SearchAuthorsKeywordsSubjectsTitlesYear

BIBLIOGRAPHY UGALDE, GEORGE B. ...
BIBLIOGRAPHY


UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013. Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and
Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under
Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet. Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Leoncia L. Tandang, Ph.D.

ABSTRACT
The study was conducted at the Benguet State University, Balili experimental area
in La Trinidad Benguet to evaluate yield, profitability and farmers acceptability of ten
varieties of pole snap bean grown under organic production system in La Trinidad,
Benguet; identify the best variety of pole snap bean suitable for organic production system
in La Trinidad, Benguet; and document organic production practices in La Trinidad,
Benguet.

Blue Lake had significantly higher fresh pod yield than Alno, the check variety.
Blue Lake, Tublay, CPV 60, CPV 64, and Kapangan had higher return on cash expense
than Alno. For fresh pod production, growing all the ten varieties of pole snap bean for
fresh pod production resulted in positive ROCE. For seed production, Blue Lake and
Kapangan out yielded the check variety, Alno. Varieties Blue Lake, Kapangan, CPV 69
and Tublay had higher return on cash expense. All the varieties of pole snap bean evaluated
except Mabunga were accepted by the farmers. As a result of this study, Blue Lake,
Kapangan, Tublay and CPV60 were the best varieties of pole snap bean suitable for organic
production system in La Trinidad, Benguet.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
INTRODUCTION

Snap bean (Phaseolus vulagaris L.) of the legume family is an annual, warm-season
crop grown primarily for its young, edible and fleshy pods and/or seeds. It is botanically
classified as dicotyledonous crop (Aerts, 2000).
There are two types of snap bean grown by farmers in Benguet: the pole snap bean
or climbing bean that develop long twined, rarely branched indeterminate stems so it is
grown with poles or trellises to support the vines; and the bush snap bean which produces
short, erect, much-branched, and determinate stem. The leaves of both type consists of
three leaflets. The pods vary in shape and color according to the variety (Kebasen, 2000).
Snap beans are being grown as good source of income for most farmers in Benguet.
Aside from that, legume seeds are especially important as a complement to carbohydrate
staples such as rice and corn and could be a cheap substitute for protein containing foods
such as meat and fish when these becomes scarce and expensive (Shresta, 1989). Also, due
to increasing nitrogen fertilizer cost, beans belonging to legumes which have the capacity
to fix nitrogen could be a good intercrop to provide nitrogen for the next crop (Rai, 1986).
With these benefits, production of snap beans must be increased and one important factor
to increase production is to consider the variety suited to the production system and
environmental conditions.

Farmers tend to increase their production by intensive application of chemical
pesticides and synthetic fertilizers but such practices contributed to several problems like
soil degradation, water contamination, air pollution, resistance of insect pest and diseases
and imbalance in nature which leads to further reduction of yield, income, destruction of
the ecosystem and health risks to human being.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Due to these problems, an environmental friendly system of farming must be
considered. One of which is organic farming which does not employ the use of chemical
pesticides and fertilizers. It is important to farm organically to increase long-term soil
fertility, to control pests and diseases without harming the environment, to ensure that
water stays clean and safe, to use resources which the farmer already has, so the farmer
needs less money to buy farm inputs and finally, to produce nutritious food, feed for
animals and high quality crops to sell at a good price (The Organic Organization, 1998).
It is important to introduce high yielding, acceptable, and resistant varieties of pole
snap beans. Although many studies have already been conducted, it is important to continue
to test varieties with characteristics appropriate to organic production, rather than high
yielding and disease resistance properties alone.

The result of this study, if significant, could help convince farmers go on organic
production of pole snap beans and will help organic farmers identify varieties which are
high yielding, resistant to pest and diseases, acceptable to growers, and profitable under
organic production system.

The study aimed to evaluate fresh pod and seed yield of ten varieties of pole snap
bean grown under organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet, evaluate
profitability of ten varieties of pole snap bean grown under organic production system in
La Trinidad, Benguet, evaluate farmers acceptability of ten varieties of pole snap bean
grown under organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet, identify the best variety
of pole snap bean suitable for organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet; and
document organic production practices in La Trinidad, Benguet.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
The study was conducted at the organic farm of Benguet State University, Balili, La
Trinidad, Benguet from October 2012 to March 2013.





















Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The Plant

Snap bean belongs to the Leguminose family. It originated from tropical America.
It is an annual crop adapted to a wide range of soil (Martin and Leonard, 1970). In addition,
pole snap beans have twinning vine. The leaves usually have three leaflets and the flowers
are pea-like. The pods and seeds often are flattened. The string beans whose pods are eaten
are varieties of kidney bean (Collier and McMillan, 1966).

The demand for bean as a staple protein diet has been growing, while the yield of
this crop has decreased in recent years because of several biotic and abiotic stresses.
Therefore, evaluation of germplasm for yield and resistance traits is needed (Maiti, 1997).

Legumes

Legumes are the largest and most widespread flowering plants. It is of particular
value to the farmer and gardener because the plant enriches the soil in which they grow in
nitrogen compounds that are synthesized from atmospheric nitrogen by means of bacteria
which lives in nodules developed on the roots. It is also of special value to housewives
because the ripe or dry seeds contain a high proportion of protein and vitamin B (Herklots,
1972). In addition, food legumes are comparatively rich in lysine and therefore a
combination of cereal protein and legume protein comes very close to providing an ideal
source of dietary proteins for human being (Siegal and Favcett, 1976).



Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Organic Farming
Organic farming works in harmony with nature rather than against it. This involves
using techniques to achieve good crop yields without harming the natural environment or
the people who live and work in it. Organic farming does not mean going ‘back’ to
traditional methods. Many of the farming methods used in the past are still useful today.
Organic farming takes the best of these and combines them with modern scientific
knowledge (The Organic Organization, 1998). Furthermore, organic gardening is not just
about using what is natural and making use of everything that the environment has to offer.
But one must consider also that shifting into an organic form of food production simply
means a temporary disruption of your cropping cycle, needless to say, shedding ample
amount of money in order to go for the organic way (Eco Philippines, 2011).

Lockie et al. (2006) stated that the key healthy plants, animals and people, are the
diversity of life forms found on the soil. The key to successful farming therefore, is to feed
the soil not the plant. Organic food and fiber are produced and grown using practices that
enhance soil health, biodiversity, and natural ecological processes of nutrient energy
recycling, that allow animals to act out natural patterns and behavior and which reduce the
impacts of farming on the wider landscape. Organic food contain less harmful additives
and more primary and secondary nutritious than conventional foods and carries no
additional risks of food poisoning. Conventional foods are more likely to be contaminated
with potentially dangerous fungi than are organic food.

Organic production system is a holistic production management system which
promotes and enhances agro-ecosystem health, including biodiversity, biological cycles,
and soil biological activity. It emphasizes the use of management practices in which
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
preference to the use of off-farm inputs, taking into account the regional conditions require
locally adapted systems. This is accomplished by using, where possible, agronomic,
biological and mechanical methods, as opposed to using synthetic materials, to fulfill any
specific function within the system (Lockeretz, 2007).

Acceptability of Varieties to Farmers

A farmer has to select for the right variety that suits his own condition and consumer
needs as well (HARRDEC, 1996). Rasco and Amante in 1994 stated that Varietal
evaluation is ultimately measured in terms of the variety that passed the evaluation process
by the end users. Varietal trial can be done directly by assessing available plant traits or
plant product characteristics that are perceived to be related to the evaluation objectives.
Moreover, a farmer may initially accept a new variety because it suits his farming practice
and he finds it to be better yielding than his traditional variety but many stop growing it if
he finds out that many traders are not willing to buy it.
Conventional varietal testing
focuses on agronomic performance (traits like yield, duration, and disease resistance) but
farmers consider many other features of a variety when deciding whether or not to adopt
it. Farmers may also be concerned with weed competitiveness, harvestability and
storability. These factors are very hard to evaluate in variety testing programs, but maybe
strongly related to farmers decisions on adoption. Many farmers rely almost entirely on
their own seed supply for planting material, and on their friends, relatives, and neighbors
for new germplasm. They may be unaware of or have no access to improved varieties
(IRRI, 2003).

