Seminar related to Advance production technology of gava

1. 1
Welcome….
HAPPY NEW YEAR

2. Major Guide
Dr. B. N. Satodiya
Principle & Unit Officer
Seth D. M. Polyt. in
Horticulture, Model farm,
AAU, Vadodara
Co-Guide
Dr. H. L. Dadhuk
Associate Professor
Department of Genetics &
Plant Breeding,
B.A.C.A., A.A.U., Anand
SPEAKER
Pawan Kumar Nagar
M.Sc. (Hort.) 3rd sem.
Fruit Science
Department of Horticulture
BACA, AAU, Anand 2

3. Propagation Planting Cultivars
Pruning/
Rejuvenation
Crop
regulation
Growth
regulators/
Micro-
nutrient
Post harvest
management
Conclusion
Future
thrust
Irrigation
Manure &
fertilizers

4. 4

5. 5
INTRODUCTION
 Guava is also known as the “Apple of tropics”
 It is common fruits of the tropical and sub-tropical regions
 Guava is the fourth most important fruit of India
 It is precocious and prolific bearer, having good quality with
high nutritive value, medicinal attributes
 It is used both as fresh fruit and after processing by
preparation of jelly, toffee, candy, pulp, juice, jam, guava
nectar etc.
 It is rich source of Vitamin-C (299mg/100g)
5

6. Nutritive value of guava/100g fruit
Constituents Range value
Total sugars 5.0-10.25 g
Protein 0.9-1.40 g
Crude Fat 0.10-0.70 g
Vitamin A 250 IU
Vitamin C 205-10 mg
Niacin 0.20-2.30 mg
Thiamine 0.06-0.20 mg
Riboflavin 0.04-0.20 mg
Calcium 10.50-31.80 mg
Phosphorus 21.00-39.60 mg
Iron 0.55-1.36 mg 6
Constituents Range value
Total sugars 5.0-10.25 g
Protein 0.9-1.40 g
Crude Fat 0.10-0.70 g
Vitamin A 250 IU
Vitamin C 299 mg
Niacin 0.20-2.30 mg
Thiamine 0.06-0.20 mg
Riboflavin 0.04-0.20 mg
Calcium 10.50-31.80 mg
Phosphorus 21.00-39.60 mg
Iron 0.55-1.36 mg
Nutritional value of Guava/100g fruit

7. Scenario of guava
Year 2014 – 2015
Guava
Area
(in’000 ha)
Production
(in Lakh T)
Productivity
(Mt/ha)
India 251.02 40.8 16.3
Gujarat 10.81 1.40 13.3
NHB, Database (2014-15)
7

8. Leading guava producing states
NHB, Database (2013-14)8

9. Production Statistics of guava
NHB, Database (2013-14)9

10. Guava
Propagation
Planting
Manures and
fertilizers
Irrigation
Pruning/
Rejuvenation
Crop
regulation
Growth
regulators/
Micro-nutrients
Post harvest
management
10

11.  T - budding
 Air layering
 Stooling/Mound layering
11

12. 12

13. Air layering
13

14. 14

15. Table 1: Effect of time of budding on days taken for bud sprout and growth of budded
plants of guava cv. Allahabad Safeda
Treatments
Days taken for bud
sprout
Budding success (%) Shoot length (cm) Leaves/sprout
Mid April 27.3 34.0 5.4 4.7
End April 25.6 51.3 8.3 7.3
Mid May 23.8 79.3 10.2 8.0
End May 22.3 88.0 11.2 10.3
Mid June 18.0 93.3 14.9 12.7
End June 18.3 91.3 14.9 12.7
Mid July 19.5 88.7 11.5 11.3
End July 21.3 83.0 10.0 9.0
Mid August 22.5 65.3 7.1 6.7
End August 29.9 58.3 59 4.3
Mid September 33.3 40.0 3.9 1.7
End September 36.7 19.3 1.3 1.5
C.D. (P=0.05) 2.1 8.0 1.9 1.5
Ludhiana, (Punjab) Kumar et al. (2007)15

16. Table 2: Effect of IBA, NAA and its combination on rooting in stooled shoots of
guava cv. Sardar
Treatments Rooted shoots
(%)
Number of
roots/shoot
Root length (cm) Survival (%)
IBA (5000 ppm) 93.33 37.07 6.72 41.17
IBA (7500 ppm) 96.67 46.93 8.45 75.00
IBA (10,000 ppm) 90.00 29.13 5.21 64.43
NAA (5000 ppm) 86.67 20.70 4.28 36.50
NAA (7500 ppm) 90.00 31.43 6.82 60.25
NAA (10,000 ppm) 93.33 45.10 7.32 64.25
IBA (5000 ppm) +NAA (5000 ppm) 90.00 22.30 4.37 52.32
IBA (7500 ppm)+NAA (5000 ppm) 93.33 31.43 5.22 70.00
IBA (10,000 ppm)+NAA (5000 ppm) 96.00 46.00 7.12 65.07
Control (Only lanoline paste) 40.00 7.03 2.73 10.05
C.D. (P=0.05) 9.96 11.16 1.02 11.28
Lal et al. (2007)Pantnagar, (Uttrakhand) 30 Days after stooling 16

17. Table 3: Effect of IBA concentration, time of layering and rooting media on root
parameters of guava cv. Sardar
Factor Rooting (%) Primary roots Secondary roots Length of longest
root (cm)
Root weight (g)
Fresh Dry
I0 (Control) 63.70 2.80 4.77 1.76 0.445 0.081
I1 (2000 ppm) 74.45 5.04 10.82 4.87 1.276 0.230
I2 (3000 ppm) 78.47 6.79 17.53 6.95 1.831 0.335
I3 (4000 ppm) 83.15 9.14 22.82 8.92 2.346 0.433
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.30 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.004 0.001
M1 (15 June) 71.94 4.99 12.04 4.53 1.280 0.231
M2 (15 July) 74.95 6.07 14.30 5.81 1.503 0.277
M3 (15 August) 77.94 6.77 15.61 6.53 1.641 0.302
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.41 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.006 0.001
SM 76.55 6.22 14.59 5.91 1.533 0.281
CP 73.34 5.67 13.37 5.34 1.416 0.259
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.36 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.005 0.001
Rymbai and Reddy (2010)Hyderabad, (Telangana) CP = Coco peat, SM = Sphagnum moss 17

