Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T04:04:43.152Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

PHYSIOLOGICAL BASIS OF YIELD VARIATION OF TEA (CAMELLIA SINENSIS) DURING DIFFERENT YEARS OF THE PRUNING CYCLE IN THE CENTRAL HIGHLANDS OF SRI LANKA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2009

W. A. J. M. DE COSTA*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya 20400, Sri Lanka Postgraduate Institute of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya
D. M. S. NAVARATNE
Affiliation:
Postgraduate Institute of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya Tea Research Institute, Talawakelle, Sri Lanka
A. ANANDACOOMARASWAMY
Affiliation:
Tea Research Institute, Talawakelle, Sri Lanka
*
†Corresponding author: janendrad@yahoo.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The objective of this study was to elucidate the physiological basis of the significant yield decline that occurs during the fourth year of the pruning cycle of tea. Biomass partitioning, which was hypothesized to be a major factor in causing this yield decline, was measured by destructive harvests of entire tea bushes, in two contrasting, mature, field-grown tea cultivars (TRI 2025 and DT1) at the end of different years of the pruning cycle. In both cultivars, yield showed continuous increases from year 1 to 3, followed by reductions of 44% and 35% in TRI2025 and DT1 respectively in the fourth year. Patterns of biomass partitioning to roots, stems or branches did not correlate with the above yield variation whereas harvest index, canopy leaf area index and mature leaf dry weight showed variations which paralleled the yield variation. The fourth-year decline in harvest index was brought about by reductions in both shoot number per m2 and mean individual shoot weight, which indicate a reduction in sink strength. Both cultivars showed reductions in light-saturated photosynthetic rate of maintenance foliage during the second half of the pruning cycle, indicating reduced source capacity. Hence, a combined reduction of both sink strength and source capacity during the fourth year could have brought about the significant yield reduction in tea. A significant increase of root starch in the fourth year indicated a down-regulation of physiological activities of the bush towards the end of the pruning cycle. Mechanisms responsible for this down-regulation need to be elucidated by further research.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009
Figure 0

Table 1. Variation of tea yield and harvest index of two contrasting tea cultivars in different years of the pruning cycle.

Figure 1

Table 2. Variation of shoot numbers and proportions of active and banji shoots of two contrasting tea cultivars in different years of the pruning cycle.

Figure 2

Table 3. Variation of mean individual shoot weight of different types of shoots of two contrasting tea cultivars in different years of the pruning cycle.

Figure 3

Figure 1. Partitioning of biomass of a tea crop to roots (Rt), stem-branch structure (Br), intact leaves (Lvs) and fallen leaves (FLv) during different years of the pruning cycle of a) cultivar TRI2025, b) cultivar DT1. The total standing dry weight at the end of each year after pruning is given by the boundary between intact leaves and fallen leaves. .

Figure 4

Table 4. Variation of leaf area index and mature leaf dry weight of two contrasting tea cultivars during different years of the pruning cycle.

Figure 5

Table 5. Linear correlation coefficients (r) between tea yield and different growth and yield parameters.

Figure 6

Table 6. Linear correlation coefficients (r) between different growth and yield parameters.

Figure 7

Figure 2. Variation of the light-saturated net photosynthetic rate (Pmax) of mature leaves of two tea cultivars during different years of the pruning cycle. Vertical bars indicate the standard error of mean to compare Pmax values of different years within each cultivar.

Figure 8

Figure 3. Variation of soluble starch content of 1.6 cm diameter roots of two tea cultivars during different years of the pruning cycle.