Dutch Rose, Top Secret, preservatives, vase life and varieties.

India has an ancient heritage when it comes to floriculture. A consistent increase in demand for cut and potted flowers has made floriculture as one of the important commercial trades in Indian Agriculture (Gauraha et al., 2018). The demand for cut flowers is increasing day by day with the increasing standard of living, aesthetic sense and awareness in the people. It is an important floriculture product, among all the cut flowers, rose ranks first in the International flower market (Shivaprasad et al., 2016). The area under horticulture crop also rose 25.6 million hectare from 25.43 million hectare. The Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Chhattisgarh and West Bengal are the most rose farming project state in India. In the C.G. state area under floriculture is 13,089 ha-1 with the production of 2,29868 MT. approximately in the 2020-21. The successful commercial rose farming process mostly depends on the varieties of rose flower. India is bestowed with several agro climatic zones, Roses can be grown throughout the year in the India. Around 80% of floriculture area is occupied by states like Tamil nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Delhi. Rose is the principle cut flower grown all over the country. 

In India, major rose growing belts are Pune, Bangalore and Delhi. These are setup in and around Bangalore, Pune, Hyderabad and Delhi mainly of rose. So the expansion of the area is much felt in the entire viable region to increase the production. In Chhattisgarh area under flower was 7130.4 ha and Mahasamund district and surrounding areas adjacent to Raipur and Durg have been identified as possibly the best region, suited for cut flower production. Rose has become a part and parcel of the life. Rose are grown on a large scale for cut flowers and on small scale for planting shrubs, bushes, standard rose, climbers ramblers, edges and rockeries in the garden and pot plants for decorating the houses. There is a considerable demand for loose flowers for making garlands, bouquets and floral decoration. Rose is a perennial erect shrub with beautiful sweet - scented flowers grown for various purposes, such as garden flowers, for aesthetic value, cut flowers for decoration and loose flowers for garland and also for making various products such as rose oil, rose water, gulkand and rose attar etc (Subiya et al., 2017). 

Rose ranks first among the top ten cut flowers in the international flower market. It is a symbol of love, adoration and innocence and it occupies a prominent position in the tradition, religious and social culture of every country in the world. It is one of the natures beautiful creations and is universally known as "Queen of Flower" and belongs to the family Rosaceae. With the basic chromosome number n=7 and cultivated rose with chromosome number 2n = 4x = 28. Rose, botanically identified as Rosa spp., is indigenous to Europe and is widely distributed in Europe. The genus Rosa consists of about 120 species, out of which only eight species are cultivated viz., Rosa chinensis, Rosa damascena, Rosa foetida, Rosa gallica, Rosa gigantea, Rosa moschata, Rosa multiflora and and Rosa wichuriana (Soujanya et al., 2018). There are several varieties of rose classified according to colour, size, type and use etc. The varieties as per use are oil- Rosa damascena, Gulkand - Rosa damascene and Rosa chinensis. Botanically, rose is an ornamental shrub/bush with upright or climbing stems usually prickly. Leaves are alternate, compound, oddly pinnate with stipules adherent to the leaf stalk and flowers are solitary (single) or in corymbs (cluster). Calyx is five lobed, either simple or compound. Petals & Sepals are generally five; however Rosa sericea has only four petals and sepals. Carpels are many, inserted at the base of the calyx tube and with simple projecting style and stigma. Fruits are known as hips, contain many seeds and are rich in Vit. C, A1, B2, K & E. Seeds are hard and fresh seed have dormancy (Shahrin et al., 2015). 

Vase life quality of cut flowers is one of the most crucial factors for customer satisfaction and repeat purchase. Flowers grown for the ornamental market must be of high quality to extend cut flowers postharvest longevity and increase marketability and commercial value. Several preservatives are used to enhance the postharvest life of cut flowers. Different solutions containing different concentrations of sugar, citric acid, 8- Hydroxy Quinoline Sulfate (8-HQS), S-Hydroxy Quinoline Citrate (8-HQC), silver nitrate, aluminium sulphate etc. are used to prolong the post harvest life of cut flowers. Considering the potential of Dutch roses in dry flower trade, the present studies were undertaken to evaluate the colour of dried Dutch rose flowers of different drying methods using a colorimeter Minolta CR-10. It was selected as an improved colour measurement to more accurately describing the colour.