Snap bean quality is a combination of appearance and physical condition. The beans
should be well formed, uniform, straight, crisp, have good color and no defects. Except for
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
color and length there is little distinction among varieties. Horticultural beans and other
specialty beans may be purple or variegated. Green snap beans are light, medium or dark
green. Dark colored beans tend to mask some russeting and other minor defects that are
more evident on light colored beans. Curved pods and pods with missing seeds are the most
common defects in shape. Slightly curved pods are not a quality problem, however the
more the pods are curved the less uniform they appear. Straight pods provide a better
appearance. The percentage of curved pods increases in plants with pods set low in the
plants or plants that lodge allowing pods to touch the soil (Neibauer J. and E. Maynard,
2002).
Tolerant or resistant varieties, which remain the backbone of organic agriculture,
provided that the available varieties with resistance are acceptable to growers and
consumers (Lockeretz, 2007).

Varietal Evaluation

Before a variety is recommended, it has to undergo series of varietal evaluation.
Variety evaluation is the process of determining the value of a given variety or a set of
varieties. Varietal evaluation is important in order to observe performance characteristics
such as yield, earliness, vigor, maturity and keeping quality because different varieties have
wide range of differences in plant size and yield performance. Thus; the variety to be
selected should be high yielding, insect and disease resistant and early maturing
(HARRDEDC 1996). Thompson (1957) also stated that testing of the varieties to find the
most adapted to local conditions is very essential. He even mentioned that other
characteristics such as size, shape, resistance to pest and diseases and other factor should
be taken into consideration in determining the most promising variety. He stated that
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
testing of varieties is of greater importance than testing purity and germination. It is
essential for the farmer to find the suited variety or strain of some crops and recommended
varieties to determine whether or not fit to a particular condition or market.

It is necessary to know the comparative merits or value of the different varieties
which furnish the materials for selection. Once this is known, selection will consist in the
choice and use of the best variety. If the varieties in the question are grown for a long time
by a farmer, he is likely to be familiar with the comparative performance of the varieties
and no further test maybe necessary. However, when the varieties under question is new in
the farm, it will be necessary to perform comparative test of this varieties for several season
to determine which the best of them is and which should be selected (Mendiola 1958).
Trials are an inexpensive and effective way to expose farmers to new germplasm.
Variety trials conducted on the research station are often managed very differently from
farmers practice. Trials which are conducted on on-farm and under the complete
management of farmers provide information about the performance of new varieties under
the real conditions faced by farmers (IRRI, 2003). New varieties are found to be not only
unexpectedly flavorsome, but also no trouble to grow (Bonar, 1994).
When selecting varieties for organic production systems, the criteria needs to take
into account a much wider array of factors, which amongst others includes market, yield,
rotational position of the crop and height, early development characteristics and
establishment rate, canopy cover, and leaf shape size and altitude to stem (Briggs, 2008).

In 1993, Gonzales reported that five local varieties of pole snap bean were grown
in Benguet namely: Stonehill, Kentucky wonder, Burik, Alno and Patig. His finding
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
showed that Burik had the most number of pickings. In contrast, Bolislis (2004) observed
that Burik had the least count of pods.

On the other hand, in the study of Dawaten in 1999, Stonehill and Burik had
significantly longer pods compared with Black Valentine.

Muchino (2007) found that the six varieties of snap bean grown under Kabayan,
Benguet condition differed in their yielding potential. Violeta and Blue Lake performed
significantly better than other varieties in terms of pod cluster per plant, pod per plant and
weight of marketable pods. Furthermore, Calya-en (2009) stated that among the 10varieties
of pole snap beans evaluated in Mankayan, Benguet, Blue Lake B-21, CPV60 and CPV 69
were the earliest varieties to be harvested in 75 DAS. Mabunga, Blue Lake, and Taichung
had the highest pod cluster per plant while HAB 71 had the highest percentage of pod
setting.

Cayso (2005) stated that among the varieties she evaluated, they did not
significantly show differences on percentage survival, days to flowering, number of flower
per cluster, and percent pod set. B-21, Stonehill, Taichung, and Violeta were observed to
have mild resistance to pod and bean rust. Blue lake, Macarao, and B-21 exhibited higher
yield potential.

Soil and Climatic Requirements

Beans are traditionally a sub-tropical or temperate crop. Beans tolerate conditions
in tropical and temperate zones but do poorly in very wet tropics where rain cause disease
and flower drop. Blossom-up is serious above 35oC (Duke, 1993). In addition, Navazio et
al. in 2007 stated common bean is a tender, warm season crop that requires warm, well
drained soils for germination. Temperatures of 21-27oC are preferred for optimum crop
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
growth. Temperatures above 90°F or below 50°F during flowering may adversely affect
pod set and seed yields. Most snap bean cultivars germinate best when soil temperatures
are at or above 65°F (12°C.), but germination may be inhibited at temperatures above 95°F
(35°C). There are instances when seed growers must plant with soil temperatures below
optimum in order to fully mature a seed crop by the end of the season.

Snap bean beans are adaptable to a wide variety of soil types but have difficulty
emerging in crusted soils. The use of a rotary hoe is sometimes necessary on heavy soils to
break the crust. Uniform emergence is particularly important for bush type beans that will
be mechanically harvested. For this reason, all areas of the field must be well drained and
prepared with no crusted, cold or wet areas. Snap beans prefer a well-drained, fertile soil
with a pH of 5.8 to 7.0. Beans are particularly sensitive to boron and may experience
toxicity problems in fields where boron is naturally high. Snap beans will nodulate and
form symbiotic associations with nitrogen-fixing bacteria in the soil even without artificial
inoculation. Modern cultivars require fertilizer nitrogen for best performance; however,
plants fixing their own nitrogen often get off to a slower start in the cool spring weather
and are less uniform in bloom time and subsequent number of days to harvest (Anderson,
2001).

Seed Production

There are very few stages in snap bean growth in which differences within a variety
are apparent. If the seed is planted into uniform soil tilt and moisture then it is possible to
perform early selection for speed of emergence, uniformity of the stand, and overall vigor,
which are essential traits for organic production. By routinely rouging out late emerging,
low vigor seedlings there will be improvement over cycles of selection for these traits.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Proper timing of harvest is important in order to produce high quality bean seed that is fully
mature, has a high germination percentage and has maximum storage potential. Each
variety has its own specific harvest timing and while this makes overall recommendations
for gauging cutting, curing, and threshing difficult, there are basic signs that indicate
maturity. The initial signal that the crop is ready to cut is the relative maturity of the pods
and their color at or near the time when they are breaking, or when they first haven’t gone
to the tan, papery shade. Maturation to the brown, papery stage increases danger of seed
shattering during harvest. Pods should generally be yellow at harvest in order to mature
properly in the windrow, but the exact desired color may be variety-specific. The crop
should be cut when approximately 70 to 80% of the pods on the crop are of the desired
color and point of breaking. Typically, the stems of the crop are undercut mechanically just
below the soil surface during the early morning when there is dew on the plants, and may
be left in place for a day before windrowing. The next day the plants are raked into
windrows, preferably with some dew on the plants to prevent shattering or damaging the
pods (Navazio et al., 2007).

