Response of stored INIAP 650 cassava stems to the
application of biostimulants in Santa Ana, Manabí.
Respuesta de varetas de yuca del
cultivar INIAP 650 almacenadas a la
aplicación de bioestimulantes en el cantón Santa Ana,
Manabí
Agustín Álvarez Plúa 1
María Elena Baque 2
Washington Narvaez Campana 3
Fernando Ayón Villao 4
Julio Gabriel-Ortega 5
Published Edwards Deming Higher
Technological Institute. Quito
- Ecuador Periodicity April - June Vol. 1, Num. 25, 2025 pp.
54-64 http://centrosuragraria.com/index.php/revista Dates of receipt Received: January, 2024 Approved: March 5, 2025 Correspondence author agustin.alvarez @unesum.edu.ec Creative Commons License Creative Commons License,
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0
International.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.es
[1] Mg. Universidad Estatal del
Sur de Manabí, Jipijapa, Ecuador. agustin.plua@unesum.edu.ec,
https://orcid.org/ 0000-0003-0176-1314 2 Agricultural Engineer, Universidad
Estatal del Sur de Manabí, Jipijapa, Ecuador. maria.baque@unesum.edu.ec, https://orcid.org/0009-0009-2907-7689 3 Mg. Universidad Estatal
del Sur de Manabí, Jipijapa, Ecuador. washington.narvaez@unesum.edu.ec, https://orcid.org/ 0000-0002-6674-2088 4 Mg. Universidad
Estatal del Sur de Manabí, Jipijapa, Ecuador. fernando.ayon@unesum.edu.ec, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4772-9344 5 Phd. Universidad Estatal del Sur de Manabí, Jipijapa, Ecuador. julio.gabriel@unesum.edu.ec, http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9776-9235
Key words: Incidence, storage, sprouting, multiplication,
quantitative variables.
Resumen: Con el
objetivo de evaluar la respuesta de las varetas de yuca (Manihot
esculenta Crantz) a tres épocas de almacenamiento y dos bioestimulantes, se implementó una investigación en el cantón Santa Ana de la provincia Manabí
en un diseño experimental de bloques completamente aleatorios con arreglo
factorial 3 x 3 con tres repeticiones y nueve tratamientos, que corresponde al
factor A: Bioestimulantes (A1: Sin bioestimulantes, A2: biol y A3:
lixiviado) y el factor B: Almacenamiento (B1: 30, B2: 60 y B3: 90) días. Las
variables evaluadas fueron número de brotes, porcentaje de brotes, altura de
brotes (cm), diámetro de brotes (cm), largo de hoja (cm), número de raíces,
peso de raíces (g), longitud de raíces (cm). Los resultados mostraron que en
los efectos simples y principales el mejor bioestimulante
fue el lixiviado con un promedio de 14,26 (cm) para longitud de las raíces. El
factor B (almacenamiento), el mejor tiempo para almacenar las varetas de yuca
fueron a los 30 y 60 días. Cabe resaltar que a los 30 días, se obtuvo un
promedio de 9,89 para número de brotes, 98,89% porcentaje de brotes, 5,28 cm
número de brotes, 18,39 (g) peso de raíces, 12,46 (cm) longitud de raíces. Sin
embargo se observó una fuerte interacción entre los factores bioestimulantes y días de almacenamiento (30 y 60 días)
para las variables altura de brote, número de brotes, largo de raíz y peso de
raíz.
Palabras
clave: Incidencia,
almacenamiento, brotes, multiplicación, variables cuantitativas.
