1. BANGLADESH RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS JOURNAL
ISSN: 1998-2003, Volume: 11,Issue: 3, Page: 198-203, June - August 2015
Review Paper
GROWTH, YIELD AND QUALITY OF SAU-AGNI AND SAU-CAYENNE CHILI
VARIETY
A.F.M. Jamal Uddin1
*, M.S. Hussain1
, Sk. S. Rahman1
, H. Ahmad 1
and M.Z.K. Roni2
A.F.M. Jamal U ddin, M.S. Hussain, Sk. S. Rahman, H. Ahmad and M.Z.K. Roni (2015). Growt h, yield and qualit y of
SAU -Agni and SAU -Cayenne chili variet y. Bangladesh Res. Pub. J. 11(3): 198-203. Ret rieve from
htt p://www.bdresearchpublicat ions.com/admin/journal/upload/1410082/1410082.pdf
Abstract
An ex periment w as carried out in Horticulture Farm in Department of Horticulture,
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka, during March 2015 to June 2015, to
evaluate the grow th, yield and quality performance of chili varieties. This
ex periment w as consistedw ith tw o chili varieties namely V1, SAU-Agni and V2, SAU-
Cayenne, and w as done in randomized completely block design (RCBD) w ith three
replications. Significant difference w as observedw ith the cultivars on plant height,
number of branches, number of flow ers, number of fruits, fruit length and diameter,
fresh single fruit w eight, dry matter content and yield. Highest capsaicin
concentrations (1.6%) of found in SAU-Agni (V1) and low est (1.2%) from SAU-
Cayane. Similarly, higher level of vitamin-C w as found in both green (86.5 mg) and
ripens (158.2 mg) w ith SAU-Agni, w here as low erw as from SAU-Cayane. Results also
investigated the fruit per plant (70.2) and yield per plant (380.7 g) in SAU-Cayane.
On the other hand, fruit per plant (33.2) and yield per plant (229.6 g) also found
from SAU-Agni.
Key words: Capsaicin, Vitamin-C and Yield.
Introduction
Chili (Capsicum annum L.) is most consumed and pungent spices, belongs to the
Solanaceae family. Commonly it is used in the w hole world for different purpose like as
salad, catsup and other cooking dishes. According to cooking spices vegetables, chilies
position is higher than other spices. Generally, high vitamin and nutrient are found in chili
like vitamin C and absicic acid, capsaicin etc. Capsaicin is the active compound in
chilies, w hich gives pungency. Pungency varies w ith different varieties of chilies.
Nevertheless, demand of high pungent chili is very popular with dark color flavor in hotel
and restaurant. Industrial demand of chili is also very high in worldw ide.
In Bangladesh chili is high demandable spices which is used in direct or indirect
consuming purposes. Furthermore, cultivation of chili is accomplished in all the part of
Bangladesh. It is used in both green and ripens condition. Due to friendly climate, chili can
easily grow in Bangladesh w hole year. Most of chili varieties are found in rural market.
Most of them are local and hybrid. However, most common chili varieties are released
from Bangladesh agricultural research institute and other private research organization,
but there are no high potential pungent and hot chili varieties. Based on industrial
purposes, hot chili is very demandable in industrial product. However, there is no specific
industrial chili variety in Bangladesh. Varietal development and improvement is priority to
supply the varieties that satisfy market demand (M cDonald, 2001). Hot chili is an important
horticultural crop, not only because of its economic importance, but also due to
nutritional and medicinal value of its fruit (Iqbal et al., 2009). Foremost case, lack of
qualitative analysis is also barrier for development of industrial chili. For this condition, high
pungent and quality chili are very essential either industrial purpose or hotels and
restaurants. Interestingly, it is still unknown. Considering the above points, present study
observed to evaluate the high pungent chili variety for industrial purpose.
