© 2001 Rahmi Yunianti                                                                                                           Posted 5 December  2001   [rudyct] 

Makalah Falsafah Sains (PPs 702)   

Program Pasca Sarjana / S3

Institut Pertanian Bogor

December 2001

 

Dosen:

Prof Dr Ir Rudy C Tarumingkeng (Penanggung Jawab

 

 

INFLORESCENCE AND PRODUCTION OF BUSHY PEPPER AT VARIOUS WATERING AND FERTILIZATION

 

 

By

 

Rahmi Yunianti

A156010061

E-mail: rahmi_yunianti@yahoo.com

 

 

 

 

 

ABSTRACT

            The aim of this experiment was to get information regarding the amount of fertilizer and irrigation necessary for maximum production of bushy peppers.  The experiment was conducted in the green house of Cimanggu Research Institute for Spice and Medicinal Crops, Bogor, from October 1999 to September 2000.  The experiment was arranged in a factorial randomized block design with three replications and six plants per unit.  There were two factors treated : five levels of watering (7 mm/2 days/plant, 14 mm/2 days/plant, 21 mm/2 days/plant, 14 mm/4 days/plant and 21 mm/4 days/plant) and four levels of NPKMg 12-12-17-2 (0 g/plant/year,100 g/plant/year, 200 g/plant/year and 300 g/plant/year).

The result showed the inflorescence and production of bushy pepper were affected by interaction between watering and fertilization.  Stress condition that effected by unbalanced watering and fertilization on inflorescence stage adapted by reduced flowers bunch number, abbreviated of inflorescence process, prolonged period of inflorescence, and abbreviated of flowers bunch.  The condition also caused reduced fruits bunch number, abbreviated of fruits bunch, accelerated of fruits formation, reduced of fruit per flower percentage, and reduced of production per plant. The highest production produced by combination of 21 mm/plant and 100 g NPKMg 12-12-17-2/plant/year.

 

Key words :  bushy pepper, inflorescence, production, watering, fertilization

 

INTRODUCTION

            Peppers have been cultivated extensively in the forest garden in Indonesia.  Farmer cultivated them as climbing plant with supporting poles, so production cost become expensive. In addition, they cultivated peppers without any fertilizer nor irrigation therefore they produced low yield.

Bushy peppers are alternatifes technology that expected increasing yield and reducing production costs.  This type peppers could be cultivated more denssely in the field without supporting poles, so opportuned to cultivated as multiple cropping and intercropping system between other perenial like coconuts (Syakir and Zaubin, 1994; Syakir, 1996).  In addition, bushy peppers reached the reproductive phase earliar than climbing peppers.  Bushy peppers also simple in cultivated and harvested.  Because cuttings derived from flowering shoots bushy peppers have highly photosynthesis (Helmi, 1999).  Their root system are shallow and less leafy.  About 80% of them spreated until 40 cm depth, therefore water have been limited component on bushy peppers cultivating (Pujiharti, Dwiwarni and Muchlas, 1995).  These make the root cannot balance energetic shoot growth.  The condition also caused nutrient deficiency, therefore bushy pepper needs intensive fertilizing for optimum growth.

            Some research about bushy peppers have been done.  However there are very few studies about the cultivatinon method of bushy peppers in fields. The aim of this experiment was to get information regarding the amount of fertilizer and irrigation necessary for maximum production of bushy peppers.

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

            The experiment was conducted in green house of Cimanggu Research Institute for Spice and Medicinal Crops, Bogor, from October 1999 to September 2000.  Materials that used in this experiment were bushy peppers  variety Petaling 1 (planted on June 1996), NPKMg 12-12-17-2 (ingredients Urea, SP 36, KCl and Kieserit) and water. Bushy peppers planted in pots (diameter = 37 cm, high = 50 cm)  that  filled with sandy loam soil (Figure 1).

