See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/299457239

Sucker production in banana

Article  in  Journal of Tropical Agriculture · December 2015

CITATIONS READS

4 5,171

2 authors:

Siddhesh Bhende Sajan Kurien

UAHS, Shivamogga Kerala Agricultural University.RARS.Kumarakom
24 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS    9 PUBLICATIONS   8 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Niche area of excellence for mango View project

Kasthuric Turmeric View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Siddhesh Bhende on 28 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Tropical Agriculture 53 (2) : 97-106, 2015 97

Review paper
Sucker production in banana

Siddhesh Shamrao Bhende1 and Sajan Kurien2*

1
Department of Pomology & Floriculture, College of Horticulture, Vellanikkara, Thrissur - 680 656, Kerala, India
2
Directorate of Research, Kerala Agricultural University, Vellanikkara, Thrissur - 680 656, Kerala, India

Received 6 August 2015; received in revised form 12 November 2015; accepted 22 December 2015

Abstract
Quality planting material is the key to successful cultivation of all crops. Sucker is the primary and major source of
propagation material in banana. Continuity of the production process can be maintained only by balancing good bunch
yield and optimum number of quality suckers. The research work on the initiation and the development of suckers
indicated that its genesis could be in the cortex part of the mother corm. Both internal factors (ploidy levels, genomic
constitution etc.) and external factors (planting seasons, depth, spacing etc.) affect the sucker production. Sucker production
increases with decrease in ploidy levels and with increase in M. balbisiana genomic group in the genomic constitution
of the particular clone. Intra-clonal variability in suckering habit of different banana clones is much clear. Physical
methods of sucker activation techniques like goose necking, mattocking, decapitation, false decapitation are reported to
enhance the sucker production. Influences of mattocking on translocation of nutrients from mother plant to daughter
suckers at various physiological stages of the mother plant and under the different systems of planting have been explored
by many scientists. Cultural methods (like Ascenso’s method, use of different organic manures, biofertilizers, fertilizers,
micronutrients etc.) and hormonal methods (application of ethrel, GA3, Pachlobutrazol, BA and IAA etc.) were found to
be effective. Newer techniques like split corm, split bud, minisetting, PIF etc. can also be useful in salvaging
underdeveloped suckers.

Key words: Quality suckers, Factors, Ploidy levels, Genomic constitution, Intra-clonal variability, Sucker activation
techniques, Mattocking

Introduction

Studies solely focused on sucker production in pests, diseases and at the same time sustains high
banana are meager. They have mostly been recorded bunch yield. Simmonds (1960) observed three
as a concomitant aspect of other studies. Several distinct stages in the course of sucker development
types of planting materials are being used in banana namely the peeper, the sword and maiden sucker.
and innumerable reports exists on yield as a function
of quality planting material like the comparison of Sucker: as a quality planting material
different planting materials, the influence of age,
size and weight of planting materials on yield. The banana is genetically old, decrepit and the fruit
Propagation techniques in banana can broadly be is a sterile, seedless mutant and therein lies a major
classified into macropropagation and problem. Monocropping of a single clone (as in
micropropagation or as conventional and in vitro recent past with Grand Naine) makes banana ripe
(tissue culture) methods. for disease infestation like no other crop in the
world, as evidenced in the historic case of Latin
Ideally, a good sucker is one that possesses the American Gros Michel (Pearce, 2008). Thus, there
potential for vigorous growth, free from inherent is urgent need to provide alternative varieties with
*Author for correspondences: Phone-0487-2438101; E-mail: [email protected]
Sucker production in banana 98

potential for export. Number of native varieties has rhizome and corm together. Few others have also
high export and domestic potential, but they are on used the term ‘bulb’. Simmonds (1987) botanically
the brink of extinction primarily due to non- described the banana stem as a ‘short rhizome’
availability of the planting material (Bohra et al., which is nowadays mostly accepted.
2013). In many cultivars, particularly the heavy
suckering types, sucker affects plant growth and The rhizome has extremely short internodes covered
bunch yield. Under the conventional production externally by closely-packed leaf scars. Internally,
system the aim is always to balance good yield and it is differentiated into the central cylinder and cortex
assured finger quality with an optimum number of whereas, the ground tissue is starchy parenchyma.
quality suckers. Thus, the rhizome is an important storage organ for
sustaining growth of the bunch and the developing
The advantages of propagation through suckers are sucker. Analysis of literature available on the sucker
mainly the low planting material cost, easy origin reveals that there is no much work on the
availability, lesser input requirements, scope for initiation and development of corm except that of a
immediate planting in the field, higher longevity of passing mention about its genesis could be in the
plants, less prone plants to physical damages and cortex part of the corm (Simmonds, 1960).
easiness in conserving native and rare varieties Externally they are first observed as ‘eye’ or ‘buds’
(Simmonds, 1962 and Swennen et al., 1984). on the corm.

