (2017) revealed a relative deficiency of Mg, Zn, and B corresponding to relative sufficiency of Ca, N, P, S, and K detected in 9-year-old mango orchards. For the younger orchards (6-year-old ones), the order of requirement of nutrient was observed as Ca > S > K > B > N > P > Mg > Zn. Parent et al. (2013) suggested plant ionome (the mineral nutrient and trace element composition of an organism) diagnosis using sound boundaries in mango considering the biasness between critical nutrient concentration ranges and DRIS. Biswas et al. (1986) determined critical limits based on critical leaf nutrient levels of N, P, and K for bearing orchards on soil test values. Critical values for N and K were observed higher than those for seedlings, indicating that younger plants are more sensitive than older ones. However, this approach has some limitations, because plants are analyzed at only juvenile phase with restricted root system and media culture does not represent the root soil interface in the field conditions. These limitations were revealed by Samra et al. (1978) through survey for assessment of leaf nutrient status of 30 bearing orchards, relating results to sand culture limits for 1–2-year-old seedlings of mango from India and Florida. The studies have fixed critical limits of N, P, K, Mg, and S based on pot culture experiment. The critical limits (Table 43.3) fixed through pot culture may not be genuine because of juvenile phase of seedlings with limited root system compared with bearing trees with vast tree structure and extensive root system. And in pot culture, such growing conditions do not exist similar to field, with result; the reproducibility of such results is very difficult to obtain under varied orchard conditions. Optimum leaf nutrient concentration worked out for different mango cultivar has been further summarized (Table 43.4).

7 Optimum fertilizer requirement Field experiments are being laid out for making fertilizers recommendation schedule in mango in different parts of mango-growing region of the world. In a field trail, soil application of 50-kg farmyard manure, 1.5-kg N, 0.5-kg P205, and 1.0-kg K2O/tree in the first fortnight of June and application of paclobutrazol at 0.75 g ai/m canopy diameter during second fortnight of July to first fortnight of August with three foliar sprays of 1% KNO3 at peanut, marble, and egg stage increased the yield and quality of Alphonso mango coupled with reduced spongy tissue incidences (Shinde et al., 2006). Sujatha and Reddy (2006) recommended drip irrigation at 0.75 Ep and NPK (100 g each/tree) + farmyard manure (75 kg/tree) in mango var. Keshar on Alfisols. According to Krishnakumar et al. (1998) mean nutrient removal by every kilogram of dried senescent leaves was 6.63, 0.39, 2.48, 35.81, 0.84, 0.276, 0.65, 0.053, and 0.059 g each N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Fe, Mn, Zn, and Cu, respectively. Sharma et al. (1998) investigated three levels of N (0, 400, and 800 g) in combination with three levels each of P2O5 (2, 200, and 400 g) and P2O5 (0, 300, and 600 g)/plant were applied to 25-year-old Dashehari mango plants. The study revealed optimum fertilizer requirement of 800 g N + 200 g P2O5 + 300 g K2O/tree/year. The fertilizer recommendations for mango in India were reviewed by Tandon (1987) and presented (Rahim et al., 2018).

640

43. Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango

TABLE 43.4

Optimum leaf nutrient concentration suggested for different commercial mango cultivars. Mango cultivars

Nutrient

Totapuri (1)

Kent, Parvin, Haden, Zill (2)

Dashehari (3)

Owaise (4)

Alfonso (5)

N (%)

0.92–1.37

1.0–1.5

–

0.74–1.43

0.77–1.65

P (%)

0.08–0.16

0.08–0.17

–

0.07–0.14

0.08–0.18

K (%)

0.21–0.44

0.30–0.80

–

0.54–1.04

0.77–1.73

Ca (%)

1.71–3.47

2.0–3.5

–

1.4–2.6

0.76–1.63

Mg (%)

0.15–0.37

0.15–0.40

–

0.15–0.30

0.13–0.35

Fe (mg/kg)

63–227

–

177–19

389–1148

657–961

Mn (mg/kg)

87–223

–

69–79

23–60

13–408

Cu (mg/kg)

1–6

–

14–26

2–12

14–18

Zn (mg/kg)

11–19

–

28–38

28–56

17–18

Data from (1) Hundal, H.S., Dhanwinder, S., Brar, J.S., 2005. Diagnosis and recommendation integrated system for monitoring nutrient status of mango trees in sub-mountainous area of Punjab, India, Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal., 36, 2085–2099; (2) Young, T.W., Koo, R.C.J., 1969. Mineral composition of Florida mango leaves. In: Florida State Horticultural Society. Florida Agricultural Experiment Station Journal Series, vol. 3368. pp. 324–328; (3) Kumar, P., Rehalia, A.S., 2007. Standardization of micronutrients range in mango (Mangifera indica L.) by orchard surveys. Asian J. Hortic. 2(1), 218–221; (4) Ali, A.M., 2018. Nutrient sufficiency ranges in mango using boundary-line approach and compositional nutrient diagnosis norms in El-Sahiya, Egypt. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 49(2), 188–201; (5) Raghupathi, H.B. and Bhargava, B.S. 1999. Preliminary nutrient norms for ‘alphonso’ mango using diagnosis and recommendation integrated system. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 69, 648–650.

7.1 Time and method of fertilizer application Timing of fertilizers application depends upon the intensity and period of rainfall, fruiting time, vegetative growth, and irrigation water availability. Chadha and Rajput (1993) suggested that, at the time of plantation of new mango orchard, 50-kg FYM, 2.5-kg single superphosphate, and 1-kg muriate of potash should be added in the pits along with insecticide for the management of soil pests. Foliar feeding of nutrients should be done as per need. Micronutrient application should be done by foliar spray for maximum recovery. Placement of manures and fertilizers bearing mango trees should be restricted to active root zone. Bhojappa and Singh (1974) observed that about 82%–88% active roots were located within a radius of 300 cm and the highest activity occurred at a distance of 120 cm from the trunk. During the rainy season, 65%–70% of root activity was observed within a depth of 60 cm, while most of it was confined to a depth of 30 cm from February to March. Several studies have been carried out for finding appropriate method and time of placement of fertilizers for maximum recovery. In a long-term fertilizer experiment on full-grown Dashehari mango trees, no significant differences were found on increase in growth parameters (viz., plant height, girth of rootstocks, and scion and canopy spread) due to differential time of fertilizer application. Yield data showed significant difference due to various treatments. The highest yield (96.66 kg/tree) was obtained from the trees that received full dose of N, P, and K (1 kg/tree each) in the month of July, which was significantly higher than all treatments, except the one in which three split parts of full dose of N, P, and K were given in April, August, and October. Fertilizer application in April, August, and October gave significantly higher yield that treatment of March and July, August and October, and control. Munniswami (1970) reported that manures are to be applied in 15 cm deep and 60 cm wide trench 30 cm away from the trunk but 60 cm away from trunk in older trees.

