Abstract
The cassava seed system faces challenges due to limited seed stock caused by a slow propagation rate and a lengthy growth period. Conventional methods lacking phytosanitary guarantees further compound these issues. To address these limitations, the Semi-Autotrophic Hydroponics (SAH) technology was adopted for the rapid mass propagation of healthy, disease-free cassava plants. This research aimed to evaluate the performance of cassava planting materials using different substrates for stem-cutting multiplication in the laboratory at the IITA Kalambo research station in DR Congo. The experiment followed a split-plot design of five replications of three consecutive sub-culture periods lasting four weeks each. Four different genotypes: IB961089A, MM060083, Nase14, and Albert28 as the main plots, with four different substrates: KlasmannTS3, Vermiculite, Local Peat, and Sawdust as the sub-plots, were laid out. Cuttings were placed in 500-ml substrate-filled boxes and watered weekly with a 100-ml Miracle-Gro solution. Data were collected on survival, height, leaf and internode numbers, and cutting numbers at the end of each subculture period. The data were analysed using ANOVA in R software. The Fisher's Least Significant Difference (LSD) test was utilised to separate means when significant differences among treatments were present (p <0.05). The results showed that survival was primarily influenced by the substrate used, with KlasmannTS3 demonstrating the highest rate, exceeding 90%. Significant differences (p < 0.05) among genotypes for survival rate and performance parameters mentioned above (p < 0.001) were observed. Similarly, there were significant differences (p < 0.001) among substrates for survival rate and performance parameters. Furthermore, the interaction between genotype and substrate significantly (p < 0.001) affected performance parameters. MM060083 performed the best across all traits. KlasmannTS3 was the superior substrate and had the highest average cutting number regardless of genotype, with a notable increase of 292% from 20 to 58.4 cuttings, representing a ratio of 1:3 within three months. Sawdust had the lowest multiplication rate, with a 5% decrease. The superior performance of KlasmannTS3 was attributed to its rapid growth and favourable properties. The interaction between MM060083 and KlasmannTS3 consistently showed the highest number of cuttings (70.4). Sawdust consistently showed poor growth performance, regardless of genotype. The study concludes that the SAH offers the potential for rapid multiplication of disease-free cassava planting materials in reduced space and time.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 11
Claim · model-written summary
KlasmannTS3 gave the highest cassava plantlet survival rate, exceeding 90%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cassava”
e0“survival was primarily influenced by the substrate used, with KlasmannTS3 demonstrating the highest rate, exceeding 90%”
Claim · model-written summary
Genotypes differed significantly in survival rate.
- Taxon
- cassava
Manihot esculentat0 - Material
- genotypese0
- Outcome
- survival ratee0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cassava”
e0“Significant differences (p < 0.05) among genotypes for survival rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Genotypes differed significantly in performance parameters.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Material
- genotypese1
- Outcome
- performance parameterse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cassava”
e0“performance parameters mentioned above (p < 0.001) were observed”
e1“Significant differences (p < 0.05) among genotypes”
Claim · model-written summary
Substrates differed significantly in survival and performance parameters.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- substratese0
- Outcome
- survival rate and performance parameterse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cassava”
e0“significant differences (p < 0.001) among substrates for survival rate and performance parameters”
Claim · model-written summary
Genotype by substrate interaction significantly affected performance parameters.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Material
- genotypee0
- Treatment
- substratee0
- Outcome
- performance parameterse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cassava”
e0“interaction between genotype and substrate significantly (p < 0.001) affected performance parameters”
Claim · model-written summary
MM060083 performed best across all measured traits.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Material
- MM060083e0
- Outcome
- all traitse0
- Direction
- beste0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cassava”
e0“MM060083 performed the best across all traits”
Claim · model-written summary
KlasmannTS3 gave the highest average cutting number, rising 292% from 20 to 58.4 within three months.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- KlasmannTS3e0
- Outcome
- average cutting numbere0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 292%e0
- Qualifier
- within three monthse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cassava”
e0“KlasmannTS3 was the superior substrate and had the highest average cutting number regardless of genotype, with a notable increase of 292% from 20 to 58.4 cuttings, representing a ratio of 1:3 within three months”
Claim · model-written summary
Sawdust gave the lowest multiplication rate, decreasing 5%.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- Sawduste0
- Outcome
- multiplication ratee0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- 5%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cassava”
e0“Sawdust had the lowest multiplication rate, with a 5% decrease”
Claim · model-written summary
MM060083 with KlasmannTS3 gave the highest cutting number, 70.4.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Material
- MM060083e0
- Treatment
- KlasmannTS3e0
- Outcome
- number of cuttingse0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 70.4e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cassava”
e0“interaction between MM060083 and KlasmannTS3 consistently showed the highest number of cuttings (70.4)”
Claim · model-written summary
Sawdust consistently gave poor growth across genotypes.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- Sawduste0
- Outcome
- growth performancee0
- Direction
- poore0
- Qualifier
- regardless of genotypee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cassava”
e0“Sawdust consistently showed poor growth performance, regardless of genotype”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude SAH can rapidly multiply disease-free cassava planting material in reduced space and time.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Outcome
- rapid multiplication of disease-free cassava planting materialse0
- Qualifier
- in reduced space and timee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cassava”
e0“SAH offers the potential for rapid multiplication of disease-free cassava planting materials in reduced space and time”
The same questions in other papers
growing medium · growth · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.