The experiment was arranged in a factorial randomized block design with three replications and six plants per unit.  There were two factors treated, five levels of watering and four levels of fertilization.  The first factor consist of   7 mm/2 days/plant (W1), 14 mm/2 days/plant (W2), 21 mm/2 days/plant (W3),       14 mm/4 days/plant (W4) and 21 mm/4 days/plant (W5). The second factor consist of 0 g/plant/year (F0), 100 g/plant/year (F1) 200 g/plant/year (F2) and 300 g/plant/year (F3).  Fertilizer divided into four application with proportion 4:3:2:1.  Interval application was 2 month.  Dosage of fertilizer for each treatment and application dishes laid out on Table 1.

 

 


Figure 1.  Bushy pepper planted in pot

 


Table 1.  Dosage of fertilizer for each Treatment and aplication (g/plant)

Fertilizer

H0

H1

H2

H3

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

Urea

0

0

0

0

11.1

8.4

5.6

2.8

22.2

16.8

11.2

5.6

33.3

25.2

16.8

8.4

SP 36

0

0

0

0

13.9

10.4

7.0

3.5

27.8

20.8

14.0

7.0

41.7

31.2

21.0

10.5

KCl

0

0

0

0

11.8

8.8

5.9

1.5

23.6

17.6

11.8

5.8

35.4

26.4

17.7

8.7

Kieserit

0

0

0

0

3.2

2.4

1.5

0.8

6.4

4.8

3.0

1.6

9.6

7.2

4.5

2.4

Total

0

0

0

0

40

30

20

10

80

60

40

20

120

90

60

30

 

 

            Observed variables were number of flowers bunch, process of inflorescence, length of flower bunch, number of fruits bunch, length of fruits bunch, duration of fruits formation, fruits per flowers percentage, dryweight of 100 grains, and production per plant.

 

 

 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Inflorescence

            Number of flowers bunch. Number of flowers bunch was affected by interaction between watering and fertilization.  The greatest number of flowers bunch produced by W4F3, whereas fewer number of flowers bunch dominated by treatment that combined with F0 (Table 2).  Watering that combined with F0 and fertilization that combined with W1 and W4, had prolonged inflorescence.  It seen from flowers bunch existence untill 24 weeks since beginning of experiment (Figure 2).  According to Mubiyanto (1997) water stress condition would be increased ABA hormone formation that function as stimulus of flower formation.

 

Table 2.  Number of flowers bunch

 

Watering

Fertilization

F0

F1

F2

F3

W1

9.2a

19.7cd

31.5fg

52.0l

W2

8.5a

34.3gh

39.6hi

43.4ij

W3

5.1a

39.3hi

41.0ij

50.1kl

W4

10.8ab

25.4de

40.7I

78.6m

W5

14.9bc

46.4jk

25.2de

26.4e

 

Note  :    Numbers followed by the same letters are not significantly different at 5% of DMRT

 

Process of inflorescence. Process of inflorescence classified into 4 stage flower development (Figure 3).  All inflorescence stage were affected by interaction watering and fertilization.  The faster combination that reached stage 1 was W4F0 and the latest was W1F3.  On stage 2, the faster one was W3F2 and the latest was W4F3, on stage 3, the faster one was W5F3 and the latest was W1F3, and on stage 4, the faster one was W4F0 and the latest  was W3F1.  Combination of W1F0, W2F0, W2F1, W3F0, W3F2, and W4F0 reached every inflorescence stage earlier than another combination, whereas combination W1F3 and W4F3 delayed (Table 3).

 

 

Figure 2. Flowers bunch number of bushy peppers at various treatment

 

Different with Iljas (1969) and Helmi (1999) researches, in this experiment founded phenomenon that male flowers could be come out before all female flowers appeared, so stage 3 could be occured faster than stage 2.  Beside of difference of variety and experiment condition, apparently there were another factors that played a part to determined development process of pepper’s flower on that stage.