The most favorable time for harvesting bean seed is normally 90 - 110 days after
planting depending on the variety grown. When all leaves and pods of upright bush beans
are yellow, you know that the plants are ready for harvesting. Harvest pods of climbing
and trailing beans as they mature. Rapid harvest of the seed reduces to a minimum their
deterioration in the field, infestation by insects and losses from physical damage. It is not
advisable to harvest pods in contact with the soil. Do not dry beans on the ground. This
way they can get dirty, wet, or eaten by animals. You can dry beans in their pods on a mat.
It is better to dry them on a plastic sheet, raised platform or in a maize crib (FoDiS, 2009).
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
MATERIALS AND METHODS

An area of 337m2 was thoroughly prepared and divided into three blocks consisting
of 30 plots with a dimension of 0.75m x 5m. Three plots were allotted to a treatment in
each replication. The two outer plots were used for seed production and the inner plot was
for fresh pod production. The study was laid-out in a randomized complete block design
(RCBD) with three replications.
Two seeds of pole snap bean were sown per hill in a double row plot at a distance
of 25cm x 25cm between hills and between rows (Fig. 1). All cultural management
practices for organic production of pole snap beans in La Trinidad, Benguet such as: basal
application of vermi-compost at a rate of 3000kg/ha (Fig. 2), trellising (Fig. 3), hilling-up
just after side-dress of vermi-compost at a rate of 1000kg/ha(Fig. 4), leaf pruning or leaf
thinning i.e. removal of infected and infested leaves (Fig. 5) as cultural pest control and
spraying of Lacto Acid Bacteria Serum (Fig. 6) as organic fungicide were followed and
documented. Soil sampling was done before and after the experiment to determine the soil
properties of the experimental area. Standard seed production technology which is
harvesting the first and last pods of the plant as fresh pod and prime harvesting for seeds
was followed.
The following varieties of pole snap bean that were obtained from Benguet State
University- Institute of Plant Breeding Highland Crops Research Station (BSU-IPB HCRS)
served as treatments.


Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
TREATMENT
VARIETIES
V1
Alno (check)
V2
Blue Lake
V3
Kapangan
V4
Mabunga
V5
Patig
V6
Tublay
V7
B-21
V8
CPV 60
V9
CPV 64
V10
CPV 69


Figure 1. Planting of the ten pole beans varieties under organic production system in La
Trinidad, Benguet
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013

Figure 2. Land preparation (left) and basal application of vermicompost (right) under
organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet



Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Figure 3. Incorporation of vermi-compost to the soil (left) and trellising (right) on the ten
varieties of pole snap bean under organic production system in La Trinidad,
Benguet

Figure 4. Side-dressing of vermicompost on the ten varieties of pole snap bean under
organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet



Figure 5. Trimming or leaf pruning of the ten varieties of pole snap bean under organic
production system in La Trinidad, Benguet


Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Figure 6.Organic fungicide used for the control of bean rust (Lacto acid bacteria serum) on
the ten varieties of pole snap bean under organic production system in La
Trinidad, Benguet
Data Gathered
1. Agro-climatic data. Monthly mean minimum and maximum temperature, relative
humidity, rainfall and sunshine duration prevailing over the experimental area were
collected at the BSU/PAGASA, Agronomical- Meteorological station during the period of
the study.
2. Description of the location. This was the topography and elevation including the
cropping system/history employed in the area which were asked from the previous farmer
or manager who used the area.
3. Soil chemical properties. Sampling of soil was done before and after the
experiment and they were analyzed at the Regional Soil Laboratory in San Fernando City
for its chemical properties.
4. Number of days from sowing to emergence. This was taken by counting the
number of days from planting up to the time when at least 50% of plants per treatment
emerged.

5. Percentage germination. This was computed using the following formula:
Number of seeds germinated
Percentage germination (%) =
X 100
Number of seeds sown

6. Percentage survival. This was computed using the following formula:
Number of plants survived
Percentage survival (%) =
X 100
Number of seeds sown



Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
7. Number of days from emergence to flowering. This was determined by counting
the number of days from emergence to the time at least 50% of the plant per treatment have
fully opened flowers.
8. Number of days from emergence to first harvesting of fresh pod. This was taken
by counting the number of days from emergence to first harvesting of fresh pods.

9. Number of days from emergence to last harvesting of fresh pod. This was taken
by counting the number of days from emergence to the last harvest of fresh pods.
10. Number of flowers per cluster. This was recorded by counting the number of
flowers per cluster from ten sample cluster per treatment.
11. Number of pods per cluster. The number of pods per cluster was obtained by
counting the number of pods produced from ten sampled cluster per treatment used for
gathering number of flower per cluster.
12. Percentage pod set per cluster (%). This was obtained using the following
formula:
Number of flower/cluster
Percentage pod setting (%) =
X 100
Number of pods/cluster


13. Number of seeds per pod. The number of seeds per pod was counted from ten
sample pods per treatment.
14. Pod length (cm). This was taken by measuring the length in cm of ten sample
pods from the pedicel end to the blossom end using a foot rule.

15. Pod width (cm). This was taken by measuring the width of the broadest portion
of ten sample pods per plot.

16. Pod straightness. This was recorded from visual observation as either straight
or curved pod.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
17. Pod shape. This was recorded visually whether it is a round or flat pod.

18. Pod color. This was observed visually when the pods were fully developed.

19. Weight of marketable fresh pods per plot (kg/3.75m2). This was
gathered by weighing the pods that are straight and free from insect pest damage and
disease infection.
20. Weight of non-marketable fresh pods per plot (kg/3.75m2). This was gathered
by getting the weight of pods that are abnormal in shape and damaged by insect pest and
diseases.
21. Total fresh pod yield per plot (kg/3.75m2). The over-all total weight of
marketable and non-marketable pods was obtained by getting the sum of all the weight of
marketable and non-marketable yield throughout the harvesting period.
22. Computed fresh pod yield per hectare (t/ha). This was computed using the
formula:


Fresh pod yield (tons/ha) = Total yield/plot (kg/3.75m2) x 2.67
where 2.67 was the factor used to convert fresh pod yield in kg/3.75m2 plot to t/ha.
23. Seed length (cm). Ten sample seeds was randomly selected from each treatment
will be measured using a foot rule.
24. Seed width (cm). The mid portion of the seed was measured using a foot rule.

25. Seed diameter (cm). The diameter of the seed was measured at harvest from ten
sample seeds selected at random. This will be measured parallel to the haulm using a
vernier caliper.
26. Weight of marketable seeds per plot (kg/7.5m2). This was obtained by weighing
the marketable seeds that are infected with disease, malformed and damaged by insect pest.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
27. Weight of non-marketable seeds per treatment (kg/7.5m2). This was obtained
by weighing non-marketable seeds that were damaged, small sized, and infested with pest.
28. Weight of 200 seeds (g). This was obtained by weighing 200 good seeds per
treatment.
29. Total seed yield per plot (kg/7.5m2). This was obtained by taking the sum of
marketable and non-marketable seeds per plot.
30. Computed seed yield per hectare (t/ha). This was computed using the following
formula:

Seed yield (tons/ha) = total fresh pod yield/plot (kg/m2) x 1.33


Where 1.33 was the factor used to convert seed yield in kg/7.5m2 to tons/ha.


