BIBLIOGRAPHY IMARGA, BENJIE Z. 2009. Growth...
BIBLIOGRAPHY
IMARGA, BENJIE Z. 2009. Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic
Production at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet. Benguet State University, La Trinidad,
Benguet
Adviser: Belinda A Tad-awan, Ph.D.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted at Cosmic Organic Farm, Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet
from December to March 2009 to evaluate the growth and yield of potato entries under
organic production and identify the best potato entries based on yield and resistance to
diseases and insects.
CIP 380241.17 and MLUSA 5 had a highest percent survival and tallest plants
which was not significantly different with MLUSA 5. Igorota produced the highest
canopy cover at 75 DAP. CIP 380241.17, MLUSA 5, MLUSA 8 and Igorota were rated
moderately vigorous at 75 DAP. Igorota and MLUSA 3 were highly resistant to late
blight while the other entries were rated moderately resistant to leaf miner at 75 DAP.
MLUSA 5 produced the highest number of marketable tuber while CIP 380241.17
produced the heaviest weight of marketable tubers and highest total yield and highest
ROCE.
CIP 380241.17, MLUSA 5, MLUSA 8 and Igorota are adapted under organic
production at Beckel La Trinidad, Benguet. However, further evaluation of potato entries
should be conducted to determine their adaptability, stability in terms of yield and
resistance to diseases and insects.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography...…………………………………………………………….......... і
Abstract……………………………………………………………………....... i
Table of Content…………………………………………………………. ........ iii
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………...... 1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE……………………………………………......... 3
MATERIALS AND METHODS…………………………………………........ 6
RESULTS AND DISCUSION…...................................................................... 14
Meteorological Data…………………………………………………… 14
Chemical Properties of the Soil……......…………………………......... 14
Plant Survival……………………………………………………........... 15
Plant Height at 30 and 75 DAP……………………………………....... 15
Canopy Cover…………………………………………………….......... 16
Plant Vigor………………………………………………………........... 17
Late Blight Incidence…………………………………………….......... 19
Leaf Miner incidence………………………………………………...... 19
Number and Weight of Marketable Tubers per Plot……..………......... 19
Number and Weight of Non-Marketable Tubers per Plot………........... 21
Total Yield per Plot………………………………………………......... 21
Computed Yield..............…...……………………………………......... 22
Dry Matter Content………………………………………………......... 23
Sugar Content…………………………………………………….......... 23
iii
Return on Cash Expense………………………………………………. 24
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS..……….......... 27
LITERATURE CITED…………………………………………………........... 29
APPENDICES…………………………………………………………........... 31
iv
1
INTRODUCTION
The potato (Solanum tubersom L.) is an annual plant belongs to the Solanaceae
family and grown for its starchy tuber. In recent centuries, potatoes have been the world’s
most important tuber crop and fourth most important source of energy (after rice, wheat
and maize) (Anonymous, 2008).
Potato is one of the major crops grown in Benguet and Mountain Province
because of its adaptability to semi-temperate climate. However, it was reported that
potato is the most chemically sprayed crop. To avoid the harmful effects of using
pesticides and chemical fertilizers alternative methods should be done. One of these
alternative practices is organic farming.
Organic production is a method of production that practices biologically
enhancing soil and plants and the economical balance of the environment (Petzoldt,
2005). An important practice in organic farming is the use of variety that performs well
and resistant to pest and diseases.
As cited by Wang, et.al. (2001), organic production is practical, long term and
environmentally safe means of limiting damage from the attack of pest and diseases.
At present organic production is being promoted in Benguet and Mountain
Province. This is due to high cost of pesticide and chemical fertilizers. The farmers are
looking for the alternative production system that would require lesser and cost of
production. Once a variety for organic production is identified, it could be integrated in
the system for use of the farmers.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
2
The study was conducted to evaluate the growth and yield of potato entries under
organic production at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet and to identify the best potato entry
based on yield and resistance to diseases and insects.
The study was conducted at the Cosmic Organic farm, located at Beckel, La
Trinidad, Benguet from December 2008 to March 2009.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Importance of Organic Production
Organic production is a holistic system that aims to increase the productivity and
fitness of diverse communities within the agro ecosystem, including soil organism, plant,
livestock and people. The development of enterprises that are sustainable and harmonious
with the environment is the aim of organic production (CAN/CGSB-32.310, 2006).
Recently, there are many farmers who practice diverse method of farming from
conventional to the organic farming because of the unstable price of oil. Oil is the major
ingredient for making chemical fertilizers. The farmers realized to look for an alternative
low cost of fertilizers that are not harmful but beneficial to the environment and the plant
(Razzaq, 2008). According to the PCARRD (2000), organic production is the traditional
method used by the farmers to practice the diverse farming which avoided the use of
synthetic chemicals.
Organic farming conserves and maintains the ecological balance of the
environment. It avoids the contamination of the air, soil, water, and the crop itself.
According to Balfour (2000), organic farming preserves and enhances top soil and it
increases the chances that future generation can continue growing food.
Organic production is highly recommended in the Cordillera. This production
strategy enhances safety and quality, environmental sustainability and gives concern to
the health and welfare of the farmer in the future (Briones, 1997).
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
4
Varietal Evaluation on Organic Production
Varietal evaluation or crop selection in agronomic crops is important for
managing crops under organic production. There is need to evaluate the variety under
organic contest to know what variety is good for organic production. According to Wang,
et.al. (2001), the desirable method in organic production is the cultivation of resistant
varieities.
In wheat, Lammerts van Bueren (2002), suggested to implement plant traits
evaluation through recovery from mechanical harrowing, tillering, speed of closing the
crop, canopy density, canopy habit, green index, distance of ear-flag leaf, compactness of
the ear and resistance to sprouting.
Similarly, DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) (2006)
as cited by Bueren (2002), suggests that cereal varieties for organic production are
characterized by growth habit and weed suppression capacity, in early vigor, long straw,
and tolerance to weeds.
