Effect of Biofield Energy Treatment on Chlorophyll Content, Pathological Study, and Molecular Analysis of Cashew Plant (Anacardium occidentale L.)
Journal of Plant Sciences
Volume 3, Issue 6, December 2015, Pages: 372-382
Received: Oct. 30, 2015;
Accepted: Nov. 24, 2015;
Published: Dec. 21, 2015
Views 4846 Downloads 79
Mahendra Kumar Trivedi, Trivedi Global Inc., Henderson, USA
Alice Branton, Trivedi Global Inc., Henderson, USA
Dahryn Trivedi, Trivedi Global Inc., Henderson, USA
Gopal Nayak, Trivedi Global Inc., Henderson, USA
Mayank Gangwar, Trivedi Science Research Laboratory Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India
Snehasis Jana, Trivedi Science Research Laboratory Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India
Follow on us
In the world scenario, India occupies a premier position contributing to about 43 per cent production of the cashew nut (Anacardium occidentale L.) along with export and processing. The aim is to study the impact of biofield energy treatment on selected farms for cashew farming. The control and biofield treated farms were divided as control and treated farms, and Mr. Trivedi provided the biofield energy treatment to the treated farms. Further, the plants and fruits were analyzed for overall growth of plants, chlorophyll content, productivity, pathological study, and shelf life using UN specifications for International Trade, biophoton emission study, and DNA fingerprinting using RAPD method. No chemicals, fertilizers, were used on the treated plot, although regular practices were followed on control farms such as fertilizers, pesticides and fungicides due to the high incidence of disease and the requirement of nutritional supplements in the region. The analysis showed that biofield treated farm plants have thicker and stronger branches with more secondary and tertiary branches, flowering pattern, and canopy of plants was improved than trees of the same variety along with height of the plants, as compared with the control. The results showed that chlorophyll a and b content in biofield treated lands plants were increased by approximately 30% and 93% respectively, while total chlorophyll content by 45% as compared with the control. The pathological examination showed the presence of fungi namely Colletotrichum gloeosporioides and Botryodiplodia theobromae in control, which were absent in treated plants. Biophoton study suggested that the cashew fruits were bigger in size with high density, strength, and vitality as compared with the control. The shelf life analysis reflected that the biofield treated cashews showed sweet taste, and can be stored for longer duration due to less moisture, and altered minerals content, such as high iodine, and low p-anisidine level. RAPD analysis showed a high level of polymorphism among control and treated samples, while level of true polymorphism among V4 variety of cashew was ranges from 0 to 100%, and in V7 variety, it ranged from 25 to 91% using different set of RAPD primers. Overall, study results suggest that Mr. Trivedi’s biofield energy treatment on land planted with cashew could be an alternative approach to improve the overall growth of plant, and fruit yield.
Anacardium occidentale L., Biofield Energy Treatment, Chlorophyll a, b, Biophoton Emission, Shelf-Life, Fungi
To cite this article
Mahendra Kumar Trivedi,
Effect of Biofield Energy Treatment on Chlorophyll Content, Pathological Study, and Molecular Analysis of Cashew Plant (Anacardium occidentale L.), Journal of Plant Sciences.
Vol. 3, No. 6,
2015, pp. 372-382.
Copyright © 2015 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Azam-Ali S, Judge E (2000) The global cashew industry-opportunities for small-scale processors. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on cashew production and processing-cashing in on Cashew. Marawila: Sri Lanka.
Akinwale TO (2000). Cashew apple juice: Its use in fortifying the nutritional quality of some tropical fruits. Eur Food Res Technol 211: 205-207.
Cavalcante Ana AM, Rubensam G, Picada JN, da Silva EG, Moreira FJC, et al. (2003) Mutagenicity evaluation, antioxidant potential and antimutagenic activity against hydrogen peroxide of cashew (Anacardium occidentale L.) apple juice and cajuina. Environ Mol Mut 41: 360-369.
Aliyu OM (2007) Clonal propagation in cashew (Anacardium occidentale): Effect of rooting media on the root-ability and sprouting of air-layers. Trop Sci 47: 65-72.
