ISSN 0258-7122

Bangladesh J. Agril. Res. 38(2): 203-209, June 2013

PERFORMANCE OF BARI MANGO (Mangifera indica L.) VARIETIES
IN CHITTAGONG REGION

H. BARUA2, M. M. ALAM PATWARY1 AND M. H. RAHMAN2

Abstract
Five mango varieties developed by Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute
(BARI) were evaluated at ARS, Pahartali, Chittagong during January to June
2012 to find out the suitable variety. The earliest flowering as well as harvesting
were observed in BARI Aam-1 and the latest in BARI Aam-8. Number of fruits
per tree varied from 51 to 117. Maximum number of fruits (117) per tree was
obtained from BARI Aam-8, while minimum fruits (51) from BARI Aam-4
(Hybrid). The heaviest fruit (373.0 g) was obtained from BARI Aam-4 (Hybrid),
while the lightest fruit (172.6 g) was in BARI Aam-3. Maximum yield per plant
was found in BARI Aam-8 (33.59 kg) followed by BARI Aam-4 (19.02 kg),
whereas it was lowest in BARI Aam-1(14.42 kg). The highest edible portion
(78.66 %) was recorded in BARI Aam-4, while the lowest (65.99%) was
obtained from BARI Aam-1. The highest TSS content (21.36%) was recorded in
BARI Aam-3, whereas the lowest TSS content (16.51%) was observed in BARI
Aam-2.
Keywords: Growth, flowering, fruit characteristics, mango.

Introduction
Mango (Mangifera indica L.), a tropical and sub-tropical fruit, belongs to the
family Anacardiaceae, which was originated in South Asia/Malayan archipelago
and has been in cultivation for more than 4000 years (Mukherjee, 1949; Candole,
1984; Bose, 1985). It is an important and popular fruit in the world for its
excellent flavours, attractive colour, delicious taste, and high nutritive value. In
Bangladesh, it occupies an area of 32011 hectares of land with an annual
production of 1047849 metric tons (BBS, 2011).
Although it grows well in all parts of Bangladesh, the grafted mango plants
are concentrated in a few places in the north western region and seedling
mangoes are grown in the southern and other parts of Bangladesh (Bhuyan,
1995). But the scenario has changed to some extent in recent years. Some elite
farmers have taken keen interest to establish commercial orchard for mango with
grafted mango plants in southern region, especially in the hilly areas and
Chittagong Hill Tracts. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) has
already released 10 (ten) mango varieties with variable quality. In general, the
cultivars are location specific and the commercial varieties of one region may not
1
Senior Scientific Officer, 2Scientific Officer, Agricultural Research Station, Pahartali,
Chittagong, Bangladesh.
204 BARUA et al..

do so well when grown in other areas (Majumder et al., 2001). Information

regarding the performances of the released mango varieties is scanty under
Chittagong condition. Therefore, the present investigation was undertaken to
evaluate the performance of mango varieties developed by BARI under hot and
humid climatic condition of Chittagong region.