Furthermore, sweetpotato for being one of agronomic crops is evaluated in
California under organic production. One variety found to be suitable for organic
production was the White Regal potato. The White Regal is resistant to fusarium wilt and
the southern root-knot nematode and it can be stored also for several months (Adam,
2006).
In China, studies have shown that sweetpotato yield can be increased by as much
as 30%-40% without adding of fertilizer, using of pesticide or genetic improvement
(Adam, 2006).
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
5
Varietal Evaluation on Organic Potato Production
HARRDEC (1996), stated that achieving maximum production requires the best
variety to be selected in the locality. Series of varietal evaluation must be conducted in
order to determine the adapted variety and the performance of newly introduced varieties.
Lem-ew (2007), found that CIP 13.1.1 and CIP 5.119.2.2 are the best potato
entries under organic production at Bakun, Benguet exhibiting resistance to late blight
and high yield. In a related study by Montes (2006), potato genotype CIP 676089 is the
best under organic production at Puguis, La Trinidad, Benguet as evidenced by highly
vigorous and tall plants, high yield, high dry matter content of tubers and resistance to
late blight.
During the wet season, Laweng (2006), found that the potato entry Catani
produced high yield but susceptible to late blight. CIP 676089 is resistant to late blight
and had comparable yield with Catani.
The study of Gayomba (2006), revealed that CIP 13.1.1 is the best genotype for
organic production at Sinipsip, Buguias due to its canopy cover, high resistance to late
blight and high total yield. Genotype 13.1.1 also had the highest ROCE (Return On Cash
Expense) for both seed and table potato production.
Balas (2006), also found that canopy cover at 75 DAP, number of secondary
stem and haulm weight could be used as indices for selection of varieties or genotypes for
organic production.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
6
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The farm
The study was conducted at Cosmic Farm, Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet. It has
an area of 5000 m2. Cosmic farm is operating as an organic farm for the last 11 years and
member of OPTA (Organic Producers Traders Association) of the Philippines and
produces mainly vegetables.
The owner is Mr. Rogel Marzan, 49 years old and an organic practitioner for 11
years. Mr. Marzan practices organic production in all his crops produced.
Land Preparation
An area of 90 m2 was first cleared of weeds. Plots were prepared measuring 1 m x
5 m (Fig. 1).
Organic Fertilizer Preparation and Application
Grasses of different species were collected within the locality. These grasses were
shredded and composted within 10 days with the aid of effective microorganisms.
Compost was applied at a rate of 8 kg/ 5 m2 two weeks before planting (Fig. 2).
The fermented plant juice (FPG) composed of “Kangkong” chopped thinly and
molasses fermented for seven days. The ratio was 4 kg of chopped “Kangkong” in 1
gallon of molasses. Application was one cup of fermented plant juice in one basin of
water every seven days (Fig. 4).
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
7
Figure 1. Preparation of plot
Figure 2. Application of compost
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
8
Figure 3. Making of compost
Figure 4. Finished fermented plant juice
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
9
Lay-out of the Experiment
The experiment was laid-out following the randomized complete block design
(RCBD) with three replications.
Code
Entry
E1
MLUSA 2
E2
MLUSA 3
E3
MLUSA 5
E4
MLUSA 8
E5
IGOROTA
E6
CIP
380241.17
Cultural Management Practices
Cultural practices such as hilling up, weeding, and irrigation were uniformly done
in all the treatments.
Data Gathered
A. Vegetative Characters
1. Plant survival (%). The number of plants that survived were counted 30 days
after panting (DAP) and calculated using the formula.
% Plant Survival = No of Plant Survived
x 100
Total Number of Plants Planted
2. Plant Height. Height was taken at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP using a meter stick.
3. Canopy cover. This was gathered at 30, 45, 60, and 75 DAP using a wooden
frame which measures 120 cm x 60 cm having equal size 12 cm x 6 cm grids.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
10
4. Plant vigor. Plants were rated at 30, 45, 50, 60, and 75 days DAP based on a
rating scale by CIP (Gonzales et al; 2004)
Scale Description Reaction
5
Plants are strong with robust stem and
Highly vigorous
leaves, light color to dark green in color.
4
Plants are moderately strong with robust
Moderately vigorous
stem and leaves were light green in color.
3
Better than less vigorous
Vigorous
2
Plants are weak with few thin stems and
Less Vigorous
leaves, pale.
1
Plants are weak with few stems and leaves,
Poor Vigorous
very pale.
B. Reaction to Pest and Disease
1. Reaction to leaf miner. The reaction to leaf miner was recorded at 30, 45, 60,
and 75 DAP using the following rating scale (CIP, 2001):
Scale Description Reaction
1
Leaf infested (1-20%)
Highly Resistant
2
Infested (20-40%)
Moderately Resistant
3
Moderately infested (41-60%)
Susceptible
4
Severely infested (61-80%)
Moderately Susceptible
5
Most Serious (81-100%)
Very Susceptible
2. Reaction to late blight. Ratings were done at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP using the
CIP (Henfling, 1987) rating scale as follows:
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
11
Blight Scale Description
1
1
No blight to be seed
01-1
2
Very few plants in larger treatment with lesions
not more than 2 lesions 10m or row (+/-30
plants).
1.1-2
2
Up to 10 lesions per plant.
3.1-10
3
Up to 30 small lesions per plant or up to 1 inch
leaflets attacked.
10.1-24
4
Most plants are visibly attacked and 1 m 3
leaflets infected. Multiple infections per leaflets.
5-49
5
Nearly every leaflets with lesion. Multiple
infections per leaflets are common. Field of plot
look green, but all plants are pots are blighted.
50-74
6
Every plant blighted and half the leaf area
destroyed by blight fields look green, flecked,
and brown, blight is very obvious.
75-90
7
As previous but ¾ of each plant blighted. Lower
branches may be overwhelmingly killed off, and
the only green leaves, if any, are spindly due to
extensive foliage loss, field looks neither brown
nor green.