Rhizome and suckers: a closer look at the origin of Factors governing sucker production
suckers Factors influencing the sucker production can
The true stem of the banana plant is either partly or broadly be categorised under the major heads as
wholly underground, and hence is often technically internal and external.
referred as a ‘tuberous rhizome’. Bananas do not
have extended horizontal growth like most Internal
rhizomatous crops but, nevertheless, suckers grow Ploidy level
successively outwards. Suckers themselves make In banana, ploidy levels reported are diploid (2n),
small initial horizontal growth before they turns triploid (3n) and tetraploid (4n). Turner (1972)
upwards. Thus, there is much misunderstanding here observed early suckering in diploid and triploid
because the term ‘corm’ is being used in common bananas which attributed to the early development
parlance, whereas others have used both the terms of lateral buds. This because of the high nutrient
availability from the mother plants to daughter
suckers. Sucker production was indirectly
proportional to the level of ploidy (Balakrishnan,
1980). Alagiamanvalan (1979) reported that the
diploid Anaikomban (AA) within M. accuminata
group produced more suckers.

Blomme et al. (2000) reported that all diploid

bananas had a non-regulating suckering behaviour
(i.e. all suckers grow vigorously), while triploids
and tetraploids had a regulated (i.e. 2 or 3 suckers
grow vigorously) or an inhibited suckering (i.e. no
sucker grows vigorously).
Figure 1. Genesis of sucker from mother corm
Siddhesh Shamrao Bhende and Sajan Kurien 99

Table 1. Effect of different plant spacing on sucker production

Plant spacing (m) Sucker ha-1 Sucker plant-1 Clone Authority
1.20 x 1.20 24027.8 3.46 Robusta Reddy (1982)
2.10 x 2.10 15260.7 6.73
2.25 x 2.25 12541.4 6.35 Robusta Rajeevan and Geetha (1989)
2.00 x 2.00 14500.0 5.80 Nendran Anil (1994)
1.75 x 1.75 15835.4 4.85
1.50 x 1.50 20664.4 4.65
1.25 x 1.25 21440.0 3.35
1.50 x 1.50 4444.0 7.80 Jahaji Chaudhuri and Baruah (2004)
2.40 x 2.40 6076.4 3.50 Rajapuri Athani et al. (2009a)

Genomic constitution the particular active root zone resulting in the better
The edible bananas in the section Eumusa have their sucker production. Planting of suckers at a depth of
origins from two wild progenitors M. accuminata 30 cm was found to be optimum for cv. Nendran
and M. balbisiana. Among the genomic traits M. under irrigated conditions as evidenced by trial
balbisiana genome constitution influence suckering. conducted at BRS, Kannara during 1964 whereas,
Simmonds (1960) reported that within the triploid Bakhiet and Elbadri, (2004) reported that among
ploidy level more balbisiana genome increases the the different planting depth tried (30, 40, 50 and 60
suckering ability. Balakrishnan (1980) reported that cm), 40 cm depth recorded the highest number of
triploid Monthan (ABB) within its ploidy level suckers at 4 MAP and at shooting.
produced more number of suckers.
Intra-clonal variability and sucker production
External Different accessions of the same clones have been
Planting season reported to show differences in suckering habit.
Seasonal effects on suckering behavior of banana Sunilkumar (1997) reported that among the different
are very explicit and reported to differ with varieties. accessions of ‘Kaliethan’ Nendran banana,
Ghose and Hossain, (1992) reported that banana maximum number of suckers were produced by
rhizomes planted in September produced more Venjarmoodu (7.66) followed by Neyyattinkara
number of suckers compared to February and May (7.14) and Kaliyoor (6.43) at the time of harvest
in cv. Amritsagar and Sabri. Yadav et al. (2011) whereas, Palode, Vellayani and Anad produced only
reported that in a study with ten planting seasons 4.00, 5.50 and 5.50 number of suckers respectively.
and with four clones (Dwarf Cavendish, Grand
Naine, Robusta and Kullan), maximum numbers of Sucker activation techniques
suckers were produced in the May planting in Dwarf Different techniques have been adopted to
Cavendish and least in Robusta during October- invigorate the underdeveloped suckers. All such
November. techniques are sucker activation / invigoration
techniques. The objective is to salvage the
Plant spacing underdeveloped suckers and thereby to have more
The major reports on the above aspect are presented number of quality suckers from a mother plant,
in Table 1. without affecting the bunch yield. These techniques
can broadly be classified as physical, cultural,
Planting depth hormonal methods and newer techniques.
Correct planting depth will increase the nutrient
absorption rate of the rhizome of mother plant from
Sucker production in banana 100