7.2 Organic nutrient management Indiscriminate use of chemical fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides especially in commercial mango production has resulted in various environmental and health hazards along with socioeconomic problems. Organic mango cultivation of late is claimed in climate mitigation, carbon fixation, soil fertility improvement, and water conservation. In present scenario shifting from conventional to organic, maintenance of soil health and insect paste management are consider major challenges, which auger so well with a variety of practices associated with organic cultivation (Ram and Kumar, 2019). The on-farm organic input production with locally available materials normally leads to a reduction in variable

641

7 Optimum fertilizer requirement

TABLE 43.5

Doses of fertilizer for different ages of mango plants. Doses of fertilizer (g/plant)

Plant age (year)

Decomposed cowdung (kg)

Urea

TSP

MOP

Gypsum

Zinc

Boron

2

12

650

620

260

90

25

10

3

16

755

825

290

120

20

15

4

20

860

950

390

150

30

15

5

25

900

1050

450

180

40

20

6–8

50

1255

1260

750

220

50

25

9–11

60

1550

1575

1100

250

50

25

Above 12

80

1850

1875

1300

300

60

30

Aforementioned fertilizers are applied in two splits, that is, first 75% in September-October and second 25% in April-May. Data from Rahim, M.A., Quddus, Islam, M.A., Karim, F., Kabir, M.M., Sarker, M.A., Naher, B.C.N., Alam M.S., Fatema, K., 2018. Present Status, future, prospect of growing temperate fruits in Bangladesh a—tropical environment–with special reference to contribution in nutrition and poverty alleviation. VIII Symposium of Temperate Zone Fruits in the Tropics and Subtropics Certifies, Florianopolis, SC.

input costs under organic management (Pathak et al., 2010; Ram and Pathak, 2016); in few cases, higher input costs due to purchase of composed and organic manures have been reported (Sellen et al., 1993). The diversity on organic farms provides many ecological services that significantly enhance farm resilience (Bengtsson et al., 2005; Hole et al., 2005). Interestingly, yields from organic production under conditions where water is limited during the growing period and under subsistence farming are equal or significantly higher than those from conventional production. A comparison of 133 studies from developing countries concluded that organic crops and livestock yields were 80% higher than conventional (increase in yield was 74% in crops according to Badgley et al. (2007). Ram et al. (2017) reported increase in production and benefit-cost ratio with biodynamic package of practice compared with recommended dose of fertilizers (Table 43.5). Singh et al. (2004) observed the different organic ammendments on soil, biophysical attributes, and yield of mango cv. Langra. The study showed that an maximum increase in organic carbon content was observed with vermicompost 0.495% treatment followed by cow pat pit (0.465%) as compared with control (0.307%). The fruit retension per panicle, fruit number, and fruit weight were also obtained with BD-500 + biodynamic compost (10.35). The maximum fruit number (309) and fruit yield (68.4 kg) per tree were obtained with BD-500 + biodynamic compost. Ram et al. (2011) reported that highest number of fruit (260/tree) and fruit yield (30.1 kg/tree) with the treatment involving rhizosphere soil of Ficus benghalensis (250 g/tree) + 5% Amritpani + organic mulching, After 2 years of treatment, maximum organic carbon (1.00%) was recorded in mango basin soil with vermicompost (45 kg/tree) + Azospirillum culture (250 g/tree) + PSB (50 g/tree) in addition to Olsen-P (61.2 ppm), NH4OAc-K (280.50 ppm), DTPA-Zn (11.68 ppm), and DTPA-Cu (9.60 ppm) in rhizosphere soil of F. benghalensis (250 g/tree). Ram and Verma (2015) estimated energy input, output, and economic analysis in organic mango production system. Study revealed that irrigation consumed the least energy (63 MJ) and diesel oil ranked first (3040.74 MJ) (Table 43.6) in energy consumption. Maximum input energy was consumed (8121.49 MJ) with application of 50-kg vermicompost +250-g Azospirillum + PSB culture per tree + vermiwash spray compared with 6232.24 MJ with the application of 50 kg FYM/tree (Table 43.7). Chavan et al. (2018) studied the different organic sources on yield of mango cv. Alphonso, and 6 years of pooled data revealed highest fruit yield 5.17 t/ha with the application of 100-kg vermicompost + 20 kg of glyricidia green leaf manuring followed by 50 kg of vermicompost + 20 kg of glyricidia green leaf manuring (2.55 t/ha) and 150-kg FYM + 20-kg glyricidia green leaf manuring (2.20 t/ha). These studies strongly warranted the high-utility organic cultural practices.

7.3 Integrated nutrient management The continuous use or excess supply of inorganic fertilizers as source of nutrient in imbalanced proportion is also a problem, causing economic inefficiency, damage to the environment, and in certain situations harm to the plants themselves and also to human beings who consume them. On the other hand, increase in productivity of mango removes large amounts of essential nutrients from the soil nutrient reserves, which unduly impose a variety of stresses on soil as growing medium. Another issue of great concern is the sustainability of soil productivity, as soil as growing medium began to be intensively exhausted to produce higher yields. Overtime, cumulative depletion decreased and yield and

642 TABLE 43.6

43. Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango

Budgeting of energy (MJ) consumption under different organic treatments in mango cv. Dashehari.

50-kg Vermicompost/ tree

50-kg Vermicompost + 250 g Azospirillum + PSB culture/ tree

50-kg Vermicompost + 250 g Azotobacter + PSB culture/tree

50-kg Vermicompost + 250 g Azospirillum +PSB culture/tree + vermiwash spray

532.52

494.26

536.58

534.08

486.70

931.05

931.05

931.05

931.05

931.05

931.05

1500

2000

2000

2500

3000

3000

3300

Diesel oil

3040.74

3040.74

3040.74

3040.74

3040.74

3040.74

3040.74

Irrigation

63

63

63

63

63

63

63

Biopesticides

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

Total energy input

6232.24

6813.52

6867.31

7329.05

7871.37

7868.87

8121.49

50-kg FYM/tree

50-kg FYM +250 g Azospirillum +PSB culture/tree

50-kg FYM +250 g Azotobacter +PSB culture/tree

Human labor

397.45

478.73

Machinery

931.05

Organic manures

Particular

Data from Ram, R.A., Verma, A.K., 2015. Energy input, output and economic analysis of organic production of mango (Mangifera Indica L.) cv. ‘Dashehari’. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 85(6), 827–832.

TABLE 43.7

Economic analysis of an organic mango production. Fruit yield

Fruit quality parameters

Treatments

Fruit yield (kg/tree)

Fruit yield (tons/ha)

TSS (°Brix)

Titrable acidity (%)

Total carotenoids (mg/ 100 g)

Benefit-cost ratio

T1

60.68

6.068

22.00

0.30

4.24

1.67

T2

108.98

10.899

23.50

0.24

5.50

3.19

T3

81.75

8.175

21.83

0.22

4.41

1.60

T4

61.56

6.156

21.00

0.31

5.06

1.90

T5

57.95

5.795

21.53

0.32

3.73

1.74

T6

82.18

8.218

22.33

0.28

3.38

2.26

T7

46.18

4.686

20.50

0.38

4.98

1.44

CD at 5%

27.20

2.72

1.74

NS

0.87

0.78

T1, FYM (40 kg/tree) + Azotobacter + Azospirillum + PSB (108 cfu/g) + VAM; T2, biodynamic compost (30 kg/tree) + bioenhancers (CPP 100 g, BD – 500 and BD 501 as soil and foliar spray); T3, Neem cake + farmyard manure (20 kg each/tree) + Azotobacter + Azospirillum + PSB (108 cfu/g); T4, vermicompost (30 kg/tree) + Azotobacter + Azospirillum + PSB (108 cfu/g); T5, farmyard manure (40 kg/tree) + bioenhancer (Amritpani 5% soil application); T6, FYM (40 kg/tree) + green manuring (sun hemp) Azotobacter + Azospirillum + PSB (108 cfu/g); T7, 1000 g N P K/tree.

soil fertility coupled with soil degradation. The new approach to farming often referred to as sustainable agriculture, seeks to introduce agricultural practices that are eco-friendly and maintain the long-term ecological balance of soil as a dynamic ecosystem. The judicious use of organic inputs with inorganic is considered as an alternative strategy to meet the nutrient requirement of mango. Haldavnekar et al. (2018a,b) studied the substrate dynamics for IPNM in mango cv. Alphonso with recommended dose of fertilizers (RDF) and different combinations of organic manure (Farmyard manure and vermicompost), organic mulching, inorganic fertilizer, and biofertilizers (Azotobacter, Azospirillium, Pseudomonas fluorescence, and Trichoderma). The treatment consisting of half RDF + 50-kg farmyard manure + 250-g Trichoderma + 250-g Pseudomonas proved to be the most effective with regard to maximum number of fruits per tree (289.67) and yield (72.30 kg/tree and 7.23 t/ha) over rest of the treatments. Bauri and Ghosh (1998) reported maximum fruit yield (by weight) in trees treated with organic matter and 300 g N + 200 g P2O5 + 200 g K2O/tree/year, in addition to leaf nutrient composition (2.03% N, 0.08% P, and 0.72% K).

