VIUSID agro EFFICACY TRIAL ON TOBACCO Nicaragua … · IN A COMMERCIAL AREA WITH THE PRODUCT VIUSID AGRO ... Weighing and measuring of the green leaves was carried out ... (kg) 0.2

EFFICACY TRIAL ON TOBACCO

IN A COMMERCIAL AREA WITH THE PRODUCT

VIUSID AGRO®

AUTHOR: ENG. SANTIAGO AGUIRRE ZAMORA

E mail: [email protected]

FINCA LA MÍA

JALAPA, NICARAGUA

May 2015

INTRODUCTION

Nicaragua currently produces over 7 thousand blocks of tobacco, being the most

important sector in the cities of Estelí and Jalapa, with a production of 150 million

cigars per year, generating direct employment for 35 thousand people. Estelí has

35 cigar factories that export to the United States, Europe, Asia and Russia.

The Cigar Association of America selected 700 brands of cigar, from there, the top

25 in the world, including Cuba, Dominican Republic, Honduras and Nicaragua

among others, were selected. From 2004 to 2014 the tobacco produced in

Nicaragua has earned a number one position on four occasions (2004, 2007, 2009,

2012), and on the remaining occasions has been in the top 5. Every year,

Nicaraguan cigars are within the top 25 in the world. In particular, the winning

cigar is 100% Nicaraguan tobacco. Taken from the prestigious Cigars Aficionado

publication.

The most grown varieties in Nicaragua include Habana 2000, Corojo 92, Criollo 98,

Corojo 99 and Corojo 2006.

Obtaining a good harvest depends on many factors, such as type of soil, good

nutrition and plant health. Thus, the use of chemical fertilizers is an inviolable

cultivation practice.

Due to international requirements for traceability in tobacco, new alternatives to

avoid contaminating the sub-soil and water sources are being investigated. Mainly

for the protection of nature and human beings. The practices in tobacco cultivation

are aiming towards improving the quality of our cigars, taking care of the

environment and granting stability to crops and workers. Tobacco production is the

sector that generates most manual labour employment worldwide.

GENERAL OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of VIUSID AGRO (made by the Spanish company

Catalysis) on the morpho-agronomic parameters of tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.)

cultivation.

Evaluate the behaviour of Viusid Agro within the climactic conditions of the Jalapa

area.

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the behaviour of the two doses of VIUSID AGRO on the

morpho-agronomic parameters of tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.)

cultivation. Applied at two different dosages:

A. 1 ml per 5 ml of water (40 ml per block)

B. 0.5 ml per 5 ml of water (20 ml per block)

To determine the treatment that behaves best regarding tobacco (Nicotiana

tabacum L.) cultivation's morpho-agronomic parameters.

1. Height of the plant

2. Stalk diameter

3. Number of leaves

4. Leaf width

5. Leaf length

6. Green leaf weight when cut

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Experiment location

The experiment was carried out in the La Mía estate, 13 km south-west of the

city of Jalapa (Nueva Segovia, Nicaragua). At coordinates 13˚50’21.N

86˚09’38.7O and at an altitude of 638 metres above sea level. With a relative

humidity of between 33% and 90%.

This terrain has a sandy loam structure [Universidad Agraria de Nicaragua

2013].

The variety of tobacco used for the trial was COROJO 2006.

Tasks performed

The soil was prepared traditionally with mechanised tilling, successive harrowing,

and ploughing. Tobacco seedlings were transplanted. Chemical fertilization was

applied 7, 14 and 21 days after transplantation. Caning was set up at 7 days, first

earthing-up was at 14 days and second earthing-up was at 22 days. Fumigation

with certain agrochemicals was carried out in all cycles of the crop to guarantee

protection from pests and diseases. Constant watering guaranteed the humidity

needed by the plantation. The apical bud was removed between the 40th and 48th

day after planting. In terms of the phytosanitary control, the insecticides were

applied as shown in the following table.