Physical False decapitation

It includes cutting the pseudostem of mother plant In this method a hole is bored into the pseudostem
at different heights or arresting the apical dominance of five to six month old plant to destroy the inner
or suppressing the growing point at different part at the level of the stem. The upper part of the
physiological stages. plant will automatically die enabling the stock at
the ground level to produce suckers. This practice
Cutting back is normally taken up in cv. ‘Ebanga’, ‘Ngumba’ and
Borel (1952) tried cutting back in Gros Michel at ‘Nyale’. This method can give up to 15 suckers in
0.6 m above the collar after fruiting for the just two months (Anon., 2009).
development of underdeveloped suckers. The
underlying physiology involved in these being Baiyeri and Ndubizu (1994) compared the suckers
‘increased flow of nutrients from mother plant to produced by six cultural methods (including
the daughter suckers’. Goose necking (nicking the decapitation techniques and mulching) revealed that
pseudostem and bending it over) was found to 98 % of the suckers survived in the first six months
stimulate sucker production in his study. Osborne after planting. The fastest growing suckers were
(1963) doubled sucker production in the tetraploid, those produced by using false decapitation
Bodles Altafort by goose necking, within six month. technique. Noupadja (1995) subjected in vitro-
Eckstein and Robinson (1999) reported that partial cultured plantain cv. French Sombre to different
removal of the mother plant canopy after flowering decapitation treatments and noted that suckers
was useful for accelerating ratoon sucker growth. harvested within nine months by false decapitation
were significantly greater than suckers obtained by
Cutting height of parent pseudostem all other treatments.
Cutting the parent pseudostem at a height of 200
cm could activate sucker growth (Daniells and Cultural Methods
O’Farrell, 1987; Rodriguez et al., 2006). Mathew Different cultural methods were tried for sucker
et al. (2000) reported that retention of un-topped activation in banana.
parent pseudostem gave maximum height and girth
of the suckers. Ascenso’s method
Ascenso (1967) developed a simple technique for
Decapitation the rapid multiplication of Gros Michel banana.
De Langhe (1961) studied sucker production in cv. Mother plants were earthed up and fertilized with
Bousa and reported that six to eight suckers can be N @ 720 g ammonium sulphate plant-1 year-1 in four
obtained during a period of six months by cutting equal dressings to force suckering. A rapid
off six month old mother plants at the ground level multiplication rate of 15.5:1 was obtained in nine
and elimination of central bud. Noupadja (1995) months. Ravichandran (1983) obtained a mean
reported that suckers harvested within nine months multiplication rate of 16.9:1 by this method.
were significantly greater in natural suckering than
that of total decapitation of pseudostem in plantain Trials at Agricultural College, Vellayani also proved
(Musa AAB). Weerasinghe et al. (2003) decapitated that this method was useful but lacks field relevance
four to five month-old plants and then suppressed as farmers want both bunch yield and suckers. A
the growing terminal point. Sucker emergence combination of foliar spray of ethrel @ 400 ppm at
initiated at seven to ten days after decapitation and 15 days interval starting from 120 DAP till shooting
continued up to six weeks. and Ascenso’s method both at 30 and 60 cm of
cutting height resulted in better sucker production
(Shridhar, 1986).
Siddhesh Shamrao Bhende and Sajan Kurien 101

