Influence of container, potting media and nutrients on production and post-production consumer acceptance of potted marigold (Tagetes patula L.)

Production of potted plants is influenced by factors viz., type of container, potting medium, nutrient dose. A study was conducted to standardize these factors for potted French marigold var. Arka Pari. The treatments comprised of two type of containers (plastic and coir), three potting media [red s...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of Horticultural Sciences (Online) 2023-06, Vol.18 (1), p.113-121
Hauptverfasser: Nair, S A, Smitha, G R, Kalaivanan, D
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Production of potted plants is influenced by factors viz., type of container, potting medium, nutrient dose. A study was conducted to standardize these factors for potted French marigold var. Arka Pari. The treatments comprised of two type of containers (plastic and coir), three potting media [red soil + FYM + sand (1:1:1 v/v), Arka fermented cocopeat (AFC), AFC + vermicompost (1:1 v/v)] and four nutrition concentrations (160:30:180 ppm N:P: K, 128:24:144 ppm N:P: K, 96:18:108 ppm N:P:K and 3% Jeevamrutha) laid out in factorial completely randomized design replicated thrice. Plants grown in potting media combination of Arka fermented cocopeat (AFC) + vermicompost (1:1 v/v) along with weekly application of nutrient solution (128:24:144 ppm NPK) produced maximum number of flowers plant-1 (147.61) and registered highest uptake of nitrogen (2.87 g plant-1), phosphorus (0.53 g plant-1), potassium (3.24 g plant-1), magnesium (0.85 g plant-1) and sulphur (0.21 g plant-1). Based on the attributes of the potted plants, this treatment combination also registered the highest score (81.2 on a scale of 100), willingness of the consumers to purchase (4.5 on a scale of 5), overall acceptability (2.7 on a scale of 3) and the benefit cost ratio of 1.18.
ISSN:0973-354X
2582-4899
DOI:10.24154/jhs.v18i1.2153