18. Table 4: Effect of rooting media on root parameters in air-layers of guava cv. Sardar
Rooting
media
Rooting
(%)
Primary
roots
Secondary
roots
Length of
longest
root (cm)
Roots weight
(g)
Establish
-ment
(%)
Number of
leaves
(60 DAT)Dry fresh
CP 80.00 9.60 19.20 9.336 2.45 0.45 77.50 8.00
SM 82.50 9.80 20.40 10.133 2.57 0.46 79.17 13.00
CP + SM 85.00 10.80 22.40 10.78 2.72 0.51 83.33 13.83
C.D.
(P=0.05)
0.44 0.83 1.12 0.82 0.09 0.02 2.62 1.15
Hyderabad, (Telangana) Rymbai et al. (2012)
Note-75 Days after layering (CP= Coco peat, SM= Sphagnum moss)
18

19. Table 5: Effect of rooting media on rooting parameters of guava air layers cv. Sardar
Treatments
Number of
primary roots
Length of primary
roots (cm)
Number of
secondary roots
Number of
leaves
Number of side
shoots
Survival (%)
T1 - Sphagnum moss 5.67 4.34 5.00 12.33 3.66 72.22
T2 - vermi-compost 4.67 2.35 2.67 1.89 1.22 22.22
T3 - Sawdust 5.00 3.11 3.33 3.44 1.33 27.77
T4 - Coco peat 8.17 4.77 6.67 10.00 3.55 66.66
T5 - Coir pith 4.00 2.33 2.00 1.66 1.02 22.11
T6 - Sphagnum moss + vermi-compost (1:1) 5.50 4.22 4.67 7.33 2.00 38.89
T7- Sawdust + vermi-compost (1:1) 5.00 2.72 3.67 2.88 1.05 22.11
T8 – Coco peat + vermi-compost (1:1) 5.33 3.88 4.33 1.89 1.55 27.66
T9 – Coir pith + vermi-compost (1:1) 4.33 2.39 2.67 1.89 1.27 22.22
T10 - Sawdust Sphagnum motss (1:1) 5.00 3.61 3.67 5.00 1.55 38.89
T11 – Coco peat + Sphagnum moss (1:1) 5.60 4.30 4.93 7.55 2.67 41.11
T12 – Coir pith + Sphagnum moss (1:1) 4.17 2.38 2.33 1.83 1.22 24.33
T13 – Sawdust + Coco peat (1:1) 4.67 2.66 4.67 3.55 1.55 33.33
T14 – Sawdust + Coir pith (1:1) 4.33 3.44 4.67 3.88 1.44 27.66
T15 – Coco peat + Coir pith (1:1) 5.33 2.83 4.33 4.33 2.11 33.33
C.D. (P=0.05) 1.94 0.97 1.89 3.47 1.50 16.96
Naik et al. (2016)Bagalkot, (Karnataka) 19

20. 20

21. Table 6: Different spacing and density of plant/ha of guava
Planting system Spacing (m) Density of plant/ha
Low density 8 × 8 156
Medium density
6 × 6 277
High density 3 × 3 1,111
Ultra-high density
3 × 1.5 2,222
Meadow orcharding 2 × 1 5,000
Singh (2010)

22. High Density Ultra High Density
3 x 3 m 3 x 1.5 m
2 x 1 m
22

23. Advantages of HDP
Increases yield
Improves fruit quality
Reduces labour cost resulting in low cost of production
Enables mechanization of fruit crop production
It facilitates more efficient use of fertilizers, water, solar
radiation, fungicides, weedicides and pesticides

24. Table 7: Effect of different spacing on physico-chemical parameter of guava cv.
Sardar
Spacing (m) Tree height (m) Tree spread (cm) Fruit breadth
(cm)
Breadth
TSS
(ºBrix)
N-W E-W
6 x 4 4.28 5.60 5.63 6.46 9.77
6 x 5 4.58 5.82 6.10 6.67 10.31
6 x 6 4.66 5.90 6.33 6.78 10.77
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.25 0.51
Bal and Dhaliwal (2003)Ludhiana, (Punjab)
24

25. Table 8: Effect of planting density on fruit and quality characters of guava
cv. Sardar
Spacing (m x m) Fruit set (%) Yield/ha
(q)
Vitamin-C
(mg/100g pulp)
6 x 6 61.2 102.4 141.4
4 x 4 60.7 205.1 139.5
3 x 3 57.6 333.7 133.3
2.5 x 2.5 68.8 446.5 131.9
C.D. (P=0.05) 2.21 35.3 4.029
Kundu (2007)Ludhiana, (Punjab)
25

26. Table 9: Effect of different spacing on yield and quality parameters of guava cv.
Sardar
Treatment (m) Fruit weight (g) Yield (kg/plant)
T1- (2.0 x 2.0 ) 77.50 1.32
T2- (2.0 x 1.5 ) 75.40 1.25
T3- (1.5 x 1.5 ) 71.20 1.12
T4- (2.0 x 1.0 ) 73.00 1.05
T5- (1.0 x 1.5) 68.05 0.86
C.D. (P=0.05) 5.6888 0.2027
Kumawat et al. (2014)Udaipur, (Rajasthan) 26

27. 4. Shweta 5. Lalit 6. Apple color
1. Arka Mridula 2. Arka Kiran 3. Arka Rashmi