Table 2. Use of organic manures and biofertilizers for sucker production

Best manure/ biofertilizer treatment Cultivar Authority
180: 108: 225 g NPK plant-1 +
VAM fungus (Glomus fasciculatum) @ 50 g pit-1
+ Trichoderma harzianum @ 50 g pit-1 Rajapuri Sabarad et al. (2004)
Azospirillium @ 20 g plant-1 +
Phosphorus solubilizing bacteria @ 20 g plant-1 Giant Cavendish Kumar et al. (2013)
Chicken manure @ 20 kg plant-1 +16:16:16 NPK
fertilizer mixture @ 250 g plant-1 Kamphaeng Phet Emperor Chaichuay et al. (2013)
Bacillus subtilis @ 0.9 mg sucker-1 +
BAP (6-Benzylaminopurine) @ 4 ml sucker-1 Bangladesh Malbhog Sajith et al. (2014)

Table 3. Use of different fertilizers and micronutrients for sucker production

Best fertilizer /micronutrient treatment Cultivar Authority
190: 115: 300, 240: 140: 360 and
300: 140: 450 g NPK plant-1 Nendran Beena (1987)
400 g nitrogen plant-1 Williams Saad (1997)
800 g K2O plant-1 Grand Naine Saad and Atawia (1999)
Zn (1 %) + B (0.5 %) Giant Governor Mandal et al. (2002)
17:17:17 NPK mixture @ 10 g and
20 g nitrogen equivalent plant-1 Nendran Kurien (2008)
180: 108: 225 g NPK plant-1 Rajapuri Athani et al. (2009b)

Use of organic manures and biofertilizers Combination of physical and cultural methods
Organic manures like vermicompost provides Doses of 0 to 240 g N and 0 to 2.2 g B plant-1
nutrients which are readily available to mother combined with pruning and without pruning of
banana plant rhizome resulting in well developed pseudostem tried in ‘Pacovan’ banana. Results
banana clump with better suckers. Several reports revealed that pruning of the mother plant
exist on use of VAM fungi for enhancing growth pseudostem with elimination of apical meristem and
and yield by improved colonization of VAM fungi application of N increased sucker production
with roots. The reports are summarized in Table 2. (Nobrega et al., 2010).

Use of fertilizers and micronutrients Hormonal methods

Use of micronutrients for sucker production is the Ortiz and Vuylsteke (1994) from International
area where further studies are necessary. The reports Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Nigeria, reported
on the above aspects are summarised below in Table. that sucker growth rates are generally the result of
3. gibberellic acid (GA3) levels and Ad gene regulates

Table 4. Effect of different hormones on sucker production

Hormonal doses Cultivar Authority
Ethrel @ 400 ppm Njalipoovan, Poovan, Palayankodan,
Nendran, Robusta, Red Banana and Monthan Shridhar (1986)
GA3 @ 200 ppm Barjahaji Barman and Das (2002)
BA @ 250, 500 and 750 ppm Nendran Kurien (2008)
Paclobutrazol @ 1.0 and 1.5 g a. i. Prata Anã and FHIA-01 Maia et al. (2009)
Sucker production in banana 102