7 Optimum fertilizer requirement

643

Fruit crops including mango have an excellent synergy with a variety of microbes. Sukhada (1998) isolated major species of vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizal (VAM) fungi belonging to genus Glomus from the rhizosphere of mango rootstocks Totapuri and Vellaikulumban in the natural habitat, which was multiplied in a glasshouse on Rhodes grass from single spore. The rootstocks took 6–8 months to colonize 90% roots up to and showed significant visible increase in plant height (70%–80%). Dry-matter accumulation was significantly higher in all VAM-inoculated plants compared with uninoculated plants. Gupta and Bhriguvansi (1998) studied the effects of VAM fungi (Glomus fasciculatum and G. mosseae) and humacil (an organic source) on growth and mineral nutrition of mango seedlings under pot culture conditions. At initial growth (3–9 months) of mango seedlings, all the plants grew with no significant difference irrespective of the mycorrhizal infection, but, at later stage of growth (9–15 months), soil inoculated with G. fasciculatum and half dose of P205 followed by humacil with full dose of P205 showed higher plant height over other treatments. In a long-term experiment on organic production of mango cv. Dashehari, maximum yield (72 kg/tree) and average fruit number (305 fruits/tree) along with fruit quality was recorded with 50-kg vermicompost + 250-g Azospirillum + PSB culture + vermiwash per tree during the third year of experimentation. This treatment was associated with maximum production cost (INR 22,002.26/ha), productivity (0.33 kg per INR), net return INR (49,997.74/ha), and benefit-cost ratio (3.27) according to (Ram and Verma, 2018). In another experiment, application of different amendments on 35-year-old trees of mango cv. Mallika, highest fruit yield (160.30 kg/tree) was recorded with the application of biodynamic compost (30 kg/tree) + CPP 100 g, BD-500 and BD-501 as soil and foliar spray (Ram et al., 2016). Raut et al. (2018) studied the effect of manures and biofertilizers on soil microbial population of Alphonso mango. The results revealed that treatment involving FYM (50 kg/tree) + Azospirillum culture (250 g/tree) + PSB (250 g tree) recorded the highest population count of Azospirillum (23.7 cfu/g), while the highest PSB count (110.0 cfu/g) was recorded with the treatment having vermicompost (50 kg/tree) + Azospirillum culture (250 g/tree) + PSB (250 g/tree). In a long-term field trail in 17-year-old mango cv. Dashehari plants, growth parameters remained unaffected due to the application of various manures, fertilizers, and biofertilizers. Maximum yield (83.66 kg/tree) was obtained from plants receiving 300-g culture of Azospirillum, significantly higher than all other treatments except the treatments with 10-kg neem cake per tree. The lowest yield (39.66 kg/tree) was obtained from the trees under which Sesbania was applied as green manure (Ram and Rajput, 1998).

7.4 Foliar application of nutrients Foliar application of nutrients basically micronutrients is an age-old practice to rectify the deficiency symptoms. Soil application of micronutrients is far less effective than foliar application (Srivastava and Singh, 2004), although combined application of Zn (0.4%) and urea (1%) produced the highest number of fruits and yield of mango, whereas the fruit quality was improved by the application of B (0.4%) + urea (1%) to younger plants (Banik et al., 1997). Nijjar et al. (1976) recommended 27.5 mg/kg Zn in deficient leaves and 35.2 mg/kg for healthy leaves to be maintained with three sprays of ZnSO4 to correct the Zn deficiency. Arora et al. (2018) studies on foliar sprays of potassium nitrate at 2%, 3%, and 4% as a single (10 days after fruit set), double (10 days after fruit set and superimposed 20 days after fruit set), and triple spray (10 days after fruit set and superimposed 20 and 30 days after fruit set), respectively, on Amrapali mango trees. The fruit retention (%) was significantly highest (2.41%) in double spray of KNO3 3%, followed by 2% triple spray (2.16%) and 4% single day (2.22%), respectively, compared with control (1.59%). The fruit was significantly recorded highest with double-spray spread trees with KNO3 3% (49.80 kg/tree). The study concluded that potassium nitrate as foliar spray significantly improves the fruit retention quality and yield the double spray of KNO3 at 3% was the best when applied on Amrapali cultivar of mango. Hiray et al. (2018) carried out an experiment to find out the response of boiler fertilizers, namely, SOP 1%, SOP 2.0%, and KNO3 1.5% and 2% at different fruit developmental stages, namely, 50% marble stages, 50% egg stage, and twice at 50% marble stage as along with control. Results revealed that maximum fruit set (%) and minimum fruit set to maturity (125.10 days). While maximum fruit yields (14.57 t/ha) were recorded with foliar application of 2% SOP twice spray at 50% marble stage and 50% egg stage. Some other recommendations of foliar application of micronutrients cultivar wise are further summarized (Table 43.8).

7.5 Fertigation Fertigation is an effective means of controlling the timing and placement of fertilizers to root zone of crop (Shirgure and Srivastava, 2014). Fertigation is considered synonymous to nutrient use efficiency (Srivastava et al., 2014) that can further be fine-tuned with nitrification inhibitors (restrict the microbial conversion of ammonium to nitrate that it is

644 TABLE 43.8

43. Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango

Recommendations on foliar application of micronutrients in different commercial mango cultivars.

Treatments

Response parameters

References

Fazli: 0.40% Zn 0.40%B + 1% urea

Improvement in growth flowering intensity, fruit set, fruit yield, and fruit quality

Banik et al. (1997)

Chausa: 0.80% Zn

Fruit weight, fruit yield, and fruit quality

Singh and Rajput (1976)

Langra: 0.40% Zn + 0.20% Cu + 0.20% B

Fruit yield and fruit quality

Bhriguvanshi and Gupta (1998)

Dashehari: 0.50% FeSO4 + 0.50% MnSO4 + 0.50% ZnSO4 + 0.20% borax

Fruit yield, pulp peel-stone ratio, fruit quality

Malhi and Joshi (1998)

Dashehari: 1000 ppm cobalt sulfate + 4000 ppm zinc sulfate + 100 ppm NAA

Flowering, fruit length, fruit breath, fruit set, fruit retention, fruit weight, and fruit yield

Chander and Singh (1998)

Dashehari and Langra: RDF + 100 g/tree ZnSO4 + 50 g/tree CuSO4 + 50 g/tree boric acid + foliar spray of 0.20% ZnSO4 + 0.10% CuSO4 + 0.10% boric acid

Fruit yield and quality

Mukesh et al. (2018)

Alphonso: 0.50% (urea, single superphosphate and potash) + 0.25%(ZnSO4, borax, and CuSO4 each) + 0.01% sodium molybdate

Flowering, fruit set, fruit yield, quality, and benefit-cost ratio

Patil et al. (2018)

Dashehari: 0.50% FeSO4 + 0.50% ZnSO4 + 0.50% MnSO4 + 1.0% Sodium tetraborate

Fruit quality and fruit yield

Joshi and Malhi (1998)