Materials and Method

The experiment was conducted at the Agricultural Research Station, Pahartali,
Chittagong during 2011-2012. Five released mango varieties, namely BARI
Aam-1, BARI Aam-2, BARI Aam-3, BARI Aam-4 (Hybrid), and BARI Aam-8
were included in this study. The experiment was laid out in randomized complete
block design (RCBD) with three replications. The saplings were planted on July
2004 with a spacing of 8m × 8m. A single tree of each variety constituted the unit
of replication. The trees were fertilized as per schedule described by Hossain
(1989). Ripcord 10 EC @ 1 ml along with Dithane M- 45 @ 2 g per litre of water
was sprayed with the help of a power sprayer at panicle emergence (before
anthesis) and pea stage of fruits to control mango hoppers and anthracnose as per
recommendation of Hossain (1989). Fertilizers were applied twice in a year on
29 June and 25 September 2011. Irrigation was done at pea stage of fruit on 10
April 2011. Other intercultural operations, such as weeding, ploughing, and
mulching were done as and when necessary. Girth of the trunk was measured at a
height of 15 cm from ground level and tree volume was calculated following
formula by Castle (1983) with some modifications, such as π/6 X height X (2r) 2
where, 2r = (East – West + North – South canopy spread)/2. Data on plant height,
canopy of the tree, flowering and harvesting, fruit weight, number of fruits per
tree, TSS content, edible portion, fruit size, stone size and stone weight were
recorded. All the data were recorded following mango descriptor recommended
by IBPGR (2006). Organoleptic evaluation was done and for this, a panel of five
members were selected to determine the pulp colour, sweetness, aroma, texture,
juiciness, fibrousness, peeling quality, eye appeal, and general quality of fruits of
different genotypes based on the criteria of the score card as follows : a) Pulp
colour: 1- light yellow, 2- yellow, 3- bright yellow; b) Sweetness/Taste: 1-
insipid, 2- sweet, 3- very sweet; c) Aroma: 1- very slight, 2- pleasant, 3-
delightful; d) Texture: 1- firm, 2- medium, 3- soft; e) Juiciness: 1- scantly, 2-
much, 3- abundant; f) Fibrousness: 1- abundant, 2- much, 3- scanty; g) Peeling
quality: 1- hard, 2- medium, 3- easy, and h) Eye appeal: 1- poor, 2- good, 3- very
good (Uddin et al., 1998). Data on insect pest and diseases were also recorded at
fruit harvest. Data were analyzed statistically and the means were separated by
LSD following MSTATC software.
PERFORMANCE OF BARI MANGO (Mangifera indica L.) VARIETIES 205

Results and Discussion

Results of the study are presented in Table 1, 2, 3, and 4. The investigation
revealed that growth of mango varieties varied significantly for all the parameters
(Table 1). The widest base girth (49.92 cm) was produced by BARI Aam-1,
whereas the narrowest (35.36 cm) by BARI Aam-3. Highest plant height was
observed in BARI Aam-8 (4.81 m) followed by that of BARI Aam-1(4.52m),
while the lowest in BARI Aam-3 (3.90 m). Tree volume was maximum (42.33
m3) in BARI Aam-8 followed by that in BARI Aam-1 (40.55 m3) and it was
minimum in BARI Aam-3 (31.21 m3). The other varieties had intermediate tree
volume. The flowering of all the varieties took place in between 23.02.2012 and
07.03.2012. The earliest flowering at 23 February was produced by BARI Aam-
1, while the latest flowering at 07 March by BARI Aam - 8. The variability in
relation to flowering found in the present study is in agreement with the findings
of Valmayor (1962) who reported that the variation of blooming period was
dependent upon the combination of environmental factors and the condition of
the plant. The harvesting period varied from 08 May to 22 July. Among the
varieties, the fruits of BARI Aam-1 matured on 08 May, while the fruits of BARI
Aam- 4 matured on 22 June. Other varieties were intermediate in fruit maturity.
The result supports the findings of Hossain (1989) who reported that fruits of
mango mature within 4-6 months of flowering.
The heaviest fruit (373 g) was obtained from BARI Aam-4, whereas the
lightest fruit (172 g) in BARI Aam-3 (Table 2). This variation might be due to
genetic differences among the variety. Uddin et al. (2006) also reported variable
fruit weight in different mango varieties. The longest fruit (12.30 cm) was obtained
from BARI Aam-1. The highest fruit breadth (9.18 cm) and fruit thickness (7.04
cm) were recorded from BARI Aam-4, while the lowest breadth (6.24 cm) and
thickness (5.50 cm) were recorded from BARI Aam-3. Mollah and Siddique
(1973) and Saha and Hossain (1988) also found different fruit sizes in different
mango varieties. Number of fruits per tree varied from 51 to 117. The highest
number of fruits per tree (117) was obtained from BARI Aam-8, while the lowest
number of fruits per tree (51) from BARI Aam-4 (Hybrid). The number of fruits
per tree varied depending upon the variety (Singh, 1990). Fruit production per unit
volume of tree was the highest (3.52/m3) in BARI Aam-3 and the lowest (1.40/ m3)
in BARI Aam-4. The highest yield (33.59 kg) per tree was produced by BARI
Aam-8 and the lowest yield (14.42 kg) was recorded from BARI Aam-1.The
heaviest stone (50.8 g) was recorded in BARI Aam-4, whereas the lightest stone
(29.2 g) in BARI Aam-3 (Table 3). The longest (10.11 cm) and the shortest (6.76
cm) stones were produced in BARI Aam-8 and BARI Aam-1, respectively. The
widest (5.23 cm) and the thickest (2.27 cm) stones were produced by BARI Aam-8
and BARI Aam-2, respectively. Percent edible portion and percent TSS of fruits
are the two most important criteria of quality mango. These were significantly
206 BARUA et al..