GA3 production. Increased frequency of the Ad gene Twyford (1968) and Teisson (1970) revealed that
and commensurate improvement in the suckering there was transfer of 32P from the mother plant and
behavior of the diploids can be achieved by vice versa. Turner and Barkus (1973) mentioned
phenotypic recurrent selection. Apical dominance the weekly loss of mineral from banana pseudostem
in plantain is genetically controlled by a major after harvest. They opined that if the lost nutrients
recessive ad gene. Most bananas have the alternative were translocated to young suckers, they would
dominant allele Ad, which improves the suckering contribute more than 40 % of its requirements for
in plantain–banana. The Ad allele has incomplete all the elements, except Mg and Zn. Balakrishnan
penetrance, genetic specificity and variable (1980) observed that intact pseudostem after harvest
expressivity. continued to translocate nutrients to the developing
suckers in cv. ‘Robusta’.
Newer techniques
Rajeevan (1985) studied the recovery of
Different newer techniques have also been reported radioactivity in the leaf tissues of sucker in the early
for salvaging the underdeveloped suckers such as stages after inoculation of 32P in cv. Palayankodan.
split corm (Adelaja, 1995), split buds techniques, He found that there was translocation of nutrients
minisetting, PIF (plantes issues de fragments de from mother plant to daughter sucker after harvest
tiges) meaning plants resulting from stem in both treatments involving cutting of half
fragments/ bits (Lefranc et al. 2010). pseudostem and also in case of the retention of
whole plant. He concluded that it was beneficial to
Influence of mattocking on translocation of 32P retain the mother plant pseudostem for one month
On the belief that there was translocation of nutrients after harvest. Murthy and Iyengar (1991) reported
from the mother plant after harvest to suckers in that at the pre-shooting stage, 32P activity in the
the clump, the practice of ‘mattocking’ was mother plant decreased with an increase in the
developed. After the harvest, the whole or a part of number of suckers retained. The suckers derived
mother plant was retained so as to nurse the follower. 53-87 % of their P from the mother plant.
Nayar et al. (1956) found that the yield of ratoon Translocation of 32P to the first sucker was 52, 47
crop was significantly higher than the parent when and 41 % of the total P translocation when two, three
the mother pseudostem was half removed or and four suckers were retained respectively. During
untouched after harvest. According to Martin-Prevel the post-harvest stage, the 32P concentration and
(1964), the banana growers believed that one plant activity in both the mother plant and the sucker
in a clump obtained water and nutrients from decreased with an increase in time of retention of
another to varying extent and that the young the mother plant from 15 to 45 days. The P derived
developing plants were nourished by the older from the mother plant in the sucker was 44 % when
plants. This nursing continued until the young plant the mother plant was retained for 15 days and
is separated after reaching sufficient growth. decreased to 19 % after 45 days. The results show
the deleterious effect of allowing suckers to develop
Morez (1960) reported that leaving a portion of the during the early vegetative and pre-shooting phases
pseudostem attached to the mother corm resulted due to depletion of the P content of the mother plant,
in lesser number of suckers but with longer and and the beneficial effect of retaining the mother
stouter shoots of around 26 % more leaf surface plant up to 45 days after bunch harvest due to
than suckers in all other methods, three months after mobilization of a considerable P quantity from the
harvest. Morez and Gullemot (1962) reported that mother plant to the suckers.
sucker growth was improved by leaving 1.5 m of
the pseudostem in Poyo banana. Walmsley and Kurien et al. (1999) using 32P confirmed that there