Alphanso: RDF + foliar spray of 0.40% ZnSO4 + 0.20% boric acid

Flowering, fruit set, fruit yield, and fruit quality

Haldavnekar et al. (2018a, b)

mobile in soils) or plant growth-promoting bioeffectors (microorganisms and active natural compounds involved in plant growth). Bhriguvanshi et al. (2014) evaluated the effect of different soil moisture and nitrogen levels on the yield, quality, and water use efficiency (WUE) of mango cv. Dashehari. The results revealed that the drip irrigation irrespective of fertigation levels significantly increased fruit yield over basin irrigation. Irrigation given to the replenishment of 60% of United States Weather Bureau (USWB) Open Pan Evaporation was found to be statistically superior to 70% and 90% replenishments. The increase in fruit yield in 0.9, 0.7, and 0.6 OPE was 19.4%, 40.5%, and 57.5%, respectively, as compared with basin irrigation. The yield improvement in 0.6 OPE was higher to the tune of 32.0% and 15.5% as compared with 0.9 and 0.7 OPE, respectively. It was found that, under the condition of limited water supply, drip irrigation proved consistently superior to the basin application, which significantly saved 15.0%, 31.4%, and 40.5% of irrigation water in 0.9, 0.7, and 0.6 OPE, respectively, as compared with control. The water use efficiency ranged from 9.9- to 18.8-kg fruits/m3 of water applied in the drip irrigation system as compared with 7.0-kg fruits/m3 of water applied in basin irrigation. Increased mobility of P dissolved in irrigation water was observed, especially for sandy soils (O’Neil et al., 1979) and fine-textured clay loams (Rauschkolb et al., 1976). The improved mobility has been attributed to movement of P in mass flow with irrigation waters after saturation of reaction sites near the zone of P application. The extent of P mobility was illustrated from a fertigation study carried out by Neilsen et al. (1997). Trees in an orchard on a loamy sand soil received annual applications of 40 g N and 17.5 g P as mixtures of ammonium nitrate (34 N-0 P-0 K) and ammonium polyphosphate (10 N-15 P-0 K), through a single drip emitter. Increases in extractable soil P were measurable as far as 30 cm from the emitter, regardless of whether the same amount of P was applied as a single dose, four weekly doses, or thirty daily doses in May. Changes were most apparent directly beneath the emitter (0 distance), with an elevated extractable P concentration at 30 cm depth immediately after application. This was in contrast with the behavior of surface broadcast P fertilizer, which failed to penetrate below 7 cm depth for sandy soil after 16 irrigation applications totaling 16 cm. This is a clear indication of the mobility of fertigated P. The mobility of fertigated K is well documented and illustrated by changes in extractable soil K at selected depths and distances from an emitter through which K was added (Uriu et al., 1980). At the end of a single growing season in a clay loam soil, expected to inhibit downward movement of fertilizer K, increased in NH4OAc-extractable K could be observed to depths of 60–75 cm and lateral distances as great as 60 cm. Thus, the distribution of soil K was similar in depth but greater in lateral extent than similar changes previously cited after broadcasting K directly beneath the emitter at rates that exceeded by >50 times normal unit area surface broadcast rates under flood irrigation.

9 Future line of research

645

8 Plant nutrition and shelf life of fruits Studies on mango dealing with the factors that determine the final quality of fruit at the consumer level have generally focused on maturity at harvest ( Jacobi et al., 1995; Lalel et al., 2003) and on postharvest management (Hoa et al., 2002; Nunes et al., 2007). However, as is the case with other stone fruits, preharvest cultural practices, which affect the environmental conditions of fruit development, profoundly influence postharvest performance and final quality (Crisosto et al., 1995; Hewett, 2006). Mango is a fleshy fruit containing more than 80% water (Lakshimnarayana et al., 1970). Its size depends on the accumulation of water and dry matter in the various compartments during fruit growth. The skin, the flesh, and the stone have specific compositions that appear to accumulate water and dry matter at different rates, depending on environmental conditions (L
echaudel and Joas, 2006). Fruit growth after cell division consists in the enlargement of fruit cells characterized by a large accumulation of water that results from the balance between incoming fluxes such as phloem and xylem and outgoing fluxes such as transpiration (Ho et al., 1987). Changing the balance between these various fluxes, which have elastic and plastic components, leads to large variations in fruit volume. Another quality trait for mango is its shelf life, which can vary with postharvest conditions, the best known of which is temperature. However, this attribute can be influenced by conditions during fruit growth that affect the supply of minerals to the fruit. In fact, relationships between minerals (the main one in mango is potassium, followed by magnesium and calcium; Simmons et al. (1998)) and shelf life are often studied. In particular, it appears those variations in calcium content or the ratio between calcium and the other two minerals delays ripening and senescence (Ferguson, 1984) or reduces storage disorders (Bangerth, 1979). Calcium is supplied by the xylem ( Jones et al., 1983), and potassium and magnesium are phloem-mobile nutrients (Nooden, 1988). Special attention must also be paid to the influence of environmental factors on ingoing fruit fluxes and on the balance between mineral ions in mango, as has been done for other fruits (Ferguson et al., 1999). Moreover, shelf life can be discussed in terms of dry matter content, which is directly affected by carbohydrate and water fluxes at the fruit level during its growth. Hence, improved plant nutrition is supposed to elevate the postharvest life of mango fruits.

9 Future line of research Various studies on field’s trials, surveys of orchards, and tissue analyses have been accomplished throughout the world, for fertilizer recommendations in mango plantation. These recommendations are restricted to specific climatic and soil conditions. An in-depth study is needed to develop target yield-based fertilizer recommendation using soil test value of leaf analysis values. At the same time, a database evidence as needed to testify how depletion in soil fertility is adversely affecting nutrient density of mango, besides yield and quality. Foliar application of nutrients particularly micronutrients has become a popular practice for correction of short-term deficiency symptoms. Besides micronutrients, foliar application of macronutrients is also cost effective and well suited for maximum nutrient recovery. There is need to develop cost-effective package of practice of nutrients for sustainable production in different agroclimatic conditions, with an eye on developing nutrient-dense mango. Mango is a perennial crop; efforts should be directed toward proper in situ recycling of orchard organic wastes for reduction of cost of cultivation. Some of the other issues like on-farm input generation to make it cost effective; quantum production equal or higher what is expected from optimum combination of agrochemicals; continuous improvement in physicochemical and biological properties of soil; and improvement in produce quality with respect to nutrition, essential constituents, therapeutic value and storability, and eco-friendly and cost-effective technology with emphasis on quality production of mango need an immediate attention. Role of rootstocks in nutrient absorption from the soil is equally important for better growth and development of plant. Therefore, there is a need to standardize various rootstocks for different agroclimatic and soil conditions with emphasis on salinity and drought. Study should also be carried out for the identification of proper source of nutrients, time, method of nutrient application, and source of nutrients (4R Nutrient Stewardship) in combination with plant protection measures for cost-effective production of mango. Despite all these efforts, we need a comprehensive study to streamline mango trees as a carbon sink, as the carbon footprint of mango plantation will further reveal the role of perennial fruit crops in climate change mitigation and soil health resilience. There is also a stronger need to develop equality index of mango as a comprehensive system of evaluating the nutrient quality of mango. Such studies should be duly supported by neutraceutical and phytonutrient profiling of mango germplasm to be later utilized in

646

43. Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango

identifying nutrient-efficient genotypes of mango, the efforts on which are really limited. These studies will perch the mango industry on a different dimension to ensure sustained quality production of mango completed with soil health. Mango, a tropical fruit of great economic importance, is generally harvested green and then commercialized after a period of storage. Unfortunately, the final quality of mango batches is highly heterogeneous, in fruit size as well as in gustatory quality and postharvest behavior. A large amount of knowledge has been gathered on the effects of the maturity stage at harvest and postharvest conditions on the final quality of mango. Considerably less attention has been paid to the influence of environmental factors on mango growth, quality traits, and postharvest behavior. It remains to be experimentally seen how preharvest conditions affect postharvest life of mango fruits, besides growth and quality (L
echaudel and Joas, 2007).

