Searching for Suitable Cultivation System of Swiss Chard (Beta vulgaris subsp. cicla (L.) W.D.J.Koch) in the Tropical Lowland

Ria, Rofiqoh P.; Lakitan, Benyamin; Sulaiman, Firdaus; Yakup, Yakup

Searching for Suitable Cultivation System of Swiss Chard (Beta vulgaris subsp. cicla (L.) W.D.J.Koch) in the Tropical Lowland

Journal of Horticultural Research

Volume 31 (2023): Issue 1 (June 2023)

By:

Rofiqoh P. Ria

, Benyamin Lakitan

, Firdaus Sulaiman

and Yakup Yakup

Open Access

|Feb 2023

Figures & Tables

Upper and bottom surfaces of the PET raft for vegetable floating culture. The ¾-inch PVC pipe (1), elbow connector (2), T-connector (3), arranged PET bottles (4), and stainless mosquito net (5)

The effect of cultivation systems and cultivars of the Swiss chard on fresh weight (A–B) and number of leaves (C–D) at 22, 25, and 28 days after transplanting (DAT). The different letters on standard error bar are significantly different based on the LSD at p ≤ 0.05

Water content of leaf blade and petiole amongst three different cultivation systems

Cultivation	Blade water content (%)	Petiole water content (%)
22 DAT
Conventional	89.4 ± 0.44 b	87.4 ± 3.75 a
Floating	90.5 ± 0.71 ab	92.7 ± 0.57 a
Bottom-wet	91.5 ± 0.33 a	92.2 ± 1.08 a
25 DAT
Conventional	90.3 ± 0.39 a	91.6 ± 0.61 a
Floating	90.4 ± 0.49 a	93.1 ± 0.12 a
Bottom-wet	88.5 ± 2.02 a	91.6 ± 1.31 a
28 DAT
Conventional	87.6 ± 0.39 b	89.9 ± 0.45 b
Floating	89.8 ± 0.16 a	92.5 ± 0.22 a
Bottom-wet	88.4 ± 1.08 b	89.8 ± 0.54 b

The leaf area estimation model and coefficient determination (R2) for ‘Red Ruby’, ‘Yellow Canary’, and ‘Pink Passion’ cultivars of the Swiss chard plant

Cultivar	Regression	Predictor	Model	R²
‘Red Ruby’	Zero-Intercept Linear	Length × Width	LA = 0.695 LW	0.981
		Length	LA = 5.704 L	0.924
		Width	LA = 9.816 W	0.940

	Power	Length × Width	LA = 0.786 LW^0.972	0.921
		Length	LA = 0.406 L^1.991	0.856
		Width	LA = 1.973 W^1.746	0.866

‘Yellow Canary’	Zero-Intercept Linear	Length × Width	LA = 0.658 LW	0.982
		Length	LA = 6.302 L	0.931
		Width	LA = 11.887 W	0.937

	Power	Length × Width	LA = 1.138 LW^0.893	0.934
		Length	LA = 0.791 L^1.707	0.836
		Width	LA = 2.759 W^1.631	0.842

‘Pink Passion’	Zero-Intercept Linear	Length × Width	LA = 0.666 LW	0.976
		Length	LA = 6.021 L	0.925
		Width	LA = 10.028 W	0.927

	Power	Length × Width	LA = 0.909 LW^0.937	0.904
		Length	LA = 0.440 L^1.968	0.829
		Width	LA = 2.472 W^1.622	0.817

Fresh and dry weights of the leaf and petiole in three different Swiss chard cultivars

Cultivar	Leaf FW (g)	Leaf DW (g)	Petiole FW (g)	Petiole DW (g)
22 DAT

‘Red Ruby’	27.6 ± 4.60 a	2.03 ± 0.50 a	10.8 ± 2.90 a	0.91 ± 2.28 a
‘Yellow Canary’	31.1 ± 6.01 a	2.75 ± 0.49 a	14.8 ± 2.16 a	1.17 ± 2.08 a
‘Pink Passion’	19.9 ± 0.68 b	2.70 ± 0.28 a	12.5 ± 3.00 a	1.05 ± 1.45 a