31. Reaction to bean rust, fusarium root rot and pod borer. This was determined at
peak of harvesting stage using the respective rating scale for bean rust infection and pod
borer infestation used at BSU-IPB by Tandang et al. (2008) as follows:
a. Bean rust
Scale
Percent Infestation
Remarks
1
Less than 20% infection per plot
highly resistant
2
20-40% infection per plot
moderately resistant
3
41-60% infection per plot
mildly resistant
4
61-80% infection per plot
Susceptible
5
61-80% infection per plot
very susceptible




Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013

b. Pod borer
Scale
Percent Infestation
Remarks
1
Less than 20% infection per plot
highly resistant
2
20-40% infection per plot
moderately resistant
3
41-60% infection per plot
mildly resistant
4
61-80% infection per plot
Susceptible
5
61-80% infection per plot
very susceptible

c. Fusarium root rot
Scale
Percent Infestation
Remarks
1
Less than 20% infection per plot
highly resistant
2
20-40% infection per plot
moderately resistant
3
41-60% infection per plot
mildly resistant
4
61-80% infection per plot
Susceptible
5
61-80% infection per plot
very susceptible
32. Return on cash expense (ROCE). The return on cash expense for fresh pod
production and seed production were obtained separately by using the following formula:
Net income
ROCE =
X 100
Total expense


33. Farmers acceptability. Ten farmers were invited to make their own selection of
the ten pole snap bean varieties evaluated. Selection was based on fresh pod straightness,
color, shape, taste and general acceptability after harvest. Hedonic scale for sensory
evaluation used by Tandang in 1998 as follows was used.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Scale

Description
Remark
1
Dislike Extremely
2
Dislike Very much
3
Dislike Moderately
4
Dislike Slightly
5
Neither like nor dislike
6
Like slightly
7
Like moderately
8
Like very much
9
Like extremely


Analysis of Data
The data gathered were tabulated and statistically analyzed using the analysis of
variance (ANOVA) for randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three
replications. The significance of differences among treatments were tested using Least
Significant Difference (LSD) at 5% and 1% level of significance.





Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Agro- climatic Data

Table 1 shows the minimum and maximum monthly temperature, relative humidity,
amount of rainfall and sunshine duration during the conduct of the study from November
2012 to February 2013. Minimum temperature ranged from 11.8oC to 18.9oC while
maximum temperature ranged from 17.5oC to 22.6oC and the relative humidity ranged from
68 to 86.5. According to Narvazio, J. et al. in 2007, Temperatures ranging from 21°C-27°C
is required for optimum crop growth of pole snap bean.

Total amount of rainfall was recorded at 1.33 mm in November 2012 then it
declined in the succeeding month which is observed to be insufficient for growing pole
snap bean. Thus, irrigation was done at four days interval from planting.
According to Terry in 1999, Snap beans need bright sunshine duration for eight
hours (480 minutes) every day. During the conduct of the study, total bright sunshine
duration ranged from 121.18 min to 360 min or a mean of 285.10min which was shorter

Table 1. Agro-climatic conditions taken during the conduct of the study (PAG-ASA) in La
Trinidad, Benguet

MONTH
TEMPERATURE
AMOUNT
RELATTIVE
SUNSHINE
(0C)
OF
HUMIDITY
DURATION
RAINFALL
MIN
MAX
(%)
(min)
(mm)
NOVEMBER
13.10
20.90
84.75
1.33
329.00
DECEMBER
13.20
22.60
86.50
0.15
121.18
JANUARY
18.90
20.10
80.00
0.50
360.00
FEBRUARY
11.80
17.50
68.00
0.29
330.20
MEAN
14.25
20.28
79.81
0.57
285.10
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013

than sunshine duration required in growing pole snap beans. Shortest sunshine duration
was recorded in December 2010 which coincided with the flowering stage of the different
varieties of pole snap beans evaluated.

Description of the Location

The area planted belonged to the zero to three percent slope category of barangay
Balili which is described to be level to nearly level and it has an elevation of 1,336m above
sea level. The barangay where the study was conducted has an average minimum
temperature of 16 oC and maximum of 26oC. It is classified under type ‘A’ climate.
According to farmers interviewed who have been previously tilling the area, the area where
the study was conducted was previously planted with lettuce varieties such as romaine and
green ice, and bush snap bean followed by pole snap beans and green lettuce the next
cropping. After that, the area was fallowed for about six months before the study was
conducted. Processed chicken manure, sunflower juice mixed with chicken dung, and urea
were previously applied on the area.

Soil Chemical Properties

Table 2 shows the chemical properties of soil in the area where the experiment was
conducted. The soil in the area was medium textured. Medium textured soils are well
drained soils that have typically good soil aeration meaning that the soil contains air that is
similar to atmospheric air, which is conducive to healthy root growth, and thus, a healthy
crop (Berry, 2007).


Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Table 2. Soil chemical properties
ORGANIC
SAMPLE
NITROGEN PHOSPHORUS POTASSIUM
TEXTURE pH
MATTER
FIELD
(%)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(%)
Before
Medium
6.20
1.50
7.5
120
180
After
Medium
6.30
1.50
7.5
90
210

Soil pH was originally 6.20 before planting which was according to Watkins in
2004, a best pH for growing snap beans pole after the experiment. In contrast, percentage
of potassium increased after the experiment however, the pH was raised to 6.30 after the
experiment. Organic matter as well as nitrogen percentage of 1.50 and 7.5 respectively,
remained as is. Percentage of phosphorus before planting was lowered.

Percent Germination and Percentage Survival

Among the varieties tested, the study shows that only CPV 69 had significantly
higher percentage germination than Alno, the check variety which had comparable
percentage germination to all the other varieties tested (Table 3).

There was no significant difference observed between the varieties tested with the
check variety, Alno. All the ten varieties of pole snap bean studied produced comparable
percent germination ranging from 56.95 to 80.56 (Table 3).

Although high percentage germination was noted among the ten varieties of pole
snap bean, lower percentage survival was recorded among the varieties evaluated due to
infection of the area with Fusarium solani f. sp. phaseoli.



Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Table 3. Percent germination and survival of ten pole snap bean varieties evaluated under
organic production system in La, Trinidad, Benguet
VARIETIES
GERMINATION
SURVIVAL
(%)
(%)
Alno (check)
85.28a
65.84
Blue Lake
88.91a
65.84
Kapangan
87.92a
79.44
Mabunga
87.92a
84.58
Patig
83.47a
68.47
Tublay
85.70a
69.31
B-21
86.52a
78.89
CPV-60
91.25a
80.56
CPV-64
83.47a
56.95
CPV-69
91.39b
73.61
CV (%)
3.46
16.61
LSD (.01)
6.06*
ns
Means within a column, means followed by “a” are not significantly different; and means
in a column followed by “b” are significantly higher than Alno


Number of Days from Sowing to Emergence and from Emergence to Flowering and First
and Last Harvesting of Fresh Pods


Table 4 shows that among the varieties evaluated, Blue Lake, Mabunga, and Patig
emerged one day earlier than Alno. This could be attributed to the varietal characteristics
of the test materials studied. The other varieties emerged within seven days which is the
same with Alno.

Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
In terms of days from emergence (DAE) to flowering, highly significant difference
was observed between the varieties of pole snap bean evaluated and Alno (Table 4). All
the other varieties flowered earlier except for Mabunga. B-21 flowered at 36 DAE followed
by Kapangan and CPV 60 which flowered one day later and others flowered two to four
days later. Alno and Mabunga were the latest to flower at 41 DAE.

Table 4. Number of days from sowing to emergence and from emergence to flowering,

first harvest and last harvest of ten pole snap bean varieties grown under organic

production system in La Trinidad Benguet.

NUMBER OF DAYS FROM EMERGENCE TO
NUMBER OF
VARIETIES
DAYS FROM
FIRST
LAST
SOWING TO
FLOWERING HARVESTING HARVESTING
EMERGENCE
OF FRESH
OF FRESH
POD
POD
Alno (check)
7a
41a
61a
93a
Blue Lake
6b
38b
61a
89b
Kapangan
7a
37b
61a
83b
Mabunga
6b
41a
62c
84b
Patig
6b
38b
62c
92b
Tublay
7a
40b
60b
83b
B-21
7a
36b
60b
88b
CPV-60
7a
37b
61a
93a
CPV-64
7a
40b
61a
93a
CPV-69
7a
40b
62c
93a
CV %
2.6
0.77
0.33
0.19
LSD (.01)
0.54**
0.88**
0.57**
0.08**
Means in a column followed by “a” are not significantly different; means in a column
followed by “b” are significantly earlier; and “c” are significantly later than the check
variety, Alno.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Table 4 also shows that in terms of DAE to first harvesting of fresh pod Tublay and
B-21 significantly were first harvested one day earlier than Blue Lake, Kapangan, CPV 60
and CPV 64 which were first harvested along with the check variety, Alno. Mabunga, Patig
and CPV 69 were the latest to be harvested for fresh pod yield at 62 DAE.