The field experiment was carried out during the year 2021-2022 and 2022-23 under Naturally Ventilated Polyhouse at Hi-Tech Horticulture Unit, village – Mohandi, District –Mahasamund and Department of Floriculture and Landscape Architecture, College of Agriculture, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Krishak Nagar Raipur (C.G.). The soil of experimental site possesses sandy loam texture. With 9 treatment combinations with 3 preservative solutions along with 3 varieties with three replications, the experiment was laid out in Factorial Randomized Block Design (FRBD). Preservative having P1 Al2 (SO4)3 400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %, P2 Chitosan 50 ppm + Sucrose 4 %, P3 Control. VarietiesV1 Top Secret, V2 Jumilia and V3 Avalanche. To collect the data, flask with solution and with or without flower stalk were weighed every day and from these data fresh weight, solution uptake and petal membrane stability index were worked out.

A. Fresh weight of flower (g)

Data collected to find out the fresh weight presented in Table – 1 and graphically illustrated in Fig. 1. During the first year of observation in the 3rd, 6th, 9th, & 12th day, the P1 (Al2 (SO4)3  400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %) resulted maximum fresh weight (45.41, 42.35, 36.25, & 22.54 respectively). Among all the variety V1 (Top Secret) recorded maximum fresh weight ( 42.81, 39.32, 34.12,  & 19.05 respectively). Highest fresh weight was recorded (47.64, 44.16, 38.23  & 24.5) under (T1) Top Secret + Al2 (SO4)3 400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %  respectively. 

During the second year of observation in the 3rd, 6th, 9th, & 12th day, the P1resulted maximum fresh weight (46.28, 43.38, 39.41, & 23.53 respectively). Among all the varietal V1 recorded maximum fresh weight (44.32, 40.45, 36.23, & 20.12 respectively). Interaction between preservative and varietal had significant affects the vase life. Highest fresh weight was recorded (49.32, 46.23, 41.31 & 25.16) under T1 (P1V1) respectively. Pooled mean recorded for both year under 3rd, 6th, 9th, & 12th day highest was recorded in P1 (46.16, 42.34, 37.83, & 22.53). Among all varietal highest was recorded   in V1 (43.34, 39.78, 35.02,  & 19.05). Interaction effect for fresh weight on 3rd, 6th, 9th, & 12th day was found highest under T1 (48.45, 45.53, 40.32, & 24.34 respectively)  in P1V1 (Top Secret + Al2 (SO4)3 400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %).  Maximum fresh weight was recorded in (Top Secret + Al2 (SO4)3   400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %) and was least in Avalanche Control. Bhattacharjee (1998) reported that use of sucrose in the vase solution influenced water uptake, transpiration loss of water, maintained better water relations there by improved fresh weight of the flower. Similar finding reported by Luo et al. (2003) in cut carnation flowers Kazaz et al. (2019).

Table 1:  Fresh weight of Rose variety.

Fig. 1.  Fresh weight.

B. Solution uptake ( ml/flower)  

 Data collected to find out the solution uptake presented in Table 2 and graphically illustrated in Fig. 2. Significant differences were observed among different rose variety.

During the first year  of observation in the 3rd, 6th, 9th, & 12th day, the P1 (Al2 (SO4)3 400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %) resulted maximum solution uptake (33.34, 27.87, 21.47, & 10.97 respectively). Among all the variety V1 (Top Secret) recorded maximum solution uptake (31.08, 24.37, 19.47,  & 9.47 respectively). Interaction between preservative and variety had significant affects the vase life. Highest solution uptake was recorded (37.08, 29.66, 22.88  & 13.04) under (Top Secret + Al2 (SO4)3 400 ppm + Sucrose 4 % (T1) respectively.