De Azevedo DMP, Crisostomo JR, Imeda FCG, Rossetti AG (1998) Estimates of genetic correlations and correlated responses to selection in cashew (Anacardium occidentale L.). Genet Mol Biol 21: 344-400.
Shomari SH (2002) Opportunities and constraints to the development of cashew exports in eastern and southern Africa.
Afanador-Kafuri L, Minz D, Maymon M, Freeman S (2003). Characterization of Colletotrichum isolates from tamarillo, passiflora, and mango in Colombia and identification of a unique species from the genus. Phytopathology 9: 579-587.
Sances F, Flora E, Patil S, Spence A, Shinde V (2013) Impact of biofield treatment on ginseng and organic blueberry yield. AGRIVITA J Agric Sci 35: 22-29.
Lenssen AW (2013) Biofield and fungicide seed treatment influences on soybean productivity, seed quality and weed community. Agricultural Journal 8: 138-143.
Movaffaghi Z, Farsi M (2009) Biofield therapies: Biophysical basis and biological regulations? Complement Ther Clin Pract 15: 35-37, 31.
Oschman JL (2000) Energy medicine: The scientific base. (2ndedn), Edinburgh: Churchill Livingston.
NIH, National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. CAM Basics. Publication 347. [October 2, 2008]. Available at: http://nccam.nih.gov/health/whatiscam/
Shinde V, Sances F, Patil S, Spence A (2012) Impact of biofield treatment on growth and yield of lettuce and tomato. Aust J Basic Appl Sci 6: 100-105.
Nayak G, Altekar N (2015) Effect of biofield treatment on plant growth and adaptation. J Environ Health Sci 1: 1-9.
Trivedi MK, Patil S, Shettigar H, Bairwa K, Jana S (2015) Phenotypic and biotypic characterization of Klebsiella oxytoca: An impact of biofield treatment. J Microb Biochem Technol 7: 203-206.
Patil SA, Nayak GB, Barve SS, Tembe RP, Khan RR (2012) Impact of biofield treatment on growth and anatomical characteristics of Pogostemon cablin (Benth.). Biotechnology 11: 154-162.
Arnon DI (1949) Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts. Polyphenoloxidase in Beta vulgaris. Plant Physiol 24: 1-15.
Bajpai RP, Bajpai PK (1992) Light-induced biophotonic emission from plant tissues. J Biolumin Chemilumin 7: 177-184.
Chunwongse J, Martin GB, Tanksley SD (1993) Pre-germination genotypic screening using PCR amplification of half-seeds. Theor Appl Genet 86: 694-698.
Semagn K, Bjornstad A, Ndjiondjop MN (2006) An overview of molecular marker methods for plants. Afr J Biotechnol 5: 2540-2568.
Heard TA, Vithanage V, Chacko EK (1990) Pollination biology of cashew in the northern territory of Australia. Australian J Agric Res 41: 1101-1114.
De Souza RP, Ribeiro RV, Machado EC, de Oliveira RF, da Silveira JAG (2005) Photosynthetic responses of young cashew plants to varying environmental conditions. Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira 40: 735-744.
Muniz CR, Freire FC, Viana FM, Cardoso JE, Cooke P, et al. (2011) Colonization of cashew plants by Lasiodiplodia theobromae: Microscopical features. Micron 42: 419-428.
Frinking HD (1991) Aerobiology of “closed” agricultural systems. Grana 30: 2, 481-485.
Irtwange SV, Oshodi AO (2009) Shelf-life of roasted cashew nuts as affected by relative humidity, thickness of polythene packaging material and duration of storage. Res J Appl Sci Eng Technol 1: 149-153.
Williams JG, Hanafey MK, Rafalski JA, Tingey SV (1993) Genetic analysis using random amplified polymorphic DNA markers. Methods Enzymol 218: 704-740.
Asolkar T, Desai AR, Singh NP (2011) Molecular analysis of cashew genotypes and their half-sib progeny using RAPD marker. Biotechnol Bioinf Bioeng 1: 495-504.