Table 1. Application of Viusid Agro to 3.5 blocks of Corojo 2006 tobacco

Table 2. Application of Viusid Agro to 3.5 blocks of Corojo 2006 tobacco

Table 3. Without Viusid Agro, 3.5 blocks of Corojo 2006 tobacco

Table 1. Phytosanitary treatments

Application

date Pesticide U/M

Dosage/

block Pest to control

February 20th Transplant Plants 21,606

February 21st

Penta hydrated

copper sulfate +

potassium phosphite

ml 500

Prevention of fungus

bacteria

February 24th

Abacmetin + NPK

Solluble oil of

Melaleuca

alternifolia

ml

kg

ml

150

1

300

Pest control

Nitration of the plant

Blue mould prevention

March 5th

Viusid Agro

Dimethomorph

Imidacloprid

ml

kg

g

40

750

100

Nutrition and cellular

protection

Blue mould control

Pest control

March 10th

Multimineral

Melaleuca

Alternifolia oil

ml

ml

500

300

Nutrition of the plant

Mould and cercospora

prevention

March 18th

Viusid Agro

Abacmetin

ml

ml

40

150


protection

Pest control

March 30th

Viusid Agro

Mandipropamid

ml

ml

40

400


protection


April 15th

Viusid Agro

Penta hydrated

copper sulphate

ml

ml

40

400


protection

Cercospora control

April 28th Bacillus

thuringiensis

g 300 Manduca sexta control

Note: 40 ml per block is equivalent to 1 ml per 5 l of water.


Application

date Pesticide U/M

Dosage/


February 20th Transplant Plants 21.606

February 21st

Penta hydrated

copper sulfate +

potassium phosphite

ml 500


bacteria

February 24th

Abacmetin + NPK

Solluble oil of

Melaleuca

alternifolia

ml

kg

ml

150

1

300

Pest control



March 5th

Viusid Agro

Dimethomorph

Imidacloprid

ml

kg

g

20

750

100


protection

Blue mould control

Pest control

March 10th

Multimineral

Melaleuca

Alternifolia oil

ml

ml

500

300



prevention

March 18th

VIUSID Agro

Abacmetin

ml

ml

20

150


protection

Pest control

March 30th

VIUSID Agro

Mandipropamid

ml

ml

20

400


protection


April 15th

VIUSID Agro

Penta hydrated

copper sulphate

ml

ml

20

400


protection

Cercospora control

April 28th Bacillus

thuringiensis


NB: 20 ml per block is equivalent to 0.5 ml per 5 l of water.


Application

date Pesticide U/M

Dosage/


February 20th Transplant Plants 21.606

February 21st

Penta hydrated

copper sulfate +

potassium phosphite

ml 500


bacteria

February 24th

Abacmetin + NPK

Solluble oil of

Melaleuca

alternifolia

ml

kg

ml

150

1

300

Pest control



March 5th

Dimethomorph

Imidacloprid

kg

g

750

100

Blue mould control

Pest control

March 10th

Multimineral

Melaleuca

Alternifolia oil

ml

ml

500

300



prevention

March 18th Abacmetin ml 150 Pest control

March 30th

Mandipropamid

ml

400


April 15th Penta hydrated

copper sulphate

ml 400

Cercospora control

April 28th Bacillus

thuringiensis


Spatial arrangement of treatments

Each experiment was set up under production conditions, in 3.5 blocks, taking four

experimental swathes, two of which correspond to each treatment to be evaluated.

These swathes were composed of five furrows of 90 plants each, evaluations being

made in both central furrows, randomly selecting 15 plants per treatment, taking

five plants at the beginning part of the furrow, five plants in the middle part, and five

plants at the end part. The first ten and the last ten plants were discarded.

Treatments evaluated

In the experiment, experimental plots were used for each treatment with a total

number of 450 plants per plot, with a planting distance of 0.36 m x 0.14 m. The

treatments evaluated are shown in table 2.

Table 2. Treatments evaluated

Treatments Dosage by block Dosage

A: VIUSID AGRO 40 ml 1 ml/5 l

B: VIUSID AGRO 20 ml 0.5 ml/5 l

C: CONTROL Without treatment ******

The first application of Viusid Agro was carried out fifteen days after

transplantation, and subsequent applications were spaced at fifteen days. A 20 l

capacity manual sprayer was used for the first two fumigations, the remaining

applications were carried out using a power sprayer to obtain better coverage.

Evaluations carried out

Two evaluations were performed during the cultivation cycle: the first, 46 days after

transplantation, and the second, 70 days after planting, coinciding with harvest

time. In both cases, the plant's height was measured, the total number of leaves,

the stalk's diameter as well as the length and width of the two central leaves. A

metric tape and a calliper were used to take the measurements.