References Abou El-Dahab, M.K., 1975. Correcting malformation symptoms on mango trees in Egypt by soil application of iron chelates. Egypt. J. Phytopath. 7, 97–99. Agarawala, S.C., Naurial, B.D., Chatterji, C., Sharma, P.C., 1989. Manganese, zinc and boron deficiency in mango. Sci. Hortic. 35, 99–107. Agarwala, S.C., Nautiyal, B.D., Sharma, C.P., Chatterjee, C., 1991. Studies on copper deficiency in mango, guava and jackfruit. Indian J. Hortic. 48, 192–200. Arora, R., Singh, N., Gill, M., Kaur, S., 2018. Yield and quality attributes of mango cv. ‘Amrapali’ as influenced by foliar application of potassium nitrate. In: International Mango Conference, 2018 May 8–10, Vengurla, India, pp. 91–92. Badgley, C., Moghtader, J., Quintero, E., Zakem, E., Jahi, Chappell, M., Aviles Vazquez, K., Samulon, A., Perfecto, I., 2007. Organic agriculture and the global food supply. Renewable Agric. Food Syst. 22 (2), 86–108. Bahadur, L., Malhi, C.S., Chander, P., 1998. Zinc content of pulp, rag and stone as affected by ZnSO4 application. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 36. Bangerth, F., 1979. Calcium-related physiological disorders of plants. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 17, 97–122. Banik, B.C., Sen, S.K., Bose, T.K., 1997. Effect of zinc, iron and boron in combination with urea on growth, flowering, fruiting and fruit quality of mango cv. Fazli. Environ. Ecol. 15 (1), 122–125. Bauri, F.K., Ghosh, S.N., 1998. Growth, yield and physio-chemical properties of mango cv. ‘Himsagar’ grown in response to organic and inorganic fertilizers under rainfed laterite soil. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 36. Bengtsson, J., Ahnstr€ om, J., Weibull, A.C., 2005. The effects of organic agriculture on biodiversity and abundance: a meta-analysis. J. Appl. Ecol. 42, 261–269. Bhojappa, K.M., Singh, R.N., 1974. Root activity of mango by radioactive technique using P32. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 44, 175–180. Bhriguvanshi, S.R., Gupta, M., 1998. Effect of various micronutrient sprays on yield and quality of mango (Mangifera indica L.) fruit. In: Symposium Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 37. Bhriguvanshi, S.R., Adak, T., Kumar, K., Singh, A., Sing, K., 2014. Impact of varying soil moisture regimes on growth and soil nutrient availability in mango. Indian J. Soil Conserv. 42 (1), 68–73. Bindra, O.S., Bakhetia, D.R.C., 1971. Investigations on etiology and control of mango malformation. Indian J. hortic. 28, 80–85. Biswas, P.P., Joshi, O.P., Rajput, M.S., 1986. Potassium supplying capacity of some mango orchards. J. Potassium Res. 2 (3), 83–89. Brandon Gaille, 2018. 21 Mango Industry Statistics. Trends & Analysis. https://brandongaille.com/21-mango-industry-statistics-trends-analysis/. Chadha, K.L., Rajput, M.S., 1993. Mango nutrition. In: Chadha, K.L., Pareek, O.P. (Eds.), Advance in Horticulture. In: vol. 2. Malhotra Publishing House, New Delhi, pp. 813–826. Chadha, K.L., Samra, J.S., Thakur, R.S., 1980. Standardization of leaf sampling technique for mineral composition of leaves of mango cultivar ‘Chausa’. Sci. Hortic. 13, 323–329. Chakrabarti, D.K., Ghosal, S., 1989. The disease cycle of mango malformation induced by Fusarium moniliforme var. subglutinans and the curative effects of mangiferin metal chilates. J. Phytopathol. 125, 238–246. Chander, P., Singh, A., 1998. Effect of cobalt, zinc and napthaline acetic acid (NAA) on yield and fruit quality in mango cv. ‘Dashehari’. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 21. Chander, P., Singh, A., Ohiman, J.S., 1998. Effect of exogenous application of cobalt, zinc and napthaline acetic acid on mango malformation. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 73. Chandra, A., 1988. Note on control of pre-harvest fruit drop in mango. Curr. Agric. 12, 91–92. Chaudhary, S.K., Nijjar, G.S., Rehalia, A.S., 1985. Nutritional status of mango orchards of Gurdaspur district in Punjab. Acta Hortic. 231, 282–285. Chavan, L.S., Mhaskar, N.V., Karle, S.S., Jondhale, D.G., Haldankar, P.M., 2018. Studies on comparative effeciency of organic manures on fruit yield of alphonso mango in konkan region of Maharashtra. In: International Mango Conference, 8–11 May, 2018, RFRS, Vengurla, Maharashtra, p. 37. Coetzer, L.A., Robbertse, P., Wet, E.D., 1991. The influence of boron application on fruit production and cold storage of mangoes. In: Year Book of the South African Mango Growers Association. vol. 11, pp. 29–31. Crane, J.H., Campbell, C.W., 1994. Fact Sheet HS-2, Horticultural Science Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service. Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Crisosto, C.H., Mitchell, F.G., Johnson, S., 1995. Factors in fresh market stone fruit quality. Postharvest News Inf. 6, 171–211. Daulta, B.S., Singh, H.K., Chauhan, K.S., 1981. Effect of zinc and CCC sprays on flowering, fruiting and physico-chemical composition of fruit in mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. ‘Dashehari’. Haryana J. Hortic. Sci. 10, 161–165. Devrani, H.B., Ram, S., 1978. Studies on micro-nutrient in relation to age of mango leaves. Plant Sci. 10, 73–75. El-Beltagy, M.S., El-Ghandour, M.A., El-Hanawi, 1980. Effects of Bayfolan and some growth regulators on modifying flowering and the incidence of flowering malformation of mango (Magnifera indica L.). Egyptian J. Hortic. 6, 125–139.