28. Varietal Improvement
Less and soft seed content for edible purpose
Less pectin content for edible purpose
More pectin content for processing
High keeping quality
Uniform ripening
28

29. Table 10: Characteristics of fruit of newly developed hybrids of guava
Hybrids/Cultivars
Fruit weight (g) Fruit length (cm) Fruit diameter (cm)
RCGH-1 154.75 6.26 6.48
Allahabad Safeda 142.63 5.98 6.15
RCGH-7 135.22 6.24 6.42
L-49 151.68 6.25 6.45
RCGH-4 175.73 6.54 6.99
Lalit 131.11 6.08 6.30
C.D. (P= 0.05) 9.70 0.25 0.31
Deshmukh et al. (2013)Umiam, (Meghalaya) 29

30. Table 11: Biochemical characteristics of newly developed hybrids of guava
Hybrids/Cultivars
TSS
(ºBrix)
Acidity
(%)
Ascorbic
acid
(mg/100g)
Total
Sugar (%)
Pectin
(%)
RCGH-1 10.83 0.50 231.86 8.07 1.33
Allahabad Safeda 10.14 0.61 182.06 6.97 0.92
RCGH-7 10.39 0.51 205.26 8.05 1.31
L-49 10.16 0.5054 195.80 7.14 0.97
RCGH-4 9.87 0.56 186.68 6.42 0.82
Lalit 9.59 0.67 168.78 6.58 1.07
C.D. (P= 0.05) 0.29 0.12 27.86 0.49 0.09
Deshmukh et al. (2013)Umiam, (Meghalaya) 30

32. For Spacing of 3.0 x 1.5 m (2,222 plants/ha); 3.0 x 3.0 m (1,111 plants/ha) and 6.0 x 3.0 m (555 plants/ha)
Year Urea (g/plant) SSP (g/plant) MOP (g/plant)
1st 182 375 100
2nd 364 750 200
3rd 546 1125 300
4th 728 1500 400
5th & Above 910 1875 500
For Spacing of 2.0 x 1.0 m (5000 plants/ha)
Year Urea (g/plant) SSP (g/plant) MOP (g/plant)
1st 90 185 50
2nd 180 370 100
3rd 270 555 150
4th 360 740 200
5th & Above 450 900 250
Nutrient requirement
Lucknow, (Uttar Pradesh) Singh (2008)32

33. Table 12: Effect of foliar application of nutrients on physico-chemical characters of guava
cv. Sardar
Nutrient Concentration
(%)
Fruit weight (g) Yield/tree (kg) TSS (ºBrix)
Ascorbic
acid
(mg/100g)
Total sugar
(%)
K2SO4 (0.5) 130 60.9 13.2 176 6.80
K2SO4 (1.0) 134 63.9 13.2 183 7.10
K2SO4 (1.5) 138 66.9 13.6 186 7.34
ZnSO4 (0.5) 128 63.0 12.4 173 6.90
ZnSO4 (1.0) 131 68.0 12.6 176 7.09
ZnSO4 (1.5) 133 68.0 12.6 182 7.15
H3BO3 (0.5) 135 68.0 12.5 177 7.04
H3BO3 (1.0) 141 71.0 13.5 173 7.00
H3BO3 (1.5) 141 73.0 13.9 185 7.37
Control 125 58.0 13.7 181 7.26
C.D. (P= 0.05) 05 5.1 0.3 10 0.35
Bhatia et al. (2001)Hisar, (Hariyana) 33

34. Table 13: Effect of N, Zn, and Mn on qualitative characteristics of guava cv. Allahabad
Safeda
Treatment (g/plant) TSS (ºBrix) Acidity (%)
Ascorbic acid
(%)
Reducing sugar
(%)
Non reducing
sugar (%)
Total sugar (%) Pectin (%)
N0 (0) 8.35 0.53 133.6 3.08 2.25 7.26 1.80
N1 (300) 9.96 0.48 159.1 3.53 2.60 7.82 1.87
N2 (600) 11.25 0.47 176.9 3.91 2.81 8.06 2.04
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.29 0.06 2.2 0.29 0.17 0.05 0.07
Zn0 (0) 8.95 0.51 141.5 3.24 2.34 7.42 1.79
Zn1(300) 9.95 0.49 159.0 3.58 2.63 7.76 1.93
Zn2 (600) 10.65 0.48 169.1 3.77 2.69 7.96 2.01
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.29 0.06 2.2 0.29 0.17 0.05 0.07
Mn0 (0) 9.09 0.51 143.5 3.27 2.41 7.49 1.79
Mn1 (300) 10.05 0.49 159.9 3.57 2.58 7.76 1.95
Mn2 (600) 10.35 0.48 166.1 3.67 2.66 7.85 1.98
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.29 0.06 0.29 0.29 0.17 0.05 0.07
Lal and Sen (2001)Jobner, (Rajasthan) 34

35. Table 14: Influence of bio-fertilizers on physico-chemical properties of guava cv. Sardar
Treatments
Fruit weight
(g)
Fruit length
(cm)
Fruit diameter
(cm)
TSS (°Brix)
Vitamin- C
(mg/100g)
Azotobactor 136.30 3.93 4.35 9.68 129.0
Azospirillum 135.30 3.85 4.03 9.25 136.0
VAM 147.00 4.15 4.58 10.10 151.8
Microphos 139.80 4.00 4.45 9.58 147.5
Phosphobacterin 154.50 4.27 4.68 9.68 149.3
Control 128.50 3.25 3.68 9.30 140.0
C.D. (P=0.05) 8.80 0.18 0.40 0.18 5.04
Dey et al. (2005)Ranchi, (Jharkhand) 35