Highly significant difference was observed in terms of days from emergence to last
harvesting of fresh pod among the between the nine varieties of pole snap bean tested and
Alno. Majority of them were harvested one to ten days earlier than Alno which was last
harvested 93 DAE like those of CPV 60, CPV 64, and CPV 69 (Table 4).

Pod Length and Pod Width, and Number of Seeds per Pod

As shown in Table 5, among the ten varieties of pole snap bean evaluated, only
Mabunga had significantly longer pods than Alno. And in terms of pod width, only B-21
significantly produced narrower pods than Alno.

On the number of seeds per pod, all the varieties evaluated except CPV 60 produced
eight seeds per pod which was one seed greater than Alno. CPV 60 had similar number of
seeds with Alno (Table 5).

Number of Flowers and Pods per Cluster

Blue Lake, Tublay and CPV 64 produced eight flowers per cluster which was
significantly higher than Alno (Table 6). Other varieties had comparable number of flowers
per cluster with Alno. On the number of pods per cluster, Blue Lake, Kapangan, Tublay,
B-21 and CPV 60 also produced greater number of pods per cluster than Alno, the check
variety. Other varieties had comparable number of pods per cluster with Alno (Table 6).

Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Table 5. Pod length and width, and number of seeds per pod of ten varieties of pole snap
beans evaluated under organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet

POD LENTH
POD WIDTH
NUMBER OF
VARIETIES
(cm)
(cm)
SEEDS PER POD
Alno (check)
14.82a
11.83a
7a
Blue Lake
13.75a
12.27a
8b
Kapangan
14.63a
11.07a
8b
Mabunga
16.69b
12.3a
8b
Patig
14.28a
11.57a
8b
Tublay
14.61a
12.00a
8b
B-21
14.03a
10.27b
8b
CPV-60
14.53a
12.67a
7a
CPV-64
13.91a
11.93a
8b
CPV-69
14.04a
11.77a
8b
CV %
4.46
3.18
.01
LSD (.01)
1.31**
1.09**
0.22**
Means in a column followed by “a” are not significantly different; and means in a column
followed by “b” are significantly higherthan the check variety, Alno.






Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013



Figure 7. Fresh pod of the ten varieties of pole snap bean grown under organic production
system in La Trinidad, Benguet


Percent Pod Set per Cluster

As also shown on Table 6, Tublay, B-21, Blue Lake, Mabunga, and CPV 60 had
significantly higher percentage pod set than Alno. Only Patig numerically had lower
percentage pod set per cluster than Alno. Other varieties had comparable pod setting
percentage with Alno.

Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Table 6. Number of flowers and per cluster, and percent pod set per cluster of ten
varieties of pole snap bean

NUMBER OF
% POD SET PER
VARIETIES
FLOWERS PER
PODS PER
CLUSTER
CLUSTER
CLUSTER
Alno (check)
7a
3a
50.00a
Blue Lake
8b
6b
73.81b
Kapangan
7a
5a
64.88a
Mabunga
7a
4a
72.70b
Patig
7a
3a
44.29a
Tublay
8b
6b
82.74b
B-21
7a
5b
80.16b
CPV-60
7a
5b
69.84b
CPV-64
8b
4a
56.55a
CPV-69
7a
3a
50.00a
CV %
4.54
12.96
9.75
LSD (.05)
0.93**
1.72**
18.49**
Means in a column followed by “a” are not significantly different; and means in a column
followed by “b” are significantly higher than the check variety, Alno.


Pod Straightness, Shape, and Color

In terms of pod straightness, all pole snap bean varieties evaluated were observed
to have straight pods, except for Mabunga and Patig which had slightly curved pods. Blue
Lake, Kapangan, Mabunga, and Patig had round pods while the rest had flat pods. All
varieties produced green pods except for Mabunga which had purple pods (Table 7). This
could be due to unique varietal characteristic of Mabunga.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
According to Neibauer and Maynard in 2002, beans should be well formed, straight,
and have good color. For color and length there is little distinction among varieties. Slightly
curved pods are not a quality problem, however the more the pods are curved the less
uniform they appear.

Weight of Marketable, Non-marketable and Total
Fresh Pod per Plot (kg/3.75m2) and Computed
Fresh Pod Yield per Hectare (t/ha)

Snap bean quality is a combination of appearance and physical condition. The beans
should be well formed, uniform, straight, crisp, have good color and no defects in order to
be considered marketable (Neibauer and Maynard, 2002).

Table 7. Pod straightness, shape, and color of the ten varieties of pole snap bean evaluated
POD
VARIETIES
STRAIGHTNESS
SHAPE
COLOR
Alno (check)
straight
flat
green
Blue Lake
straight
round
green
Kapangan
straight
round
green
Mabunga
Slightly curved
round
purple
Patig
Slightly curved
round
green
Tublay
straight
flat
green
B-21
straight
flat
green
CPV-60
straight
flat
green
CPV-64
straight
flat
green
CPV-69
straight
flat
green

Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Blue Lake significantly produced the heaviest weight of marketable fresh pod per
plot among the varieties of pole snap beans evaluated (Table 8). Statistical analysis
revealed no significant difference in marketable fresh pods per plot between other varieties
and Alno, the check variety.
All the ten varieties of pole snap bean studied produced comparable non-marketable
fresh pods that ranged from 0.74kg/3.75m2 to 0.96kg/3.75m2 (Table 8).

Table 8. Fresh pod yield per plot and computed yield per hectare of the ten varieties of

pole snap beans evaluated
FRESH POD YIELD PER PLOT (kg/3.75m2)
COMPUTED
FRESH POD
VARIETIES
NON-
MARKETABLE
TOTAL
YIELD PER
MAKETABLE
HECTARE (t/ha)
Alno (check)
3.72a
0.89
4.61a
3.28a
Blue Lake
7.14b
0.96
8.10b
5.76b
Kapangan
4.48a
0.82
5.30a
3.77a
Mabunga
2.46a
0.90
3.36a
2.39a
Patig
2.77a
0.81
3.50a
2.55a
Tublay
4.94a
0.82
5.76a
4.10a
B-21
3.80a
0.78
4.58a
3.26a
CPV-60
4.85a
0.74
5.59a
3.98a
CPV-64
4.56a
0.84
5.40a
3.85a
CPV-69
3.54a
0.96
4.51a
3.21a
CV %
14.38
15.00
14.2
7.70
LSD (.05)
1.80**
ns
2.10**
1.49**
Means in a column followed by “a” are not significantly different; and means in a column
followed by “b” are significantly higher than the check variety, Alno.

Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013


Figure 8. Marketable fresh pod (left) and non-marketable fresh pod (right) of ten varieties
of pole snap beans evaluated under organic production system in La Trinidad,
Benguet


Statistically, among all the varieties evaluated, only Blue Lake significantly out
yielded the check variety, Alno. The other varieties had statistically similar total fresh pod
yield per plot with Alno (Table 8).

Among all the varieties of pole snap beans evaluated, only Blue Lake at
significantly higher computed fresh pod yield per hectare (t/ha) than Alno which only
recorded 3.28 t/ha of fresh pod yield (Table 8).

Seed Length (cm), Width (cm), and Diameter (cm)

Comparing the other varieties of pole snap beans evaluated with Alno, Tublay, CPV
60, CPV 64, and CPV 69 had significantly longer seeds (Table 9).