 

 

Figure 3.  Development of bushy pepper’s flower

(a) bunch of flower, (b) pistil, (c) stamen bunch of flower appeared, (2)stage 1, pistil appeared on

basis of bunch, (3) stage 2, all flowers had pistil, (4) stage 3, stamen appeared on basis of flower,

(5) stage 4, all flowers had stamen and pistil (hermaphrodite flowers), and (6) fruits appeared

 

 

Length of flower bunch. Length of flower bunch was affected by interaction between both treatment.  Combination of W2F3 and W5F3 produced the longest flowers bunch or not significantly different with treatment that produced the longest one on every stage, whereas W1F0, W1F3 and W3F0 produced shorter flowers bunch (Table 3).  Entire treatment  indicated that watering that combined with F0 and fertilization that combined with W1, inclined to produced shorter flowers bunch. Soedarsono (1997) reported that water stress would be reduced size of reproduction organs.

 

Tablel 3.     Inflorescence process and length of fruits bunch in every  flower development stage

 

Treatment

Inflorescence Process

Length of Fruits Bunch

Stage 1

Stage 2

Stage 3

Stage 4

Stage 1

Stage 2

Stage 3

Stage 4

Day after bud appeared

(cm)

W1F0

13.9a

21.9ab

23.4abcd

29.6ab

5.8a

  8.2ab

  8.6abc

  9.1ab

W1F1

14.9abc

26.0def

23.9abcdef

30.0abc

6.4abc

  9.4bcde

  9.3bc

  9.9bcde

W1F2

15.5abcd

23.7abcd

23.8abcde

29.5ab

6.9abcd

  9.7bcdef

  9.3bcd

10.2bcdef

W1F3

19.2g

28.3fg

26.1h

33.5efg

5.8a

  7.4a

  7.3a

  7.8a

W2F0

15.1abc

23.7abcd

23.4abcd

29.9abc

6.3abc

  9.2bcde

  9.1bc

  9.7bcd

W2F1

14.9ab

22.9ab

23.1ab

29.2ab

6.1abc

  9.6bcde

  9.6bcd

10.2bcdef

W2F2

16.4bcdef

23.8abcd

24.7cdefgh

31.1abcde

6.0abc

  8.6abcd

  9.4bcd

10.0bcdef

W2F3

16.2bcde

25.5cdef

25.7gh

30.7abcd

7.7de

11.2f

11.3e

11.8g

W3F0

16.3bcdef

22.7abc

23.1abc

29.8abc

6.1abc

  8.3abc

  8.3ab

  9.1ab

W3F1

18.0fg

24.6bcde

25.0efgh

35.1g

6.6abcd

10.2def

  9.9bcde

11.3efg

W3F2

15.2abc

21.2a

24.2abcdefg

29.8abc

7.0bcd

10.4ef

10.9de

11.4fg

W3F3

17.1def

27.1efg

25.5fgh

33.0defg

7.2cd

10.4ef

10.1cde

11.2defg

W4F0

13.9a

22.7abc

23.7abcde

28.7a

5.9ab

  9.0bcde

  9.1bc

  9.6bc

W4F1

14.2a

23.1abcd

24.3bcdefg

29.1ab

6.2abc

  9.0bcde

  9.2bc

  9.5bc

W4F2

15.2abc

26.1def

24.6bcdefg

29.9abc

7.2cd

  9.9cdef

10.0cde

10.4bcdefg

W4F3

18.1fg

29.3g

25.7gh

34.1fg

6.3abc

  9.1bcde

  8.6abc

  9.5bc

W5F0

16.7cdef

24.5bcde

24.3bcdef

32.3cdef

6.3abc

  8.9abcde

  9.0bc

  9.7bcd

W5F1

17.3ef

25.2cde

24.7defgh

31.3abcde

7.0bcd

  9.7bcde

  9.6bcd

10.3bcdefg

W5F2

16.5bcdef

25.1cde

24.2abcdefg

31.6bcde

7.1cd

  9.8bcdef

  9.7bcd

10.4bcdefg

W5F3

16.7bcdef

24.9bcde

22.6a

31.2abcde

8.4e

10.4ef

  9.9bcde

10.8cdefg

 