During the second year  of observation in the 3rd, 6th, 9th, & 12th day, the P1 resulted maximum solution uptake (36.05, 28.37, 23.54, & 13.41 respectively). Among all the varietal V1 recorded maximum solution uptake (32.82, 26.27, 20.72,  & 11.07 respectively). Interaction between preservative and varietal had significant affects the vase life. Highest solution uptake was recorded (38.82, 30.42, 24.54  & 14.61) under T1 (P1V1) respectively.

 Pooled mean recorded for both year under 3rd, 6th, 9th, & 12th day .Highest was recorded in P1 (34.22, 27.22, 21.55,16.66 & 11.83) . Among all varietal highest was recorded   in V1 (30.88, 24.05, 19.05, 14.22 & 9.94). Interaction effect for solution uptake on 3rd, 6th, 9th, & 12th day was found highest under T1 (37.95, 30.04, 23.71,  & 13.82 respectively) in P1V1.

Maximum solution uptake was recorded in (Top Secret + Al2 (SO4)3 400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %) and was least in Avalanche Control. Rogers, 1973 reported that addition  of sucrose to holding solution might have lead to increased uptake of the holding solution. Liao et al. (2001) observed that with Al2 (SO4)3 water uptake in cut lisianthus was increased Al2 (SO4)3 is the most important bactericide which as same as citric acid have positive effect water uptake rate consequence in anthesis. Hassanpour et al. (2004) reported that Al2SO4 acidifies vase solution, diminishes bacterial proliferation and enhances water uptake. 

Table 2:  Solution uptake of Rose variety.

Fig. 2.  Solution uptake of rose variety.

C. Petal membrane stability index (%)

The data perusing to Petal membrane stability index of rose variety with chemical treatment has been presented in Table 3 and graphically illustrated in Fig. 3. Significant differences were observed among different rose variety.

During the first year  of observation in the 1st, 3rd, & 5th day, the (Al2 (SO4)3  400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %) P1resulted maximum petal membrane stability index (41.62, 33.25, & 21.63 respectively). Among all the variety (Top Secret)V1 recorded maximum petal membrane stability index( 38.25, 28.92,  & 18.47 respectively). Interaction between preservative and variety had significant affects the vase life. Highest petal membrane stability index was recorded (42.73, 34.40, & 23.40) under (Top Secret + Al2 (SO4)3 400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %.)  T1 (P1V1) respectively.

During the second year of observation in the 1st, 3rd, & 5th day, the P1 resulted maximum petal membrane stability index(42.47, 33.07, & 23.47 respectively). Among all the varietal V1 recorded maximum petal membrane stability index (39.45, 30.23,  & 20.23 respectively). Interaction between preservative and varietal had significant affects the vase life. Highest petal membrane stability index was recorded (32.50, 22.16 & 12.16) under (T1) P1V1 respectively.

Pooled mean recorded for both year under 1st, 3rd, & 5th day. Highest was recorded in P1 (42.05, 33.50, & 22.56 respectively). Among all varietal highest was recorded   in V1 (38.86, 12.51, & 19.36). Interaction effect for petal membrane stability index on 1st, 3rd, & 5th day was found highest under T1 (42.95, 34.78, & 24.61 respectively)  in P1V1.

Maximum Petal membrane stability index was recorded in (Top Secret + Al2 (SO4)3   400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %) and was least in Avalanche Control. Blum and Ebercon (1980)  reported  that the membrane stability index (MSI) is another physiological index that has been widely used to evaluate drought and heat tolerance. Similar observation was reported  by Farahat et al. (2014);  Dastborhan & Ghassemi-Golezani (2015); Khan et al. (2015); Hassani et al. (2020).

Table 3:  Petal membrane stability index of Rose variety.

