263

Journal of Tropical Agriculture 58 (2): 263-268, 2020

Short Communication
Macropropagated plantlets in banana: Performance evaluation with
suckers and tissue culture plants in Grand Naine and Nendran

P. R. Manju* and P. B. Pushpalatha

Banana Research Station, Kerala Agricultural University, Kannara 680 652, Kerala, India.

Received 6 September 2019; received in revised form 7 December 2020; accepted 11 December 2020

Abstract
Macropropagation is a cost effective vegetative propagation technique, whereby 20-25 plants can be produced
from a single corm in a matter of 3-4 months depending upon the variety. The technique involves the
repression of apical meristem ultimately stimulating the regeneration of lateral meristem. The present
study conducted at Banana Research Station, Kannara, attempted to evaluate the performance of
macropropagated plantlets of banana varieties Grand Naine (AAA) and Nendran (AAB) compared to
suckers and tissue culture plants. Macropropagated plantlets of both Grand Naine and Nendran responded
as well as tissue culture plants and significantly better than suckers in terms of bunch weight, hands per
bunch, fingers per bunch and finger weight. In Grand Naine, macropropagated plantlets recorded a bunch
weight of 28.29 kg/plant, while in Nendran, it was 12.25 kg/plant. Sucker derived plants recorded 18.13
and 9.78 kg bunch weight in Grand Naine and Nendran respectively. An additional yield of 56% and 25%
was obtained from macropropagated Grand Naine and Nendran respectively. Fruit quality in terms of TSS,
acidity and shelf life remained on par among the treatments. No significant difference was observed among
the treatments for days to bunching, days to harvest and crop duration.

Key words : Banana, Grand Naine, Macropropagation, Nendran, Planting materials.

India is the largest producer of banana in the world, material often spreads diseases and shortens the
with an average production of 29 million tonnes lifespan of plantations (Njukwe et al., 2013). Huge
per year. Bananas and plantains are the most widely number of quality planting materials can be made
cultivated and consumed fruit crop in Kerala. The available by tissue culture technique. However,
annual production of banana and plantain in the state tissue culture plants are costlier and small and
is 1.14 lakh ha with a production of 8.82 lakh tons marginal farmers cannot afford the higher cost.
(FIB, 2019). A major constraint to the expansion of Under the above circumstances, the new technology
banana and plantain cultivation is the scarcity of viz., macropropagation of banana has been
healthy planting material (Nkendah and advocated as an effective alternative method which
Akyeampong, 2003). The lack of formal systems requires less capital and skill to produce large
for producing and distributing quality planting numbers of quality banana seedlings (Sajith et al.,
material force the farmers to depend on natural 2014). Recently, the Plantain and Banana
regeneration of plants. More than 95% of banana Improvement Program of the International Institute
are vegetatively propagated through suckers. This of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Nigeria, advanced
is usually a very slow process, and produces less the use of macropropagation method for increasing
planting materials that are likely to be contaminated sucker multiplication at farm level. Studies
with soil-borne pathogens, insect pests and conducted under the ICAR-AICRP (Fruits) at
nematodes. Also, transplanting of the contaminated Banana Research Station, Kannara have led to the
*Author for correspondences : Phone : +91 9446331330, Email: [email protected]
Macropropagated plantlets in banana: Performance evaluation in Grand Naine and Nendran 264

standardization of macropropagation technique in a stem girth of 2.5cm, the primary plantlets were
banana varieties Grand Naine and Nendran (Patil decapitated as done with the mother corm and
et al., 2016). The present study was undertaken to covered with sawdust and watered. From each
assess the performance of these macropropagated primary plantlet, secondary plantlets developed
plantlets in the field as compared to conventional were allowed to grow for another 20-30 days, after
planting materials like suckers and tissue culture which they were carefully removed along with the
plants. root system and planted in poly bags filled with
potting mixture (1:1:1 soil, sand and farm yard
The study was carried out at Banana Research manure) for establishment. At the end of 45 days of
Station, Kannara, Thrissur, Kerala Agricultural hardening they were field planted for evaluation,
University, Thrissur, Kerala during 2018-19 as part along with tissue culture plants and suckers. For
of the project under ICAR-AICRP (Fruits). Nendran this, pest and disease free sword suckers (3-4 months
(AAB) and Grand Naine (AAA) were subjected to old) and 2 ½ to 3 months old hardened tissue culture
macropropagation as described below to produce plants (virus indexed) of Grand Naine and Nendran
secondary plantlets for field planting. were used.