References

647

Faria, L.N., Donato, S.L.R., Dos Santos, M.R., Castro, L.G., 2016. Nutrient contents in Tommy Atkins mango leaves at flowering and fruiting stages. J. Braz. Assoc. Agric. Eng. 36 (6), 1073–1085. Ferguson, I.B., 1984. Calcium in plant senescence and fruit ripening. Plant Cell Environ. 7, 397–405. Ferguson, I.B., Volz, R., Woolf, A., 1999. Preharvest factors affecting physiological disorders of fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 15, 255–262. Fowomola, M.A., 2010. Some nutrients and antinutrients contents of mango (Mangifera indica) seed. Afr. J. Food Sci. 4 (8), 472–476. Galan, S.V., Galvan, D.F., Calvo, R., 1984. Incidence of soft-nose on mangoes in the Canary Islands. Proc. Florida State Hortic. Soc. 97, 358–360. Gunjate, R.T., Tare, S.J., Rangwala, A.D., Limaye, V.P., 1979. Effect of pre-harvest and post-harvest calcium treatments on calcium content and occurrence of spongy tissue in ‘alphonso’ mango fruits. Indian J. Hortic. 37, 140–144. Gupta, M., Bhriguvansi, S.R., 1998. Effect of vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizal (VAM) fungi and humacil on growth and mineral nutrition of mango seedlings (Mangifera indica L.). In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 22. Haldavnekar, P.C., Salvi, B.R., Munj, A.Y., Raut, R.A., Baviskar, S.B., Satelkar, A.G., Shedge, M.S., 2018a. Integrated plant nutrient management in ‘Alphonso’ mango under konkan agro climatic conditions. In: International Mango Conference, May 8–10, Vengurla, India, p. 87. Haldavnekar, P.C., Salvi, B.R., Satelkar, A.G., Munj, A.Y., Shedge, M.S., Baviskar, S.B., Raut, R.A., Sanas, M.P., Sawant, S.N., 2018b. Micronutrient effect on yield and physico-chemical composition of ‘alphonso’ mango under Konkan agro-climatic conditions. In: International Mango Conference, May 8–10, Vengurla, India, pp. 87–88. Hewett, E.W., 2006. An overview of preharvest factors influencing postharvest quality of horticultural products. Int. J. Postharvest Technol. Innov. 1, 4–15. Hiffny, H.A.A., El-Barkouki, M., El-Banna, G.S., 1978. Morphological and physiological aspects of the floral malformation of mangoes. Egypt. J. Hortic. 5, 43–53. Hiray, S.A., Patel, B.N., Tandel, B.M., Patil, S., 2018. Effect of foliar fertilizers sprays on fruit set, fruit drop and yield of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. ‘Kesar’. In: International Mango Conference, 2018 May 8–10, Vengurla, India, p. 89. Ho, L.C., Grange, R.I., Picken, A.J., 1987. An analysis of the accumulation of water and dry matter in tomato fruit. Plant Cell Environ. 10, 157–162. Hoa, T.T., Ducamp, M.N., Lebrun, M., Baldwin, E.A., 2002. Effect of different coating treatments on the quality of mango fruit. J. Food Qual. 25, 471–486. Hole, D.G., Perkins, A.J., Wilson, J.D., Alexander, I.H., Grice, P.V., Evans, A.D., 2005. Does organic farming benefit biodiversity? Biol. Conserv. 122, 113–130. Jacobi, K.K., Wong, L.S., Giles, J.E., 1995. Effect of fruit maturity on quality and physiology of high-humidity hot air-treated ‘Kensington’ mango (Mangifera indica Linn.). Postharvest Biol. Technol. 5, 149–159. Jones, H.G., Higgs, K.H., Samuelson, T.J., 1983. Calcium uptake by developing apple fruits. I. Seasonal changes in calcium content of fruits. J. Hortic. Sci. 58, 173–182. Joshi, A., Malhi, C.S., 1998. Effect of micronutrient sprays on growth, yield and fruit quality of mango cv. ‘Dashehari’. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, Held at ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 38. Joshi, N.S., Prabhudesai, S.S., Burondarkar, M.M., Gokhale, N.B., Pujari, K.H., Dhekale, J.S., 2016. Stage-wise nutrient status of leaf and soil of alphonso mango grown in Ratnagiri district of Maharashtra, India. Indian. J. Agric. Res. 50 (4), 318–324. Kadrnan, A., Gazit, S., 1984. The problem of iron deficiency in mango trees and experiments to cure it in Israel. J. Plant Nutr. 7, 283–290. Kanwar, J.S., Kahlon, G.S., 1987. Effect of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium fertilizer on panicle malformation in mango, Mangifera indica, L. cv. Dashehari. Punjab Hort. J. 27, 12–16. Khader, S.E.S.A., Rajput, M.S., Biswas, P.P., 1988. Index to quantify black-tip disorder of mango (Mangifera indica L.) in orchards and its relationship with brick kilns. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 58 (7), 573–575. Koo, R.C.J., Young, T.W., 1972. Effect of age and position on mineral composition of mango leaves. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 97, 792–794. Krishnakumar, B.G., Nachegowda, V., Bhargawa, B.S., 1998. Nutrient removal through harvested mango fruit. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 40. Krishnamurthi, S., Randhawa, G.S., 1959. Role of potassium in nutrition of fruit crops. Indian J. Hortic. 16, 175–182. Kumar, S., Nauriyal, J.P., 1977. Nutritional studies on mango—tentative leaf analysis standards. Indian J. Hortic. 34, 100–106. Lakshimnarayana, S., Subhadra, N.V., Subramanyam, H., 1970. Some aspects of developmental physiology of mango fruit. J. Hortic. Sci. 45, 133–142. Lalel, H.J.D., Singh, Z., Tan, S.C., 2003. Maturity stage at harvest affects fruit ripening, quality and biosynthesis of aroma volatile compounds in ‘Kensington Pride’ mango. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 78, 225–233. L
echaudel, M., Joas, J., 2006. Quality and maturation of mango fruits of cv. Cogshall in relation to harvest date and carbon supply. Aust. J. Agr. Res. 57, 419–426. L
echaudel, M., Joas, J., 2007. An overview of preharvest factors influencing mango fruit growth, quality and postharvest behaviour. Braz. J. Plant Physiol. 19 (4), 287–298. Litz, R.E., 1997. The Mango: Botany, Production and Uses. CAB International, Wallingford. Majumdar, P.K., Singa, G.C., Singh, R.N., 1970. Effect of exogenous application of alfa-naphthylacetic acid on mango (Magnifera indica L.) malformation. Indian J. Hortic. 20, 130–131. Majumder, P.K., Sinha, G.C., 1972. Seasonal variation in incidence of malformation in Mangifera indica L. Acta Hortic. 24, 221–223. Malhi, C.S., Joshi, A., 1998. Effect of micro nutrient spray on the nutrient uptake and their distribution in various parts of fruits. In: Symposium Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, Indiapp. 37–38. Mallik, P.C., 1963. Mango malformation-symptoms, causes and cure. Punjab Hortic. J. 3, 292–299. Malo, S.E., Campbell, C.W., 1978. Studies on mango fruit breakdown in Florida. Proc. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. Trop. Reg. 22, 1–15. Martin-Preveli, P., Marchal, J., Furon, V., 1975. A case of zinc deficiency in mango. Fruits 30, 201. Minessey, F.A., Biely, M.P., El-Fahal, A., 1971. Effect of iron chelates in correcting malformation of terminal bud growth in mango. Sudan Agric. J. 6, 71–74. Mishra, K.A., 1976. Studies on Bearing Behaviour of Mangifera indica L. and its Malformation. PhD thesis, PAU, Ludhiana. Misra, A.K., Singh, V.K., 2002. Fusarium subglutinans (F. moniliforme var. subglutinans) in relation to mango malformation. Indian J. Plant Pathol. 20, 81–83. Mukesh, K.M., Kaushik, R.A., Laxman, J., Sarolia, D.K., 2018. Response of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cultivars to micronutrients on fruit quality and yield attributes. In: International Mango Conference, May 08–10, Vengurla, India, p. 68.

