R. VERMA1*, D.K. MEHTA2
1Department of Seed Science and Technology, Dr Y. S. Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan, 173230, Himachal Pradesh, India
2Department of Seed Science and Technology, Dr Y. S. Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan, 173230, Himachal Pradesh, India
* Corresponding Author : vermarohitsep@gmail.com
Received : 24-08-2018 Accepted : 11-01-2019 Published : 30-01-2019
Volume : 11 Issue : 1 Pages : 1452 - 1454
Int J Microbiol Res 11.1 (2019):1452-1454
Keywords : Bell pepper, laboratory and nursery conditions, pelleting, seed quality
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India for providing financial assistance for research. Authors are also thankful to Department of Seed Science and Technology, Dr Y. S. Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan, 173230, Himachal Pradesh, India
Author Contribution : All author equally contributed
The laboratory and nursery experiments were conducted for two consecutive years (2016-17 and 2017-18) to evaluate the effect of seed pelleting on seed quality parameters of bell pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) using cv. Solan Bharpur. There were 15 different pelleting treatments used and replicated four times in the laboratory and nursery studies. The results revealed that seed pelleting significantly influenced the seed quality parameters. Maximum germination (93.87 % and 87.00 %), seedling length (10.12 cm and 11.12 cm), seedling dry weight (2.96 mg and 5.79 mg), seedling vigour index-Length (950.25 and 967.86) and seedling vigour index-Mass (278.22 and 504.13) were recorded in seed pelleted with zinc sulphate (P4) under laboratory and nursery conditions, respectively. However, the speed of germination was recorded only under nursery conditions and maximum speed of germination (38.99) was recorded in unpelleted seeds (P0).
1. Bosland P.W. (1992) Hort Technology 2, 7-10.
2. Doijode S.D. (1988) Haryana Journal of Horticultural Sciences 17, 94-96.
3. Khare D. and Bhale M.S. (2000) Scientific publishers (India), Jodhpur p. 260.
4. Gomez K.A. and Gomez K.A. (1984) John Wiley and Sons, New York. 690p.
5. Cackmak I. (2000) New Phytologist 146, 185-05.
6. Broadley M.R., White P.J., Hammond J.P., Zelko I. and Lux A. (2007) New Phytologist 173, 677-02.
7. Hall J.L. (2002) Journal of Experimental Botany 53, 1-11.
8. Kiran S.P., Paramesh R., Nishanth G.K., Channakeshava and Niranjana Kumara B. (2014) International Journal of Advances in Pharmacy, Biology and Chemistry 3, 277-81.
9. Soulange J.G. and Levantard M. (2008) African Journal of Agricultural Research 3, 725-31.
10. Anbarasan R., Srimathi P. and Vijayakumar A. (2016) Legume Research 39, 584-89.
11. Srinivasan P.S. and Naidu M.K. (1986) Philippines Journal of Crop Science 11, 47-51.
12. Patil S.B., Vyakarannahal B.S., Deshpande V.K. and Shekargouda M. (2006) Karnataka Journal Agricultural Sciences 19, 708-10.
13. Manjunath S.N., Deshpande V.K., Sridevi O., Uppar D.S., Babalad H.B. and Rao M.S.L. (2009) Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences 22, 762-64.
14. Brady N.C. (1990) New Delhi. 383p.
15. Dileepkumar A.M., Vyakaranahal B.S. and Deshpande V.K. (2009) Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences 22, 898-01.