36. Table 15: Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers on yield parameters of guava cv.
Hisar Safeda
Bhobia et al. (2006)Hisar, (Hariyana)
Treatments
Fruit
Number of
fruit/plant
Yield (kg/plant)
Length (cm)
Breadth
(cm)
T1 (Control) 6.13 6.00 245 44
T2 (100% N through Urea ) 6.73 6.90 249 56
T3 (80 % N through Urea + 20% N through FYM) 7.30 7.40 259 63
T4 (60 % N through Urea + 40% N through FYM)
7.20 7.80 282 74
T5 (40 % N through Urea + 60% N through FYM)
7.60 8.00 300 85
T6 (20 % N through Urea + 80% N through FYM)
7.30 7.60 280 62
T7 (100% N through FYM) 6.46 6.38 288 58
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.32 0.36 12 8
36

37. Table 16: Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers on biochemical parameters of guava
cv. Hisar Safeda
Bhobia et al. (2006)Hisar, (Hariyana)
Treatments TSS (ºBrix) Total sugar (%) Reducing sugar (%)
Non reducing
sugar (%)
T1 (Control) 10.2 8.10 4.25 3.85
T2 (100% N through Urea ) 10.2 8.53 4.63 3.95
T3 (80 % N through Urea + 20% N through FYM) 10.4 8.94 4.81 4.12
T4 (60 % N through Urea + 40% N through FYM) 10.8 9.46 5.14 4.32
T5 (40 % N through Urea + 60% N through FYM) 11.0 9.89 5.45 4.44
T6 (20 % N through Urea + 80% N through FYM) 10.6 9.23 5.05 4.18
T7 (100% N through FYM) 10.4 8.36 4.42 3.94
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.4 0.13 0.03 0.03
37

38. Table 17: Effect of organic treatments on yield and quality parameters of guava cv.
Allahabad Safeda
Ram et al. (2007a)Lucknow, (Uttar Pradesh)
Treatments
Fruit weight
(g)
Fruit diameter (cm)
TSS
(%)
vermi-compost 5 kg 209.33 7.07 12.20
FYM- 20 kg + vermi-wash 126.66 6.15 11.06
FYM- 20 kg + BD-500 206.00 7.07 14.13
FYM- 20 kg + CPP-500 g 212.00 7.13 14.00
FYM- 20 kg + 250 g Azospirillum 128.66 5.91 13.40
FYM- 20 kg + 250 g Azotobactor 188.66 6.96 13.66
FYM- 10 kg + 5 Kg Ceil rich 145.22 6.22 16.20
NPK (350:200:350) g 170.00 6.70 13.53
C.D. (P=0.05) 75.55 0.83 3.03
CPP = Cow Pat Pit, BD-500 = Fermented cow dung 38

39. Table 18: Effect of different integrated nutrient treatments on yield and quality
attributes of guava cv. Sardar
Ram et al. (2007b)Lucknow, (Uttar Pradesh)
Nutrient combination (g) Number of fruit/plant Yield (kg/plant) TSS (°Brix) Reducing sugar (%)
NPK (500:200:500) 845 120.71 12.50 3.25
NPK (250:100:250) + 5 kg neem cake 696 87.0 12.65 3.41
NPK (250:100:250) + 10kg FYM 592 84.50 12.47 3.12
NPK (250:100:250) + Sesbenia as green manure 698 99.80 12.21 2.35
NPK (250:100:250) + Azotobactor 700 112.00 12.25 3.54
NPK (250:100:250) + Azospirillum 985 135.45 12.25 3.23
NPK (250:100:250) + 10 kg FYM +Azospirillum 854 132.45 12.50 3.50
NPK (250:100:250) + 10 kg FYM +Azotobactor 1200 150.25 13.50 3.58
NPK (500:100:500) 685 111.20 13.00 3.50
PK (100:250) + Azotobactor 878 128.50 12.50 3.20
PK (100:250) + Azotobactor 658 115.32 11.45 3.45
Control 560 80.50 11.25 3.28
C.D. (P=0.05) 290.12 98.35 1.00 0.20
39 Azotobactor and Azospirillum @ 250 g

40. Table 19: Effect of inorganic and bio-fertilizer on yield and yield attributes of guava cv.
Sardar
Dutta et al. (2009)Mohanpur, (West Bengal)
Treatments Length of fruit (cm)
Diameter of fruit
(cm)
Weight of fruit (g)
Yield
(kg/plant)
T1 = 100%N + 100%P + Azospirillum 9.4 8.8 248.5 45.07
T2 =50%N + 100%P + Azospirillum 6.7 6.2 181.5 34.19
T3 = 100%N + 100%P + VAM 8.7 8.3 225.8 38.78
T4 = 100% N + 50%P + VAM 9.1 8.4 230.3 49.14
T5 = 100% N + 100%P + Azospirillum + VAM 9.5 8.9 255.0 51.26
T6 = 50%N + 50%P + Azospirillum + VAM 7.1 6.6 190.8 40.14
T7 = 100%N + 100%P 8.5 8.1 220.5 50.29
T8 = 50% N + 50%P 6.4 6.0 162.0 36.94
T9 (Control) 6.3 5.9 142.1 23.42
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.15 0.22 7.47 2.700
40
 100% N = 260 g N, 100% P = 320 g P, Azospirillum and VAM @ 30 g/plant

41. Table 20: Effect of NPK on yield and quality attributes of guava cv. Allahabad Safeda
Kumar et al. (2009)Bhubaneswar, (Orissa)
Treatments (g)
Number of fruit/
tree
Yield (kg/tree) Fruit size (cm) TSS (°Brix)
N1- 300 340.90 35.45 7.06 x 6.88 12.49
N2- 600 380.55 38.12 7.28 x 7.06 12.57
N3- 900 406.86 42.61 7.46 x 7.08 12.72
C.D. (P=0.05) 35.67 4.35 - NS
P1- 300 355.74 34.78 7.21 x 6.94 12.49
P2- 600 396.11 36.97 7.32 x 7.03 12.62
C.D. (P=0.05) NS NS - NS
K1- 300 342.76 36.90 7.15 x 7.02 12.44
K2- 600 377.62 41.75 7.33 x 7.13 12.63
K3- 900 412.42 45.45 7.39 x 7.18 12.88
C.D. (P=0.05) 35.67 4.35 - 0.35
Control 293.63 25.25
6.30 x 6.20
12.38
41