Statistical analysis shows no significant difference in seed width between Alno and
the varieties evaluated (Table 9). It ranged from 0.75cm to 0.92cm.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Highly significant difference in seed diameter was observed between the ten
varieties evaluated and Alno (Table 9). Mabunga and Blue Lake were recorded to have
statistically smaller seeds. Other varieties had comparable seed diameter with Alno (Table
9).
Table 9. Seed length, width, and diameter of the ten varieties of pole snap bean evaluated
SEED
WEIGHT OF
VARIETIES
LENGTH(cm) WIDTH (cm) DIAMETER (cm) 200 SEEDS (g)
Alno(check)
1.28a
0.68
0.65a
68.33a
Blue Lake
1.25a
0.63
0.60b
57.67c
Kapangan
1.34a
0.71
0.68a
73.33b
Mabunga
1.24a
0.62
0.59c
57.67c
Patig
1.24a
0.67
0.65a
68.33a
Tublay
1.40b
0.66
0.70b
64.33a
B-21
1.33a
0.70
0.65a
62.33a
CPV-60
1.40b
0.69
0.68a
65.67a
CPV-64
1.38b
0.67
0.65a
61.00c
CPV-69
1.37b
0.75
0.69a
70.33a
CV %
0.16
0.66
2.18
3.58
LSD (.01)
0.06**
ns
0.05**
6.83**
Means in a column followed by “a” are not significantly different; and means in a column
followed by “b” are significantly higher than the check variety, Alno.









Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Weight of 200 Seeds (g)

Significantly heavier weight of 200 seeds was recorded in Alno than Blue Lake,
Mabunga and CPV 64. Other varieties had comparable 200 seed weight with Alno (Table
9).




Figure 9. Seeds of the ten varieties of pole snap beans evaluated under organic production
system in La Trinidad, Benguet

Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Weight of Marketable, Non-marketable and Total Seed Yield per Plot (kg/7.5) and
Computed Seed Yield per Hectare (t/ha).


Table 10 shows that among the varieties of pole snap beans evaluated, only Blue
Lake had significantly heavier weight of marketable seeds per 3.75m2 while Patig had
lower marketable seed yield. All other varieties have comparable marketable seed yield
with Alno.
Statistical analysis revealed highly significant difference between all the varieties
evaluated except Blue Lake and Kapangan that produced higher total seed yield per plot
than Alno while Patig and B-21 had significantly lower total seed yield per plot (Table 10).

Table 10. Seed yield per plot and computed seed yield per hectare of the ten varieties
of pole snap beans evaluated
SEED YIELD PER PLOT (kg/7.5m2)
COMPUTED
SEED YIELD
VARIETIES
NON-
MARKETABLE
TOTAL
PER HECTARE
MAKETABLE
(t/ha)
Alno(check)
1.32a
0.03a
1.35a
0.24a
Blue Lake
1.93b
0.08b
2.01b
0.36b
Kapangan
1.54a
0.09b
1.63b
0.29a
Mabunga
1.18a
0.02a
1.20c
0.21a
Patig
0.74b
0.04a
0.78b
0.14a
Tublay
1.28a
0.01a
1.30a
0.23a
B-21
0.95a
0.01a
0.96c
0.17a
CPV-60
1.08a
0.03a
1.11c
0.20a
CPV-64
1.12a
0.02a
1.13c
0.20a
CPV-69
1.35a
0.05a
1.40a
0.25a
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
CV %
0.21
2.15
7.24
19.38
LSD (.01)
0.52**
0.05**
0.14**
0.11**
Means in a column followed by “a” are not significantly different; and means in a
column followed by “b” are significantly higherthan the check variety, Alno.



Figure 10. Marketable seeds (upper) and non-marketable seeds (lower)of the ten varieties
of pole snap beans evaluatedunder organic production system in La Trinidad,
Benguet


Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
As shown on Table 10, all the varieties evaluated had comparable computed seed
yield per hectare with Alno except for Blue Lake which had significantly higher computed
seed yield per hectare.
Only Kapangan and Blue Lake had highly significant difference in weight of non-
marketable seeds per plot with Alno (Table 10).

Weight of Marketable, Non-marketable and Total
Yield per Plot (kg/7.5m2), and Computed Fresh
Pod Yield (t/ha) Harvested from Plots Intended
for Seed Production


To improve seed quality of pole snap beans (personal communication with Dr.
Tandang, 2013), the first two to three pods of the plant must be harvested to direct more
nutrients in the succeeding pods. So in this study, harvesting of pods was done twice in all
the plots. Thus, this data on fresh pod was gathered.
There was highly significant difference on the weight of marketable fresh pod per
plot between the varieties of pole snap bean evaluated and Alno (Table 11). Mabunga and
Patig had significantly lower weight of marketable fresh pod per 7.5m2 than Alno. The
other varieties had comparable weight of marketable fresh pod with the check variety,
Alno.

Table 11 Showed that Blue Lake, Mabunga, Patig, B-21 and CPV 69 had
significantly lower weight of non-marketable fresh pods per 7.5m2 than Alno. All the other
varieties have comparable weight of non-marketable seeds per plot.
In terms of total fresh pod yield per plot, Mabunga and Patig were significantly
lower than Alno (Table 11). All the other varieties had comparable total fresh pod yield
with the check variety, Alno.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Table 11. Fresh pod of ten varieties of pole snap bean evaluated harvested from plots

intended for seed production
FRESH POD YIELD PER PLOT (kg/7.5m2)
COMPUTED
FRESH POD
VARIETIES
NON-
MARKETABLE
TOTAL
YIELD PER
MAKETABLE
(kg)
(kg)
HECTARE
(kg)
(t/ha)
Alno(check)
1.00a
0.22a
1.22a
0.43a
Blue Lake
1.32a
0.07b
1.39a
0.50a
Kapangan
1.12a
0.17a
1.29a
0.46a
Mabunga
0.26c
0.03b
0.29c
0.10c
Patig
0.33c
0.06b
0.39a
0.14a
Tublay
1.43a
0.15a
1.58a
0.56a
B-21
1.06a
0.10b
1.16a
0.41a
CPV-60
1.44a
0.16a
1.59a
0.57a
CPV-64
1.25a
0.12a
1.37a
0.49a
CPV-69
1.01a
0.09b
1.10a
0.39a
CV %
18.25
10.50
11.10
7.24
LSD (.01)
0.83**
0.09**
0.89**
0.32**
Means in a colum followed by “a” are not significantly different; means followed in a
column by “b” are significantly higher; and “c” is significantly lower than the check
variety, Alno.


There was highly significant difference on the weight of marketable fresh pod per
plot between the varieties of pole snap bean evaluated and Alno (Table 11). Mabunga and
Patig had significantly lower weight of marketable fresh pod per 7.5m2 than Alno. The
other varieties had comparable weight of marketable fresh pod with the check variety,
Alno.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
There was highly significant difference on the weight of marketable fresh pod per
plot between the varieties of pole snap bean evaluated and Alno (Table 11). Mabunga and
Patig had significantly lower weight of marketable fresh pod per 7.5m2 than Alno. The
other varieties had comparable weight of marketable fresh pod with the check variety,
Alno.

Table 11 Showed that Blue Lake, Mabunga, Patig, B-21 and CPV 69 had
significantly lower weight of non-marketable fresh pods per 7.5m2 than Alno. All the other
varieties have comparable weight of non-marketable seeds per plot.
In terms of total fresh pod yield per plot, Mabunga and Patig were significantly
lower than Alno (Table 11). All the other varieties had comparable total fresh pod yield
with the check variety, Alno.
Table 11 showed that only Mabunga had significantly lower computed fresh pod
yield per hectare than Alno. All the other varieties had comparable computed fresh pod
yield per hectare with the check variety, Alno.

Bean Rust Infection

In terms of bean rust infection, all varieties evaluated were rated to be moderately
resistant than Alno and Patig except for Mabunga which were rated as mildly resistant
(Table 12).