91-97
8
Some leaves and most stems are green, filed
looks brown with some leaves patches.
97.1-99.9
9
Few green leaves almost all with blight lesions
remain. Many stems lesions field look brown.
100
9
All leaves and stem dead.
Description: 1- highly resistant, 2-3 -resistant, 4-5- moderately resistant, 6-7-
moderately susceptible, 8-9- susceptible.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
12
C. Yield and Yield Components
1. Number and weight of marketable tubers per plot (kg). All tubers that were of
marketable size, not malformed, free from cuts, cracks and with out more than 10%
greening of the total surface was counted and weighed at harvest.
2. Number and weight of non-marketable tubers per plot (kg). This was obtained
by counting and weighing all tubers that are malformed, damaged by pests and diseases
and with more than 10% greening.
3. Total yield plot (kg). This is sum of the weight of marketable and non-
marketable tubers.
4. Computed yield (tons/ha). This was computed on a hectare basis using the
formula:
Computed
Yield
= Total Yield per Plot (kg) x 2
*where: 2 is the factor use to convert yield in tons per hectare assuming one
hectare effective area.
D. Dry matter content of tubers (%). Twenty gram tubers were weighed and sliced
into cubes and oven dried at 80oC for 24 hours. This was recorded and computed using
the following formula:
Dry Matter = 100 - % moisture content
Where: % moisture content= Fresh Weight- Oven Dry Weight x 100
Fresh Weight
E.
ROCE. This was computed using the formula:
Net Income
ROCE=
x 100
Total Cost of Production
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
13
Data Analysis
All quantitative data were analyzed using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for
Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. The significance of
difference among the treatment means was tested using the Duncan’s Multiple Range
Test (DMRT) at 5% level of significance.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
14
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Meteorological Data
Table 1 shows the temperature, relative humidity, rain fall and sunshine duration
during the conduct of the study. Results show that temperature ranged from 13.6 ºC to
25.2 ºC. In the month of March high relative humidity was observed. Rainfall amount of
0.10 mm, 0.03 mm, 3. 45 mm and 1.6 mm were recorded in December, January, February
and March, respectively. Potato production was best with temperature ranging from 17 to
22 ºC and with an average relative humidity of 86 % (HARRDEC, 1996).
Chemical Properties of the Soil
Chemical properties of the soil before and after taken at the experimental area are
shown in Table 2. It was observed that pH decreased after planting, the soil pH in the
place where the study was conducted may not favor in the growth of potato since the
optimum pH for potato production ranged from 5.6 to 6.5.
The organic matter present in the soil is 2 % before and after planting. According
to Lambert (1996), organic matter present in the soil is sufficient since the optimum
content of organic matter for potato production is ranges from 1-4 %.
As shown in Table 2, there was a decrease in the phosphorus content of the soil
after harvest. This could be due to high phosphorus requirement of the potato plants.
Potassium content of the soil increased after harvest which could be due to the
compost applied.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
15
Table 1. Temperature, relative humidity, rainfall and sunshine duration during the conduct
Of the study
TEMPERATURE
RELATIVE RAINFALL SUNSHINE
MONTH_________ºC__________ HUMIDITY(%)_ AMOUNT(mm)_DURATION (kj)
MAX MIN
December 24.4 13.6 82.0
0.10 369.8
January 24.6
13.4 85.0 0.03 349.0
February 24.5 14.05 85.25 3.45 387.2
March 25.8 17.0 86 1.6 310.9
.
Table 2. Chemical properties of the soil taken before and after planting.
SAMPLING PH ORGANIC PHOSPHORUS POTASSIUM
TIME MATTER (ppm) (ppm)
______________________________(%)_______________________________________
Before planting 6.8 2 47 340
After planting 6.7 2 13 384
Plant Survival
The percent survival of the entries taken a 30 DAP is shown in Table 3. No
significant differences were observed among the entries. Generally, there was low
percent survival which could be attributed to unfavorable weather conditions such as low
temperature and low sunshine duration.
Plant Height at 30 and 75 DAP
Highly significant differences were observed on the plant height of the different
potato entries at 30 and 75 DAP (Table 4). CIP 380241.17 produced tallest plants at 30
and 75 DAP which was not significantly different with MLUSA 5 and MLUSA 8. At 75
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
16
DAP, CIP 380241.17 also produced tallest plants followed by MLUSA 5. MLUSA 5
produced shortest plant at 30 and 75 DAP.
The differences of height among the entries could be due to genotypic
characteristics and response of potato entries to the low temperature as shown in Table 1.
Canopy cover
Table 5 shows the canopy cover of the six potato entries. Numerically, at 30 DAP
CIP 380241.17 has the highest canopy cover of 19, this is followed by MLUSA 5 and
MLUSA 8 trailing at 12. MLUSA 3 produced the lowest canopy cover. All entries
increased in canopy cover at 45 DAP,
The decrease of canopy cover could be due to senescence of potato entries due to
the attack of pest (red ants) and late blight infection during the period
Table 3. Plant survival of the different potato entries at 30 days after planting
ENTRY
PLANT SURVIVAL
(%)
MLUSA 2
61
MLUSA 3
71
MLUSA 5
88
MLUSA 8
85
CIP 380241.17
90
Igorota
83
CV (%)
20.07
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
17
Table 4 . Plant height of the different potato entries at 30 and 75 DAP
PLANT SURVIVAL
ENTRY
(cm)
30 DAP
75 DAP
MLUSA 2
3.09c
13.22b
MLUSA 3
2.6c
2.93c
MLUSA 5
6.46a
24.99a
MLUSA 8
5.44ab
19.2ab
CIP 380241.17
6.89a
26.32a
Igorota
4.17bc
21.96a
CV (%)
18.57
27.58
Means with the same letter are not significant by DMRT (P>0.05)
Table 5. Canopy cover of the potato entries at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP
ENTRY CANOPY
COVER
30 DAP
45 DAP
60 DAP
75 DAP
MLUSA 2
8bc
17
35a
28bc
MLUSA 3
5c
11
9b
9c
MLUSA 5
12b
27
52a
42ab
MLUSA 8
12b
20
42a
38ab
CIP 380241.17
19a
32
51a
46ab
Igorota
9bc
21
46a
53a
CV (%)
23.08
15.98
20.49
22.09
Means with the same letter are not significantly different by DMRT (P>0.05)
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
18
Plant Vigor
Table 6 shows the plant vigor of thedifferent potato entries at 30, 45, 60 and 75
DAP. CIP 380241.17 and MLUSA 5 were found to be moderately vigorous while
MLUSA 3, MLUSA 8 and Igorota were vigorous while MLUSA 2 was less vigorous.