*Corresponding Aut hor Email: jamal4@yahoo.com
1Depart ment of Hort icult ure, Sher-e-Bangla Agricult ural U niversit y, Dhaka1207, Bangladesh
2Depart ment of Agricult ural Bot any, Sher-e-Bangla Agricult ural U niversit y, Dhaka1207, Bangladesh

2. SAU-Agni and SAU-Cayenne chili variety
http://www.bdresearchpublications.com/journal/
199
Materials and Methods
A field study was conducted in Horticulture Farm, Department of Horticulture, Sher-e-
Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka, during M arch 2015 to June 2015, to evaluate the
growth, yield and quality of two new chili varieties for industrial market. The chili varieties
were used viz. V1, SAU-Agni and V2, SAU-Cayenne in this experiment and was laid out in
randomized completely block design (RCBD) with three replications. The unit plots size was
2.5m ×2.5m and the plant spacing 50 cm x 50 cm were maintained. Inorganic fertilizer,
N:P:K, w as used in 1:1:1 ratio and cowdung was mixed in soil properly before
transplanting. 30 days aged seedling w as transplanted in the main field. Intercultural
operations and watering were also done at fortnight intervals.
Plant height, leaf numbers, branch numbers, flower numbers, fruit numbers, single fruit
weight, length and diameter of fruit, yield per plant were also measured. The dry matter
(%) of the fruit was taken after drying sample fruits in an oven at 70o C for 72 hours until
constant weight w as attained. Vitamin C was measured by Oxidative Reduction Titration
Method. Two gram of green and ripen chilies were dried and powdered for estimating
capsaicin percentage, whether capsaicin percentage was measured by
spectrophotometer. Collected data were statistically analyzed using MSTAT-C computer
package programme. Difference between treatments was assessed by t-Test at 5% level
of significance (Gomez and Gomez, 1984).
Varieties Leaf Flower Green fruit Ripen fruit
SAU- Agni
SAU-
Cayenne
Plate 1. Photographic presentation of two chili varieties viz. SAU-Agni and SAU-
Cayenne
Results and discussion
Plant height: Plant height was showed significant differences with two chili varieties. Tallest
plant height (64.6 cm) was obtained from SAU-Cayenne (V2) and shortest (57.1 cm) was in
SAU-Agni (V1) (Table 1).
Branch number: Branch number w as significantly influenced by two chili varieties.
Maximum number (9.3) was observed in SAU-Cayenne (V2), where as minimum (6.8) was
from SAU-Agni (V1) (Table 1).
Flowers number: Significant variation was observed on flowers number with two chili
varieties. M aximum flower number (151.0) was found from SAU-Cayenne (V2) and
minimum (50.1) was in SAU-Agni (V1) (Table 1).

3. Uddin et al.
http://www.bdresearchpublications.com/journal/
200
Fruits number: Fruit number w as showed the significant variation w ith two chili varieties.
SAU-Cayenne produced maximum number of fruit (70.2) and number of fruit (33.2) was
from SAU-Agni (Table 1).
Fruit length: Significant difference w as observed in fruits length with two different two chili
varieties. M aximum fruit length (10.3 cm) was obtained from SAU-Cayenne (V2), w here as
minimum (7.0 cm) was from SAU-Agni (V1) (Table 1).
Fruit diameter: Chili varieties were showed the significant variation on fruit diameter.
Maximum fruit diameter (3.9 cm) w as obtained from V1 (SAU-Agni) and minimum (1.7 cm)
was in V2 (SAU-Cayenne) (Table 1).
Fresh weight per single fruit: Fresh w eight per single fruit was significantly influenced by two
chili varieties. Maximum fresh weight (6.9 g) was found from SAU-Agni (V1). On the other
hand, low est (5.7 g)was in SAU-Cayenne (V2) (Table 1).
Table 1. Performance of chili varieties SAU-Agni and SAU-Cayenne on growth and yield
traitsx
Variety
Plant
heigh
t (cm)
Numbe
r of
branch
Flowers
numbe
r per
plant
Fruits
numbe
r per
plant
Fruit
lengt
h
(cm)
Fruit
diamete
r (cm)
Fresh
weight/frui
t (g)
Dry
matter
conten
t (%)
SAU-
Agni
57.1 6.8 50.1 33.2 7.0 3.9 6.9 24.5
SAU-
Cayane
64.6 9.3 151.0 70.2 10.3 1.7 5.7 19.3
LSD 6.2 3.4 21.7 30.8 2.9 1.5 2.0 3.4
CV (%) 1.0 3.7 1.8 3.7 5.6 7.6 3.8 5.6
xIn a column means having similar letter (s) are st atist ically identical and t hose having
dissimilar letter (s) differ significant ly as per 0.01 level of probability
Dry matter content (%): Significant difference w as observed on dry matter content w ith
chili varieties. Maximum dry matter content (24.5%) was measured in SAU-Agni (V1) and
minimum (19.3%)w as from SAU-Cayenne (V2) (Table 1).