Weighing and measuring of the green leaves was carried out immediately they

were cut, using a scale and a metric tape.

Statistical processing

Table 3 shows the statistical analysis corresponding to the measurements carried

out………..

Table 3. Statistical analysis of the first evaluation

Treatment Plant height

(cm)

Stalk diameter

(cm)

Total leaves

Length of the two central

leaves cm

Width of the two central

leaves cm

A: VIUSID AGRO 1 ml/5 l

82.39 2.24 15.79 47.68 26.59

B: VIUSID AGRO 0.5 ml/5 l

76.98 2.13 14.96 46.46 26.17

C: CONTROL 67 1.93 13.26 41.33 23.14

Table 4. Statistical analysis of the second evaluation

Treatment Plant height

(cm)

Stalk diameter

(cm)

Total leaves

Length of the two central

leaves cm

Width of the two central

leaves cm

A: VIUSID AGRO 1 ml/5 l

89.15 2.47 16.10 50.53 28.13

B: VIUSID AGRO 0.5 ml/5 l

81.15 2.27 15.85 48.84 29.2

C: CONTROL 69.19 2.04 13.28 43.99 24.60

Table 5. Statistical summary of the first and second evaluations

Treatment Evaluation Plant height (cm)

Stalk diameter

(cm)

Total leaves

Length of the two central leaves

Width of the two central leaves

VIUSID AGRO 1 ml/5 l

First 82.39 2.24 15.79 47.68 26.59

Second 89.15 2.47 16.10 50.53 28.13

Average 85.77 2.35 15.94 49.10 27.36


Stalk diameter

(cm)

Total leaves



VIUSID AGRO 0.5 ml/5 l

First 76.98 2.13 14.96 46.46 26.17

Second 81.15 2.27 15.85 48.84 29.20

Average 79.06 2.2 15.40 47.65 27.68


Stalk diameter

(cm)

Total leaves



CONTROL

First 67 1.93 13.26 41.33 23.14

Second 69.19 2.04 13.28 43.99 24.60

Average 68.09 1.98 13.27 42.66 23.87

Following are the results of weighing of green tobacco immediately after cut.

Table 8. Consolidation of green tobacco weight by 150 leaf stakes

Dosage # Cuts Total

leaves Total stakes

Average stake weight (kg)

0.2 ml/l (1 ml/5 l)

*1 -- -- --

2 300 2 5.99

3 300 2 6.13

4 300 2 6.45

5 300 2 6.39

Stake average 6.24

Dosage # Cuts Total

leaves Total stakes


0.1 ml/l 0.50 ml/5 l

*1 -- -- --

2 300 2 5.67

3 300 2 5.97

4 300 2 6.40

5 300 2 6.13

Stake average 6.04

Dosage # Cuts Total

leaves Total stakes


Control

*1 -- -- --

2 300 2 4.14

3 300 2 5.66

4 300 2 5.98

5 300 2 5.61

Stake average 5.35

Table 9. Consolidations of measurement of green tobacco leaves by cut

Dosage # Cuts # Average

leaves Average leaf size (cm)

Width Length

1 ml/5 l

*1 -- -- --

2 50 27.88 49.70

3 50 28.92 52.73

4 50 28.26 49.32

5 50 28.00 47.66

Average 28.26 49.85

* First cut is not evaluated due to debris and discarded leaves.



Width Length

0.50 ml/5 l

*1 -- -- --

2 50 27.74 48.98

3 50 28.24 50.90

4 50 28.16 49.34

5 50 27.26 46.52

Average 27.85 48.93



Width Length

Control

*1 -- -- --

2 50 24.62 44.82

3 50 25.80 45.62

4 50 26.14 45.88

5 50 24.98 41.22

Average 25.38 44.38

* First cut is not evaluated due high mechanical damage and imperfect

leaves.

Table 10. Consolidation of Tobacco weight per stake

Dosage # Cuts Total number of weighed leaves

Stake total


0.2 ml/l 1 ml/5 l

2 3 4 5

300 300 300 300

2 2 2 2

0.706 0.810 0.944 0.942

Average

0.850


Stake total


0.1 ml/l 0.50 ml/5 l

2 3 4 5

300 300 300 300

2 2 2 2

0.710 0.805 0.906 0.931

Average

0.838


Stake total


Control

2 3 4 5

300 300 300 300

2 2 2 2

0.681 0.693 0.860 0.871

Average

0.776

The tables show that there are significant differences between the two dosages of

Viusid Agro and the control group, regarding weight (which is one of the variables

under discussion).