CIP 380241.17 was found to be highly vigorous followed by MLUSA 5 and MLUSA 8
for being moderately vigorous at 45 DAP. MLUSA 3 produced the lowest vigor. Plant
vigor of potato entries consistently increased at 60 DAP except MLUSA 3 which had
decreased in vigor. At 75 DAP, CIP 380241.17 and MLUSA 5 had decreased vigor while
the other entries retaind in their vigor
There was decrease in vigor of some entries which might be due to late blight at
75 DAP, and senescence of some plants due to the attack of red ants
Table 6. Plant vigor of the different potato entries at 30, 45, 60 and 75 days after planting.
ENTRY CANOPY
COVER
30 DAP
45 DAP
60 DAP
75 DAP
MLUSA 2
2b
3bc
3bc
3ab
MLUSA 3
3ab
2c
2c
2b
MLUSA 5
4a
4ab
5a
4a
MLUSA 8
3ab
4ab
4ab
4a
CIP 380241.17
4a
5a
5a
4a
Igorota
3ab
3bc
4ab
4a
CV (%)
13.23
22.74
20.31
24.47
Means with the same letter are not significantly different by DMRT (P>0.05)
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
19
Late Blight Incidence
Table 5 shows late blight ratings of the six potato entries at 75 DAP. It was
observed that entries MLUSA 3 and Igorota are highly resistant while the other entries
are resistant to late blight.
The resistance of the entries could be due to the organic matter applied to the
plants, and the organic fungicide (fermented plant juice and seaweed extract) sprayed on
the plants.
Leaf Miner Incidence
Table 6 shows the leaf miner incidence of the six potato entries at 75DAP. It was
observed that all the entries at 30, 45 and 60 days after planting were no incidence of leaf
miner while in 75 DAP all entries were moderately resistant.
The occurrence of leaf miner incidence at 75 days after plating could be due to the
aging of the plants
Number and weight of Marketable Tubers per Plot
Significant differences among the six entries of potato on the number of
marketable tubers were observed (Table 7). MLUSA 5 produced highest number of
marketable tubers while MLUSA 3 produced the lowest.
On weight, CIP 380241.17 produced the heaviest marketable tubers while
MLUSA 2 produced the lowest.
More tubers produced in MLUSA 5 and Igorota could be due to high percent of
survival and highly vigorous plants.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
20
a. MLUSA 2 at vegetative stage
b. MLUSA 5 at vegetative stage
c. MLUSA 8 at vegetative stage
d. Igorota at vegetative stage
e. CIP 380241.17 at vegetative stage
Figure 5, a-e. Vegetative growth of the potato entries
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
21
Table 7. Number and weight of marketable tubers of the six potato entries
MARKETABLE TUBER
ENTRY
NUMBER WEIGHT
(g)
MLUSA 2
56b
242
MLUSA 3
28b
548
MLUSA 5
207a
1248
MLUSA 8
78b
1238
CIP 380241.17
82b
1983
Igorota
112ab
1283
CV (%)
29.26
20.07
Means with the same letter are not significant by DMRT (P>0.05)
Number and Weight of Non-marketable Tubers per Plot
Table 8 shows the number and weight of non-marketable tubers of six potato
entries. Numerically, MLUSA 5 produced highest number and weight of non-marketable
tubers while MLUSA 3 produced the lowest number and weight
Total Yield per Plot
Statistical analysis shows highly significant differences among the entries in terms
of total yield (Table 9). CIP 380241.17 produced the highest yield per plot 2.08 kg
followed by MLUSA 5, Igorota and MLUSA 8 of 1.37 kg, 1.32 kg and 1.28 kg,
respectively. MLUSA 2 produced the lowest yield per plot. Low yield of entries could be
due to the effect of low temperature from December to February and high relative
humidity which may not favor to the optimum yield of the potato.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
22
Since, management practices were done uniformly in all entries, the genotypic
characteristic as influenced by the environment might have contributed the low yield.
Computed Yield (tons/ha)
Statistical analysis show that there were no significant differences among the six
entries of potato in terms of computed yield (tons/ha) as shown in table 9. CIP 380241.17
produced the highest yield of 4.15 tons followed by MLUSA 5, Igorota and MLUSA 8
with yields of 2.74, 2.65 and 2.56 tons respectively. The other entries produced a yield
ranging from 0.59 to 1.17 tons. Figure 6 shows the tubers harvested from the different
entries.
Table 8. Number and weight of non- marketable tubers of the six potato entries.
NON-MARKETABLE TUBER
ENTRY
NUMBER WEIGHT
(g)
MLUSA 2
41b
32b
MLUSA 3
8b
38b
MLUSA 5
88a
123a
MLUSA 8
16b
42b
CIP 380241.17
11b
93ab
Igorota
27b
42b
CV (%)
26.30
21.39
Means with the same letter are not significant by DMRT (P>0.05)
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
23
Table 9. Total yield and computed yield of the six potato entries.