Introduction
Cassava is
native to South America, as it has been domesticated for more than 5000 years
and is currently cultivated extensively in tropical and subtropical areas
around the world (Paredes et al., 2022). Suarez and Mederos
(2011) mention that its genetic center of origin is in the
Amazon Basin and indicate that the scientific name of cassava was
originally given by Crantz in 1766. In Ecuador, about
96 210 t are produced, of which 8 502 t correspond to the province of Manabí
according to official data from the National Institute of Statistics and Census
(INEC, 2023). In addition, it can be indicated that cassava cultivation is
widespread nationwide, with the provinces of greatest production being Manabí,
Cotopaxi, Santo Domingo de los Tsachilas,
Los Ríos, Esmeraldas, Pichincha, Guayas, Loja and Morona Santiago (Corozo, 2020). The quality of yucca "seed"
depends on its maturity, thickness, number of buds per stake and size. While Arismendi (2001) mentions that the selection of the cassava
sticks for planting, those of good thickness should be selected, because they
resist adverse weather conditions for a longer time and guarantee a good
percentage of "germination", on the other hand, more vigorous cassava
plants are obtained. To avoid mechanical damage and rubbing between the stem
bundles and not to generate bud damage, they should be stored in the following
way; in vertical position and verify the tropism of the buds that should point
upwards in the same position as it grows in the field, therefore, in this way the
loss of planting material by sprouting is reduced (Rodriguez et al., 2021). During the storage of the
rods there are some problems such as dehydration, bud re-sprouting and attack
by some pests, so, to avoid losses, a part of the crop can be left unharvested
and the branches can be placed in a vertical position inside, therefore, the
appropriate environment for this process is the one generated by the plantation
itself (Rodriguez, 2021). Valverde-Lucio et al. (2020) describes that "Biostimulants are formulated products of biological origin
that improve plant productivity". Biostimulants
have the potential to act on plant physiology through different nutrient
pathways to improve crop vigor, yields, quality and shelf life, post-harvest
conservation (Tarazona, 2020). In the province of
Manabí and especially in the canton of Santa Ana, cassava is grown by small
farmers with low economic income, because it is produced in poor soils or
marginal lands, so they use as planting material, stems (pieces of stems), in
many cases are fresh and in others have a long storage period, whose sprouting
is significantly affected, thus causing a decrease in the number of plants at
the field level. Ortega & Velásquez (2006),
indicate that farmers store whole cassava stems in bundles and put them in the
shade, in order to avoid dehydration until the moment of planting. Therefore,
inadequate storage causes to the planting material, loss of germination power,
vigor, weight of the stems, bud sprouts, presence of pests, diseases and dehydration
of the cuttings, added to the negative effect of abiotic factors that exert on
the stored stems, which ultimately causes a decrease in the quality of the
stems. Therefore, the objective of this research was to evaluate the response
of cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) stems to three storage periods and two biostimulants.
Methodology
The research was carried out on the slope of
the Santa Ana canton, province of Manabí (PDyOT, 2015). Most of the canton is located in the very dry tropical
bioclimatic zone, with a temperature that ranges between 18 and 22ºC and has an
average annual rainfall of 711.8 mm
Study
factors
The research was bifactorial.
The study factors were: Factor A: biostimulants and Factor B: days of storage.
Treatments
The treatments were: biostimulants
(A1: no biostimulants, A2: biol
and A3: bovine manure leachate) in three storage periods (B1: 30, B2: 60 and
B3: 90 days).
Statistical
analysis
The research was implemented in a completely
randomized block experimental design in a 3 x 3 factorial arrangement with
three replications and nine treatments (Gabriel et al., 20 22).
On the basis of the defined model, analyses of
variance were performed to test hypotheses about fixed effects, as well as
comparisons of treatment means using Tukey's test at 5%. The analysis of
variance was also used to estimate the variance components for the random
effects. The indicated analyses were performed in Infostat
software (InfoStat, 2020).
Study
variables
The following variables were evaluated: number
of shoots (NDB), percentage of shoot bud break (PDB), shoot height (ADB), shoot
diameter (DDB), leaf length (LDH), root weight (PDR) and root length (LDR). The
study variables were evaluated at three storage dates: 30 days, 60 days and 90
days. Once the rods were treated with biostimulants
and without biostimulants, they were stored as 1 m
rods in groups or bundles of 10 stems, and then cut at 20 cm and transplanted
in polyethylene plastic bags for later evaluation.
