EFFECT OF DIFFERENT SHADENET ON GROWTH, FLOWERING, YIELD AND QUALITY OF MUSKMELON (Cucumis melo L.) CV. GMM3

G.K. SANKHALA¹, P. VERMA², B.M. NANDRE³*, J.R. VADODARIA⁴, P.C. JOSHI⁵, F.B. VANI^6
1Department of Vegetable Science, College of Horticulture, Jagudan, Sardarkrushinagar Dantiwada Agricultural University, Sardarkrushinagar, 385506, Gujarat, India
²Department of Horticulture, C.P. College of Agriculture, Sardarkrushinagar Dantiwada Agricultural University, Sardarkrushinagar, 385506, Gujarat, India
³Agricultural Research Station, Aseda, 385540, Sardarkrushinagar Dantiwada Agricultural University, Sardarkrushinagar, 385506, Gujarat, India
⁴Department of Vegetable Science, College of Horticulture, Jagudan, Sardarkrushinagar Dantiwada Agricultural University, Sardarkrushinagar, 385506, Gujarat, India
⁵Department of Horticulture, C.P. College of Agriculture, Sardarkrushinagar Dantiwada Agricultural University, Sardarkrushinagar, 385506, Gujarat, India
⁶Department of Vegetable Science, College of Horticulture, Jagudan, Sardarkrushinagar Dantiwada Agricultural University, Sardarkrushinagar, 385506, Gujarat, India
* Corresponding Author : bmnandre@gmail.com

Received : 18-02-2019     Accepted : 12-03-2019     Published : 15-03-2019
Volume : 11     Issue : 5       Pages : 7950 - 7952
Int J Agr Sci 11.5 (2019):7950-7952

Keywords : Growth, Muskmelon, Shadenet Quality and Yield
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Sardarkrushinagar Dantiwada Agricultural University, Sardarkrushinagar, 385506, Gujarat
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

A field experiment entitled “Effect of different shadenet on growth, flowering, yield and quality of muskmelon (Cucumis melo L.) cv. GMM 3” was carried out during summer-2017 at College of Horticulture, Sardarkrushinagar Dantiwada Agricultural University, Jagudan (Gujarat). In this investigation of comprising of two different growing conditions viz. 50 percent green shadenet and 50 percent white shadenet were tested in the Randomized Block Design with three replications. Treatments were evaluated on the basis of growth, flowering, yield and quality characteristics of muskmelon. The 50 percent white shadenet reported maximum vine length at 30 and 60 DAS, number of branches per plant and leaf area at 45 DAS, minimum male flower per plant, maximum female flower, percent fruit set and sex ratio, minimum days taken for initiation of flowering, yield attributes viz., number of fruits per plant, average weight of fruit, yield per plant, yield per meter square, minimum days taken from fruit set to edible maturity and also the quality parameters viz., TSS (°Brix), diameter of fruit, thickness of pulp and minimum diameter of seed cavity.

1. M. and Subbiah V. R. (2004) Proceedings of biodiversity resources management and sustainable use, 119-122.
2. Sirohi N. P. S. (2002) Abstract published in International Conference on Vegetables at Bangalore, 4(3), 162.
3. Panse V.G. and Sukhatme P.V. (1985) I.C.A.R. pub. New Delhi, 97-123.
4. Gilsha Bai E.B. and Sudha B. (2015) International Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 11, 297-300.
5. Mantur S.M., Patil H.B., Biradas D.P., Patil S.R. and Patil D.R. (2007) Karnataka Journal Agriculture Science, 20(3), 578-580.
6. Wani K.P., Singh P.K., Amin A., Mushtaq F. and Dar Z.A. (2011) Asian Journal Science and Technology, 1(4), 56-61.
7. Abu-Zahra R. and Mazen A.A. (2016) International Journal of Environmental and Sustainability, 5(1), 10-17.
8. Hashem F.A., Medany M.A., Abd El-Moniem E.M. and Abdallah M.M.F. (2011) Annals of Agricultural Science, 56, 49-55.
9. Bhatia A.K., Arora S.K., Malik T.P., Singh V.P. and Yadav S.P.S. (2007) Haryana Journal Horticulture Science, 36(1&2), 150-152.
10. Cockshull K.E., Graves C.J. and Cave C.R.J. (1992) Journal of Horticultural Science, 67, 11-24.
11. Kumar M. Sirohi H.S., Singh B., Tomar B.S. and Dwivedi P.K. (2017) Journal of Experiment Zoology Indian, 20(1), 581-585.
12. Sahu G., Aslam T., Das S.P., Gupta N.K. and Maity T.K. (2016) Journal of Crop and Weed, 12(3),31-32.
13. Sandri M.A., Andriolo J.L., Witter M. and Ross T.D. (2003) Horticulture Brasileria, 21,642-645.
14. Ganesan M. (2004) Irish Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 80, 12-16.
15. Rodriguez J.C., Cantliffe D.J. and Shaw N.L. (2006) Horticulture Science, 41(5), 1200-1205.
16. Fukuda N. and Anami Y. (2002) Acta Horticulture, 588, 111-117.
17. Patil M.A. and Bhagat A.D. (2014) International Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 7(1), 243-248.
18. Tribhuvan N.B. and Borude S.P. (2010) Thesis, Mahatma PhuleKrishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, Ahmednagar, India.
19. Anjanappa M., Venkatesha J. and Kumara S.B. (2012) Vegetable Science, 39(1), 47-50.
20. Rao Ramana K.V., Agrawal V., Chourasia L., Keshri R. and Patel G.P. (2013) International Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 9(2),602-604.
21. Singh R., Nagre D.D. and Satyendra K. (2005) International Conference on Plasticulture and Precision Farming, held at The Ashok, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi (17th Nov. to 21st Nov., 2005). Book of Abstract. 28, 45-46.
22. Dixit A. (2007) The Asian Journal of Horticulture, 2(1), 197-200.
23. Vidyadhar B., Tomar B.S., Singh B. and Kaddi G. (2014) Progressive Horticulture, 46(1), 124-132.