ENTRY TOTAL
YIELD
COMPUTED YIELD
(kg/plot)
(tons/ha)
MLUSA 2
0.27 b
.547
MLUSA 3
0.59 b
1.17
MLUSA 5
1.37 b
2.74
MLUSA 8
1.28 b
2.56
CIP 380241.17
2.08 a
4.15
Igorota
1.32 b
2.65
CV (%)
15.38
25.01
Means with the same letter are not significant by DMRT (P>0.05)
Dry Matter Content
There were no significant differences amongthe six potato entries in terms of dry
matter content. It was observed that all entries are good for processing. According to
Montes (2006), DMC of tuber ranged from 18-24% is an indication of good processing
type of potato.
Sugar Content
There were no significant differences for sugar content among the six potato
entries. However, the results show that entries MLUSA 3 and Igorota obtained the
highest sugar content while remaining entries had the same sugar content of 3 OBrix.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
24
Table 10.Dry matter and sugar content of the six potato entries.
ENTRY DMC
SUGAR CONTENT
(%)
(OBrix)
MLUSA 2
22
3
MLUSA 3
22
4
MLUSA 5
20
3
MLUSA 8
22
3
CIP 380241.17
20
3
Igorota
23
4
CV (%)
10.16
16.46
Means with the same letter are not significantly different by DMRT (P>0.05)
Return of Cash Expense
Positive ROCE was obtained from the entries CIP 380241.17, MLUSA 5,
MLUSA 8 and Igorota. CIP 380241.17 had a highest ROCE with 103.13 % followed by
Igorota, MLUSA 5, and MLUSA 8 of 31.44 %, 27.85 % and 26.83 %, respectively.
Mlusa 2 and MLUSA 3 obtained negative ROCE
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
25
Table 11. Return on cash expense of the six potato entries.
ENTRY COST OF
GROSS
PRODUCTION
NET INCOME ROCE
INCOME
(Php.)
(Php) (%)
(Php.)
MLUSA 2 234.33
58.00 -184.33
-78.00
MLUSA 3 234.33
131.6
-102.73 -43.84
MLUSA 5 234.33
299.6
65.27 27.85
MLUSA 8 234.33
297.2
62.87 26.83
CIP 380241.17 234.33 476.00 241.67 31.44
Igorota 234.33
308.00 73.67 103.13
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
26
a. MLUSA 2 tubers
b. MLUSA 3 tubers
c. MLUSA 5 tubers
d. MLUSA 8 tubers
e. Igorota tubers
f. CIP 380241.17
Figure 6, a-f. Tubers of six potato entries
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
27
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The study was conducted at the Cosmic Farm, Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet from
December 2008 to March 2009 to evaluate the growth and yield of potato entries under
organic production and to identify the best potato entries based on yield and resistance to
diseases and insects.
CIP 380241.17 and MLUSA 5 had a highest percent of survival, tallest plant
which was not significantly different with MLUSA 5. Igorota produced the highest
canopy cover at 75 DAP. CIP 380241.17 MLUSA 5, MLUSA 8 and Igorota were rated
moderately vigorous at 75 DAP. Igorota and MLUSA 3 were highly resistant to late
blight and all entries were rated moderately resistant to leaf miner at 75 DAP. MLUSA 5
produced the highest number of marketable tubers. CIP 380241.17 produced the heaviest
weight of marketable tubers and highest total yield. CIP 380241.17 had the highest
ROCE.
Conclusion
CIP 380241.17 produced the heaviest weight of marketable tubers followed by
MLUSA 5. CIP 380241.17 obtained the highest ROCE. MLUSA 2 produced the lowest
yield.
Recommendation
Under the condition of the study CIP 380241.17, MLUSA 5, MLUSA 8 and
Igorota are adopted to organic production at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet. However,
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
28
further evaluation of potato entries should be conducted to further determine their
adaptability and stability in terms of yield and resistance to diseases and insects.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
29
LITERATURE CITED
ADAM, 2006. K.L. Sweet potato: Organic Production. Retrieved data December 14,
2008 from http://aattar.Neat.Org/attar-pub/sweetpotato.html
ANONYMOUS. 2008. Potato Pre-inca Inca,s food. Retrieved data December 14 from
http://geometry.com/potato_pre_inca _global_food.Html
BALAS, M.B. 2006. Correlation of morphological and marketable yield in potato
genotype (Solanum tuberosum) grown organically. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad,
Benguet. P.50
BALFOUR, S. B. 2000. Real Benefits of Organic Farming. Retrived data November 24,
2008 from http//: www. Geodata. Soton. Ac. v/4. Ensci 2000. html
BRIONES, A 1997. Sustainable Development Through Organic Agriculture Department
of Science and Technology. Pp. 18-19.
BUEREN, L V. 2006. Retrived data Nvember 2008 from Seedquality.
http://www.organic_reversion.org/pub/D_5_2_quality_report-final.pdf.
CAN/CGSB -32. 310. 2006. Organic production- General principles and management
standards Retrived data December 2008 from http://tpsgc-
pwgsc.gc.ca/casb/on_the_net//organic/032_0310_206-e.pdf.
CIP. 2001. Facts sheet. International Potato Center (CIP).
GAYOMBA, H.C. 2006. Growth and yield of promising potato genotypes grown in
organic farm at Sinipsip, Buguias. BS. Thesis. BSU La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 23-
24.
GONZALES, I. C., O. BADOL, D. K. SIMONGO, T. D. MASANGKAY, A. T.
BOTANGEN and F. S. BALOG-AS. 2004. Potato clone IP84004.7: A variety
release in the Philippine highlands. BSU research journal, La Trinidad, Benguet.
No. 42 and 43. P. 73.
HARRDEC. 1996. High land potato technoguide (3rd edition). Benguet State University,
La Trinidada, Benguet. Pp. 1-5.
HENFLING, J.W. 1987. Technical info bulletin 4: Late blight of potato. CIP, peru.
LAMBERT,K. 1996. Soil fertility evaluation advirdary aspects. Philippines, Belgian
Corporation project. Benguet State University. Pp. 3-30.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
30
LAWENG, J.A. 2006. Wet season evaluation of potato entries for organic production
under La Trinidad, Benguet condition. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Pp. 23-24.