Sucker preparation: 2-3 months old healthy sword The treatments included plantlets produced by
suckers (1 kg) without any weevil or nematode macropropagation (secondary seedlings) (T1), 3-4
infestation were selected and detopped just above month old pest and disease free sword suckers (T2),
the juncture of the corm and aerial shoot. The and 2 ½ to 3 months old hardened virus indexed
remains of the pseudostem and roots were removed tissue culture plants (T3). The varieties were V1 -
and external layer of the corm was scraped using a Grand Naine (AAA) and V2 - Nendran (AAB), and
sharp knife. After washing in clean water, the pared there were six treatment combinations, viz., Grand
corms were scarified by removing the apical Naine (T1V1, T2V1, T3V1), and Nendran (T1V2,
meristem to a depth of 2 cm and given 6 to 8 cross T2V2, T3V2). Randomized Block Design (RBD)
cuts depending on the size of the suckers. The corms was adopted with seven replications, and there were
were then soaked in Carbendazim (0.2%) for 30 15 plants per replication, adopting a spacing of 2 x
minutes to prevent any soil borne fungal diseases, 2m. Cultural practices were given as per the Package
and allowed to dry. of Practices recommendations of Kerala
Agricultural University (KAU, 2016). The
Preparation of substrate and planting of suckers: treatments were evaluated for a single season (plant
Decorticated and decapitated suckers were planted crop) for growth, yield, fruit quality and Eumusae
individually in pots (30 cm diameter and height), leaf spot incidence.
with sawdust as substrate (2 kg) which was initially
moistened and decomposed for a period of 2-3 Plant height (m), pseudostem girth (cm), suckers
weeks prior to use. Sawdust was supplemented with per plant, leaves per plant and leaf area were
VAM (30 g per corm) and Bacillus subtilis (30 g recorded at bunching. Plant height was measured
per corm) at the time of planting. Benzyl Amino from the base of the plant to the point of emergence
Purine (BAP 40 ppm @ 4 ml/corm) was applied to of peduncle using a measuring scale. The girth of
corms, followed by complete burial of the corms to the pseudostem at 1m height from the base of the
a depth of 3-5 cm. plant was measured using measuring tape and
expressed in cm. Leaf area (m2) was estimated using
Bud formation and decapitation: Primary plantlets the formula:
which emerged were allowed to grow for 25-30
days. At 3 leaf stage, with a height of 15-20cm and Leaf area = L x B x Number of leaves x 0.755,
P. R. Manju and P. B. Pushpalatha 265