Siddhesh Shamrao Bhende and Sajan Kurien 103

is a definite allocatory pattern of nutrient cycling needs to be probed at length is sucker production in
from mother plant to daughter sucker with the first relation to biotic and abiotic stress. This will remain
formed suckers receiving more initially and last a priority area due to increase in arable area
formed suckers receiving the major share with progressively stress prone. Standardization of
passage of time. Kurien et al. (2002) studied the enhanced sucker production techniques of each
nutrient cycling from the mother plants to daughter clone is also necessary and could be an easy way
suckers at various physiological stages of the mother for genetic conservation of large variants observed
plant. A combination of three spacing with five in Musa spp.
stages of sucker retention, were the treatment
combinations and another similar plot was Conclusion
maintained without suckers in Mysore syn.
Palayankodan. It was concluded that both the Sucker production capacity varies in different
spacing and sucker development phases have banana clones and is a function of numerous internal
influence on the nutrient cycling pattern. Nutrient and external factors. Large number of
cycling, if tapped efficiently, can result in reducing underdeveloped or immature suckers can be seen
costly fertilizer inputs. Most importantly, the on the corm of a mother plant at the time of the
amount of tracer recovered from the neighboring harvest which have the potential for development
border plants confirms beyond doubt that the tracer as good planting material. Sucker invigoration
extruded out from the treated plant which in turn techniques are found effective for salvaging the
was absorbed by the neighboring plant. There is underdeveloped suckers. Different methods of
some form of nutrient sharing both within a clump sucker activation techniques have been followed in
and between clumps, confirming that, in banana, different locations. In real sense, the most acceptable
the system of giving recommendation on an method to the farmers will be one that ideally
individual basis needs to be coupled with a block combines both good bunch yields with quality finger
or plot level. attributes and at the same time promote the
production of maximum number of quality suckers.
Future thrust
References
Studies on clonal and intra-clonal variation with
reference to the suckering habits are an absolute Adelaja, B. A. 1995. Rapid on-farm multiplication
necessity. Understanding the genetics of sucker technique for plantain and banana. MusAfrica, 8: 6.
Alagiamanvalan, R. S. 1979. An appraisal of edible
production, the genes coding for each aspect of
diploid and synthetic bananas. Ph. D. thesis, Tamil
quality sucker production and further genic level Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 259p.
of manipulation should be the prime area of Anil, B.K. 1994. Standardization of spacing for tissue
investigation. Though many sucker initials lie culture banana cv. Nendran (AAB Group). M. Sc.
embedded in the cortex of the corm its development (Hort.) thesis, Kerala Agricultural University,
and activation within the corm has to be a major Thrissur, 192p.
focal point. Physiological studies in this direction Anonymous 2009. Plantain Production: Techniques of
still remain as a much wanted area of research. Plantain Seedling Multiplication The Farmers Voice.
Anatomical studies using electron microscope could Available http://www.thefarmersvoice.org/16.php?
throw more light on the sucker primordia subaction=showfull&id=1240604175&archive=&
start from=&ucat=16&>(accepted 24 Apr. 2009).
development. There is a need to find out the most
Ascenso, J. C. 1967. A simple technique for
effective method of sucker invigoration, which can multiplication of banana planting material. Trop.
be recommended for farmers to fulfill their in situ Agric., 44: 243-244.
planting material requirement. Further area that
Sucker production in banana 104