Pod Borer Infestation

Alno, BlueLake, Kapangan, Tublay, CPV 60, CPV 64, and CPV 69 were rated to
be moderately resistant while B-21 and Patig were observed to be mildly resistant to pod
borer. Mabunga is found to be susceptible to pod borer (Table 12).
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Fusarium Root Rot

Symptoms of fusarium root rot were observed on pole snap bean varieties
evaluated. All varieties were observed to be moderately resistant to fusrium root rot except
for Blue Lake which is rated to be mildly resistant (Table 12).

Table 12. Pod borer infestation, bean rust and fusarium root rot infection of ten varieties
evaluated under organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet

BEAN RUST
POD BORER
FUSARIUM ROOT
VARIETIES
INFEECTION
INFESTATION
ROT INFECTION
Alno
Susceptible
Moderately resistant
Moderately resistant
Blue Lake
Moderately resistant
Moderately resistant
Mildly resistant
Kapangan
Moderately resistant
Moderately resistant
Moderately resistant
Mabunga
Mildly resistant
Susceptible
Moderately resistant
Patig
Susceptible
Mildly resistant
Moderately resistant
Tublay
Moderately resistant
Moderately resistant
Moderately resistant
B-21
Moderately resistant
Mildly resistant
Moderately resistant
CPV 60
Moderately resistant
Moderately resistant
Moderately resistant
CPV 64
Moderately resistant
Moderately resistant
Moderately resistant
CPV 69
Moderately resistant
Moderately resistant
Moderately resistant

Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013

Figure 11.Susceptibility to bean rustof the ten varieties of pole snap beans evaluatedunder
organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet

A
B
C

Figure 12. Symptoms of Fusarium root rot. (A) Wilting, (B) resting spores on roots, (C)
microscopic structureof the ten varieties of pole snap beans evaluatedunder
organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet






Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Farmer’s Acceptability
In terms of pod color, all varieties were liked very much by farmers except
Mabunga which was rated neither liked nor disliked. Alno, Blue Lake, Kapangan,
Mabunga, B-21 and CPV-64 were liked moderately while the rest were liked slightly in
terms of shape. The size of Blue Lake and Mabunga were liked by farmers than Alno.
When it comes to taste, all the varieties were liked slightly by farmers but in terms of
general acceptability, all varieties were liked very much except for Mabunga which was
neither liked nor disliked by most of the farmers.

Figure 13. Farmer’s evaluating the ten pole snap bean varieties evaluated under organic
production system in La Trinidad, Benguet

Table 13. Result of evaluation of the ten pole snap bean varieties by ten farmers
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
GENERAL
VARIE-
COLOR
SHAPE
SIZE
TASTE
ACCEPTA-
TIES
BILITY
Alno
Liked very
Liked
Liked
Liked
Liked very
much
moderaely
moderaely
slightly
much
Blue Lake
Liked very
Liked
Liked very
Liked
Liked very
much
moderaely
much
slightly
much
Kapangan
Liked very
Liked
Liked
Liked
Liked very
much
moderaely
moderaely
slightly
much
Mabunga
Neither
Liked
Like very
Liked
Neither liked
liked nor
moderaely
much
slightly
nor disliked
disliked
Patig
Liked very
Liked
Liked
Liked
Liked very
much
slightly
moderaely
slightly
much
Tublay
Liked very
Liked
Like
Liked
Liked very
much
slightly
moderaely
slightly
much
B-21
Liked very
Liked
Liked
Liked
Liked very
much
moderaely
moderaely
slightly
much
CPV-60
Liked very
Liked
Like slightly
Liked
Liked very
much
slightly
slightly
much
CPV-64
Liked very
Liked
Liked
Liked
Liked very
much
moderaely
moderaely
slightly
much
CPV-69
Liked very
Liked
Like slightly
Liked
Liked very
much
slightly
slightly
much

Return on Cash Expense on
Fresh Pod Production
Table 14 shows the cost and return analysis for fresh pod production of ten varieties
of pole snap bean evaluated under organic production in La Trinidad, Benguet. Blue Lake
garnered the highest percentage on ROCE at 337.84% followed by Tublay, CPV 60, CPV
64, and Kapangan. Patig and Mabunga showed lower ROCE than Alno.

Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Table 14. Return on Cash Expenses (ROCE) on fresh pod production of ten pole snap

beans varieties evaluated under organic production system in La Trinidad,

Benguet
MARKETABLE
GROSS
TOTAL
NET
ROCE
VARIETIES
PODS
SALE
EXPENSE
INCOME
(%)
(kg/3.75m2)
(PhP)
(PhP)
(PhP)
Alno(check)
4.61
277
111
166
149.19
Blue Lake
8.10
486
111
375
337.84
Kapangan
5.30
318
111
207
186.49
Mabunga
3.36
202
111
91
81.62
Patig
3.50
210
111
99
89.19
Tublay
5.76
346
111
235
211.35
B-21
4.58
275
111
164
147.57
CPV-60
5.59
335
111
224
202.16
CPV-64
5.40
324
111
213
191.89
CPV-69
4.51
271
111
160
143.78
Selling price for fresh pod: PhP 50/kg


Return on Cash Expense on
Seed Production

Blue Lake, Kapangan, Tublay, CPV 60 and CPV 64 have higher percentage of
return on cash expense than Alno (Table 15).
It is observed that varieties with high fresh pod yield also had high seed yield.
Interestingly, growing all the varieties of pole snap bean evaluated could be
profitable under organic production system in La Trindad, Benguet.


Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Summary
The study was conducted at the organic farm of Benguet State University, Balili,
La Trinidad Benguet to evaluate yield of ten varieties of pole snap bean grown under
organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet; evaluate profitability of ten varieties
of pole snap bean grown under organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet;
evaluate farmer’s acceptability of ten varieties of pole snap bean grown under organic
production system in La Trinidad, Benguet; identify the best variety of pole snap bean
suitable for organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet; and identify the best
variety of pole snap bean suitable for organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet;
and document organic production practices in La Trinidad, Benguet.
In almost all the parameters measured, there were highly significant differences
comparing nine other varieties of pole snap bean with the check variety, Alno. CPV 69
had higher germination percentage. Blue Lake, Mabunga and Patig emerged one day
earlier. All the varieties flowered earlier except for mabunga. Tublay and B-21 was first
harvested with fresh pod one day earlier while Mabunga and Patig were later. Mabunga
significantly have longer pod while B-21 have broader and except CPV 60, all the varieties
have more number of seeds per pod than Alno. Blue Lake, Tublay, and CPV 64 had greater
number of flowers per cluster. Blue Lake, Mabunga, Tublay, B-21 and CPV 60 had higher
percentage pod set. Tublay, CPV 60, CPV 64, and CPV 69 significantly have broader
seeds. Blue Lake and Mabunga had smaller while Tublay had the bigger seeds. Blue Lake,
Mabunga and CPV 64 had lesser weight of 200 seeds.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Alno, Blue Lake, Kapangan, Tublay, CPV 60, CPV 64, and CPV 69 were rated to
be moderately resistant to pod borer. Blue Lake, Kapangan, Tublay, B-21, CPV 60, CPV
64, and CPV 69 were moderately resistant to bean rust. All varieties were observed to be
moderately resistant to fusarium root rot except for Blue Lake which was recorded to be
mildly resistant.
Based on fresh pod yield performance, Blue Lake had higher weight of marketable
fresh pods, total yield, and computed yield per hectare than Alno. It had also gained the
highest return on cash expense followed by Tublay, CPV 60, CPV 64, and Kapangan.
Based on seed yield performance, Blue Lake had higher weight of marketable seeds
per plot and computed seed yield per hectare as compared to Alno. On total yield per plot,
Blue Lake and Kapangan had higher seed yield. Blue Lake gained the highest return on
cash expenses followed by Kapangan, CPV 69, and Tublay.
All varieties except Mabunga were generally liked very much by farmers.