Vitamin C content in Green fruit: Significant variation w as obtained on green fruit with two
chili varieties. M aximum vitamin C (86.5 mg) was reported from SAI-Agni (V1), w here as
minimum (68.1 mg) was in SAU-Cayenne (V2) (Table 2).
Vitamin C content in ripen fruit: Vitamin C content of ripen fruit was significantly influenced
among two chili varieties. Maximum vitamin C (158.2 mg) was found in SAU-Agni (V1) and
minimum (112.1) was found in V2 (SAU-Cayenne) (Table 2).
Capsaicin (%): Capsaicin percentage was showed the significant variation w ithin two
chili varieties. Maximum capsaicin (1.6%) was measured from SAU-Agni (V1), w here as
minimum (1.2%) was from SAU-Cayenne (V2) (Table 2).
Number of seeds per fruit: Significant variation was found on number of seeds with two
different chilies. Maximum seeds number (47.2) w as observed in SAU-Cayenne (V2) and
minimum (13.6) was from SAU-Agni (V1) (Table 2).
Yield per plant: Yield per plant was significantly performed by two chili varieties. Maximum
yield per plant (380.7 g) was determined in SAU-Cayenne (V2). On the other hand,
minimum (229.6 g) was in SAU-Agni (V1) (Table 2).
Yield: Significant difference was observed on yield per hectare with two chili varieties.
SAU-Cayenne (V2) produced the maximum yield (1.5 ton/ha) and minimum (1.2 ton/ha)
was from SAU-Agni (V1) (Table 2).

4. SAU-Agni and SAU-Cayenne chili variety
http://www.bdresearchpublications.com/journal/
201
Table 2. Performance of chili varieties SAU-Agni and SAU-Cayenne on yield and quality
traitsx
Variety
Vitamin C
(mg/ 100g) Capsaicin
(%)
Number of
seeds per
fruit
Yield
per
plant
(g)
Yield per
hectare
(ton)
Green
fruit
Ripen
fruit
SAU-Agni 86.5 158.2 1.6 13.6 229.6 1.5
SAU-Cayenne 68.1 112.1 1.2 47.2 380.7 1.2
LSD 14.3 34.5 0.4 16.5 50.3 0.4
CV (%) 1.3 1.7 8.9 1.4 4.2 5.8
xIn a column means having similar letter (s) are stat istically identical and those having
dissimilar letter (s) differ significant ly as per 0.01 level of probability
Discussion
Parameters of growth and yield are positively correlated with plant height in chili varieties
(except number of flowering) (Tesfaw et al., 2013). Sileshi (2011) ascertained that variety is
one of the most important factors determining the number of branches in hot peppers.
Tesfaw et al. (2013) governed by varietal traits which are responsible for the acquisition of
various numbers of fruits. However, Schemske (1980) also reported that pollination can be
the main factor limiting fruit production and resulting in low productivity. The variations
were most probably being attributed to their inherited traits or the grow ing environment.
Moreover, pod length is directly related w ith the amount of nutrients taken and the
vegetative status of the plant (Tesfaw et al., 2013). Hence, the result is in line with the
finding of M ARC (2005) w hich reported that the longest (15cm) and the shortest (7cm)
pod lengths of the local chili varieties. Padda et al. (1970), Hosmani (1982) and Pillai and
Bellukutty (1978) also identified the varietal variation in fruit length of chili. Veerapa (1980)
recorded the fruit diameter (3.1 to 5.2 cm) variation in bell pepper. Fruit diameter
difference among varieties is attributed to variation in dry matter partitioning ability of
plants and the soil fertility status of the growing locations. Nevertheless, larger and w ider
hot pepper pods are considered to be the best in quality indicator parameter and have
better demand for fresh as well as dry pod use in hot pepper markets (Beyene and David,
2007; and Tesfaw et al., 2013). When sufficient nutrient supply is available in the soil, fruits
as other vegetative parts of the plant take part in assimilating portion of the nutrient and
would acquire larger and thicker sizes (Hegden, 1997). Variations of fruit diameter also
found in different of chili varieties by Sharma et al. (1981); Hasan et al. (2014) and Tesfaw
et al. (2013). Dhaliw al et al. (2013) mentioned that fresh weight varies among the new chili
varieties. Consistent with this result, Hedge (1997), noted that a comparable size in fruit
weight and other yield related characteristics of chili varieties. The variation in dry matter
percent of fruits is probably due to the difference in nutrient accumulation of
photosynthetic products which are transported from sources (leaves) to fruits (Tesfaw et
al., 2013). Guerpinar and Mordogan (2002) found that pod dry matter content of peppers
was directly related to the amount of nutrient taken from the soil which also directly
related w ith the nutrients present in the soil or the amount of organic and inorganic
fertilizers applied. This finding agreesw ith the results reported in bell peppers by Howard et
al. (2000) w ho stated that that vitamin C levels in peppers can increase as the fruit ripens
than green fruits. Sanatombi and Sharma (2008) observed the similar results on the
capsaicin content and pungency of the six chilies varied depending upon the genotype.