42. Table 21: Effect of FYM, Urea and Azotobactor on yield and yield parameters of guava cv. Sardar
Treatment Yield (kg/plant) Length (cm) Diameter (cm) Fruit weight (g)
T1 – 100% N through FYM 24.74 7.73 7.44 153.65
T2 - 75% N through FYM + 25% N through
Inorganic fertilizer
26.30 7.80 7.47 156.66
T3 - 50% N through FYM + 50% N through
In-organic fertilizer
34.16 7.97 7.60 176.60
T4 - 25% N through FYM + 75% N through
Inorganic fertilizer
36.61 8.16 7.72 188.40
T5 - 100% N through Inorganic fertilizer 32.97 7.87 7.52 170.91
T6 – Azotobactor 22.30 7.56 7.20 137.96
T7 –Azotobactor + T1 29.55 7.80 7.49 169.05
T8 –Azotobactor + T2 35.05 7.98 7.64 187.06
T9 – Azotobactor +T3 38.70 8.27 7.80 197.40
T10 – Azotobactor + T4 41.14 8.39 7.94 244.24
T11 – Azotobactor +T5 38.95 8.32 7.86 239.00
T12 - Absolute 18.86 7.34 7.15 128.17
C.D. (P=0.05) 6.27 0.13 0.12 1.33
Jammu, (Jammu & Kashmir) Sharma et al. (2013)42 Azotobactor 200 g/plant

43. Table 22: Effect of FYM, Urea and Azotobactor on biochemical parameters of guava cv. Sardar
Treatment TSS (°Brix) Total sugar (%) Reducing sugar (%)
Non- Reducing sugar
(%)
T1 – 100% N through FYM 11.89 7.59 4.46 2.98
T2 - 75% N through FYM + 25% N through
Inorganic fertilizer
12.43 7.75 4.50 3.08
T3 - 50% N through FYM + 50% N through
Inorganic fertilizer
12.62 8.08 4.66 3.25
T4 - 25% N through FYM + 75% N through
Inorganic fertilizer
12.49 7.90 4.61 3.13
T5 - 100% N through Inorganic fertilizer 12.35 7.76 4.53 3.07
T6 – Azotobactor 11.73 7.42 4.32 2.77
T7 –Azotobactor + T1 12.12 7.65 4.52 2.97
T8 –Azotobactor + T2 12.67 8.20 4.73 3.30
T9 – Azotobactor + T3 12.95 8.61 4.83 3.58
T10 – Azotobactor + T4 12.86 8.55 4.81 3.56
T11 – Azotobactor + T5 12.70 8.24 4.75 3.31
T12 - Absolute 11.58 7.10 4.23 2.73
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.03 0.10 0.02 0.07
Jammu, (Jammu & Kashmir) Sharma et al. (2013)43 Azotobactor 200 g/plant

45. Table 23: Effect of irrigation/fertigation levels on yield and yield parameters of guava
cv. Shweta
Treatments (g) Fruit weight (g) Pulp weight (g) Pulp: Seed ratio Yield (kg/plant)
I0 -(Basin) 147.63 123.05 23.53 5.29
I1 -(50%) 135.26 112.74 21.62 5.21
I2 -(75%) 160.67 135.09 24.97 5.82
I3 -(100%) 163.71 138.17 25.01 5.87
C.D. (P=0.05) 6.186 5.181 0.734 0.217
F0- (NPK 60:20:40) 150.25 125.75 23.84 5.12
F1- (NPK 30:10:10) 134.79 112.79 21.61 5.10
F2 - (NPK45:20:20) 159.79 134.15 24.73 5.96
F3 -(NPK 60:30:30) 162.43 136.37 24.95 6.01
C.D. (P=0.05) 6.186 5.181 0.734 0.217
Ramniwas et al. (2012)Udaipur, (Rajasthan) 45 Irrigation of irrigation water/cumulative pan evaporation (IW/CPE)

46. Conti….
Treatments Fruit weight (g) Pulp weight (g) Pulp: Seed ratio Yield (kg/plant)
I0F0 (Basin) + (NPK 60:20:40) 151.00 125.78 23.99 5.08
I0F1 (Basin) + (NPK 30:10:10) 135.00 112.46 21.75 5.05
I0F2 (Basin) + (NPK 45:20:20) 151.67 126.49 24.15 5.48
I0F3 (Basin) + (NPK 60:30:30) 152.83 127.46 24.21 5.57
I1F0 (50%) + (NPK 60:20:40) 135.67 113.01 21.68 5.00
I1F1 (50%) + (NPK 30:10:10) 132.33 110.23 21.35 5.09
I1F2 (50%) + (NPK 45:20:20) 136.00 113.42 21.69 5.41
I1F3 (50%) + (NPK 60:30:30) 137..06 114.31 21.75 5.34
I2F0 (75%) + (NPK 60:20:40) 155.00 129.74 24.69 5.22
I2F1 (75%) + (NPK 30:10:10) 135.83 113.69 21.74 5.16
I2F2 (75%) + (NPK 45:20:20) 174.17 147.00 26.62 6.56
I2F3 (75%) + (NPK 60:30:30) 177.67 149.95 26.83 6.53
I3F0 (100%) + (NPK 60:20:40) 159.33 134.38 24.99 5.18
I3F1 (100%) + (NPK 30:10:10) 136.00 114.78 21.60 5.10
I3F2 (100%) + (NPK 45:20:20) 177.33 149.67 26.44 6.40
I3F3 (100%) + (NPK 60:30:30) 182.17 153.75 27.02 6.59
C.D. (P=0.05) 12.371 10.362 1.467 0.434
Ramniwas et al. (2012)Udaipur, (Rajasthan) 46 Irrigation of irrigation water/cumulative pan evaporation (IW/CPE)