where, L was the length of standard leaf in metres Table 1. Effect of propagules and varieties on bunch
(3rd leaf from the top), and B was the maximum weight and yield of banana
width of the standard leaf in metres. Treatment Bunch Yield B:C
weight(kg/plant) (t/ha) ratio
T1V1 28.29 70.73 3.11
Days to bunching was taken as the number of days T2V1 18.13 45.33 2.00
from planting to bunching, while days to harvest T3V1 26.75 66.87 2.94
was recorded as the days for maturity of the fruits SEm± 0.77 1.92 -
LSD at 5% 3.09 7.72 -
from bunching to harvest. Crop duration was the
T1V2 12.25 30.62 3.33
number of days taken from planting to harvest. T2V2 9.78 24.46 2.66
T3V2 12.08 30.00 3.28
Bunch weight (kg/plant) and yield (t/ha), hands per SEm± 0.31 0.68 -
bunch, fingers per bunch, finger weight (g), pulp LSD at 5% 1.26 2.76 -
weight (g), finger length (cm) and finger girth (cm)
significantly higher than suckers (18.13 kg). A
were observed at harvest. The middle finger on the
similar trend was also observed in Nendran, with
top row of the second hand from the basal end of
macropropagated plantlets and tissue culture plants
the bunch was used for recording finger characters.
performing equally well with a bunch weight of
Total Soluble Solids (TSS) was measured using a
12.25 and 12.08 kg respectively, but significantly
hand refractometer, while fruit acidity was
better than suckers (9.78 kg bunch weight). This
determined as per the method suggested by
gave an additional yield of 56% from Grand Naine
Ranganna (1997) at ripening. Shelf life was the
macropropagated plants, while in Nendran, an
number of days from the date of ripening to a stage
additional yield of 25% was observed compared to
unfit for consumption. Disease severity index (PDI
suckers. Macropropagated plantlets of Grand Naine
%) of Eumusae leaf spot was calculated as per
and Nendran recorded the highest B:C ratio of 3.11
Gauhl’s modification of Stover’s severity scoring
and 3.33 respectively, compared to tissue culture
system (Gauhl et al., 1995; Carlier et al., 2002) using
plants and suckers. Suryanarayana (2017) compared
the formula:
the performance of macropropagated plantlets with
suckers in banana varieties Champa, Bantal,
Infection index (PDI) = Σnb/ (N - 1) T x 100 where,
Patkapura and Grand Naine and observed no
n = number of leaves in each grade, b = grade, N =
significant difference between them. In Nendran
number of grades used in the scale and T= total
banana, 25.63 per cent additional yield was recorded
number of leaves scored.
in tissue culture plants as compared to suckers
(Sheela and Nair, 2001). Increased bunch weight in
Analysis of variance for each parameter was done
macropropagated as well as tissue culture plants was
as per Panse and Sukhatme (1967). Comparison of
attributed to better bunch characters viz., hands per
parameters between macropropagated plantlets,
bunch and fingers per bunch compared to suckers
sucker and tissue culture plants was made within
in both varieties. Finger weight and pulp weight was
each variety.
also significantly higher in macropropagated
Nendran compared to suckers (Table 2). Sheela and
Macropropagated plantlets performed significantly
Nair (2001) observed that in Nendran banana, length
better than suckers and was on par with tissue
of bunch and fingers per bunch are attributes
culture plants in both Grand Naine and Nendran
responsible for yield improvement.
with respect to bunch weight and yield. In Grand
Naine, macropropagated plants recorded the greatest
There was no difference between the treatments with
bunch weight (Table 1) of 28.29 kg which was on
respect to plant height, pseudostem girth, leaves per
par with tissue culture plants (26.75 kg) and
Macropropagated plantlets in banana: Performance evaluation in Grand Naine and Nendran 266

Table 2. Effect of propagules and varieties on fruit characters of banana

Treatment Hands per Fingers per Finger Pulp Finger Finger
bunch bunch weight (g) weight(g) length (cm) girth (cm)
T1V1 9.45 163.68 161.45 102.68 20.06 12.53
T2V1 8.12 130.51 143.04 93.98 18.90 11.77
T3V1 9.62 167.27 149.00 100.69 19.03 12.15
SEm± 0.11 3.74 5.71 2.45 0.59 0.19
LSD at 5% 0.46 15.17 NS NS NS NS
T1V2 5.80 61.51 161.97 111.84 21.30 12.26
T1V2 4.99 50.59 156.12 96.43 20.30 11.97
T3V2 5.58 58.68 158.59 108.70 20.57 11.96
SEm± 0.14 0.69 1.24 2.27 0.56 0.13
LSD at 5% 0.56 2.78 NS NS NS NS

Table 3. Effect of propagules and varieties on growth characters (at bunching)

Treatment Plant Pseudostem Leaves/ Suckers/ Leaf Area Days to Days to Crop
height(m) girth (cm) plant plant (m2) bunching(days) harvest(days) duration(days)
T1V1 2.61 54.09 11.15 4.12 15.95 238.96 92.55 331.36
T2V1 2.33 52.56 10.56 3.98 14.97 248.74 88.96 337.86
T3V1 2.60 54.29 11.97 4.09 16.42 249.03 91.88 342.86
SEm± 15.73 1.18 0.16 0.21 0.33 1.95 1.54 2.25
LSD at 5% NS NS 0.66 NS NS 7.86 NS NS
T1V2 3.20 48.07 11.52 3.72 7.66 253.07 89.56 342.62
T2V2 2.92 46.84 10.05 3.44 7.64 249.25 88.43 337.60
T3V2 3.16 47.75 11.07 3.94 7.97 260.92 89.17 350.33
SEm± 4.77 0.31 0.67 0.22 0.49 7.22 2.09 7.54
LSD at 5% 19.24 NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