Interestingly, capsaicin percentage represents the hot flavor Mathur et al. (2000) and it is
also very important for market value and industrial purpose. Similar results also revealed by
Gnayfeed et al. (2001) and Antonious and Jarret (2006). Furthermore, yield per plant was
significantly and positively associated w ith both genotypic and phenotypic levels (Farhad
et al., 2008). Karad et al. (2006), Raikar et al. (2005), Rani et al. (2008), Rangaiah et al.
(2001), Rathod et al. (2002) reported similar results. As fruit yield may be attributed to the
adaptability and performance of the variety to the local environmental conditions (Sleshi,
2011). Due to the primary and secondary branches are locations of fruit buds and thus
foundation of new fruit bud development in hot peppers (Bosland and Votava, 2000).
Results are emphasizing the need for research on hot chili for the development of hot chili
industry. Germplasm development and improvement is priority to supply the varieties that
satisfy market demand (M cDonald, 2001).

5. Uddin et al.
http://www.bdresearchpublications.com/journal/
202
Conclusion
From the above study it was observed that SAU-Agni and SAU-Cayane showed the
significant variation among all growth and yield characters. However, SAU-Agni had high
vitamin-C content as well as capsaicin percentage which is important for industrial
purpose. On the other hand, maximum yieldwas found in SAU-Cayane variety.
Reference
Antonious, G. F. and R. L. Jarret. (2006) Screening capsicum accessions for capsaicinoids
content. J. Environ, Sci. Health B. 41 (5):717-729.
Beyene, T. and D. Phillips. (2007) Ensuring small scale producers in Ethiopia to achieve
sustainable and fair access to pepper Market. Uganda Journal of Agriculture, 3(2):
113-119.
Bosland, P. W. and E. J. Votava. (2000) Peppers, vegetables and spices capsicum. CABI
Publishing. New York. 198p.
Dhaliw al, M. S., Yadav, A., & Jindal, S. K. (2014) Molecular characterization and diversity
analysis in chilli pepper using simple sequence repeats (SSR) markers. African
Journal of Biotechnology, 13(31), 3137-3143.
Farhad, M ., M . Hasanuzzaman, B. K. Biswas, A. K. Azad and M. Arifuzzaman. (2008)
Reliability of yield contributing characters for improving yield potential in chilli
(Capsicum annum). Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 3(3): 30-38
Gnayfeed,M . H., H. G. Daood, P. A. Biacs and C. F. Alcaraz. (2001) Content of bioactive
compounds in pungent spice red pepper (paprika) as affected by ripening and
genotype. J. Sci. Food Agric. 81(15): 1580-1585.
Gomez, K. A. and A. A. Gomez. (1984) Statistical procedures for agricultural research. 2nd
edn. John Wiley and Sons. New York: 680.
Guerpinar A, and Mordogan N. (2002) The effect of different compost applications on
organically produced red peppers (Capsicum annum L.). Republic of Turkey.
Hasan, M ., T. Haider, M . S. N. Chow dhury, M . F. Howlader and AFM Jamal Uddin. (2014)
Study on morpho-physiological and yield performance of four chili (Capsicum
spp.) Lines. J. Biosci. Agri. Res. 2(01): 01-07.
Hedge, D. M . 1997. Nutrient requirements of solanceous vegetable crops. Extension
Bulletin ASPAC, Food and Fertilizer Technology Center, No. 441, p. 9.