Conclusion

Based on the results of the study, Blue Lake have higher fresh pod yield than the
check variety, Alno. In terms of ROCE for fresh pod, Blue Lake, Tublay, CPV 60, CPV
64, and Kapangan is higher than Alno.

Based on seed yield performance, Blue Lake and Kapangan outyielded the check
variety, Alno. Also, Blue Lake, Kapangan, CPV 69 and Tublay had higher ROCE for seed
production than Alno.
All the pole snap bean varieties evaluated except Mabunga are acceptable to
farmers in La Trinidad, Benguet.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
Blue Lake, Tublay, CPV 60, CPV 64 and Kapangan for fresh pod production and
Blue Lake, Kapangan, CPV 69 and Kapangan for seed production are therefore the most
suitable varieties of pole snap for organic production system in La Trinidad Benguet.


Recommendation

Blue Lake, Kapangan, Tublay and CPV 69 are recommended for seed production;
and Blue Lake, Tublay, CPV 60, CPV 64 and Kapangan are recommended for fresh pod
production under organic production system in La Trinidad, Benguet.

















Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013

LITERATURE CITED

AERTS, M. 2000. An economic assessment of snap bean. Retrieved on September 13,
2012 from http://www.rma.usda.gov/pilots/feasible/txt/snapbean.txt.
ANDERSON, C. R. 2003. Crop profile for snap beans in Arkansas.Retrieved on September
11, 2012 from http://www.ipmcenters.org/cropprofiles/ docs/ARsnap beans.html.
BOLISLIS, R.D. 2004. Yield evaluation of pole snap beans locally produced in Benguet.
BS Thesis. Benguet State University. La Trinidad Benguet.P. 13.
BONAR, A. 1994. Vegetables. Tiger books enterprise. Ltd. London.P. 18.
BRIGGS, S. 2008. Organic cereal and pulse production: A complete guide. Crowood press
Ltd. Ramsburry, Marlborough wilt shire SN8 2HR. P. 174.
CALYA-EN, S.M. 2009. Onfarm trial of promising varieties of pole snap bean in Balili,
Mankayan, Benguet. BS Thesis. Benguet State University. La Trinidad, Benguet.
P. 14.
CAYSO, A.L. 2005. Performance of ten pole snap bean (phaseolus vulgaris L.) varieties
under Basil, Tublay, Benguet condition. BS Thesis. Benguet State University. La
Trinidad, Benguet. P. 15.
COLLIER and McMILLAN. 1966. Colliers encyclopedia. United States of America. 3:
731.
DAWATEN, A.G. 1999. Yield performance and profitability of main and lateral vines of
six pole snap bean entries under La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 11.
DUKE, J. A. 1983. Handbook of Energy crops. Retrieved on September 13, 2012 from
http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/duke_energy/Phaseolus_vulgaris.html.
ECO. PHILIPPINES. 2011. Organic Farming in the Philippines– Part 1. Retrieved on
September 22, 2012 fromhttp://www.eco-philippines.com/organic-farming-in-
thephilippines%E2%80%93-part-1/.
FODIS. 2009. Growing Beans in Zambia - Seed Multiplication. Retrieved on September
16, 2012 fromhttp://www.zari.gov.zm/media/growing_beans_in_zambia_farmers
06.2009.pdf.
FOOD and AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION. 2007. Training resource text on crop
development, major agronomic practices, disease and insect ecology, insect pest
ecology, insect pests, natural enemies and disease of green bean. Retrieved on
September 11, 2012 from http://www.vegetableipmasia.org/docs/Ecological%20
Guide/Green %20 Bean %20 Integrated%20Pest%20Management.pdf.
GONZALES, E.L. 1983. Characteristics and yield of local varieties of pole snap bean. BS
Thesis. Mountain State Agricultural College. La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 25.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
HERKLOTS, G.A.C. 1972. Vegetables in South- East Asia. Hafner Press, New York.P.
225.
HIGHLAND AGRICULTURE and RESOURCES RESEARCH and DEVELOPMENT
CONSORTIUM (HARDDEC). 1996. Traditional Farming systems in Benguet.
Department of Agriculture. Philippines. P.12.
INTERNATIONAL RICE RESEARCH INSTITUTE (IRRI). 2003. Participatory variety
trials for rainfed rice cultivar. Retrieved on August 08, 2012. From http/www.
training.irri.org.
KEBASEN, B.A. 2000. Varietal response of Bush Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) to
Fertilization and Inoculation. MS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp.1-2.
LOCKERETZ, W. 2007. Organic farming: An international history. Cromwell Press. UK.
P. 81.
LOCKIE, S, K. G. LLOYNS, LAWRENCE, D. HALPIN. 2006. Going organic mobilizing
networks for environmentally responsible food production. Athenaeum press,
Gateshead. UK. Pp. 1-13.
MAITI, R. 1997.Phaseolus spp. Bean science. Science publishers Inc. USA. P. 1.
MARTIN, J.R and W.H LEONARD. 1970. Principles of crop production. New York: The
McMillan Co. Pp. 672-673.
MENDIOLA, N.B. 1958. Principles of crop production. United circulation. Philippines. P.
314.
MUCHINO, R.T. Onfarm evaluation of potential pole snap bean (phaseolus vulgaris) at
Gusaran, Kabayan, Benguet condition. BS Thesis. Benguet State University. La
Trinidad Benguet.
NAVAZIO, J., M. COLLEY, and M. DILLON, M. COLLEY. 2007. Principles and
Practices of Organic Bean Seed Production in the Pacific Northwest. Organic Seed
Alliance. Retrieved on September 20, 2010 fromhttp:/ /www. Saving ourseeds. org
/ pdf/osa_bean_seed_manual.pdf.
RAI, A. 1986. Performance of Bush Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) as affected by
inoculation and nitrogen fertilization. MS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp.
2-3.
RASCO, E.T.JR. and V.D AMANTE. 1994. Sweet potato varietal evaluation. Volume 1.
South Asian Program for Potato Research and Development. Lima, Peru. Pp. 42-
43.
SHRESTHA, M. 1989. Varietal Response of Bush Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) to
Fertilization and Inoculation. MS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 1 and 2.
Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013
SIEGAL, A and B. FAVCETT. 1976.Food legume processing and utilization. International
development Research Center. Ottawa, Canada. P. 5.
TANDANG, L.L. A.M. KIMEU, B.B. AMLOS, J.G BAGTILA.. B.A KEBASEN,. and
G.R. MAGHIRANG. 2008. Development and Evaluation of Snap Bean (Phaseolus
vulgaris) Cultivars for the Philippine Highlands. A paper presented during the 2009
Agency Inhouse Review at Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 11.
THE ORGANIC ORGANIZATION. 1998. A modern approach to farming. Retrieved on
September 16, 2012 fromhttp://www.infonet biovision.org/res/res/files/ 488.Org
Farm.pdf.
THOMPSON, H.C. and W.C KELLY. 1957. Vegetable crops. TATA McGrow-hill
Publishing company. New Delhi, India. P. 464.
TERRY C. 1999. How Often Should I Water My Snap Beans?. Retrieved on March 12,
2013 from http://www.ehow.com/info_8432676_should-water-snap-beans.html.
NEIBAUER, J. and E. MANARD, 2002. Flavor | Texture | Color | Size | Shape | Defects
and Disease | Shelf Life | Nutritive ValueMW Vegetable Production
Guide. | Postharvest Information (UC Davis) | USDA Grade Standards. Retrieved
on March 12, 2013 from http://www.hort. purdue.edu/prod_quality/
commodities/bean.html.

Evaluation of Yield, Profitability, and Farmers’ Acceptability of Ten Varieties of Pole Snap
Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Under Organic Production System in La Trinidad, Benguet
UGALDE, GEORGE B. APRIL 2013