648

43. Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango

Munniswami, D., 1970. Application of manures and fertilizers for mango crop. Lal Baugh 15, 7–8. Nachegowda, V., Krishnakumar, B.G., Bhargawa, B.S., 1998. Leaf nutrient status of mango varieties. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25-27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 23. Naik, S.K., Bhatt, B.P., 2017. Diagnostic leaf nutrient norms and identification of yield—Limiting nutrients of mango in eastern plateau and hilly region of India. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 48, 1574–1583. Neilsen, G.H., Parchomchuk, P., Neilsen, D., 1997. Distribution of soil P and K as affected by NP-fertigation in high density apple orchards. Acta Hortic. 451, 439–447. NHB, 2017. http://nhb.gov.in/statistics/Publication/Horticulture%20At%20a%20Glance%202017%20for%20net%20uplod%20(2).pdf. Nijjar, G.S., Arora, J.S., Singh, G., Dwivedi, R.S., 1976. Symptoms of zinc deficiency in mango. Punjab Hortic. J. 16, 113–114. Nirvan, R.S., 1953. Bunchy top of young mango seedlings. Sci. Cult. 18, 335–336. Nooden, L.D., 1988. Whole plant senescence. In: Nooden, L.D., Leopold, A. (Eds.), Senescence and Aging in Plants. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 391–439. Nunes, C.N., Emond, J.P., Brecht, J.K., Dea, S., Proulx, E., 2007. Quality curves for mango fruit (cv. Tommy Atkins and palmer) stored at chilling and non-chilling temperatures. J. Food Qual. 30, 104–120. O’Neil, M.K., Gardner, B.R., Roth, R.L., 1979. Orthophosphoric acid as phosphorus fertilizer in trickle irrigation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 43, 283–286. Oosthuyse, S.A., 1997. Variation of leaf nutrition status in relation to fruit growth in mango. In: Mango Growers’ Association Year Book.vol. 17, pp. 25–28. Pal, R.N., Chadha, K.L., 1980. Black tip disorder of mango: a review. Punjab Hortic. J. 20, 112–121. Pandey, D., Pandey, S.N., 1997. Effect of growth regulators and zinc sulphate on floral malformation in mango (Mangifera indica L.). In: Proceeding of the National Seminar ISPP, March, 19–21, IARI, New Delhi, p. 94. Pandey, R.M., Sinha, G.C., Singh, R.N., Majumder, P.K., 1973. Some biochemical aspects of vegetative malformation in mango (Mangifera indica L.) carbohydrate reserve and nitrogenous fractions. Indian J. Hortic. 3–4, 475–480. Pandey, R.M., Rao, M.M., Pathak, R.A., 1977. Biochemical changes associated with floral malformation in mango. Sci. Hortic. 6, 37–44. Parent, S.E., Parent, L.E., Rozane, D.E., Natale, W., 2013. Plant ionome diagnosis using sound balances: case study with mango (Mangifera indica). Front. Plant Sci. 4, 1–12. Article 449. Pathak, R.K., Ram, R.A., Garg, N., Kishun, R., Bhriguvanshi, S.R., Sharma, S., 2010. Critical review of indigenous technologies for organic farming in horticultural crops. Org. Farming News Lett. 6 (2), 3–16. Patil, K.D., Salvi, B.R., Chavan, S.A., Khobragade, N.H., 2018. Supplementation of nutrients through foliar application at critical stages for increasing the yield of ‘alphonso’ mango. In: International Mango Conference, 2018 May 8–10, Vengurla, India, p. 78. Raghupati, H.B., Reddy, Y.T.N., Reju, M.K., Bhargava, B.S., 2005. Diagnosis of nutrient imbalance in mango by DRIS and PCA approaches. J. Plant Nutr. 27 (7), 1131–1148. Rahim, M.A., 2018. Horticultural crops and agroforestry in Bangladesh. In: Mirza, M.J.A. (Ed.), Agroforestry. GTI Publications, p. 302. Rahim, M.A., Quddus, Islam, M.A., Karim, F., Kabir, M.M., Sarker, M.A., Naher, B.C.N., Alam, M.S., Fatema, K., 2018. Present Status, future, prospect of growing temperate fruits in Bangladesh a—tropical environment–with special reference to contribution in nutrition and poverty alleviation. In: VIII Symposium of Temperate Zone Fruits in the Tropics and Subtropics Certifies, Florianopolis, SC. Rajan, S., 1986. Biochemical Basis of Mango (Mangifera indica L.), Malformation. PhD thesis, IARI, New Delhi. Rajput, C.B.S., Singh, B.P., Singh, S.B., 1975. Effect of foliar application of zinc sulphate on vegetative growth of mango. Bangladesh Hortic. 4, 23–24. Rajput, M.S., Srivastava, K.C., Singh, B.P., 1987. Factors affecting mineral composition of mango leaves—a review. Harayana J. Hortic. Sci. 16, 1–10. Ram, S., 1989. Factors associated with black tip and internal necrosis in mango and their control. Acta Hortic. (231), 797–804. Ram, S., 1991. Horticultural aspects of mango malformation. Acta Hortic. 291, 235–252. Ram, R.A., Kumar, A., 2019. Growing fruit crop organically: challenges and opportunities. Curr. Hortic. 7 (1), 3–11. Ram, R.A., Pathak, R.K., 2016. Organic approaches for sustainable production of horticulture crops: a review. Prog. Hortic. 48, 1–16. Ram, R.A., Rajput, M.S., 1998. Studies on the effect of organic and bio-fertilizers on growth and yield of mango cv. ‘Dashehari’. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., India, Lucknow, p. 39. Ram, R.A., Verma, A.K., 2015. Energy input, output and economic analysis of organic production of mango (Mangifera Indica L.) cv. ‘Dashehari’. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 85 (6), 827–832. Ram, R.A., Verma, A.K., 2018. Response of various organic amendments on yield, quality and economics of production in mango cv. ‘Dashehari’. In: International Mango Conference, 8–11 May, 2018, RFRS, Vengurla, Maharashtra, Indiap. 173. Ram, R.A., Singha, A., Bhriguvanshi, S.R., 2011. Response of different organic inputs on soil, plant nutrient status, yield and quality of mango cv. ‘Amrapali’. In: Global Conference on Augmenting Production and Utilization of Mango: Biotic and Abiotic Stresses, 21–24 June, ICAR-CISH, Lucknow, India, pp. 100–101. Ram, R.A., Verma, A.K., Vaish, S., 2016. Development of cost effective package of practice for organic production of mango cv. ‘Mallika’. In: International Seminar on Recent Trends and Experimental Approaches in Science, Technology and Nature, 23–24 December, 2016 by Society for Science and Nature, IISR, Lucknow, India, p. 2. Ram, R.A., Verma, A.G., Vaish, S., 2017. Studies on yield, fruit quality and economics of organic production of mango cv. ‘Mallika’. In: Organic e Prints, pp. 485–488. Rameshwar, A., Kulkarni, B., 1979. Effect of micronutrient spray on mango. In: Proceedings of mango workers meeting, Panaji, Goa, Horticultural Society of India, Bangalore, pp. 177–178. Rao, M.M., 1998. Approaches for managing the problem of biennial bearing in ‘alphonso’ mango trees. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 23. Rao, D.P., Mukherjee, S.K., 1989. Nutrient status in leaf and soil of some cultivars of mango in relation to yield. Acta Hortic. 231, 286–289. Rath, S., Singh, R.L., Singh, B., Singh, D.B., 1980. Effect of boron and zinc sprays on the physico-chemical composition of mango fruits. Punjab Hortic. J. 20, 33–35.