different among the varieties. The highest edible portion (78.66 %) was recorded in
BARI Aam-4, while the lowest edible portion (65.99%) was obtained from BARI
Aam-1. The findings of the present study are in good agreement with that of Haque
et al. (1993). The highest TSS content in fruit juice (21.36%) was recorded in
BARI Aam-3 followed by that in BARI Aam-4 (19.20%). The lowest TSS
(16.51%) was observed in BARI Aam-2. The results are in conformity with Haque
et al. (1993) who recorded 15.0, 20.0 and 19.0% TSS in Badshabhog, Himsagar,
and Bishawanath, respectively. During releasing varieties, the edible portion of
BARI Aam-1, BARI Aam-2, BARI Aam-3, BARI Aam-4 and BARI Aam-8 were
70%, 69%, 71%, 80%, and 70%, respectively, while TSS content of these varieties
were 19%, 17.5%, 23.4%, 24.5%, and 22%, respectively, under Nawabgonj
condition. It indicates a slight decrease in percent edible portion and TSS content in
the experimental site as compared to the original site of the varietal release. These
deterioration might be due to the climatic variation between the experimental site
of Chittagong with the original site of varietal release in Nawabgonj which is more
favourable for mango cultivation.
Table 1. Tree growth, flowering and harvesting of five mango varieties.
Plant height Base girth Tree Date of Date of
Variety
(m) (cm) volume (m3) flowering harvesting
BARI Aam -1 4.52 49.92 40.55 23.02.2012 08.05.2011
BARI Aam -2 4.12 46.00 38.10 28.02.2012 28.05.2011
BARI Aam -3 3.90 35.36 31.21 02.03.2012 06.06.2011
BARI Aam- 4 4.05 38.00 36.33 05.03.2012 22.06.2011
(Hybrid)
BARI Aam -8 4.81 48.00 42.33 07.03.2012 18.06.2011
CV (%) 1.97 0.06 0.05 - -
LSD(0.05) 0.14 0.05 5.55 - -
LSD(0.01) 0.20 0.07 8.08 - -
Table 2. Fruit characteristics and yield of five mango varieties.
Fruit Fruit size (cm) No. of
Fruits/
Variety weight fruits/ Fruit colour
Length Breadth Thickness m3
(g) tree
BARI Aam -1 192 8.02 6.74 6.12 79 1.95 Bright yellow
BARI Aam -2 227 9.48 6.96 6.26 70 1.84 Light yellow
BARI Aam -3 172 9.36 6.24 5.50 110 3.52 Yellowish
green
BARI Aam- 373 10.54 9.18 7.04 51 1.40 Yellowish
4 (Hybrid) green
BARI Aam- 8 314 12.30 7.12 6.52 117 2.76 Bright yellow
CV (%) 13.25 8.64 4.12 9.99 8.34 5.21 -
LSD(0.05) 7.74 0.12 0.78 0.51 18.46 0.12 -
LSD(0.01) 11.26 0.17 1.10 0.75 26.86 0.17 -
PERFORMANCE OF BARI MANGO (Mangifera indica L.) VARIETIES 207

Table 3. Stone and other fruit characteristics of five mango varieties.