Hegden, D. M . 1997. Nutrient requirement of solanaceaeous vegetable crops. Solapur,
Mahar Ashtra, India. 31p.
Hosmani, M . M. (1982) Chilli Published by S. M. Hosmani, Narayanapur, Dharw ad
Karnataka. pp- 232.
How ard, L. R., S. T. Talcott, C. H. Brenes and B. Villalon. (2000) Changes in phytochemical
and antioxidant activity of selected pepper cultivars (Capsicum Species) as
influenced by maturity. J. Agric. Food Chem. 48: 1713–1720.
Iqbal, Q., A. M uhammad, R. A. M uhammad, A. A. M uhammad, and A. Riaz. 2009.
Vegetative and reproductive evaluation of hot peppers under different plastic
mulches in poly/plastic tunnel. Pak. J. Agri. Sci., 46(2) 113-119.
Karad, S. R. Navate, P. A.and Kadam, D. E. (2006) Variability and path coefficient analysis
in chilli (Capsicum annum L.). Int. J. Agril. Sci. 2(1): 90-92
M ARC (Melkasa Agricultural Research Center). (2005) Progress Report on Completed
Activities. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 14p.
Mathur, R., R. S. Dangi, S. C. Dass and R. C. M alhotra. (2000) The hottest chilli variety in
India. Curr. Sci. 79 (3), 287-288.
M cDonald, F. D. (2001) A hot pepper industry in the Caribbean: A vision and requirements
of a sustainable and profitable industry. Proc. Caribbean Food Crops Soc. 37: 326-
331.

6. SAU-Agni and SAU-Cayenne chili variety
http://www.bdresearchpublications.com/journal/
203
Padda, D.S., M . S. Saimbi and G. Singh. (1970) Comparative performance of chillie
varieties in Punjab. Punjab Hort. J. 10:150-154.
Pillai, O. A. A. and B. Bellukutty. (1978) Studies on performance of certain chilli cultivars.
South Indian Hort. 26:163-166.
Raikar, G. N., S. R. Karad and P. A. Navale. (2005) Variability and path-coefficient analysis
in chilli .J. Maharashtra Agril Univ. 30(1): 90-91.
Rangaiah, S., A. M anjunath, R. S. Kulkarni and S. D. Nehru. (2001) Character association
follow ing mutagenesis in chilli (Capsicum annum L.).Mysore 35(1): 58
Rani, I., D. Veeraragavathatham and D. Sanjutha. (2008) Studies on correlation and path
coefficient analysis on yield attributes in root knot nematodes resistant F1 hybrids of
tomato. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 4: 287-295.
Rathod, R. P., D. T. Deshmukh, P. B. Ghode and V. S. Gonge. (2002) Correlation and path
analysis studies in chilli (Capsicum annum L.). Haryana J. Hort. Sci. 31(1/2): 141-143.
Sanatombi, K. and G. J. Sharma. (2008) Capsaicin content and pungency of different
Capsicum spp. cultivars.
Schemske, D. W. (1980) Evolution of floral display in the orchid Brassavola nodosa.
Evolution 34:489-493.
Sharma, P. P., S. S. Saini, and B. N. kurla. (1981) Correlation and path coefficient analysis in
Capsicum. Vegetable Science. 8: 35-44.
Sileshi, D. (2011) Evaluation of elite hot pepper varieties (Capsicum species) for growth, dry
pod yield and quality under Jimma condition, South West Ethiopia. MSc.Thesis
submitted to the school of graduate studies of Jimma Uninversity, Ethiopia. Pp. 38-
39.
Sileshi, D. (2011) Evaluation of Elite Hot Pepper Varieties (Capsicum species) for Growth,
Dry Pod Yield and Quality Under Jimma Condition, South West Ethiopia. MSc.Thesis
submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Jimma Uninversity, Ethiopia. Pp: 38-
39.
Tesfaw , A., N. Dechassa and K. W/T Sadik. (2013) Performance of hot pepper (Cupsicum
annuum) varieties as influenced by nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers at Bure,
Upper Watershed of the Blue Nile in Northwestern Ethiopia. Int. J. Agri. Sci. 3(8): 599-
608.
Veerapa, D. B. (1980) Studies on relative performance of different genotypes of sweet
Pepper (C. annuum) M. Sc. Thesis, Univ. Agril Sci., Dharw ad.