25 DAT

‘Red Ruby’	37.6 ± 3.82 ab	3.71 ± 0.45 a	21.2 ± 3.66 a	1.68 ± 0.24 a
‘Yellow Canary’	49.6 ± 10.4 a	4.28 ± 0.70 a	22.2 ± 6.21 a	1.78 ± 0.27 a
‘Pink Passion’	34.2 ± 1.88 b	3.98 ± 0.18 a	28.2 ± 4.36 a	2.00 ± 0.21 a

28 DAT

‘Red Ruby’	44.8 ± 6.95 a	5.28 ± 0.62 a	27.8 ± 5.46 a	2.51 ± 0.21 a
‘Yellow Canary’	52.5 ± 8.01 a	6.12 ± 0.51 a	31.3 ± 7.47 a	2.86 ± 0.47 a
‘Pink Passion’	49.8 ± 5.11 a	5.22 ± 0.34 a	33.6 ± 3.14 a	2.95 ± 0.22 a

Differences in the fresh and dry weight of leaf blades and petioles of Swiss chard cultivated using conventional, floating, or bottom-wet culture

Cultivation	Blade FW (g)	Blade DW (g)	Petiole FW (g)	Petiole DW (g)
22 DAT
Conventional	27.6 ± 0.25 a	2.91 ± 0.12 a	12.9 ± 0.53 ab	1.22 ± 0.05 a
Floating	31.1 ± 5.30 a	2.86 ± 0.38 a	15.3 ± 0.63 a	1.07 ± 0.07 a
Bottom-wet	19.9 ± 4.44 b	1.70 ± 0.31 b	9.9 ± 1.71 b	0.73 ± 0.04 b

25 DAT
Conventional	37.6 ± 2.36 ab	3.62 ± 0.07 a	18.6 ± 0.63 b	1.56 ± 0.10 a
Floating	49.6 ± 4.63 a	4.73 ± 0.51 a	31.1 ± 1.75 a	2.15 ± 0.07 a
Bottom-wet	34.2 ± 7.49 b	3.62 ± 0.36 a	20.0 ± 6.33 b	1.74 ± 0.30 a

28 DAT
Conventional	44.4 ± 0.41 b	5.48 ± 0.18 a	24.3 ± 2.84 b	2.39 ± 0.19 a
Floating	57.1 ± 6.56 a	5.86 ± 0.72 a	41.3 ± 2.16 a	3.10 ± 0.27 a
Bottom-wet	45.6 ± 7.82 b	5.28 ± 0.62 a	27.9 ± 3.38 b	2.91 ± 0.37 a

Length, fresh weight, and dry weight of the roots as affected by cultivation system in Swiss chard

Cultivation	Root length (cm)	Root FW (g)	Root DW (g)
22 DAT

Conventional	33.6 ± 1.43 a	5.67 ± 0.06 b	0.47 ± 0.08 ab
Floating	26.8 ± 2.48 b	9.74 ± 0.08 a	0.65 ± 0.14 a
Bottom-wet	19.6 ± 1.88 c	4.10 ± 0.05 b	0.37 ± 0.14 b

25 DAT

Conventional	34.4 ± 3.04 a	5.26 ± 1.31 b	0.56 ± 0.07 ab
Floating	28.7 ± 3.33 ab	8.58 ± 1.61 a	0.80 ± 0.15 a
Bottom-wet	22.7 ± 1.33 b	4.87 ± 1.00 b	0.51 ± 0.14 b

28 DAT

Conventional	26.8 ± 1.73 ab	7.77 ± 0.52 b	0.31 ± 0.07 b
Floating	29.2 ± 3.06 a	11.30 ± 3.04 a	0.58 ± 0.62 a
Bottom-wet	24.1 ± 1.38 b	8.28 ± 1.90 b	0.48 ± 0.36 ab

Leaf character variation of the Swiss chard in different cultivation systems and between three cultivars measured 14 and 21 days after transplanting