Table 11. Loss of weight due to leaf dehydration and drying

Dosage # Cuts Average

green stake weight (kg)

Average dry stake

weight (kg)

Weight loss difference (kg)

0.2 ml/l 1 ml/5 l

2 3 4 5

5.99 6.13 6.45 6.39

0.706 0.810 0.944 0.942

5.284 5.320 5.506 5.448

Average 6.24 0.850 5.389

86.2290



Average dry stake

weight (kg)


0.1 ml/l 0.5 ml/5 l

2 3 4 5

5.67 6.97 6.40 6.13

0.710 0.805 0.906 0.931

4.96 5.165 5.494 5.199

Average 6.04 0.838 5.204

86.1590



Average dry stake

weight (kg)


Control

2 3 4 5

4.19 5.66 5.98 5.61

0.681 0.693 0.860 0.871

3.459 4.967 5.12 4.739

Average 5.34 0.776 4.571

85.59

The results obtained in weight loss with both dosages of Viusid Agro versus control

show a significant reduction with both dosages of Viusid Agro, due to the larger

size of the leaf and the good level of hydration that they have when staked.

The turgor obtained by applying Viusid to tobacco plants favours uniform drying,

more intense colour, greater leaf elasticity and texture when harvested.

Final weighing results for dry tobacco

Table 12. Quintals per block

Dosage Total 150-leaf

stakes per block Average stake

weight (kg)

Average total kg per

block

Average quintals per block

0.2 ml/l

1,560 0.850 1,326 29.17

0.1 ml/l 1,510 0.838 1,262 27.76

Control 1,483 0.776 1,150 25.30

The final weighing of the dry tobacco showed significant differences:

- 0.2 ml/l dosage versus control: difference of 176 kg


Thus proving that the application of Viusid Agro helps to increase the yield of

tobacco crops, especially at applications of 0.2 ml/l and intervals of 15 days.

Other important variables that could be observed at harvest, when Viusid Agro was

applied, were:

- Greater texture on the leaf (larger)

- Greater leaf elasticity

- Greater leaf shine

- Higher nicotine content (more tar)

These variables were most noticeable at dosages of 0.2 ml/l.

CONCLUSIONS

The yield obtained in this efficacy trial is thus:

Greater number of leaves per plant: 2.64 leaves more than control.

Leaf length was 6.44 cm over control.

Leaf width was 3.49 cm over control.

300 leaves treated with Viusid Agro gave 0.89 kg more than control.

The dosages improved the morpho-agronomical parameters of the tobacco

crop.

The dosage with the best effect on tobacco growth was 1 ml per five litres of

water.

It was observed that VIUSID AGRO improves the efficacy of some

agrochemical products used with tobacco.

It is compatible with most of the products used with tobacco.

VIUSID AGRO adapted well to the temperature ranges in the Jalapa area,

that go from high during the day to very low during the early hours.

WEIGHING - DRY AT HARVEST

The final weighing of the dry tobacco showed significant differences:



Other important variables that could be observed at harvest, when Viusid Agro was

applied, were:

- Greater texture on the leaf (larger)

- Greater leaf elasticity

- Greater leaf shine

- Higher nicotine content (more tar)

These variables were most noticeable at dosages of 0.2 ml/l.

Recommendations

Use VIUSID AGRO at 1 ml/5 l in tobacco crops every 15 days until the

cultivation cycle ends (8 days before cut).

Evaluate VIUSID AGRO at weekly applications to compare its efficacy in

tobacco crop growth and productivity.

FINAL OBSERVATIONS

The results of dry tobacco weighing will be carried out in the following weeks, since

the tobacco is currently undergoing the drying process.

Organoleptic evaluations of the processed leaves will be carried out by specialists

in the field once the curing process has finished (combustion, flavour, ash colour,

strength on smoking)

Documents

VIUSID agro EFFICACY TRIAL ON TOBACCO Nicaragua … · IN A COMMERCIAL AREA WITH THE PRODUCT VIUSID AGRO ... Weighing and measuring of the green leaves was carried out ... (kg) 0.2