47. PRUNING/REJUVENATION
47

48. Rejuvenation
48

49. Table 24: Effect of pruning intensity on sprouting and yield attributes of guava cv.
Sardar
Pruning
intensity
Days to new
sprouting
Number of
fruits/shoot
Fruit length
(cm)
Fruit
breadth
(cm)
Fruit
weight (g)
Yield (kg/tree)
15 cm 9.8 3.0 6.1 5.9 137.6 104.7
30 cm 8.8 3.8 7.0 6.6 168.0 131.0
60 cm 8.0 4.0 6.8 6.5 164.2 131.8
Control 12.6 2.8 5.6 5.4 125.6 81.1
C.D.
(P=0.05)
1.2 0.8 0.3 0.3 14.5 37.5
Hisar, (Haryana) Mohammed et al (2006)Pruning from top portion in May 49

50. Table-25: Effect of time of pruning on yield and yield attributes of guava cv. Sardar
Time of pruning Number of fruits/plant) Yield (kg/plant)
March 275.25 71.58
April 290.00 78.28
May 94.25 26.38
June 29.75 6.98
July 17.75 3.70
Control (Unpruned) 196.5 37.33
C.D. (P=0.05 48.424 12.363
Basu et al. (2007)Mohanpur, (West Bengal) 50 Pruning in year 2003

51. Table 26: Effect of various pruning treatment on crop regulation of guava cv.
Allahabad Safeda
Treatments Yield (kg/tree) TSS (ºBrix)
T1 - (Heading back of current season shoot) 100.91 8.85
T2 - (Total pruning of bearing portion of current season shoot) 104.98 9.12
T3 -( Half Heading back of terminal branches to half length) 29.74 8.87
T4 - (Control no pruning) 7.78 7.45
C.D. (P=0.05) 36.03 0.77
Bahadurgarh, (Punjab) Singh et al (2007)51 Pruning at first week of May

52. Table-27: Effect of pruning on yield and quality attributes of guava cv. Sardar under
ultra high density planting system (1 x 2m)
Treatments Fruit weight (g) Yield (t/ha)
T1 - (No pruning) 108.25 19.06
T2 - (80% pruning in May) 122.32 22.56
T3 - (60% pruning in May) 119.45 20.58
T4 - (80% pruning in October) 129.94 12.11
T5 - (60% pruning in October) 130.01 9.25
T7 - (pruning three times in a year) 110.60 23.26
C.D. (P=0.05) 9.04 3.06
Mehta et al. (2012)Ranchi, (Jharkhand) 52 Thrice pruning at March, May, and October

53. Table-28: Influence of pruning intensity on yield parameters of guava cv. Sardar
Treatment
(Pruning intensity)
Duration of flowering (Days) Number of fruits Yield (kg/tree)
0-node 41 258.0 31.0
2- node 38.5 284.0 36.4
4- node 37 308.0 40.0
6- node 34 456.5 59.5
8- node 32 349.5 46.5
10- node 30.9 304.5 46.1
C.D. (P=0.05) 2.16 8.36 1.95
Singh (2012)Muktsar, (Punjab) 53 Regular pruning in first week of march from top portion

54. Table 29: Effect of various pruning intensity on fruit quality of guava cv. Sardar
Treatments (cm)
Fruit diameter
(cm)
Fruit weight
(g)
Yield
(kg/tree)
TSS
(ºBrix)
Total Sugar
(%)
No Pruning (0) 5.89 221.3 5.98 8.43 7.56
Light (7.10) 6.15 245.6 8.70 9.08 8.73
Moderate (5.86) 6.45 298.1 9.60 9.82 8.81
Severe (4.81) 7.15 300.2 11.66 10.1 9.12
Mean 6.41 266.30 8.99 9.36 8.56
Basar, (Arunachal Pradesh) Bhagwati et al (2015)54 Pruning at first week of May

55. CROP REGULATION
55

56. Crop regulation
Sr.
No.
Bahar Flowering Fruiting Quality
1. Ambe Feb. –March July – Sept. Watery, Poor
2. Mrig June – July Nov. - Jan. Excellent
3. Hast October Feb. - April Good, Yield
Low
3 Crop/year (Maharashtra and Tamilnadu)
In North India Mrig Bahar is preferred
In South India Hast Bahar is preferred
In Gujarat Mrig Bahar is preferred
56

57. Table 30: Effect of foliar application of chemicals for maximizing yield and fruit quality of guava
Treatments
Allahabad Safeda Sardar
Yield (kg/plant) Fruit weight (g) Yield (kg/plant) Fruit weight (g)
Urea (10%) 18.5 116.3 10.6 151.9
Urea (20%) 22.4 111.1 7.5 134.5
NAA (100 ppm) 24.3 108.2 11.4 145.7
NAA (200 ppm) 28.1 113.0 22.9 146.5
2,4-D (40 ppm) 27.6 109.1 9.4 143.1
2,4-D (60 ppm) 28.0 109.1 15.0 147.8
KI (1%) 27.3 115.3 17.8 161.2
KI (2%) 16.3 110.5 10.9 154.2
Control, 13.5 112.7 5.0 146.2
C.D. (P=0.05) 8.69 NS 3.29 19.7
Das et al. (2007)Ranchi, (Jharkhand)
Spray twice (mid-April and first week of May) @ 3 ltr/plant/spray
57