LEM-EW, J.A. 2007. Growth and yield of organically grown potato entries in two
locations of Benguet. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. P.52.
MONTES. F. R. 2006. Growth and yield of potato genotypes in organic farm at Puguis,
La Trinidad, Benguet. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. xi.
PCARRD. 2000. Sustainable development through organic agriculture. Laguna,
Philippines. P. 5.
PETZOLDT, C. 2005. Integrated crop and pest management: guidelines for commercial
vegetable production. A Cornell Cooperative Extension Publication, New york.
http:// www. Nysaes. Cornell. Edu/reccomends/51_frames_html.
RAZZAQ, T. 2008. Building open opportunity structure. Retrived data November 2009
from http://tim razzaq.blogspot.com/008/04/sludging poor fertilizer-tested-in-
poor.html
TABON, C.S. 2007. Agronomic characters of potato accession grown organically under
Mid and High elevation in Benguet. BS. Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. P.7.
WANG, S.W, W. Carlson and K.D. HEINS. 2001. Pushing proven winner. Green house
grower. Pp. 115-118.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
31
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Plant survival at 30 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ__________ΙΙΙ_____________________________
MLUSA 2
31
38 71 183 61
MLUSA 3
81
53 78 212 71
MLUSA 5
96 78 90 256 88
MLUSA 8
81 75 100 256 85
IGOROTA
100 71 78 249 83
TAWID _____84__________87___________100____________271________90
TOTAL
473 445 517 1435 80
ANALYSIS
OF
VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
439.111 219.556
Treatment
5 1967.611 393.522
1.55 ns
3.33 5.74
Error_____________ 10 2544.889 254.489_____________________________
TOTAL
17
4951.611
ns= Not significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 20.01
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
32
Appendix Table 2. Initial plant height at 30 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
3.06 3.3 2.9 9.26 3.09 c
MLUSA 3
3.3 2.2 2.3 7.8 2.6 c
MLUSA 5
6.42 6.6 6.36 19.38 6.46 a
MLUSA 8
4.94 4.68 6.7 16.32 5.44 ab
IGOROTA
6 2.3 4.2 12.5 4.17 bc
TAWID ____7.4 6.16____________7.1_________20.66______6.89 a
TOTAL
31.12 25.24 29.56 85.92 4.76
ANALYSIS
OF
VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
8.093 1.546
Treatment
5 47.075 9.415
11.98**
3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 7.858 0.786_______________________________
TOTAL
17
58.026
**=highly
significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 18.57
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
33
Appendix Table 3. Final plant height at 75 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
9 17 13.66 39.66 13.22 b
MLUSA 3
0 4.8 4 8.8 2.93 c
MLUSA 5
30.6 22 22.38 74.98 24.99 a
MLUSA 8
26.4 17.34 13.86 57.6 19.2 ab
IGOROTA
29.3 17.48 19.2 65.88 21.96 a
TAWID 29.2 19.68 16.28 63.96 26.32 a
TOTAL
123.2 98.3 89.38 310.88 18.10
ANALYSIS
OF
VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
102.409 51.205
Treatment
5 971.148 194.230 8.56** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 226.966 22.697_____________________________
TOTAL
17
1300.523
**=highly
significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 27.58
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
34
Appendix Table 4. Canopy Cover at 30 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
8 8 7 23 8 bc
MLUSA 3
4 8 4 16 5 c
MLUSA 5
11 10 14 35 12 b
MLUSA 8
10 12 13 35 12 b
IGOROTA
13 5 8 26 9bc
TAWID 21 17 20 58 19 a
TOTAL
67 60 66 193 11
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
5.776 2.889
Treatment
5 357.778 71.556 12.43** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 57.556 5.756______________________________
TOTAL
17
421.111
**=highly
significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 23.08
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
35
Appendix Table 5. Canopy Cover at 45 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
12 23 16 51 17
MLUSA 3
7 20 5 32 11
MLUSA 5
24 29 27 80 27
MLUSA 8
22 16 23 61 20
IGOROTA
27 9 26 62 21
TAWID 40 28 28 96 32
TOTAL
132 125 125 382 21
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
5.444 2.722
Treatment
5 828.444 165.689 3.12** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 531.222 53.122_____________________________
TOTAL
17
1365.111
ns= Not significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 15.98
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
36
Appendix Table 6. Canopy Cover at 60 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
28 46 30 104 35 a
MLUSA 3
0 24 4 28 9 b
MLUSA 5
57 55 44 156 52 a
MLUSA 8
52 43 32 127 42 a
IGOROTA
57 37 43 137 46 a
TAWID 76 37 40 153 51 a
TOTAL
270 242 193 705 39
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
506.333 253.167
Treatment
5 3801.833 760.367 5.17* 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 1470.333 147.033_______________________
TOTAL
17
5778.500
*= significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 20.49
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
37
Appendix Table 7. Canopy Cover at 75 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
30 30 24 84 28 b
MLUSA 3
0 24 2 26 9 c
MLUSA 5
50 40 36 126 42ab
MLUSA 8
49 45 21 115 38 ab
IGOROTA
65 53 42 160 53 a
TAWID 72 30 36 138 46 ab
TOTAL
266 222 161 649 36
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
926.778 463.389
Treatment
5 3758.944 751.789 5.73** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 1311.222 131.122____________________________
TOTAL
17
5996.944
**=highly
significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 22.09
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
38
Appendix Table 8. Plant vigor at 30 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
1 3 3 7 2 b
MLUSA 3
3 3 3 9 3 ab
MLUSA 5
3 4 4 11 4 a
MLUSA 8
3 3 4 10 3 ab
IGOROTA
3 2 3 8 3 ab
TAWID 4 4 4 12 4 a
TOTAL
17 19 21 57 3
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
1.333 .0667
Treatment
5 5.533 1.167 3.5* 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 3.333 0.333___________
TOTAL
17
10.500
*= Significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 18.23
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
39
Appendix Table 9. Plant vigor at 45 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
3 4 3 10 3 bc
MLUSA 3
2 3 1 6 2c
MLUSA 5
4 4 5 13 4 ab
MLUSA 8
4 3 4 11 4 ab
IGOROTA
4 2 3 9 3bc
