Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.12791/KSBEC.2014.23.4.376

Growth and Yield Variations among Generations in Field Cultivation of Virus-free Sweet Potato Plants  

Lee, Seung Yeob (Institute of Life Science and Natural Resources, Wonkwang University)
Lee, Na Ra (Institute of Life Science and Natural Resources, Wonkwang University)
Publication Information
Journal of Bio-Environment Control / v.23, no.4, 2014 , pp. 376-382 More about this Journal
Abstract
This work was conducted to investigate the variation of growth and yield among three generations ($TC_0$, $TC_1$, and $TC_2$) in the field cultivation of virus-free sweetpotato (Ipomoea batatas) plants. Virus-free generations of three cultivars ('Matnami', 'Shinhwangmi', and 'Yeonhwangmi') were cultivated with $75{\times}25cm$ planting density on May 20th, covered with black vinyl film. At 30 days after planting, vine growth in $TC_0$, $TC_1$, and $TC_2$ was significantly increased as compared to the farmer's plant, and vine length in $TC_0$ showed the highest growth among treatments. At harvesting time after 120 days, vine diameter, number of node, and number of branch in $TC_0$, $TC_1$, and $TC_2$ were more increased than farmer's plant, but were not statistically significant. Fresh weight of shoot in $TC_0$, $TC_1$, and $TC_2$ was significantly increased as compared to the farmer's plant, but was not statistically significant among generations or cultivars. Number of tuber per plant and mean weight of tuber in $TC_0$ and $TC_1$ showed significant increasement, but that in $TC_2$ did not show significant difference as compared to the farmer's plant. Weight of tuber per plant in $TC_0$, $TC_1$, and $TC_2$ was significantly increased as compared to the farmer's plant. Marketable yield, percentage of marketable tuber, and percentage of small tuber (40 to 200g) in $TC_0$, $TC_1$, and $TC_2$ was significantly increased as compared to the farmer's plant. The large tuber over 300g showed the lowest percentage in $TC_0$. Marketable yield in $TC_2$ was significantly decreased as compared to $TC_0$, and was not significantly different as compared to the farmer's plant. Marketable yield in 'Matnami' was highest among cultivars. From this results, Farmers are required to renew every three years to maintain the yield and quality of virus-free plants. However, the exchange period of virus-free plants is desirable to renew every 2 or 3 years according to the degree of virus reinfection.
Keywords
marketable yield; small tuber; tuber weight; vine growth;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Lee, S.Y., T.H. Kim, N.R. Lee, E.J. Lee, and J.H. Bae. 2010. Effects of cutting size and planting depth on growth and yield in late-cultivation of sweet potato. J. Bio-Env. Con. 19:153-158.
2 Ling, K.S., D.M. Jackson, H. Harrison, A.M. Simmons, and Z. Pesic-Van Esbroeck. 2010. Field evaluation of yield effects on the USA heirloom sweetpotato cultivars infected by Sweet potato leaf curl virus. Crop Protection 29:757-765.   DOI
3 Matimati, I., E. Hungwe, and F.S. Murungu. 2005. Vegetative growth and tuber yields of micropropagated and farmretained sweet potato (Ipomea batatas) cultivars. Journal of Agronomy 4:156-160.   DOI
4 Song, H.A., K.C. Kim, and S.Y. Lee. 2012. Effect of virus-free plant and subsoiling reversion soil for reduction of injury by continuous cropping of sweet potato. Kor. J. Crop Sci. 57:254-261.   DOI
5 Tairo. F., S.B. Mukasa, R.A.C. Jones, A. Kullaya, P.R. Rubaihayo, and J.P.T. Valkonen. 2005. Unravelling the genetic diversity of the three main viruses involved in sweet potato virus disease (SPVD), and its practical implications. Molecular Plant Pathology 6:199-211.   DOI
6 Teow, C.C., V. Truong, R.F. McFeeters, R.L. Thompson, K.V. Pecota, and G.C. Yencho. 2007. Antioxidant activities, phenolic and $\beta$-carotene contents of sweet potato genotypes with varying flesh colours. Food Chem. 103:829-838.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Untiveros, M., S. Fuentes, and L.F. Salazar. 2007. Synergistic interaction of sweet potato chlorotic stunt virus (Crinivirus) with carla-, cucumo-, ipomo-, and potyviruses infecting sweet potato. Plant Dis. 91:669-676.   DOI
8 Valverde, R.A., C.A. Clark, and J.P.T. Valkonen. 2007. Viruses and virus disease complexes of sweetpotato. Plant Viruses 1:116-126.