Research
management
The land was prepared where the 1 m long sticks
were stored, then the selection of the cassava sticks was made, and then the
container was prepared with the biostimulants
for the immersion of the sticks. The
substrate was also prepared with local soil, sand and organic matter in a 2:1:1
ratio, for filling the bags, in which the cassava rods were planted, and in which
the irrigation and weed control was
carried out every 15 days.
Results
The analysis of variance (Table 1) for simple factors
such as Factor A showed highly significant differences (P<0.01) for LDR. For
Factor B (Storage) there were highly significant differences (P<0.01) for
NDB, PDB, ADB and PDR; and significant differences (P<0.05) for LDH,
Table 1. Analysis of variance for morpho-agronomic
characters of cassava.
|
Fv |
gl |
|
|
Mean squares |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
NDB |
PDB |
AD |
DD |
LDH |
NDR |
PDR |
LDR |
|
|
Rep |
2 |
1,37 |
137,04 |
0,18 |
0,00 |
8,35 |
1,21 |
0,14 |
19,96 |
|
|
Factor A |
2 |
2,48 |
248,15 |
0,31 |
0,00 |
14,84 |
1,36 |
0,03 |
62,45** |
|
|
Factor B |
2 |
15,59** |
1559,26** |
12,66** |
0,05** |
38,93* |
11,05* |
4,39** |
16,79* |
|
|
A x B |
4 |
1,43 |
142,59 |
0,16 |
0,01 |
1,89 |
38,88** |
1,05 |
26,14** |
|
|
Error |
16 |
1,83 |
182,87 |
0,36 |
0,01 |
6,44 |
21,31 |
0,54 |
2,71 |
|
|
Total |
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CV |
|
14,9 |
14,9 |
20,04 |
27,95 |
31,41 |
26,03 |
20,86 |
14,29 |
|
*: Significant
at P<0.05, **: Highly significant at P<0.01, Ns: Not significant. NDB:
Number of shoots, PDB: Percentage of sprouting, ADB: Shoot height (cm), DDB:
Shoot diameter (cm), LDH: Leaf length (cm), NDR: Number of roots, PDR: Root
weight (g), LDR: Root length (cm).
NDH and LDR. The interaction showed highly significant
differences (P<0.01) for NDR and LDR. Coefficients of variance (CV%) ranged from 15 to 28%.
The analysis of means by Tukey determined that
there were interactions of the evaluated factors, so that the simple and main
effects are no longer significant. In this study it was observed that there
were significant differences (P<0.05) for the interactions in the ADB, NDB,
LDR and PDR; where the best treatment for ADB was the interaction A0B3 (23.52
cm), for NDB the best treatment was for A0B1 (7.85), for LDR and PDR the best
interaction was for A2B1 with 21.67 cm and 17.77 g respectively.
The simple and main effects of Factor B (days
of storage) for the variables NDB, PDB, and LDH, showed significant differences
(P<0.01) for 30 days with 9.89 shoots and 9.78 shoots, respectively; and,
for the 60 days with 9.78 shoots and 97.97%, respectively. For the LDH
variable, the best response was obtained with the 60-day treatment with 10.20
cm.
Table 2. Mean analysis of morphological variables evaluated.