58. Table 31: Effect of NAA, flower bud thinning and pruning on yield and yield attributes of
guava cv. Sardar
Treatments
Number of flower
bud /branch
Number of fruit set
/branch
Yield (kg/tree)
T1- NAA @ 600ppm 38.00 30.75 65.00
T2- NAA @ 800ppm 42.00 32.25 84.00
T3- Flower bud thinning 30.00 24.50 76.00
T4- One leaf pair pruning 43.00 36.00 88.00
T5- Two leaf pair pruning 33.00 27.25 61.00
T6- Control 3.50 2.77 4.50
C.D. (P=0.05) 7.94 5.42 8.27
Pantnagar, (Uttrakhand) Tiwari and Lal (2007)58Spray at 1st week of May

59. Growth regulators/
Micro-nutrients
59

60. Table 32: Effect of growth regulators on physico-chemical attributes of guava cv. Sardar
Growth regulator (ppm) Fruit weight(g) Yield/tree (kg) Ascorbic acid (mg/100g) Total sugar (%)
NAA @ 20 132 64.6 188 6.70
NAA @ 40 142 68.0 189 6.76
NAA @ 60 143 71.0 191 6.80
Mean 139 67.8 189 6.75
GA3 @ 50 138 61.0 178 6.61
GA3 @ 100 140 66.0 178 6.71
GA3 @ 150 142 68.0 180 6.72
Mean 140 65.0 179 6.68
Ethrel @ 50 119 47.4 175 7.08
Ethrel @ 100 117 46.2 173 7.05
Ethrel @ 150 116 46.0 174 7.05
Mean 117 46.5 174 7.04
Control 124 58.0 165 6.21
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.5 4.7 10 0.38
Hisar, (Haryana) Yadav et al (2001)Spray at 9th November (15 yr old) 60

61. Table 33: Effect of nutrients and plant growth regulators on physico-chemical composition of
guava cv. Sardar
Treatments Reducing sugar (%) TSS (°Brix) Total sugar (%)
T1 Urea 4.25 10.20 6.94
T2 K2SO4 4.32 10.85 7.25
T3 Zinc 4.30 10.35 7.18
T4 NAA 4.30 10.55 7.21
T5 GA3 3.48 9.75 6.42
T6 Urea + K2SO4 3.89 9.25 6.74
T7 Urea + Zinc 3.92 9.40 6.78
T8 Urea + K2SO4 + Zinc 3.90 9.80 6.82
T9 Urea + NAA 3.95 10.40 7.00
T10 Urea + K2SO4 + NAA 3.90 3.90 6.92
T11 Urea + K2SO4 + NAA + Zinc 3.99 10.60 7.18
T12 Urea + GA3 3.12 9.75 6.00
T13 Urea + K2SO4 + GA3 3.37 9.85 5.99
T14 Urea + K2SO4 + Zinc + GA3 3.42 9.90 6.12
T15 Control 3.32 8.55 5.95
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.17 1.52 0.75
Dutta and Banik (2007)Mohanpur, (West Bengal)
Urea= 1%, K2SO4=1%, Zinc=0.1%, GA3=50ppm, NAA=50ppm 1st spray at flowering, 2nd at fruit setting and 3rd at 3 week after fruit setting.
61

62. Conti….
Treatments Yield (kg/plant) Acidity (%) Ascorbic acid (mg/100g)
T1 Urea 52.12 0.44 124.43
T2 K2SO4 44.39 0.49 128.19
T3 Zinc 47.27 0.48 128.54
T4 NAA 45.28 0.39 134.44
T5 GA3 42.37 0.49 128.22
T6 Urea + K2SO4 54.12 0.46 129.10
T7 Urea + Zinc 53.74 0.52 121.00
T8 Urea + K2SO4 + Zinc 54.22 0.43 125.16
T9 Urea + NAA 54.00 0.42 125.00
T10 Urea + K2SO4 + NAA 54.42 0.48 125.12
T11 Urea + K2SO4 + NAA + Zinc 59.28 0.39 135.42
T12 Urea + GA3 54.22 0.42 127.10
T13 Urea + K2SO4 + GA3 54.38 0.48 129.42
T14 Urea + K2SO4 + Zinc + GA3 54.85 0.59 119.10
T15 Control 43.25 0.62 118.28
C.D. (P=0.05) 9.25 0.11 6.92
Dutta and Banik (2007)Mohanpur, (West Bengal)
Urea= 1%, K2SO4=1%, Zinc=0.1%, GA3=50ppm, NAA=50ppm 1st spray at flowering, 2nd at fruit setting and 3rd at 3 week after fruit setting
62

63. Table-34: Effect of pre-harvest application of micro-nutrient for maximizing yield and fruit
quality of guava cv. Allahabad Safeda
Treatments TSS (°Brix) Reducing sugar (%) Total sugar (%)
Ascorbic acid
(mg/100g)
Zinc Sulphate (0.2%) 11.12 4.60 7.88 218.20
Zinc Sulphate (0.4%) 11.52 4.70 8.34 223.61
Calcium nitrate(1.0%) 11.32 4.44 7.75 210.88
Calcium nitrate(2.0%) 10.64 4.39 7.49 207.03
Borax (0.2%) 10.04 4.21 6.99 197.31
Borax (0.4%) 10.40 4.31 7.24 203.99
Control 9.64 4.03 5.98 182.10
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.174 0.065 0.072 1.337
Singh et al. (2007)Lucknow, (Uttar Pradesh) Spray at 20 days before harvest @ 5 ltr/tree 63