Fig. 3.  Petal membrane stability index.

D. Relative water content of rose leaf  (%)

The data perusing to relative water content of leaf as shown by different variety of Rose naturally ventilated polyhouse has been presented in Table 4 and graphically illustrated in Fig. 4. During the  first year (2021-22) of observation in the 1st day, the P1 (Al2 (SO4)3  400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %)resulted maximum relative water content of leaf(84.81 %). Among all the variety V1 (Top Secret) recorded maximum relative water content of leaf (81.67 %). Interaction between preservative and varietal had significant affects the vase life. Highest relative water content of leaf was recorded (86.72 %) under , (Top Secret + Al2 (SO4)3 400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %.) T1 (P1V1) respectively.

During the  second year (2022-23) of observation in the 1st day, the P1 resulted maximum relative water content of leaf(91.33 %). Among all the varietal V1 recorded maximum relative water content of leaf (88.31 %). Interaction between preservative and varietal had significant affects the vase life. Highest relative water content of leafwas recorded (92.64 %) under T1 (P1V1) respectively.

Pooled mean recorded for both year under 1st day. Highest was recorded in P1 (88.14 %). Among all varietal highest was recorded   in V1 (85.12, %) Interaction effect for relative water content of leaf on 1st  day was found highest under T1 ( 89.32 )  in P1V1. Maximum relative water content was recorded in Top Secret and was least in Peach Avalanche. Variation in relative water content of leaf might be genetic make-up and environmental conditions prevailing during the time of experiment. Anjum et al. (2011) reported that leaf relative water content reflects the metabolic activity of tissues and  used as a meaningful index for dehydration tolerance.

Table 4:  Relative water content of  rose leaf.

Fig. 4.  Relative water content of  rose leaf.

E.  Vase life (days)

The data perusing to vase life days  of rose variety with chemical treatment has been presented in Table 5 and graphically illustrated in  Fig. 5. Significant differences were observed among different rose variety. During the first year  (2021-22)  of observation (Al2 (SO4)3  400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %) P1 resulted maximum vase life (13.04 days). Among all the variety (Top Secret) V1 recorded maximum vase life  (12.4 days). Interaction between preservative and variety had significant affect  the vase life. The  highest  vase life was  recorded (13.52 days) under (T1)  P1V1(Top Secret + Al2 (SO4)3 400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %.).

During the second year (2022-23) of observation P1resulted maximum vase life (13.47 days). Among all the varietal V1 recorded maximum vase life (12.61 days). Interaction between preservative and varietal had significant affect the vase life. The highest vase life was recorded (13.88 days) under (T1) P1V1. Pooled mean recorded for both year, the highest was recorded in P1 (13.26). Among all varietal highest was recorded   in V1 (12.51 days).Interaction effect for vase life was found highest under T1 (13.70) in P1V1. Maximum vase life was recorded in (Top Secret + Al2 (SO4)3   400 ppm + Sucrose 4 %) and was least in Avalanche Control. Reported that (Liao et al., 2001) aluminiumsulphate reduces pH of the solution, effectively inhibits bacterial growth and prevents microbial clogging at the microbial cut end of the stem thus improving water uptake (Hassanpour et al., 2004) reported that Al2SO4 acidifies vase solution, diminishes bacterial proliferation and enhances water uptake. Similar observation was reported by Farahat et al. (2014) ;  Das et al. (2020).

Table 5:  Vase life (Days) of  Rose variety.

Fig. 5.  Vase life (days).

From the present investigation, it can be concluded that the interaction of preservatives & varieties of maximum fresh weight (48.45,45.53,40.32,24.34 g), Maximum solution uptake (37.95, 30.04, 23.71, 13.82 ml), Maximum petal membrane stability index (42.95,34.78,24.61 %), Maximum relative water content of leaf (89.32 %) Maximum vase life (13.70 days) were recorded in Top Secret+ Al2 (SO4)3 400 ppm + Sucrose 4% (T1).