TAWID 5 4 5 14 5 a
TOTAL
22 20 21 63 4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.333 0.167
Treatment
5 13.833 2.767 4.37* 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 6.333 0.633______________________________
TOTAL
17
20.500
*= Significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 22.74
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
40
Appendix Table 10. Plant vigor at 60 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
3 4 3 10 3 bc
MLUSA 3
1 3 1 5 2c
MLUSA 5
5 5 5 15 5a
MLUSA 8
4 4 4 12 4ab
IGOROTA
5 3 4 12 4ab
TAWID 5 4 5 14 5 a
TOTAL
23 23 22 68 4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.111 0.056
Treatment
5 21.111 4.222 7.17** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 5.889 0.589_____________________________
TOTAL
17
21.111
**=
Highly
Significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 20.31
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
41
Appendix Table 11. Plant vigor at 75 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
3 4 3 10 3 ab
MLUSA 3
1 3 1 5 2b
MLUSA 5
5 4 4 13 4 a
MLUSA 8
4 4 3 11 4 a
IGOROTA
5 3 4 12 4a
TAWID 5 3 4 12 4 a
TOTAL
23 21 19 63 4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
1.333 0.667
Treatment
5 13.833 2.767 3.77* 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 7.333 0.733_____________________________
TOTAL
17
22.500
*=
Significant
Coefficient
of
Variation
(%)=
24.47
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
42
Appendix Table 12. Late blight incidence at 75 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
1 2 3 6 2
MLUSA 3
1 1 1 3 1
MLUSA 5
1 3 2 6 2
MLUSA 8
1 1 4 6 2
IGOROTA
1 1 1 3 1
TAWID 1 2 3 6 2__
TOTAL
6 10 14 30 2
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
43
Appendix Table 13. Leaf miner at 75 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
2 2 2 6 2
MLUSA 3
1 2 2 5 2
MLUSA 5
2 3 2 7 2
MLUSA 8
2 1 2 5 2
IGOROTA
2 2 2 6 2
TAWID 2 2 2 6 2__
TOTAL
11 12 12 35 2
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
44
Appendix Table 14. Number of marketable tubers of six potato entries
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
60 73 36 169 56b
MLUSA 3
5 72 7 84 28 b
MLUSA 5
356 136 130 622 207 a
MLUSA 8
90 89 55 234 78 b
IGOROTA
198 55 82 335 112 ab
TAWID _ 93 68 84 245 82 b
TOTAL
803 493 394 1689 94
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
15097.000 7548.500
Treatment
5 58017.833 11603.567 3.37* 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 34343.667 3434.367___________________________
TOTAL
17
107458.500
*=
Significant
Coefficient
of
Variation
(%)=
29.26
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
45
Appendix Table 15. Number of non-marketable tubers of six potato entries
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
24 43 57 124 41b
MLUSA 3
4 17 4 25 8 b
MLUSA 5
129 94 42 265 88 a
MLUSA 8
12 16 21 49 16b
IGOROTA
28 32 20 80 27b
TAWID _ 16 17 1 34 11 b
TOTAL
213 219 145 577 32
ANALYSIS
OF
VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
563.111 281.556
Treatment
5 13564.944 2712.989 6.45** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 4206.889 420.689___________________________
TOTAL
17
18334.944
**= Highly
significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 26.30
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
46
Appendix Table 16. Weight of marketable tubers of six potato entries
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
325 300 100 725 242
MLUSA 3
20 1600 25 1645 548
MLUSA 5
2325 620 800 3745 1248
MLUSA 8
2300 1065 350 3715 1238
IGOROTA
2800 350 700 3850 1283
TAWID _ 2850 1500 1600 5950 1983
TOTAL
10620 5435 3575 19630 1091
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
4443103.778 2221551.389
Treatment
5 5686694.444 1137338.889 2.02ns 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 5590997.222__559099.722_________________________
TOTAL 17
15720794.4444
ns = Significant
Coefficient
of
Variation
(%)=
20.07
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
47
Appendix Table 17. Total yield per plot of six potato entries
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
350 350 120 820 273.03
MLUSA 3
30 1700 30 1760 587.00
MLUSA 5
2475 770 870 4115 1372
MLUSA 8
2375 1105 360 3840 1280
IGOROTA
2850
400 725 3975 1325
TAWID _ 2950 1675 1605 6230 2077_
TOTAL
11030 6000 3710 20740 1152
ANALYSIS
OF
VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2 21798233.333 10899116.667
Treatment
5 117307333.333 23461466.667 9.91** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 23669083.333 2366908.333_________________________
TOTAL
17 162774650.000
**= Highly
significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 15.38
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
48
Appendix Table 18. Weight of non-marketable tubers of six potato entries
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
25 50 20 95 32b
MLUSA 3
10 100 5 115 38 b
MLUSA 5
150 150 70 370 123 a
MLUSA 8
75 40 10 125 42 b
IGOROTA
50 50 25 125 42b
TAWID _ 100 175 5 280 93ab
TOTAL
410 565 135 1110 62
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
15808.333 7904.167
Treatment
5 21150.000 4230.000 3.60* 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 11741.667 1174.167___________________________
TOTAL
17
48700.000
*=
Significant
Coefficient
of
Variation
(%)=
21.39
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
49
Appendix Table 19. Dry matter content
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
25 20 20 65 22
MLUSA 3
20 25 20 65 22
MLUSA 5
20 20 20 60 20
MLUSA 8
20 25 20 65 22
IGOROTA
25 25 20 70 23
TAWID _ 20 20 20 60 20
TOTAL
130 135 120 385 21
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
19.444 9.722
Treatment
5 23.611 4.722 1.0 ns 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 47.222 4.722______________________________
TOTAL
17
90.278
ns = Not Significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 10.16
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
50
Appendix Table 20. Computed yield (tons/ha)
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
.7 .7 2.04 1.64 .547
MLUSA 3
.06 3.4 .06 3.52 1.173
MLUSA 5
4.95 1.54 1.74 8.23 2.743
MLUSA 8
4.75 2.21 .720 7.68 2.560
IGOROTA
5.7 .8 1.45 7.95 2.650
TAWID _ 5.9 3.35 3.21 12.46 4.153
TOTAL
22.06 12.00 7.42 41.48 23.04
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
15.211 7.605
Treatment