plants, suckers per plant and leaf area (Table 3). Table 5. Effect of propagules and varieties on reaction to
Kasyoka (2013) evaluated macropropagated Eumusae leaf spot in banana
plantlets and observed that they responded similar Treatment Infection Index
T1V1 16.17
to tissue culture plants. No significant difference T2V1 17.12
was also observed between treatments with regard T3V1 17.59
to days to bunching, days to harvest and crop SEm± 2.31
duration. LSD at 5% NS
T1V2 32.08
T1V2 28.13
Macropropagated plantlets, tissue culture plants and T3V2 29.26
suckers behaved similarly with respect to TSS, SEm± 1.74
LSD at 5% NS
Table 4. Effect of propagules and varieties on quality
characters of banana acidity and shelf life, showing that there was no
Treatment TSS Fruit Shelf
(Brix) acidity (%) life(days)
influence on quality parameters by planting material
T1V1 25.74 0.33 5.81 (Table 4). Reaction to Eumusae leaf spot incidence
T2V1 24.69 0.29 5.85 also showed a similar trend (Table 5).
T3V1 24.00 0.26 5.52
SEm± 0.64 0.02 0.23 Natural regeneration in banana is through
LSD at 5% NS NS NS
T1V2 26.76 0.35 5.80 propagating material such as maiden suckers, water
T1V2 25.33 0.32 5.50 suckers, sword suckers, butt, peeper and bits.
T3V2 27.00 0.30 5.90 Among them, sword suckers are the most widely
SEm± 0.55 0.01 0.11 used as they have a well-developed base, pointed
LSD at 5% NS NS NS
tip and narrow leaf blades, while water suckers are
P. R. Manju and P. B. Pushpalatha 267

small, less vigorous, broad leaved and emerge in which had been inoculated with VAM and Bacillus
clumps (Singh et al., 2011). Natural regeneration subtilis, both of which are known biocontrol agents
has been in existence for decades as it is against Fusarium wilt. Bacillus subtilis when present
comparatively cheap and does not require any in the immediate vicinity of plant roots, can maintain
sophisticated skills for production. However, stable contact with higher plants and promote their
suckers are often the ource of banana corm weevil growth. In addition, due to its ability to form
(Cosmopolites sordidus), viruses, nematodes and endospores and produce different biologically active
pathogens such as Fusarium oxysporum fsp. compounds having broad spectrum activity, Bacillus
cubense, the causal agent of Fusarium wilt. In subtilis serve as a potential biocontrol agent
addition, natural regeneration cannot produce (Nagorska et al., 2007). Hence by ensuring the
enough planting materials for medium and large- quality of mother corms taken and by the use of
scale producers. Growth of suckers is also very slow bioinoculants, pest and disease free propagules can
due to hormone-mediated apical dominance of the be obtained through macropropagation.
mother plant. A banana plant produces only 5-20
suckers during its life time (Singh et al., 2011). Sajith et al. (2014) described macropropagation as
Tissue culture (TC) propagation technique is yet to a cost effective technique that could be made
benefit majority of small scale farmers because of accessible to small and marginal farmers without
the high costs and sophisticated skills associated compromising on quality. Again, when most of the
with the technology (Sahijram et al., 2003). tissue culture labs multiplied only commercially
Therefore, to increase banana production, there is leading varieties of the region, macropropagation
need for affordable and simple technique for technology could be used to multiply elite / rare
seedling production at farm level. banana varieties according to the interest of the
Macropropagation is one such technique that can farmer. Dayarani et al. (2013) found
greatly boost banana production. It is user friendly, macropropagation involving decapitation of
requiring minimum skill and expertise and suitable rhizome and treatment with BAP (0.04%) as a
for adoption by farmers at the farm level. The promising technique for regeneration of ornamental
present study also signifies that macropropagated banana, Musa laterita.
plantlets perform as well as tissue culture plants.
Compared to micropropagated plantlets, The study pointed out the possibility of using
macropropagation derived plantlets are more macropropagated plantlets as quality planting
adaptable to the field conditions because they are materials for enhancing yield in banana cultivars
photosynthetically active as they are regenerated Grand Naine and Nendran. Macropropagation
under in vivo conditions, while tissue cultured plants technology provided cheap, simple and relatively
are partially photosynthetic and hence are very rapid method for vegetative multiplication of
delicate and do not establish easily under field banana that could be amenable to low income,
conditions (Tenkouano et al., 2006). By maintaining unskilled small and marginal farmers who were the
a disease-free mother block as the source of healthy stake holders of bananas and plantains in the humid
and high yielding planting materials, tropics.
macropropagated plantlets offer a cheap alternative
with tremendous potential for increasing the Acknowledgement
production of banana. In the present study, the sword
suckers selected for macropropagation were taken The authors are thankful to ICAR-AICRP (Fruits)
from disease free and healthy mother plants. Further and Kerala Agricultural University for providing
the regeneration of macropropagated plantlets was the facilities and supporting the work.
carried out in soil less media, namely, saw dust,
Macropropagated plantlets in banana: Performance evaluation in Grand Naine and Nendran 268