Note    Numbers followed by the same letters at the same column are not significantly different at 5% of DMRT

 

 

Production

Number of fruits bunch. Interaction between both treatments significantly influenced to fruits bunch number.  The greatest number of fruits bunch produced by combination of  W3F3 (Table 4).  Observation seen watering that combined with F0 inclined to produced fewer fruits bunch.  Increased of fertilizer quantity showed unconsistency response.  Beside of competition inter plant organs, low nitrogen content on medium appeared as limited factor.  Sopandie (1997a) reported that the fruits developed, they required nitrogen very much.  Nitrogen content in this experiment less than 0.2% (Attachment Table 1).  According to Landon (1984) this number included to low category.

Table 4.  Number of fruits bunch

 

Watering

Fertilization

F0

F1

F2

F3

W1

2.6a

8.0de

6.8cd

4.8b

W2

3.1a

9.3ef

9.7f

11.3g

W3

2.8a

11.2f

11.4g

13.0h

W4

5.4b

4.5ef

6.9cd

8.2de

W5

6.8cd

11.9gh

8.5ef

6.1bc

 

Note  :Numbers followed by the same letters are not significantly different at 5% of DMRT

 

Treatments with low watering inclined to produced fewer fruit bunch number.  Wahid, Djoefrie and Syakir (1999) reported that plant needed more water on generative phase than vegetative phase and beginner of flower formation.  Scarcing water after flower developed caused to failured fertilization and formed abnormal flower and fruit. 

Length of fruits bunch. Length of friuts bunch was influenced by interaction watering and fertilization.  The longest fruits bunch produced by combination of W2F4 and the shortest produced by W1F3 (Table 5).  Shorter fruits bunch inclined produced by watering that combined with F0 or fertilization that combined with W1 or W4.  According to Mubiyanto (1997) water stress resulted shorther plant organ on coffea.  To produced long fruits bunch, suitable combination were W2 with F3, W3 with F1, F2 or F3, and W5 with F2 or F3. 

 

Table 5.  Duration of fruits formation and length of fruits bunch

 

Watering

Duration of Fruits Formation  (day)

Length of Fruits Bunch (cm)

Fertilization

F0

F1

F2

F3

F0

F1

F2

F3

W1

217.7bc

227.8bc

230.0bc

174.1a

9.1ab

  9.9bcd

10.2bcde

  7.8a

W2

237.2c

232.3bc

233.8bc

232.6bc

9.7bc

10.2bcde

10.0bcde

11.8f

W3

229.7bc

232.7bc

233.2bc

235.2bc

9.1ab

11.3def

11.4ef

11.5ef

W4

215.4b

228.2bc

228.9bc

217.1bc

9.6bc

  9.5bc

10.3bcde

  9.5bc

W5

223.7bc

236.2c

233.7bc

223.9bc

9.7bc

10.3bcde

10.4bcdef

10.8cdef

 

Note  Numbers followed by the same letters at the same variable are not significantly different at 5% of DMRT

 

Duration of fruits formation. interaction between both treatments influenced duration of fruits formation significantly.  The faster formation was W1F3, followed by W4F0, whereas the others treatment not significantly different with W2F0 that the longest formation (Table 5).  There were inclined faster harvesting produced by treatment that combined with relatively scarced water.  According to Sopandie (1997b) one of plant adapted mechanism to environtment stress was accelerate their life cycle. 

Fruits per flowers percentage. Friuts per flower percentage influenced by interaction watering and fertilization.  The lowest percentage produced by combination W4F3, followed by W3F2   (Table 6).  Others combination not significantly different with combination W2F0 that produced the highest percentage.  Soedarsono (1997) reported that limited water caused increased of wilting bud percentage on cacao.