References

649

Rauschkolb, R.S., Rolston, D.E., Miller, R.J., Carlton, A.B., Burau, R.G., 1976. Phosphorus fertilization with drip irrigation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 40, 68–72. Raut, R.A., Patil, P.D., Munj, A.Y., Haldavnekar, P.C., Baviskar, S.B., Sanas, M.P., Shedge, M.S., 2018. Effect of organic manures and bio-fertilizers on soil microbial population of ‘Alphonso’ mango orchard. In: International Mango Conference; May 08–10, Vengurla, India, p. 112. Ravishankar, H., Nalawadi, U.G., Hulmani, N.C., 1989. Effects of spraying chemicals and nutrients on growth and flowering in off year mango trees. J. Maharashtra Agric. Univ. 14, 319–322. Reddy, S.E., Majumdar, A.M., 1983. Response of mango (Mangifera indica L.) to foliar application of phosphorus. Fert. Res. 4, 281–285. Reddy, Y.T.N., Kurian, R.M., Sujatha, N.T., Srinivasa, M., 1998. Leaf and soil nutrient status of some cultivars of mango in relation to yield. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, pp. 33–34. Saeed, A., Schlosser, R., 1972. Effects of some cultural practices on the incidence of mango malformation. Z. Pflanzenkrankh Pflanzen Zchuz 79, 349–351. Sahithya, B.R., Raju, B., Sagar, B.S., 2018. Alternate bearing of mango. In: International Mango Conference, May 08–10, Vengurla, India, p. 17. Samra, J.S., Thakur, R.S., Chadha, K.L., 1978. Evaluation of existing critical limits of leaf nutrient standards in mango. Sci. Hortic. 8, 349–355. Schlosser, S.E., 1971. Mango malformation: symptoms, occurrence and varietal susceptibility. Plant Protect. Bull. FAO 19, 12–14. Sellen, D., Tollamn, J.H., McLeod, D., Weersink, A., Yiridoe, E., 1993. In the Economics of Organic and Conventional Horticulture Production. Department of Agricultural Economics and Business, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON. Sen, P.K., Roy, P.K., De, B.N., 1947. Hunger signs on mango. Indian J. Hortic. 5, 35–44. Severaj, Y., 1998. Investigations on the biochemistry of internal breakdown of ‘Alphonso’ mango (Mangifera indica L.) fruit. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 71. Sharma, R.C., Mahajan, B.V.C., Dhillon, B.S., 1998. Fertilizer studies on mango cv. ‘Dashehari’. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, pp. 34–35. Shinde, A.K., Dabke, B.B., Jadhav, M.N., Kandalkar, M.P., Burondkar, M.M., 2006. Effect of dose and source of potassium on yield quality ‘alphonso’ mango (Mangifera Indica L.). Indian J. Agric. Sci. 76 (4), 213–217. Shirgure, P.S., Srivastava, A.K., 2014. Fertigation in perennial fruit crops: major concerns. Agrotechnol. 3 https://doi.org/10.4172/2168-98811000e109. Shivashankar, S., Sumathi, M., 2014. A protocol for the control of spongy tissue disorder in ‘alphonso’ mango by pre-harvest treatments. J. Plant Sci. Res. 1 (4), 1–5. Simmons, S.L., Hofman, P.J., Whiley, A.W., Hetherington, S.E., 1998. Effects of leaf: fruit ratios on fruit growth, mineral concentration and quality of mango (Mangifera indica L. cv. Kensington pride). J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 73, 367–374. Singh, R.R., 1975. Effect of foliar spray of urea and superphosphate on the physico chemical composition of mango (Mangifera indica L.) fruits of cultivar ‘Chausa’. South Indian Hortic. 23, 126–129. Singh, R.R., 1977. Effect of various concentration of boron on growth characters and chemical composition of leaves of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. ‘Langra’. Bangladesh Hortic. 5, 30–34. Singh, R.N., 1978. Mango: Low Priced Book Series no 3. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi, pp. 18–22. Singh, Z., Dhillon, B.S., 1987. Effect of foliar application of boron on vegetative and panicle growth, sex expression, fruit retention and physicochemical characters of fruits of mango (Mangifera indica L.) cv. ‘Dashehari’. Trop. Agric. 64, 305–308. Singh, R.R., Rajput, C.B.S., 1976. Effect of various concentrations of zinc on vegetative growth, characters, flowering, fruiting and physiochemical composition of fruits in mango. Haryana J. Hortic. Sci. 5, 10–15. Singh, R.N., Rathore, V.S., 1983. Changes in moisture content, dry matter accumulation, chlorophyll and nutrients in mango malformation. Indian J. Hortic. 40, 21–25. Singh, U.R., Tripathi, J.S., 1978. Effect of foliar spray of potassium nitrate and sodium dihydrogen orthophosphate on physico-chemical quality of mango fruits. Punjab Hortic. J. 18, 39–40. Singh, L.S., Singh, S.M., Nirvan, R.S., 1961. Studies on mango malformation review, symptoms, extent, intensity and cause. Hortic. Adv. 5, 197–207. Singh, K.K., Grewal, J.S., Jawanda, J.S., 1962. Improved practices for citrus and mango. Punjab Hortic. J. 1, 135–140. Singh, R.L., Singh, B., Singh, R., 1979. Effect of foliar application of urea on the chemical composition of mango (Mangifera indica L.) fruits of cv. ‘Langra’. Plant Sci. 11, 94–95. Singh, D.S., Pathak, P.A., Singh, R.D., 1983. Studies on control of malformation of mango cv. Bombay green. Punjab Hortic. J. 23, 220–221. Singh, Z., Dhillon, B.S., Arora, C.L., 1991. Nutrient levels in malformed and healthy tissue of mango (Mangifera indica L.). Plant Sci. 133, 9–15. Singh, B.P., Tandon, D.K., Kalra, S.K., 1993. Changes in post-harvest quality of mangoes affected by pre-harvest application of calcium salts. Sci. Hortic. 54, 211–219. Singh, V.K., Saini, J.P., Misra, A.K., 1998. Changes in ammonia assimilating enzymes associated with floral malformation in mango. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 71. Singh, V.K., Ram, R.A., Garg, N., Pathak, R.K., 2004. Influence of organics on biophysical parameters and quality production of mango. In: National Conference on Role of Bio-pesticides, Bio-agents and Biofertilizers for Sustainable Agriculture and Horticulture, February 13–16, 2004, Lucknow, India, p. 101. Srivastava, R.P., 1963. The black-tip disease of mango. Cause and control. Punjab Hortic. J. 5, 226–228. Srivastava, A.K., 2013a. Recent developments in diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in acid lime. J. Agric. Sci. 2, 86–96. Srivastava, A.K., 2013b. Nutrientmanagement in Nagpur mandarin: frontier developments. J. Agric. Sci. 2, 1–14. Srivastava, A.K., 2013c. Nutrient deficiency symptomology in citrus: an effective diagnostic tool or just an aid for post-mortem analysis. Agri. Adv. 2 (1), 77–94. Srivastava, A.K., 2013d. Nutrient diagnostics in citrus: are they applicable to current season crop. Agrotechnology 2, 104–105. https://doi.org/ 10.4172/2168P-9881.1000e104. Srivastava, A.K., Singh, S., 2004. Zinc nutrition, a global concern for sustainable citrus production. J. Sustain. Agri. 25, 5–42. Srivastava, A.K., Singh, S., Huchche, A.D., Ram, L., 2001. Yield based leaf and soil test interpretations for Nagpur mandarin in Central India. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 32, 585–599.

650

43. Diagnosis and management of nutrient constraints in mango

Srivastava, A.K., Singh, S., Tiwari, K.N., 2006. Site specific nutrient management for Nagpur mandarin (Citrus reticulata Blanco). Better Crops 88, 22–25. Srivastava, A.K., Das, S.N., Malhotra, S.K., Kaushik, M., 2014. SSNM-based rationale of fertilizer uses in perennial crops: a review. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 84, 3–17. Sujatha, S., Reddy, N.N., 2006. Economic feasibility of drip irrigation and nutrient management in mango (Mangifera Indica L). Indian J. Agric. Sci. 76 (5), 312–314. Sukhada, M., 1998. Inoculation response of mango to VAM fungi in glass house and field trials. In: National Symposium on Mango Production and Export, 25–27 June, ICAR-C.I.S.H., Lucknow, India, p. 21. Tandon, H.L.S., 1987. Fertilizer Recommendations for Horticultural Crop in India: A Guide Book. Fertilizer Development and Consultation Organization, New Delhi. Thakur, R.S., Samra, J.S., Chadha, K.L., 1980. Assessment of micro-nutrient status in the foliage of mango trees around Malihabad, Lucknow, India. Indian J. Hortic. 37, 120–123. Thakur, R.S., Rao, G.S.P., Chadha, K.L., Samra, J.S., 1981a. Variation in mineral composition of mango leaves as contributed by leaf sampling factors. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 12, 331–341. Thakur, R.S., Samra, J.S., Chadha, K.L., 1981b. The nutrient levels in fruiting and non-fruiting terminals of three mango cultivars. Sci. Hortic. 15, 355–361. Uriu, K., Carlson, R.M., Henderson, D.W., Schulbach, H., Aldrich, T.M., 1980. Potassium fertilization of prune trees under drip irrigation. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 105, 508–510. USDA—National Nutriment database, 2019. http://nhb.gov.in/pdf/fruits/mango/man003.pdf. Varma, A., 1983. Mango malformation. In: Singh, K.G. (Ed.), Exotic Plant Quarantine Pests and Procedures for Introduction of Plant Materials. Asian Plant Quarantine Centre and Training Institutes, Serdang, Malaysia, pp. 173–188. Varma, A., Lele, V.C., Raychaudhuri, S.P., Ram, A., Sang, A., 1974. Mango malformation: a fungal disease. Phytopathol. J. 79, 254–257. Watt, G., 1891. A Dictionary of Economic Products of India vol. 5. Govt. Printing Press, Calcutta, p. 149. Young, T.W., 1957. ’Soft-nose’, a physiological disorder in mango fruits. Proc. Florida State Hortic. Soc. 70, 280–283.

Further reading Ali, A.M., 2018. Nutrient sufficiency ranges in mango using boundary-line approach and compositional nutrient diagnosis norms in El-Sahiya, Egypt. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 49 (2), 188–201. Bains, G., Pant, R.C., 2003. Mango malformation: etiology and preventive measures. Physiol. Mol. Biol. Plants 9, 41–61. Bhargava, B.S., Chadha, K.L., 1988. Leaf nutrient guide for fruit and plantation crops. Fert. News 33, 21–29. Hundal, H.S., Dhanwinder, S., Brar, J.S., 2005. Diagnosis and recommendation integrated system for monitoring nutrient status of mango trees in sub-mountainous area of Punjab, India. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 36, 2085–2099. Kumar, P., Rehalia, A.S., 2007. Standardization of micronutrients range in mango (Mangifera indica L.) by orchard surveys. Asian J. Hortic. 2 (1), 218–221. Raghupathi, H.B., Bhargava, B.S., 1999. Preliminary nutrient norms for ‘alphonso’ mango using diagnosis and recommendation integrated system. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 69, 648–650. Young, T.W., Koo, R.C.J., 1969. Mineral composition of Florida mango leaves. In: Florida State Horticultural Society.Florida Agricultural Experiment Station Journal Series, vol. 3368, pp. 324–328.