Productivity of lesser yam [Dioscorea esculenta (Lour.) Burkill] as affected by seed tuber size and spacing

Anasooya Sebastian, P. Prameela, Meera V. Menon


A field experiment was conducted to study the effect of seed tuber size and spacing on the productivity of lesser yam during May to December 2018 at KAU campus, Vellanikkara, Thrissur. Tubers weighing 50 g, 100 g and 150 g were planted at spacings of 50 cm x 50 cm (high density), 75 cm x 50 cm (medium density) and 75 cm x 75 cm (low density: recommended spacing), adopting randomized block design with nine treatments. Significant effect of large seed tubers contributing to higher total dry matter accumulation per plant was observed at 180 days after planting (DAP), while spacing had no significant effect. Leaf area index was higher for vines from large seed tubers and closer spacing at all growth stages except towards senescence. The highest tuber yield per plant was realized from 150 g seed tubers (1270 g/plant), followed by 100 g (1053 g/plant) and 50 g seed tubers (929 g/plant). Wider spacing showed significantly higher per plant yield (1217 g), compared to medium (1062 g) and closer spacing (972 g). However significantly higher productivity of 44.20 t/ha was realized with 150 g tubers under high density. The next best and comparable productivity was realized with 100 g (37.09 t/ha) and 50 g (35.36 t/ha) tubers, planted at closer spacing of 50 cm x 50 cm, and 150 g tuber at a spacing of 75 cm x 50 cm (31.80 t/ha)


Lesser yam,sSpacing, seed tuber size, high density planting

Full Text:




Enyi, B. A. C. 1972. The effects of seed size and spacing on growth and yield of lesser yam (Dioscorea esculenta). J. Agric. Sci. 78(2): 215-225.

Ferguson, T. U., Haynes, P. H. and Spence, J. A. 1983. The effect of sett size, sett type and spacing on some aspects of growth, development and yield in White Lisbon Yams (D. alata L.). In: Proceedings of the 6th Symposium of the International Society for Tropical Root Crops, pp. 649-655.

Gurnah, A. M. 1974. Effects of spacing, sett weight and fertilizers on yield and yield components in yams. Exper. Agric. 10(1): 17-22.

Irizarry, H. and Rivera, E. 1985. Nutrient uptake and dry matter production by intensively managed yams grown in an Ultisol. J. Agric. Univ. Puerto Rico. 69(1): 1-9.

KAU [Kerala Agricultural University]. 2016. Package of Practices Recommendations: Crops (15th Ed.). Kerala Agricultural University, Thrissur, 392 p.

Manyong, V. M. 2000. Farmers’ perceptions of the resource management constraints in yam-based systems. In: Project 13: Improvement of yam-based systems. Annual Report 1999. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Nigeria, pp 3–4.

Melteras, M. V., Lebot, V., Asher, C.J. and O'sullivan, J. N. 2008. Crop development and root distribution in lesser yam (Dioscorea esculenta): Implications for fertilization. Exp. Agric. 44(2): 209-221.

Njoku, E. 1963. The propagation of yams (Dioscorea spp.) by vine cuttings. J. W. Afr. Sci. Assoc. 8: 29-32.

Okoli, O. O. 1980. Dry matter accumulation and tuber sprouting in yams (Dioscorea spp). Exp. Agric. 16(2): 161-167.

Onwueme, I. C. 1978. The tropical tuber crops: yam, cassava, sweet potato and cocoyam. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, 234 p.

Sobulo, R. A. 1972. Studies on white yam (Dioscorea rotundata) II. Changes in nutrient content with age. Exp. Agric. 8(2): 107-115.

Suja, G. and Nair, T. V. R. 2006. Growth analysis of arrowroot (Maranta arundinacea L.) under different spacing and mulches. J. Root Crops. 32:47-52.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

A KAU publication [CODEN: JTAGEI; ISSN 0971-636X; eISSN 0973-5399]