Dryweight of 100 grains.  Dryweight of 100 grains just infuenced by watering.  The lowest dryweight produced by W4, whereas the highest one by W2.  Although accepted similar volume with W4, W1 produced dryweight similar with W2 and W5 (Table 7).  According to Mubiyanto (1997) untill certain limited, grains size become bigger and bigger when climate dried up, more than that, grains size become smaller affected by water deficit.

 

Table 6.  Fruits per flowers percentage and production per plant

 

Watering

Fruits per Flowers Percentage (%)

Production per Plant (g)

Fertilization

F0

F1

F2

F3

F0

F1

F2

F3

W1

75.6c

67.2abc

72.2bc

66.1abc

  93.7abcd

  95.2bcd

104.3bcd

  73.2ab

W2

76.2c

68.1abc

74.1bc

67.5abc

133.0de

162.9ef

186.2f

  85.3ab

W3

67.1abc

75.2bc

63.0ab

74.4bc

  89.5abc

244.3g

179.2f

102.8bcd

W4

75.7c

74.1bc

64.5abc

59.2a

  89.5abc

  71.4ab

  68.9ab

  51.4a

W5

73.8bc

67.9abc

67.8abc

71.8bc

146.1ef

228.8g

155.0ef

131.3cde

 

Note  :numbers followed by the same letters at the same variable are not significantly different at 5% of DMRT

 

 

 

Table 7.    Influence of Water Levels to Dryweight of 100 Grains

 

Watering

W1

W2

W3

W4

W5

Dryweight (g)

3.6528b

3.7000b

3.2498ab

2.7835a

3.6039b

 

Note  :  Numbers followed by the same letters aree not significantly different at 5% of DMRT

 

Production per plant. Production per plant significantly affected by interaction watering and fertilization.  The highest production produced by W3F1, however not significantly different with W5F1.  The lowest production produced by combination of W4F3 (Table 6).  Combination of high fertilization and limited watering produced the lowest production.  Reduced production caused by limited water also reported on coffea (Mubiyanto, 1997), cacao (Soedarsono, 1997), chasew nut (Lubis Pitono and Wahid, 1999) and pepper (Wahid et al., 1999).

 

CONCLUSION

Inflorescence and production of bushy pepper were affected by interaction between watering and fertilization.  Stress condition that effected by unbalanced watering and fertilization on inflorescence stage adapted by reduced flowers bunch number, abbreviated of inflorescence process, prolonged period of inflorescence, and abbreviated of flowers bunch.  The condition also caused abbreviated of fruits bunch number, accelerated of fruits formation, abbreviated of fruits bunch, reduced of fruit per flower percentage, and reduced of production per plant. The highest production produced by combination of 21 mm/plant and 100 g NPKMg 12-12-17-2/plant/year.

REFERENCES

 

Helmi.  1999.  Pengaruh kerapatan tanam dan cara pemupukan terhadap pertumbuhan lada perdu (Piper nigrum L.) di bawah tegakan kelapa.  Thesis.  Magister Program of IPB.  Bogor.  (Not publicated). 79 p.

 

Iljas, B. H.  1960.  Beberapa catatan tentang biologi bunga lada (Piper nigrum L.)  Agricultural Research Institute Report 157 : 1–22.

 

Landon, J. R.  1984.  Booker tropical manual. A handbook for soil survey and agriculture land evaluation in tropical and subtropical.  Booker Agriculture Land  International  Ltd.  Longmand Inc.  New York.  197 p. 

 

Lubis, M. Y.  J.  Pitono, dan P. Wahid.  1999.  Pengaruh cekaman air terhadap pertumbuhan dan produksi pada tanaman jambu mente.  Industrial Crops Research Journal 5(1) : 1-7.

 

Mubiyanto, B. M.  1997.  Tanggapan tanaman kopi terhadap cekaman air.  Coffea and Cacao Reseach Center Report 13(2) : 83-95.