9 Villordon, A., D.R. LaBonte, N. Firon, Y. Kfir, E. Pressman, and A. Schwartz. 2009. Characterization of adventitious root development in sweetpotato. HortScience 44:651-655.
10 Wang, Q., L. Zhang, B. Wang, Z. Yin, C. Feng, and Q. Wang. 2010. Sweetpotato viruses in China. Crop Protection 29:110-114.   DOI
11 Yang, C. L., Y. F. Shang, J. H. Zhao, and C. S. Li. 1998. Produce techniques and practice of virus-free sweetpotato. Acta Phytophylac. Sin. 25:51-55.
12 Yi, E.S., Y.S. Lee, H.D. Kim, S.T. Yoon, D.J. Lee. 2007. Effects of soil compacting and PE film mulching on growth and yield in sweet potato "Keumshi" and "Shinyulmee". Korean J. Intl. Agri. 19:43-48.
13 Yoo K.R. and S.Y. Lee. 2013. Growth characteristics and yield of sweet potato cultivars between virus-free and farmer's slips in late season cultivation. Kor. J. Crop Sci. 58:43-49.   DOI
14 Carrolla, H.W., A.Q. Villordonc, C.A. Clarkb, D.R. La Bontea, and M.W. Hoya. 2004. Studies on Beauregard sweetpotato clones naturally infected with viruses. Int. J. Pest Manag. 50:101-106.   DOI
15 Clark, C,A., J.A. Davis, J.A. Abad, W.J. C. Fuentes, J.F. Kreuze, R.W. Gibson, S.B. Mukasa, A.K. Tugume, F.D. Tairo, and J.P.T. Valkonen. 2012. Sweetpotato viruses: 15 years of progress on understanding and managing complex diseases. Plant Disease 96:168-185.   DOI
16 Fuglie, K.O., L. Zhang, L.F. Salazar, and T.S. Walker. 1999. Economic impact of virus-free sweetpotato planting material in Shandong province, China. In: Impact on a Changing World. CIP program report 1997-98. CIP, Rima, Peru. pp. 249-254.
17 Clark, C.A. and M.W. Hoy. 2006. Effects of common viruses on yield and quality of Beauregard sweetpotato in Louisiana. Plant Dis. 90:83-88.   DOI
18 Clark, C.A. and R.A. Valverde. 2000. Identifying the role of viruses in sweet potato cultivar decline in Louisiana, USA. in: Int. Workshop Sweetpotato Cultivar Decline Study. Y. Nakasawa and K. Ishiguro, eds. Miyakonojo, Japan. pp. 62-69.
19 Chung M.N. 2008. A study on the virus detection methods and virus-free plant mass production in sweetpotato. Ph.D. Diss. Chonnam National University, Gwangju, Korea. p. 1-80.
20 Gibson, R.W., I. Mpembe, T. Alicai, E.E. Carey, R.O.M. Mwanga, S.E. Seal, and H.J. Vetten. 1998. Symptoms, aetiology and serological analysis of sweet potato virus disease in Uganda. Plant Pathol. 47:95-102.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Gibson R.W., R.O. M. Mwanga, S. Kasule, I. Mpembe, and E.E. Carey. 1997. Apparent absence of viruses in most symptomless field grown sweet potato in Uganda. Ann. Appl. Biol. 130:481-490.   DOI
22 Gutierrez, D.L., S. Fuentes, and L. Salazar. 2003. Sweetpotato virus disease (SPVD): distribution, incidence, and effect on sweetpotato yield in Peru. Plant Dis. 87:297-302.   DOI
23 Kano, Y. and R. Nagata. 1999. Comparison of the rooting ability of virus infected and virus-free cuttings of sweet potatoes (Ipomoea batatas Poir.) and an anatomical comparison of roots. J. Hort. Sci. Biotechnol. 74:785-790.
24 Karyeija, R.F., R.W. Gibson, and J.P.T. Valkonen. 1998. The significance of sweetpotato feathery mottle virus in subsistence sweetpotato production in Africa. Plant Dis. 82:4-15.   DOI
25 Kim, H.S., J.S. Lee, Y.H. Moon, J.K. Bang. 2005. Effect of cultivation conditions on produce small-sized sweetpotato for snacks. Kor. J. Crop Sci. 50(Suppl. 2):148-149.
26 KOSIS (Korean Statistical Information Service). 2012. http://kosis.kr/