|
Bistimulants |
NDB |
PDB |
ADB |
DDB |
LDH |
NDB |
LDR |
PDR |
|
Factor A |
N.S |
N.S |
N.S |
N.S |
N.S |
N.S |
N.S |
* |
|
With Biol |
9,67 |
96,67 |
10,36 |
0,36 |
8,5 |
4,18 |
13,78 |
9,00 c |
|
Without
biostimulant |
9,89 |
88,89 |
11,12 |
0,41 |
7,76 |
4,73 |
12,61 |
11,31 b |
|
Leachate |
8,67 |
86,67 |
8,4 |
0,33 |
6,99 |
4,39 |
13,24 |
14,26 a |
|
DSH |
1,65 |
16,45 |
6,77 |
0,21 |
3,09 |
1,4 |
6,49 |
2,00 |
|
factor B |
* |
* |
* |
N.S |
** |
** |
** |
* |
|
30 Days |
9,89 a |
98,89 a |
7,63 b |
0,40 |
8.01 ab |
5,28a |
18,39 a |
12,46a |
|
60 days |
9,78 a |
97,97 a |
19,14 a |
0,41 |
10,20 a |
3,74b |
12.47ab |
12,15a |
|
90 Days |
7,56 b |
75,56 b |
3,13 b |
0,3 |
6,04 b |
4.28ab |
8,78 b |
9,96b |
|
DSH |
1,65 |
16,44 |
7,77 |
0,21 |
3,09 |
1,40 |
6,49 |
2,00 |
|
Interaction |
N.S |
N.S |
** |
N.S |
N.S |
** |
** |
** |
|
A0B1 |
10,00 |
100,00 |
3,72b |
0,41 |
6,97 |
7,85a |
18.83ab |
9,94c |
|
A0B2 |
10,00 |
100,00 |
2,70b |
0,44 |
10,75 |
2,67b |
11.67ab |
11.44bc |
|
A0B3 |
6,67 |
66,67 |
23,52a |
0,38 |
5,55 |
3,67b |
7.33 ab |
12.56 bc |
|
A1B1 |
10,00 |
100,00 |
8.59 ab |
0,3 |
9,49 |
3,33 b |
14.67 ab |
9,66 c |
|
A1B2 |
10,00 |
100,00 |
18.82 ab |
0,42 |
11,05 |
4,22b |
11.67 ab |
9,11 c |
|
A1B3 |
9,67 |
97,97 |
3,72 b |
0,31 |
7,95 |
5.00 ab |
14.00 ab |
8,20 c |
|
A2B1 |
9,33 |
93,33 |
7,17 b |
0,50 |
7,56 |
4.67ab |
21,67 a |
17,77 a |
|
A2B2 |
9,00 |
90,00 |
15.09 ab |
0,37 |
8,58 |
4,33b |
13.07ab |
15.88 ab |
|
A2B3 |
7,00 |
70,00 |
2,69 b |
0,22 a |
4,61 |
4,17 b |
5,00 b |
9,11 c |
|
DSH |
3,90 |
39,28 |
16,17 |
0,51 |
7,37 |
3,35 |
15,5 |
4,78 |
*= Significant at 5%, **=Highly
significant 1%, NS= Not significant. NDB: Number of shoots, PDB: Percentage of
sprouting, ADB: Shoot height (cm), DDB: Shoot diameter (cm), LDH: Leaf length
(cm), NDR: Number of roots, PDR: Root weight (g), LDR: Root length (cm).
In the present
investigation, it was observed that the application of biostimulants
contributed to improve root length; vermicompost
leachate and bovine manure were the best treatments. Results agree with those
reported by Veobides et al., (2023), who found that
basil plants treated by foliar spray with dilutions of vermicompost
humic extract (VHE) of bovine manure and subjected to
low water supplies, favorably stimulated root length under abiotic stress
conditions. Perez (2018), on the other hand, found that the application of vermicompost humic acids to rice
(Oriza sativa L.) plants produced a significant
increase in root length under water stress conditions.
In the research
carried out by Moncayo (2022), he agrees with regard
to the variable root length, where higher average values were obtained with the
application of biostimulants, obtaining in the first
range of significance treatment 1 or biol 1 at a dose
of 1 (B1D1), in the second range treatment 4 (B2D1), for the third range of
significance treatment 7 (B3D1), in the fourth range treatment 0 or control, in
the fifth range treatment 2 (B1D2), in the sixth range treatment 3 (B1D3), in
the seventh range treatment 3 (B1D3), in the seventh range treatment 5 (B2D2)
and treatment 6 (B2D3), in the fifth rank treatment 2 (B1D2), in the sixth rank
treatment 3 (B1D3), in the seventh rank of significance treatment 5 (B2D2) and
treatment 6 (B2D3), while in the last level treatments 8 and 9, (B3D2) and
(B3D3), respectively, therefore the best result was obtained as treatment 1
(B1D1) or biol 1 prepared based on 10 % of dry matter
at a dose 1 of 10 % biol 1 and 90 % of water with a
length of 27.67 cm.