References Nkendah, R. and Akyeampong, E. 2003. Socioeconomic

data on the plantain commodity chain in West and
Carlier, J., De Waele, D. and Escalent, J.V. 2002. Global Central Africa. InfoMusa, 12 (1): 8–13.
evaluation of Musa germplasm for resistance to Panse, V.G. and Sukhatme, P.V. 1967. Statistical Methods
Fusarium wilt, Mycosphaerella leaf spot diseases and for Agricultural Workers. Indian Council of
nematodes. INIBAP Technical Guidelines 6, Agricultural Research, New Delhi, 347p.
INIBAP, Montpellier, France, 68p. Patil, P., Naduthodi, N. and Sujatha, S. 2016. Proc. 3rd
Dayarani, M., Dhanarajan, M.S., Uma, S. and Durai, Group Discussion of ICAR - All India Coordinated
P. 2013. Macropropagation for regeneration of wild Research Project on Fruits - Tech. Doc. No. 118.
bananas (Musa spp.). Advanced BioTech, 12 (12) ICAR – Indian Institute of Horticultural Research,
:16-18. Bengaluru, 263p.
FIB [Farm Information Bureau]. 2019. Farm Guide, Ranganna, S. 1997. Handbook of Analysis and Quality
Government of Kerala, 294p. Control for Fruit and Vegetable Products (2nd Ed.).
Gauhl, F., Pasberg-Gauhl, C., Vuylsteke, D. and Ortiz, Tata McGraw Hill Publishing Company Ltd., New
R., 1995. Multilocational evaluation of black Delhi, 112 p.
Sigatoka resistance in banana and plantain. IITA Sahijram, L., Sonej, J.R. and Bollamma, K.T. 2003.
Research Guide 47, Ibadan, Nigeria, 59p. Analyzing somaclonal variations in macro
Kasyoka, M.R. 2013. Efficiency of macropropagation propagated banana (Musa spp). In vitro Cell. Dev.
in relation to other banana seedling production Biol. – Plant, 39(6) : 551-556.
methods in different agroecologies in central and Sajith, K.P., Uma, S., Saraswathi, M.S., Backiyarani, S.
eastern Kenya. M.Sc (Agron.) thesis, Kenyatta and Durai, P. 2014. Macropropagation of banana -
University, 85p. Effect of bio-fertilizers and plant hormones. Indian
KAU [Kerala Agricultural University]. 2016. Package J. Hort., 71(3): 299-305.
of Practices Recommendations: Crops 2016 (15th Sheela, V.L. and Nair, S.R. 2001. Growth, flowering and
Ed.). Kerala Agriculture University, Thrissur, Kerala, yield potential of tissue culture banana (Musa AAB
392p. cv. Nendan). J. Trop. Agric., 39: 1-4.
Nagorska, K., Bikowski, M. and Obuchowski, M. 2007. Singh, H.P., Uma, S., Selvarajan, R.J. and Karihalo, L.
Multicellular behaviour and production of a wide 2011. Micropropagation for Production of Quality
variety of toxic substances support usage of Bacillus Banana Planting Materials in Asian Pacific. Asian
subtilis as a powerful biocontrol agent. Acta Pacific Consortium on Agricultural Biotechnology
Biochim. Polon., 54: 495-508. (APCoAB), New Delhi, India, 92p.
Njukwe, E., Ouma, E., van Asten, P. J. A., Machunguzi, Suryanarayana, P. 2017. Evaluation of the field
P. and Amah, D. 2013. Challenges and opportunities performance of different macropropagated cultivars
for macropropagation technology for Musa spp. of banana (Musa spp. L.). M.Sc thesis, OUAT,
among small holder farmers and small- and medium- Bhubaneswar, 89 p.
scale enterprises. In: Blomme G., van Asten, P. and Tenkouano, A., Hauser, S., Coyne, D. and Coulibaly, O.
Vanlauwe, B. (eds.), Banana Systems in the Humid 2006. Clean planting material and management
Highlands of Sub-Saharan Africa. CAB practices for sustained production of banana and
International, pp. 66-71. plantain in Africa. Chron. Hort., 46 (2): 14-18.