	Petiole length (cm)	Leaf length (cm)	Leaf width (cm)	Leaf thickness (cm)	Number of leaves per plant	Midrib to petiole ratio
14 DAT
Conventional	8.28 ± 0.27 a	8.89 ± 0.37 a	5.45 ± 0.24 a	0.48 ± 0.03 a	4.08 ± 0.13 a	1.11 ± 0.06 a
Floating	8.79 ± 0.41 a	8.45 ± 0.43 ab	5.32 ± 0.26 a	0.53 ± 0.04 a	3.96 ± 0.15 ab	0.98 ± 0.05 a
Bottom-wet	8.48 ± 0.33 a	7.98 ± 0.27 b	5.18 ± 0.26 a	0.50 ± 0.02 a	3.62 ± 0.11 b	0.97 ± 0.03 a
P-value	0.49	0.06	0.65	0.26	0.03	0.11
‘Red Ruby’	8.82 ± 0.31 a	8.02 ± 0.19 b	5.09 ± 0.26 a	0.43 ± 0.02 c	4.04 ± 0.15 a	0.91 ± 0.02 b
‘Yellow Canary’	8.26 ± 0.32 a	9.37 ± 0.43 a	5.13 ± 0.25 a	0.59 ± 0.03 a	3.87 ± 0.11 a	1.18 ± 0.07 a
‘Pink Passion’	8.47 ± 0.39 a	7.93 ± 0.25 b	5.46 ± 0.24 a	0.49 ± 0.02 b	3.81 ± 0.16 a	0.97 ± 0.06 b
P-value	0.40	<0.001	0.41	<0.001	0.33	0.003
21 DAT
Conventional	12.9 ± 0.50 b	13.5 ± 0.44 ab	8.90 ± 0.45 ab	0.46 ± 0.02 a	5.87 ± 0.18 a	1.07 ± 0.06 a
Floating	15.0 ± 0.56 a	14.5 ± 0.63 a	9.42 ± 0.25 a	0.46 ± 0.03 a	5.53 ± 0.10 a	0.98 ± 0.05 ab
Bottom-wet	14.1 ± 0.63 ab	12.7 ± 0.60 b	8.28 ± 0.45 b	0.40 ± 0.02 b	4.95 ± 0.20 b	0.91 ± 0.03 b
P-value	0.04	0.015	0.09	0.02	0.02	0.05
‘Red Ruby’	13.1 ± 0.53 b	12.6 ± 0.57 b	8.42 ± 0.60 a	0.42 ± 0.02 a	5.59 ± 0.21 a	0.97 ± 0.03 b
‘Yellow Canary’	14.1 ± 0.65 ab	15.1 ± 0.44 a	8.99 ± 0.32 a	0.45 ± 0.03 a	5.11 ± 0.17 b	1.10 ± 0.07 a
‘Pink Passion’	14.8 ± 0.56 a	12.9 ± 0.42 b	9.19 ± 0.22 a	0.46 ± 0.02 a	5.66 ± 0.22 a	0.90 ± 0.03 b
P-value	0.09	0.0005	0.29	0.27	0.04	0.009

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/johr-2023-0022 | Journal eISSN: 2353-3978 | Journal ISSN: 2300-5009

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 81 - 90

Submitted on: Jul 1, 2022

Accepted on: Dec 1, 2022

Published on: Feb 2, 2023

Published by: National Institute of Horticultural Research

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Publication frequency: 2 times per year

Keywords:

bottom-wet system,

leaf area estimation model,

Related subjects:

Ecology,

© 2023 Rofiqoh P. Ria, Benyamin Lakitan, Firdaus Sulaiman, Yakup Yakup, published by National Institute of Horticultural Research
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous article Volume 31 (2023): Issue 1 (June 2023)

Searching for Suitable Cultivation System of Swiss Chard (Beta vulgaris subsp. cicla (L.) W.D.J.Koch) in the Tropical Lowland

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Figure 2

Water content of leaf blade and petiole amongst three different cultivation systems

The leaf area estimation model and coefficient determination (R2) for ‘Red Ruby’, ‘Yellow Canary’, and ‘Pink Passion’ cultivars of the Swiss chard plant

Fresh and dry weights of the leaf and petiole in three different Swiss chard cultivars

Differences in the fresh and dry weight of leaf blades and petioles of Swiss chard cultivated using conventional, floating, or bottom-wet culture

Length, fresh weight, and dry weight of the roots as affected by cultivation system in Swiss chard

Leaf character variation of the Swiss chard in different cultivation systems and between three cultivars measured 14 and 21 days after transplanting

Paradigm

My account