However, significant
increases were also observed for number of shoots, percentage of shoot shoot shoot, number of roots and
root length. The best treatments were at 30 and 60 days, with a root weight of
18.39 g. Dalmacio (2020) ratified the mentioned
results when he applied 2.0 liters of biol and 0.5
liters fertigation, every 14 days, obtaining 406 g beets and indicated that it
is the best natural fertilizer and the cheapest in the world with which good
results are obtained, The most important aspect of the generation of this
methodology was the use of organic fertilizers because it allowed improving the
crop diameter, using the appropriate doses of
bistimulants, because they complement the
nutritional requirements of the crop.
In the study on
cassava, in the variable percentage of sprouts, significant differences were
observed at 30 and 90 days after the application of biostimulants
with respect to those studied by Gómez (2022), which showed that the number of
sprouts was higher when using 25 L/ha of humic acids,
reaching a height of 3.67 meters, and the treatment without control in the
number of sprouts and using 0 L/ha of humic acids
reached 3.42 meters,67 meters and the treatment without control in the number
of shoots and using 0 L/ha of humic acids 3.42 m
being statistically different from all the others, the treatments where control
was exercised on the number of shoots presented the best yields, except for the
treatment without control in the number of shoots applying 25 L/ha of humic acids that also showed the highest values.
On the other hand,
Vasquez (2011), explains that the response to the addition of biol is direct, since the higher the dose of foliar organic
fertilizer, the greater the positive response for the agronomic characteristics
evaluated, with a concentration of 25% (2.5 liters of Biol
plus 7.5 liters of water), and is an alternative foliar organic fertilizer for
the production of green matter forage and cassava dry matter.
While, Rojas et al., (2019),
in their research achieved favorable results in the use of biostimulants
such as bovine biol at 5%, bovine biol
at 10% and earthworm leachate at 50% with yields of 18.00 t ha-1, 15.72 t ha-1 and
16.44 t ha-1 respectively, suggesting that they are an alternative for foliar
applications for cassava crop.
Conclusions
The biostimulants have an effect on the variables studied, with
vermicompost leachate having the best effect on root
length. As for the best storage times for the rods, they were 30 and 60 days,
which allowed quality rods with a greater possibility of rooting.
References
Arismendi, L. (2001). Cultural practices, storage and
processing of the cassava crop Manihot esculenta Crantz. In: Associate
professor promotion work. Universidad de Oriente. School of Agronomic
Engineering. 2nd Ed. Caracas Venezuela: Jusepín.
Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/HP/Downloads/Dialnet-InvestigacionSobreElCultivoDeLaYucaManihotesculent-2221453.pdf.
Corozo, L. Héctor, E.
Macías, F. Vásquez, B. Pinargote, B. Cobeña, G. Mendoza, A. & Arteaga, F.
( 2020). Micropropagation of two Ecuadorian
varieties of cassava (Manihot esculenta CRANTZ). Technical University of
Manabí, Portoviejo, Ecuador.
Dalmacio, C. C. T. (2020). Biol Dosage and Fertigation with Efficient Microorganisms on the yield of Beetroot (Beta vulgaris L.), in Edaphoclimatic Conditions of Cáhuac-Yarowilca 2019. [Thesis, Universidad Nacional Hermilio Valdizán]. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13080/6181
Gabriel, J., Valverde, A., Indacochea, B., Castro, C., Vera, M., Alcívar, J. & Vera, R. (2022). Experimental designs: Theory and practice for agricultural experiments (2nd Ed.). Editorial MAWIL, Universidad Estatal del Sur de Manabí. Quito, Ecuador. https://doi.org/10.26820/978-9942-602-26-8
Gómez
M.D. (2022). Effects of sprout number management and humic
acid application on growth and yield in cassava crop; [Thesis, Universidad
Rafael Landívar].
http://recursosbiblio.url.edu.gt/tesisjcem/2014/06/17/Gomez-Marcos.pdf
InfoStat (2020). Software for statistical analysis.
https://www.infostat.com.ar/
INEC (2018). Statistics of cassava
production and planting areas in Manabí. Informe
Técnico de Estadística de Siembra y Producción de yuca en Manabí. National Institute of
Statistics and Census (INEC), Quito, Ecuador.