Athani, S. I., Revanappa, M. and Dharmatti, P. R. 2009a. of production of the following sucker in banana Sci.
Effect of plant density on growth and yield in banana. Hortic., 31 (1/2): 89-94.
Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 22(1): 143-146. De Langhe, E. 1961b. Multiplication vegetative acceleres
Athani, S. I., Revanappa, M. and Dharmatti, P. R. 2009b. in plantation du bananier plantain “Bousa”. Bull.
Influence of organic fertilizer doses and Inf. INEAG, 10: 69-90.
vermicompost on growth and yield of banana. Eckstein, K. and Robinson, J. C. 1999. The influence of
Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 22(1): 147-150. the mother plant on sucker growth, development and
Baiyeri, K. P. and Ndubizu, T. O. 1994. Variability in photosynthesis in banana (Musa AAA, Dwarf
growth and field establishment of False Horn Cavendish). J. Hort. Sci. Biotech., 74(3): 347–350.
plantain suckers raised by six cultural methods. Ghose, G. H. and Hossain, A. K. 1992. Effect of time of
MusAfrica, 4: 1-3. planting on growth and yield of two commercial
Bakhiet, S. B. and Elbadri, G. A. 2004. Effect of planting banana varieties. Acta Hortic., 321: 463-471.
depth on crop cycle duration and yield. Infomusa, Kumar, S., Pathak, K. A., Kishore, K., Shukla, R.,
13(1): 12-14. Solankey, S. S. and Singh, D. K. 2013 Effect of bio-
Balakrishnan, R. 1980. Studies on the growth, fertilizers on biological nitrogen fixation of banana
development, sucker production and nutrient uptake cv. Giant Cavendish. Asian J. Hortic., 8(2): 436-439.
at different ploidy levels in banana (Musa spp.). Ph. Kurien, S. 2008. Annual report of the DST project on
D. thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, ‘Yield prediction models in banana’ Department of
Coimbatore, 238p. science and Technology, Ministry of science and
Barman, P. and Das, P. K. 2002. Effect of plant growth technology, Government of India,132p
substances on growth and development of banana Kurien, S., Anil, B. K., Kumar P. S. and Kamalam, N. V.
(Musa spp.) cv. Barjahaji (AAA group). Agric. Sci. 1999. Nutrient studies in banana using 32P Musa
Soc. North-East India, 15(1): 38-45. news, Infomusa, 8(1): 35–36.
Beena, 1987. Effect of split application of fertilizers in Kurien, S., Kumar, P. S., Kamalam, N. V. and Wahid, P.
banana cv. Nendran. M. Sc. (Hort.) thesis, Kerala A. 2002. Nutrient cycling from the Musa mother
Agricultural University, 71p. plants at various physiological stages to sucker as
Blomme, G., Swennen, R. and Tenkouano, A. 2000. affected by spacing and sucker retention using tracer
Assessment of variability in the root system technologies. Fruits, 57(3): 143-151.
characteristics of banana (Musa spp.) according to Lefranc, L.M., Lescot, T., Staver, C., Kwa M., Michel,
genome group and ploidy level. Infomusa, 9(2): 4- I., Nkapnang, I. and Temple, L. 2010.
7. Macropropagation as an Innovative Technology:
Bohra, P., Waman, A. A., Sathyanarayana, A. A. and Lessons and Observations from Projects in
Umesha, K., 2013. Preliminary assessment of intra- Cameroon. Acta Hortic., 879:727-733.
clonal variability in Indian banana varieties for Maia, E., Siqueira, D. L., Salomão, L. C., Peternelli, L.
sucker production. Indian J. Nat. Prod. Resour., 4(4): A., Ventrella, M. C. and Cavatte, R. P. 2009. Anais
387-391. da Academia Brasileira de Ciencias Development
Borel, E. 1952. The improvement of banana cultivar in of the banana plants ‘Prata Anã’ and ‘FHIA-01’ under
the French Cameroons. Fruits Trop. Abstr., 7: 22- the effect of paclobutrazol applied on the soil, 81(2):
30. 257-263.
Chaichuay, C., Chaichuay, R., Makornpas, C. and Mandal, K. K., Bhattacharya, B. and Singh, D. K. 2002.
Wiangsamut, B. 2013. Effect of organic fertilizer and Studies on the effect of foliar application of different
organic fertilizer plus chemical fertilizer on growth micronutrients on growth and yield of dwarf
and yield quality of Kamphaeng Phet emperor cavendish banana (Musa AAA, cv. Giant Governor).
banana. Int. J. Agric. Technol., 9 (5): 1297-1308. J. Interacademicia, 6 (2): 150-155.
Chaudhuri, P. and Baruah, K. 2004. Studies on Planting Martin-Prevel, 1964. Nutrient elements in the banana
Density in Banana cv. ‘Jahaji’ (AAA). Indian J. of plant and fruit. Fertilite, 22: 3-14.
Hill Farming, 23(2): 31-38. Mathew, B., Hasan, M. A., Mazumder, D. and
Daniells, J. W. and O’Farrell, P. J. 1987. Effect of cutting Chattopadhyay, P. K. 2000. Performance of first
height of the parent pseudostem on yield and time ratoon crop in banana as influenced by parent
Siddhesh Shamrao Bhende and Sajan Kurien 105