Stone Stone size (cm) Edible Yield
TSS
Variety weight portion /tree
Length Breadth Thickness (%) (%)
(g) (kg)
BARI Aam -1 41.4 6.76 5.00 2.12 65.99 14.42 19.14
BARI Aam-2 35.0 7.32 4.26 2.27 69.25 15.92 16.51
BARI-Aam- 3 29.2 7.12 4.75 1.89 68.02 18.12 21.36
BARI Aam- 4 50.8 8.92 5.18 2.22 78.66 19.02 19.20
(Hybrid)
BARI Aam -8 48.0 10.11 5.23 2.09 67.93 33.59 18.22
CV (%) 0.30 8.15 6.25 9.28 11.25 12.35 6.88
LSD(0.05) 0.20 0.36 0.10 0.08 1.68 1.46 1.46
LSD(0.01) 0.29 0.53 0.15 0.12 2.45 2.12 2.13

Table 4. Organoleptic characteristics of five mango varieties.

Pulp Fibrou/ Peeling Eye General Mean
Variety Taste Aroma Juiciness
colour sness quality appeal quality score
BARI 2.7 2.4 2.6 1.6 1.3 2.3 2.7 2.7 2.28
Aam-1
BARI 2.2 2.2 2.4 1.7 1.3 2.4 2.4 2.6 2.15
Aam- 2
BARI 2.9 2.9 2.3 1.9 1.1 2.5 2.3 2.8 2.33
Aam -3
BARI 2.4 2.6 2.3 1.9 1.2 2.6 2.7 2.9 2.32
Aam- 4
(Hybrid)
BARI 2.1 1.9 2.5 1.8 2.2 2.4 2.4 2.5 2.22
Aam-8
Mean 2.46 2.40 2.42 1.78 1.42 2.44 2.50 2.70

Organoleptic characteristics of five mango varieties are shown in Table 4. In

respect of pulp colour, the highest score (2.9) was obtained from BARI Aam-3
followed by that of BARI Aam-1 (2.7) and the lowest from BARI Aam-8 (2.1).
In respect of taste, BARI Aam-3 ranked the highest score (2.9) and the lowest
(1.9) was in BARI Aam-2. BARI Aam-1 scored the maximum (2.6) in respect of
aroma. In case of juiciness, the highest (1.9) score was found in BARI Aam-3
and BARI Aam-4 followed by that in BARI Aam-8 (1.8). Maximum fibre was
found in BARI Aam-8 (2.2), while the lowest (1.1) was in BARI Aam-3
preceded by BARI Aam-4 (1.2). From the above result, it is revealed that BARI
Aam-3 had the highest average mean score (2.33) followed by BARI Aam-4
208 BARUA et al..

(2.32), while the lowest score (2.15) was found in BARI Aam-2. The present
results are in accordance with the findings of Uddin et al., 2007 who mentioned
the variable score in different mango genotypes. Fruit fly infestation was
observed only in BARI Aam-3 (10%) and BARI Aam-8 (4%). On the other hand,
stone weevil infestation was observed in BARI Aam-8 (20%) and BARI Aam-3
(5%). Fruit cracking was observed only in BARI Aam -3 (18%) and BARI Aam-
8 (10%).
Table 5. Incidence of insect pest, disease and fruit cracking in five mango varieties.
Insect infestation (%) Fruit Physiological disorder/ fruit
Variety
Fruit fly Stone weevil anthracnose (%) cracking (%)
BARI Aam- 1 0 0 0 0
BARI Aam -2 0 0 3 0
BARI Aam -3 10 5 4 18
BARI Aam - 0 0 0 0
4(Hybrid)
BARI Aam -8 4 20 10 10
Mean 2.8 5 3.4 5.6

Conclusion
Among the tested mango varieties, BARI Aam-1 was found superior considering
earliness, fruit colour, and aroma without infestation by insect pest and diseases,
while BARI Aam-3, BARI Aam-4 (Hybrid), and BARI Aam- 8 were also found
suitable for cultivation in Chittagong region with minimum infestation by insect
pests and diseases.