64. Table 35: Effect of pre-harvest application of nutrient and growth regulators on physico-
chemical attributes of guava cv. Sardar
Treatments Fruit weight (g) TSS (ºBrix) vitamin-C (mg/100g) Total Sugar (%)
KNO3 (0.5%) 131.5 10.4 140.5 7.38
KNO3 (1.0%) 133.3 10.7 145.8 7.55
KNO3 (1.5%) 135.4 10.8 148.6 7.80
SADH (20 ppm) 124.1 10.2 136.4 7.31
SADH (30 ppm) 124.8 10.2 135.9 7.33
SADH (40 ppm) 126.1 10.3 138.1 7.33
Ethephon 300 ppm 120.2 10.8 142.3 7.65
Ethephon 400 ppm 120.8 11.1 149.8 7.98
Ethephon 500 ppm 118.6 11.0 146.8 7.54
Control 122.7 10.1 135.2 7.29
C.D. (P=0.05) 3.6 0.5 9.8 0.3
Ludhiana, (Punjab) Gill and Bal (2010)Spray at first week of December (5 yr old) 64

65. Post Harvest Management
65

66. Table 36: Effect of different doses of gamma radiation and chemicals on chemical
composition of guava fruits
Treatments TSS (ºBrix) Acidity (%)
Vitamin-C
(mg/100g)
Reducing
sugar (%)
Non-reducing
(%)
Total sugar
(%)
Marketable
fruits (%)
Control 12.8 0.14 192.6 4.3 4.0 8.3 8.00
50 Gy 13.0 0.12 199.2 4.3 4.0 8.3 53.84
100 Gy 13.6 0.12 204.8 5.0 4.6 9.6 57.14
200 Gy 12.8 0.24 203.2 4.8 4.3 9.1 24.0
300 Gy 13.6 0.25 201.6 4.3 4.0 8.3 2.66
1 KGy 12.3 0.25 190.6 4.4 4.2 8.6 0.00
2 KGy 12.6 0.24 178.9 4.0 4.0 8.0 0.00
3 KGy 11.3 0.24 164.0 3.9 3.4 7.3 0.00
C.D.
(P=0.05)
0.84 0.2 24.1 0.4 0.4 0.5 -
Jabalpur, (Madhya Pradesh) Baghel et al. (2005)Observation recorded at 12 Days after storage 66

67. Table 37: Effect of pre-harvest application of calcium compounds on bio-chemical
composition of guava cv. Sardar
Treatments TSS (ºBrix) Reducing sugar (%) Pectin (%) Shelf-life (Days)
CaCl2 0.5% 11.60 2.82 0.30 8.67
CaCl2 1.0% 11.57 3.07 0.37 9.00
Ca(NO3) 2 0.5% 12.90 3.24 0.47 10.00
Ca(NO3) 2 1.0% 13.03 3.55 0.51 11.67
CaSO4 0.5% 11.53 2.15 0.30 7.33
CaSO4 1.0% 11.60 2.23 0.30 7.67
Control 9.77 1.80 0.21 7.00
C.D. (P=0.05) 0.66 0.22 0.023 1.80
Hyderabad, (Andhra Pradesh) Jayachandran et al. (2005)
Spray at 15 days before harvest (15 year old) and observation recorded at 9th day after storage
67

68. Table 38: Effect of different doses of gamma radiation on chemical composition of
guava fruits
Treatments PLW (%)
Marketable fruit
retained (%)
TSS (ºBrix)
vitamin-C
(mg/100g)
Total sugar (%)
Control 27.7 13.3 13.1 190.0 7.2
50Gy 29.1 36.6 14.0 195.3 8.1
100Gy 24.7 53.3 14.3 201.3 9.4
200Gy 28.8 26.6 11.3 176.3 6.9
250Gy 29.6 20.0 11.1 165.6 6.1
CC-250ppm 24.4 50.0 15.2 194.0 8.6
CC-500ppm 22.9 60.0 15.8 201.0 9.0
CC-750ppm 24.0 40.0 14.7 192.6 9.0
MH-250ppm 24.8 30.0 14.8 200.3 9.2
MH-500ppm 25.9 43.3 15.4 201.7 9.4
MH-750ppm 29.7 23.3 14.2 187.7 9.4
Mustard oil 17.3 60.0 15.1 193.0 9.3
Coconut oil 7.1 100.0 16.1 195.0 10.0
Liquid paraffin 14.1 83.4 15.1 194.7 9.4
C.D. (P=0.05) 3.28 - 0.47 4.07 0.46
Pandey et al. (2010)Jabalpur, (Madhya Pradesh) 68Observation recorded at 12 Days after storage

69. Conclusion
Propagation  Air layering with treatment of IBA @ 4000 ppm with combination of
rooting media Coco peat/Sphagnum moss found better for rooting
Planting  HDP at 2.5 x 2.5 or 2.0 x 2.0 m gave more yield with better quality fruits
Manures and fertilizers  Integrated nutrient management produce the highest yield with better quality
fruits
Irrigation  Irrigation 100 % IW/CPE with NPK (60:30:30 g) combination found better for
quality characters
Pruning/Rejuvenation  Pruning intensity 60 cm and April is as time of pruning found better for quality
production
Crop regulation  One leaf pair pruning and spraying of KI @ 1 % or NAA @ 200 ppm produce
highest yield
Growth regulators/micro-nutrients  Spraying of NAA @ 60 ppm, urea @ 1%, K2SO4 @ 1%, GA3 @ 50ppm,
ethephon @ 400 ppm and ZnSO4 @ 0.4 % found better for quality parameters
Post-harvest management  Spraying of Ca(NO3) 2 1.0% and fruit treatment with 100 Gy, Coconut oil found
better for increasing shelf-life and fruit quality
69

70. Future thrust
Crop Improvement-
 Need to develop variety having less and soft seed as well as
seedless cultivar
 Need to develop High yielding, early bearing having good quality,
high keeping quality and insect-pest and disease resistant
varieties
 Need to develop dwarfing rootstock for high density planting
Crop production-
 Need to Standardization of training and pruning practices for HDP
Post-harvest technology-
 Need to Standardization of packaging techniques and Post harvest
techniques
70

71. for
Your
Attention
Your right is to work
only,
but never with its
fruits;
let not the fruits of
actions
be your motive,
nor let your
attachment
be to inaction
--The Great Geeta