pseudostem and sucker management. Indian J. Agric. thesis. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University,
Sci., 70 (9): 584-588. Coimbatore, 116p.
Morez, 1960.The effects of retaining a portion of the Reddy, S. A. 1982. Effect of High Density planting on
pseudostem of Poyo banana plants attached to the growth, yield and biomass production in Robusta
planted rhizomes on the emergence and development banana. Ph.D (Hort.) thesis, University of
of suckers. Fruits d’ Outre Mer., 15: 423-424. Horticultural Sciences, Bangalore, 210p.
Morez, H. and Guillemot, J. 1962. The choice of planting Rodríguez, C., Cayón, G. and Jairo Mira, J. 2006.
material for banana plantations. The effect of Influence of the harvested mother plant pseudostem
retaining part of the pseudostem attached to the on follower sucker growth and yield in banana (Musa
rhizome on the growth of Poyo suckers. Rapp. annu. AAA Simmonds). Agronomía Colombiana, 24(2):
Insi. franp. Rech. fruit. Outre-Mer, 1960-61. 274-279.
reprinted in Fruits d’Outre Mer., 16: 517-520. Saad, M. M. 1997. Effect of nitrogen fertilization on
Murthy, S. V. and Iyengar, B. R. 1991. Mobilization of growth, yield and fruit quality of “Williams” banana
phosphorus from mother plant to sucker in Robusta in sandy soil under drip irrigation system. Ann. of
banana. Indian J. Hortic., 48 (2): 95-99. Agric. Sci. Moshtohor, 35(4): 2357-2363.
Nayar, T. G., Seshadri, V.S. and Bakthavathasalu, C.M. Saad, M. M. and Atawia, A. A. R. 1999. Effect of potash
1956 A note on mattocking practices in banana application on growth, yield and fruit quality of
cultures. Indian J. Hortic., 13: 210-211. “Grand Nain” banana in sandy soil under drip
Nóbrega, J. P., Walter, E. P., Thiago, J. D., Roberto, W. irrigation system. Alexandria J. Agric. Res., 44 (1):
C., Raunira,. Da. C. and De. Francisco, A. O. 2010. 171-180.
Pseudostem pruning and doses of nitrogen and boron Sabarad, A. I., Swamy, G. S. K., Patil, C. P., Patil, P. B.
on the production of suckers of ‘Pacovan’ banana and Athani, S. I. 2004. Influence of VAM,
tree. Semina: Ciências Agrárias, Londrina, 31(1): vermicompost and Trichoderma harzianum on
1205-1218. growth of banana, cv. Rajapuri (Musa AAB).
Noupadja, P. 1995. Study of three field multiplication Karnataka J. of Agric. Sci., 17 (3): 515-518.
techniques for generating planting material of in-vitro Sajith, K. P., Uma, S., Saraswathi, M. S., Backiyarani,
propagated plantain (Musa cv. AAB). Musa Afr., 8: S. and Durai, P. 2014. Macropropagation of banana
7-8. - effect of bio-fertilizers and plant hormones. Indian
Ortiz R. and Vuylsteke D. R. 1994. Genetics of Apical J. of Hortic., 71: 299-305.
Dominance in Plantain (Musa spp., AAB Group) and Shridhar, L. 1986. Enhancing sucker production in
Improvement of Suckering Behavior. J. Am. Soc. banana and its effect on the bunch weight of the
Hortic. Sci., 119(5):1050–1053. mother plant. Ph. D thesis, Kerala Agricultural
Osborne, R. E. 1963. Sucker production with tetraploid University, Thrissur, 129p.
bananas in Jamaica. Trop. Agric. (Trin.), 40: 287- Simmonds, N.W. 1960. Bananas (1st Ed.) Longman,
90. London, United Kingdom (U.K.), 466 p.
Pearce, F. “The sterile banana.” Conservation: The Simmonds, N.W. 1962. The evolution of the bananas.
Source for Environmental Intelligence. University Longman, London and New York, 124p.
of Washington, [on-line]. Available: http:// Simmonds, N.W. 1987. The evolution of the bananas.
conservationmagazine.org/2008/09/ the-sterile- Longman, London, 152p.
banana/ (26 Sept. 2008). Sunilkumar, K. 1997. Selection of superior types of
Rajeevan, P. K. 1985. Intraclonal variations and Kalietan (Musa AAB Group) Nendran. M. Sc. (Hort.)
nutritional studies in banana (cv. Palayankodan). Ph. thesis, Kerala Agriculture University, Thrissur, 119p.
D. thesis, Kerala Agricultural University, Thrissur, Swennen, R., Wilson, G.F. and De Langhe. E. 1984.
248p. Preliminary investigation of the effects of gibberellic
Rajeevan, P. K. and Geetha, C. K. 1989. Comparative acid (GA3) on sucker development in plantain (Musa
performance of banana c.v Robusta at two planting cv. AAB) under field conditions. Trop. Agric. (Trin.),
intensities. South Indian Hortic., 37(1): 44:47. 61:253–256.
Ravichandran, P. 1983. Studies on the rapid Teisson, C. 1970. Translocation of banana plant of
multiplication of banana suckers. M. Sc. (Hort) mineral elements absorbed by its suckers. Fruits, 25:
451-454.
Sucker production in banana 106

Turner, D. W. and Barkus, B. 1973. Loss of mineral Weerasinghe, S. S., Ruwanpathirana, K. H. and
nutrients from banana pseudostems after harvest. Pemachandra, A. G. 2003. Modified conventional
Tropical Agric. (Trin.), 50: 229-234. propagation technique for banana (Musa spp.). Trop.
Turner, D. W. 1972. Banana plant growth-I Gross Agric., 154: 27-32.
morphology. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. Husb., Yadav, A., Ram, R. B., Kumar, R., Priyamvada, S.,
12(55): 209-215. Meena, M. L. and Rubee L. 2011. Response of
Walmsley, D. and Twyford. 1968. The translocation of planting seasons on growth and yield characteristics
nutrients within a stool of Robusta banana. Trop. of banana (Musa sp.) cultivars. Ann. of Hortic., 4(1):
Agric. (Trin.), 45: 229-233. 95-100.

View publication stats