 

Pujiharti, Y., I. Dwiwarni dan Muchlas.  1995.  Prospek pengembangan lada perdu untuk ekspor dalam meningkatkan pendapatan petani.  Agricultural Research and Development Journal 14 (4) : 79-85.

 

Soedarsono.  1997.  Respon fisiologi tanaman kakao terhadap cekaman air. Coffea and Cacao Reseach Center Report 13(2) : 96-109.

 

Sopandie, D.  1997a.  Fungsi dan metabolisme hara serta hubungannya dengan reproduksi tanaman.   Post Graduate Program of IPB.  Bogor.      56 p.

 

Sopandie, D.  1997b.  Adaptasi tanaman terhadap cekaman hara.   Post Graduate Program of IPB.  Bogor.  69 p.

 

Syakir, M. 1996.  Budidaya lada perdu.  P 93-104.  In Wahid, Soetopo, Zaubin, Mustika dan Nurdjannah (Ed.).  Pepper Crops Monograph of Agricultural Research and Development Institute. Research Institute for Spice and Medicinal Crops.  Bogor.

 

Syakir, M. dan R. Zaubin. 1994.  Pengadaan bahan tanam lada perdu.  Paper on Symposium II Reasearch and Development of Industrial Crops.  Bogor, November 21-22,  1994. 

 

Wahid, P., H. M. H. B. Djoefri dan M. Syakir.  1999.  Manipulasi agronomik dalam upaya meningkatkan daya saing dan keunggulan komparatif lada perdu.  RUT Report.  State Minister of Research and Technology Office and National Research Council (Not Publicated).  104 p.

 

 

 

 

Attachment Table 1.  Nutrient contents before and after experiment

 

Fertilization levels

Watering levels

W1

W2

W3

W4

W5

Before

F0

N (%)

0.16

0.16

0.15

0.15

0.16

P(ppm)

31.7

21.8

13.7

13.9

24.1

K (me/100g)

2.2

2.2

2.0

2.3

2.3

Mg (%)

2.9

2.9

2.4

1.2

2.7

F1

N (%)

0.16

0.17

0.17

0.16

0.18

P(ppm)

120.5

32.6

116.8

32.6

35.2

K (me/100g)

4.7

3.9

2.9

3.8

3.6

Mg (%)

2.9

3.3

4.8

2.3

2.6

F2

N (%)

0.17

0.17

0.18

0.17

0.18

P(ppm)

146.8

187.9

34.6

141.1

151.6

K (me/100g)

5.7

3.8

3.2

5.5

4.1

Mg (%)

2.4

2.6

3.4

2.4

3.0

F3

N (%)

0.19

0.17

0.18

0.18

0.19

P(ppm)

223.7

240.0

177.4

227.4

35.2

K (me/100g)

6.0

3.5

3.4

5.3

4.7

Mg (%)

3.7

4.4

3.4

3.1

3.2

after

F0

N (%)

0.19

0.18

0.17

0.19

0.18

P(ppm)

8.7

7.5

4.0

7.3

13.5

K (me/100g)

3.4

5.7

5.6

3.6

4.1

Mg (%)

0.5

0.6

0.6

0.6

0.6

F1

N (%)

0.18

0.17

0.18

0.19

0.18

P(ppm)

25.5

9.5

50.0

37.5

45.0

K (me/100g)

4.2

5.8

5.8

3.9

5.5

Mg (%)

1.5

1.7

1.1

1.5

1.4

F2

N (%)

0.17

0.18

0.17

0.16

0.17

P(ppm)

41.0

25.0

70.0

45.0

67.5

K (me/100g)

4.3

6.0

6.0

4.7

6.6

Mg (%)

2.4

2.4

1.2

2.0

1.8

F3

N (%)

0.16

0.16

0.16

0.17

0.16

P(ppm)

325.0

115.0

179.5

225.0

140.0

K (me/100g)

4.8

7.6

6.8

5.0

6.8

Mg (%)

2.5

2.3

1.4

2.4

2.6