References
BBS (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics). 2011. Yearbook of Agricultural Statistics of
Bangladesh 2010. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, Statistics Division, Ministry of
Planning, Government of the PeopleÕs Republic of Bangladesh. p. 136.
Bhuyan, M. A. J. 1995. Mango (Mangifera indica). In: Fruit productiuon manual. Hort.
Res. Dev. Proj. (FAO/UNDP/AsDB project: BGD/87/025). p. 197.
Bose, T. K. 1985. Fruits of India: Tropical and Sub-tropical. Naya Prokash, India, p. 91.
Candole, A. D. 1984. Origin of Cultivated Plants. Vegal Paul Trench and Co. London,
Pp. 1-67.
Castle, S. W. 1983. Growth, Yield and Cold Hardiness of seven year old “Bears” Lemon
trees on twenty seven rootstock. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 96:23-25.
Haque, A. M. M. M, M. R. Ali, M. R. Uddin, and A. K. M. A. Hossain.1993. Evaluation
of elite mango cultivars at southern region of Bangladesh. Bangladesh J. Plant
Breed. Genet. 6(2):21-28.
PERFORMANCE OF BARI MANGO (Mangifera indica L.) VARIETIES 209

Hossain, A. K. M. A. 1989. Manual on Mango Production in Bangladesh. Div. of Hort.,

Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute, Gazipur. Pp.10-64.
IBPGR. 2006. Descriptors for Mango. International Board of Plant Genetic Resources,
Rome Italy. P. 9.
Majumder, P. K., D. K. Sharma and D. Sanyal. 2001. Mango. In: Fruits: Tropical and
Subtropical. 3rd edn. Vol. 1. (Eds. T. K. Bose, S. K. Mitra and D. Sanyal), Naya
Udyog, 206, Bidhan Sarani, Calcutta, India. P. 68.
Mandal, M. R. I., M.S. Alam, M. A. J. Bhuyan, M. M. Rahman and M. H. H. Rahman
(Eds.). 2011. Krishi Projukti Hatboi. 2nd part. 5th edn. Bangladesh Agricultural
Research Institute, Gazipur, 1701. Bangladesh. Pp. 3-10.
Mollah, S. and M. A. Siddique. 1973. Studies on some mango varieties of Bangladesh.
Bangladesh Hort. 1(2): 16-24.
Mukherjee, S. K. 1949. Mango and its Relatives. Sci. Cult. 15: 5-9.
Saha, A. K. and A. K. M. A. Hossain. 1988. Studies on fruit characteristics of some
grafted mango cultivars. Bangladesh J. Agric. Res. 13(2):47-52.
Singh, R. N. 1990. Mango. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi. Pp.46-65.
Uddin, M. S., M. M. A. Patwary and M. A. Salam. 1998. Growth, flowering behaviour and
fruit characteristics of promising mango lines. Bangladesh Hort. 26 (1&2): 41-44.
Uddin, M. Z., M. A. Rahim, J. C. Barman and M.A Wadud. 2006. A study on the
physical characteristics of some mango germplasm grown in Mymensingh condition.
Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 1(2): 33-38.
Uddin, M. Z., M. G. Mortuza, M. A. Alam, M. S. Islam and M. S. Uddin. 2007.
Performance of some commercial and promising mango varieties. J. Bangladesh
Soc. Agric. Sci. Technol. 4(1&2): 105-108.
Valmayor, R. V. 1962. The Mango, its Botany and Production. University of the
Phillippines, Los Banos, Laguna, Phillippines. P.120.