The Investigation of Factors Influencing on Postharvest Longevity of Tuberose Cut Flower cv. Pearl on (Polianthes tuberosecv. Pearl)

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• S. jozghsemi ¹
• S. N. Mortazavi ²
• mohsen khodadadi ³

¹ Azad-university of Tehran

² Zanjan University

³ -

10.22067/jhorts4.v0i0.42732

Abstract

The Tuberose cut flower is much less longevity in postharvest. The less vase life due to stress of deficit carbohydrate and quick respiration on inflorescence. In this study, effectiveness factors, sucrose, CaCl2, Al2So4 and re-cut the stems. In current research two separate experiments were arranged as a factorial based on compeletly randomized design. The first experiment were added to all experimental units have 100 ppm Al2So4 and investigation the effect of sucrose and CaCl2 factors. In the other experiment was added in all treatments of suitable sulation that obtain from first experiment (3.5 percent Sucrose and 200 ppm CaCl2) and investigation the effect of Al2So4 and re-cut stems factors. The vase life of cut flower, relative water content(RWC), a, b and total chlorophyll content were evaluated. The results of first experiment indicated the effect of reciprocal treatment with sucrose (3.5 %) and CaCl2 (200 ppm) increased significantly on the protection of a, b and total chlorophyll content and RWC, and increased the longevity at the time 16 days about 88 percent. The result of secondry experiment showed that the third important cause of reduced longevity of tuberose cut flower high susceptibility to blockage xylem, and treatment with protection sulation containing 3.5 % sucrose and 200 ppm Al2So4 and spray 200 ppm CaCl2 and Re-cut every 48 hourse were recommended for using to dissolve problems of post harvest the Tuberose cut flower.

Keywords

• Tuberose
• Chlorophyll
• Sucrose
• Al2So4
• CaCl2

20.1001.1.20084730.1393.28.3.2.7

---

References

1- بحرانی م. و هابیلی ن. 1370. فیزیولوژی گیاهان و سلول های آن ها. انتشارات دانشگاه شهید چمران 574- 162.

2- جوکار م. و صالحی ح. 1385. تأثیر محلول های نگهدارنده مختلف بر عمر گلجایی گل بریده مریم گل درشت محلات. مجله علوم و فنون کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، 3: 308- 299.

3- ملکوتی م. و ریاضی همدانی ع. 1370. کودها و حاصل خیزی خاک. مرکز نشر دانشگاهی تهران 101- 99.

4- نواک ژ. و رودنیکی ر. 1999. انبارداری و جابه جایی گل های بریده، گیاهان سبز زینتی و گیاهان گلدانی. موسسه نشر اختر. 79- 32.

5- واعظی ع.، رسولی م. و ملکوتی م. 1382. مصرف بهینه کود روشی مناسب برای افزایش کمی و کیفی سیب در خاک های آهکی ایران. نشریه فنی. ترویجی. 145.

6- هلر ر. 1998. فیزیولوژی گیاهی. مرکز نشر دانشگاهی، جلد اول و دوم. 144- 110.

7- Anjum M., Naveed F., and Shazia A. 2001. Effect of some chemical on keeping quality and vase life tuberose-(Polianthes tuberose L.) cut flowers. Journal of Research Science, 12: 1-7.

8- Beltrano J., & Ronco M. 2006. Improved tolerance of wheat plants (Triticum aestivum L.) to drought stress and rewatering by the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus. Journal plant physiology, 5-8.

9- Dhont K., Langeslag J., and Dahlhaus B. 1991. The effect postharvest for of different growth regulators and chemical treatment used during preserving quality of chrysanthemums. Acta Horticulturae, 298: 211- 214.

10- Gawade B., Patil M., Ranpise S., and Jadhar M. 1994. Effects of different pulsing treatment on postharvest life tuberose. Journal of MAH-Agricultural University, 19: 470-471.

11- Gregory M., Reddy A.S., and Poovaiah B.W. 1988. Effect of calcium on cell wall structure, protein phosphorylation and protein profile in senescing apples. Plant Cell Physiology, 29: 565- 572.

12- Guyde C., luiz A., Fernando L., and Uliss G. 2003. Gray mold severity and vase life rose buds after pulsing with citric acid, salicylic acid, calcium sulfate, sucrose and silver thiosulfate. Fitopatologia Brasileira, 28: 380- 385.

13- Helper P.K. 2005. Calcium a central regulator of plant growth and development. Plant Cell Physiology, 17: 2142- 2155.

14- Hendry G., Chapman J., and Hall B. 1993. Methods in comparative plant ecology, A laboratory manual, 148- 152.

15- Ichimura K., and Kisamatsu A. 1999. Effects of continuous treatment with sucrose on the vase life, soluble carbohydrate concentrations, and ethylene production of cut snapdragon flowers. Journal of the Japanese Society for Horticultural Science, 68: 61 – 66.

16- Jeenbuntug J., Buanong M., and Kanlayanarat S. 2007. Study of sucrose pulsing treatment on physiological change of tuberose (polianthes tuberose) after harvest. Acta Horticulturae, 755.

17- Jing W., Danshjing C.H., Nianghui L.I., Jingming W., and Youxiong D. 2004. Effect of calcium chloride on preservation of cut flowers of gerbera hybrid. Acta Botanica Yunnanica, 26: 345- 348.

18- Ketsa S., and Kosonmethakul N. 2001. Prolonging vase life of dendrobium flowers. Acta Horticulturae, 543: 41- 46.

19- Liao L., Han L., Hung K., and Chen W. 2001. Vase life of eustoma grandiflorume is effected by aluminium sulfate. Botani Bell-Academic Science, 42: 35- 38.

20- Naidu S., and Reid M. 1998. Postharvest handling of tuberose. Acta Horticulturae, No. 261, pp. 313- 317.

21- Pun U.K., and Ichimura K. 2003. Role of sugars in senescence and biosynthesis of ethylene in cut flowers. Journal of Architectural Research Quarterly, 37: 219- 224.

22- Rutting A. 1991. Effects of wetting agents and cut flower food on the vase life cut roses. Acta Horticulturae, 298.

23- Reid M. 1996. Postharvest handling recommendation for cut tuberose, perishables handing, news letter issue, 88: 21- 22.

24- Reddy B., and Sing H. 1997. Effect of aluminium sulphate and sucrose on vase life tuberose. Journal of Mahar Agriculture University, 21: 201- 203.

25- Songlin R., and Hsiukuo M. 2005. Effect of chemical pretreatment on the senescence physiology of cut rose after dry cold storage. Agricultural Research Institute, 169- 179.

26- Vandoorn W., and Cruz P. 2000. Euidence for a wounding induced xylem occlusion in stems of cut chrysanthemum flowers. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 19- 73.

27- Van-Leperen W., Nijsse J., Keijzer C., and Van -Meeteren U. 2001. Induction of air ambolism in xylem conduits predefined diameter. Juornal of Experimental Botany, 52: 981 – 991.