Effect of Substrates and Draining Time on the Propagation of Seedlings from Stem Fragments (PIF): Case of Musa acuminata (Cavendish)

International Journal of Agriculture & Environmental Science

© 2025 by SSRG - IJAES Journal

Volume 12 Issue 1

Year of Publication : 2025

Authors : Fawa Guidawa, Oumarou Haman Zephirin, Teguedeme Djekwem Yvonne, Mvondo Awono Jean Pierre, Mapongmetsem Pierre Marie

10.14445/23942568/IJAES-V12I1P102

How to Cite?

Fawa Guidawa, Oumarou Haman Zephirin, Teguedeme Djekwem Yvonne, Mvondo Awono Jean Pierre, Mapongmetsem Pierre Marie, "Effect of Substrates and Draining Time on the Propagation of Seedlings from Stem Fragments (PIF): Case of Musa acuminata (Cavendish)," SSRG International Journal of Agriculture & Environmental Science, vol. 12,  no. 1, pp. 7-13, 2025. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/23942568/IJAES-V12I1P102

Abstract:

Banana plays a very important role in people's diets. It is a source of income for producers. This study aimed to investigate the effect of substrate and explant drainage time on the mass propagation of banana plantlets. The production technique of seedlings from stem fragments has been adopted. This method consists of trimming, dehulling, and excising the explant before growing it in two types of substrate, sawdust and rice bran, with draining times of 48h, 72h and 96h. The experimental design is a split plot. The experimental unit consisted of 10 explants with three repetitions. The substrate represents the primary treatment, and the draining time is the secondary treatment. A total of 10х3х3х2=180 explants are used. It emerges from this study that the sawdust substrate is best for budding with 52.22±13.94%. Explants drain at 48h also revealed the best aptitude for budding with a rate of 51.66±17.22%. Concerning rooting, the highest rate is recorded in sawdust at 48.88±20.8%. Similarly, explants drain at 72h show a good aptitude for this parameter with 38.3±21.3%. Seedlings resulting from stem fragments make mass-producing high-quality plants possible, which could constitute an important pillar for food security in Cameroon.

Keywords:

Seedlings, Stem fragment, Cavendish banana, Substrates, Draining time.

References:

[1] Moïse Kwa, and Ludovic Temple, “The Plantain Tree, Socio-Economic and Technical Issues,” Tropical Agriculture in your Pocket, Editions Quae, pp. 1-199, 2019.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[2] Banana Market Analysis 2020, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/2a64d619-f1f1-413b-9e8d-795c2f6b711b/content
[3] Pamidi Suryanarayana, Chintamani Panda, and Subhrajyoti Mishra, “Morphological and Yield Attributing Parameters of Macro Propagated Cultivars of Banana (Musa spp L.),” The Pharma Innovation Journal, vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 240-245, 2018.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[4] DB Dhed'a et al., The Cultivation of Bananas and Plantains in the Agroecological Zones of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Press Universitaure, UNIKIS, pp. 1-75, 2019.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[5] Jacques N.B Tchatchambe et al., “Macro-Propagation and Micro-Propagation of BBTV-Free Plants in Kisangani, DR Congo,” Scholars Bulletin, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 178-183, 2019.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[6] Emmanuel Youmbi, and Dieudonné Ngaha, “In Vitro Expression of Organogenic Capacities of Axillary Buds in Plantain (Musa spp.),” Fruits, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 241-248, 2004.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[7] Touckia Gorgon Igor et al., “Effect of Substrates on the Production of Banana Rejects by the Fragmentation Planting Method (FPM) in Central African Republic,” Acta Scientific Agriculture, vol. 5, no. 7, pp. 2-7, 2021.
[Publisher Link]
[8] Olivier Guy Joël Atsin et al., “Effect of Compost Based on Banana and Cocoa Residues on the Growth and Development of vivo Plants of Three Varieties of Plantain,” Ivorian Review of Science and Technology, vol. 33, pp. 276-286, 2019.
[Google Scholar]
[9] Bitha nyi Mbunzu Bangata et al., “Evaluation of the Proliferative Potential of Six Banana Cultivars (cv. AAB, ABB, and AAA) by Macropropagation in the Democratic Republic of Congo,” Journal of Applied Biosciences, vol. 127, pp. 12770-12784, 2018.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[10] B.E. Okothomas, and J.B. Mukalay, “Technical and Economic Analysis of the Multiplication of Banana Trees using the Technique of Plants from Stem Fragments (PIF) in Lubumbashi, DR Congo,” Afrique Science, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 48-56, 2018.
[Google Scholar] 
[11] Eric Opoku Mensah et al., “Sucker Multiplication in Plantain Using Chicken Manure as a Substrate Supplement,” African Journal of Plant Science, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 168-173, 2017.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[12] Leopold Sadom et al., “Comparison of the Effectiveness of Two Vegetative Propagation Methods for Banana Trees from the Study of the Agronomic Characteristics of a Hybrid of Plantain (Musa spp.),” Fruits, vol. 65, pp. 3-9, 2010.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[13] Kwa Moses, “Activation of Latent Buds and Use of Banana Stem Fragments for Mass Propagation of Plants under in Vivo Horticultural Conditions,” Fruits, vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 315-328, 2003.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[14] Samuel Yonkeu, “Vegetation of Adamaoua Pastures (Cameroon): Ecology and Potential,” Doctoral Thesis, University Rennes International, France, pp. 1-240, 1993.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[15] R. Letouzey, “Phytogeographic Study of Cameroon,” SIDALC Alliance of Agricultural Information Services, pp. 1- 511, 1968.
[Google Scholar]
[16] Marie Bezard et al., “The PIF Method: Multiplication and Sanitation of Plantain Plants on the Farm,” Nov’ae, pp. 1-9, 2023.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[17] N. Kouame, N.E. Assidjo, and A.E. Dick, “Prediction of Plantain Growth (Musa sp., AAB, Cultivar Corne 1) from Mathematical Models,” African Agronomy, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 135-147, 2017.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[18] J.P. Mayeki et al., “Influence of Substrate Composition on Weaning of Plantain (Musa sp) Vivoplants,” Plant Biotechnology Laboratory, IRAFCENAREST in Sciences Sud, vol. 3, pp. 1-16, 2010.
[Google Scholar]
[19] Jean-Michel Gobat, Michel Aragno, and Willy Matthey, Living Soil : Basics of Pedology, Soil Biology, EPFL Press, pp. 1-817, 2010.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[20] Y. M’Sadak, and L. Tayachi, “Soil-Free Agronomic Valorization of Industrial Poultry Biomethanization in Tunisia,” Journal of Renewable Energies, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 447-464, 2014.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[21] Youssef Ammari et al., “Production and Growth of Coniferous Plants in Different Compost-Based Substrates in a Modern Forest Nursery in Tunisia,” French Forestry Review, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 339-358, 2007.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[22] M.S. Lamhamedi et al., “Evaluation of Composts, Substrates and Quality of Plants Raised in Containers,” Tunisia, General Directorate of Forests and Pampev International, Bird Project, 1997.
[Google Scholar]
[23] Shahina Yasmeen et al., “Effect of Different Substrates on Growth and Flowering of Dianthus Caryophyllus cv. ‘Chauband Mixed’,” American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 249-258, 2012.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[24] Hamidi Youcef, Snoussi Sid-Ahmed, and Chaouia Chérifa, “Effect of Some Mixtures of Substrates on the Production of Rootstocks of the True Pistaciavera Pistachio Tree in The Nursery,” Agrobiologia, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 218-224, 2017.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[25] André Lassoudière, The Banana Tree and its Cultivation, Quae, pp. 1-383, 2007.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]