Moncayo, E. G. (2022). Effect of rabbit manure biol on the development of hydroponic green forage of maize (Zea mays L.) [Thesis, Universidad Central del Ecuador]. http://www.dspace.uce.edu.ec/handle/25000/27060
Ortega, E., & Velásquez, E. (2006), Guía para la producción de semillas asexual de yuca, Obtención y manejo de estacas de calidad para la producción integral de yuca. Research Fonaiap-Research Center. Agropecuarias del Estado Monagas, Maturin. ISBN: 980-318-044-4. http://www.sian.inia.gob.ve/FonaiapDivulga/fd53/yuca.htm
Paredes, N., Lima, L. V.,
Caicedo, c., Fernández, F., Subia, C., Tinoco, L., & Monteros-Altamirano,
A. (2022). Guia para la producción y
manejo integrado del cultivo de yuca para la amazonia ecuatoriana. Ecuador:
First Edition, 2021 ©Ministerio de Agricultura y GanaderíaAv. Amazonas y Eloy
Alfaro.
Perez, J.J.R. (2018). Effect of a
natural biostimulant as a salt stress attenuator in
basil (Ocimum basilicum
L.) varieties.; Available from:
http://dspace.cibnor.mx:8080/handle/123456789/2183
Rodríguez E, Garavito L, Cardona O, Germán
G, & Cañar D. (2021) Technical manual for mass propagation of cassava
vegetative seed by mini cuttings in the field. (Colombia): agrosavia,
2021.Pag, 18.
Rodríguez, E.
G. (2021). Technical manual for mass propagation of cassava vegetative seed
by mini cuttings in the field. Mosquera,
Colombia: AGROSAVIA.MAGAZINE???VOLUME, NUMBER AND PAGES
MISSING.
Rojas, P. F. (2019). Evaluation
of liquid organic fertilizers in cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) AND castella bean [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp] crops. [Thesis, Institution for Teaching and Research in
Agricultural Sciences]. http://hdl.handle.net/10521/4210
Suárez, L., & Mederos, V. (2011). Notes on the
cultivation of cassava (Manihot esculenta
Crantz). Current trends. Cultivos
Tropicales, 2011, vol. 32, no. 3, p. 27-35. ISSN 0258-5936
Tarazona, A. (2020). Biostimulants: What they are and what they are used for.
Retrieved from
https://www.antoniotarazona.com/bioestimulantes-que-son-y-para-que- sirven/
Valverde-Lucio, Y., Moreno-Quinto, J., Quijije-Quiroz,
K., Castro-Landín, A., Merchán-García, W., & Gabriel-Ortega, Julio. (2020). Biostimulants:
An innovation in agriculture for coffee (Coffea arabica L) cultivation. Journal of
the Selva Andina Research Society, 11(1),
18-28.
http://www.scielo.org.bo/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2072-92942020000100003&lng=es&tlng=es.
Vásquez, D. J. (2011) Evaluation of four doses of biol (foliar organic fertilizer) and its effect on the agronomic characteristics of cassava (Manihot esculenta) forage, clone piririca in the Zungarococha farm. [Thesis, Universidad Nacional de la Amazonia Peruana]. https://repositorio.unapiquitos.edu.pe/bitstream/handle/20.500.12737/1856/Jos% c3%a9_Caratula_Titulo_2011.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y
Veobides-Amador, H., Guridi-Izquierdo, F., Cartaya-Rubio, O., Vázquez-Padrón, V., Alarcón-Santos, O. A., & Martínez-Balmori, D. (2023). Effect of a vermicompost extract on Lactuca sativa L. grown under low water supplies. Tropical Crops, 43(2), 09.