5 19.067 3.813 1.37 ns 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 27.802 2.780______________________________
TOTAL
17
62.080
ns = Not Significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 25.01
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
51
Appendix Table 21. Sugar content (% Brix) of six potato entries
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
3.2 3.2 3.9 10.3 3
MLUSA 3
4.1 4 4.6 12.7 4
MLUSA 5
3.8 2.2 2.4 8.4 3
MLUSA 8
3.1 3.3 3.9 10.3 3
IGOROTA
4.4 3.8 3.9 12.1 4
TAWID _ 2.3 3 4.1 9.4 3
TOTAL
20.9 19.00 22.8 63.2 4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.914 0.457
Treatment
5 4.364 0.873 2.61 ns 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 3.339 0.334______________________________
TOTAL
17
8.618
ns = Not Significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 16.46
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
IMARGA, BENJIE Z. 2009. Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic
Production at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet. Benguet State University, La Trinidad,
Benguet
Adviser: Belinda A Tad-awan, Ph.D.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted at Cosmic Organic Farm, Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet
from December to March 2009 to evaluate the growth and yield of potato entries under
organic production and identify the best potato entries based on yield and resistance to
diseases and insects.
CIP 380241.17 and MLUSA 5 had a highest percent survival and tallest plants
which was not significantly different with MLUSA 5. Igorota produced the highest
canopy cover at 75 DAP. CIP 380241.17, MLUSA 5, MLUSA 8 and Igorota were rated
moderately vigorous at 75 DAP. Igorota and MLUSA 3 were highly resistant to late
blight while the other entries were rated moderately resistant to leaf miner at 75 DAP.
MLUSA 5 produced the highest number of marketable tuber while CIP 380241.17
produced the heaviest weight of marketable tubers and highest total yield and highest
ROCE.
CIP 380241.17, MLUSA 5, MLUSA 8 and Igorota are adapted under organic
production at Beckel La Trinidad, Benguet. However, further evaluation of potato entries
should be conducted to determine their adaptability, stability in terms of yield and
resistance to diseases and insects.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography...…………………………………………………………….......... і
Abstract……………………………………………………………………....... i
Table of Content…………………………………………………………. ........ iii
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………...... 1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE……………………………………………......... 3
MATERIALS AND METHODS…………………………………………........ 6
RESULTS AND DISCUSION…...................................................................... 14
Meteorological Data…………………………………………………… 14
Chemical Properties of the Soil……......…………………………......... 14
Plant Survival……………………………………………………........... 15
Plant Height at 30 and 75 DAP……………………………………....... 15
Canopy Cover…………………………………………………….......... 16
Plant Vigor………………………………………………………........... 17
Late Blight Incidence…………………………………………….......... 19
Leaf Miner incidence………………………………………………...... 19
Number and Weight of Marketable Tubers per Plot……..………......... 19
Number and Weight of Non-Marketable Tubers per Plot………........... 21
Total Yield per Plot………………………………………………......... 21
Computed Yield..............…...……………………………………......... 22
Dry Matter Content………………………………………………......... 23
Sugar Content…………………………………………………….......... 23
iii
Return on Cash Expense………………………………………………. 24
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS..……….......... 27
LITERATURE CITED…………………………………………………........... 29
APPENDICES…………………………………………………………........... 31
iv
1
INTRODUCTION
The potato (Solanum tubersom L.) is an annual plant belongs to the Solanaceae
family and grown for its starchy tuber. In recent centuries, potatoes have been the world’s
most important tuber crop and fourth most important source of energy (after rice, wheat
and maize) (Anonymous, 2008).
Potato is one of the major crops grown in Benguet and Mountain Province
because of its adaptability to semi-temperate climate. However, it was reported that
potato is the most chemically sprayed crop. To avoid the harmful effects of using
pesticides and chemical fertilizers alternative methods should be done. One of these
alternative practices is organic farming.
Organic production is a method of production that practices biologically
enhancing soil and plants and the economical balance of the environment (Petzoldt,
2005). An important practice in organic farming is the use of variety that performs well
and resistant to pest and diseases.
As cited by Wang, et.al. (2001), organic production is practical, long term and
environmentally safe means of limiting damage from the attack of pest and diseases.
At present organic production is being promoted in Benguet and Mountain
Province. This is due to high cost of pesticide and chemical fertilizers. The farmers are
looking for the alternative production system that would require lesser and cost of
production. Once a variety for organic production is identified, it could be integrated in
the system for use of the farmers.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
2
The study was conducted to evaluate the growth and yield of potato entries under
organic production at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet and to identify the best potato entry
based on yield and resistance to diseases and insects.
The study was conducted at the Cosmic Organic farm, located at Beckel, La
Trinidad, Benguet from December 2008 to March 2009.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Importance of Organic Production
Organic production is a holistic system that aims to increase the productivity and
fitness of diverse communities within the agro ecosystem, including soil organism, plant,
livestock and people. The development of enterprises that are sustainable and harmonious
with the environment is the aim of organic production (CAN/CGSB-32.310, 2006).
Recently, there are many farmers who practice diverse method of farming from
conventional to the organic farming because of the unstable price of oil. Oil is the major
ingredient for making chemical fertilizers. The farmers realized to look for an alternative
low cost of fertilizers that are not harmful but beneficial to the environment and the plant
(Razzaq, 2008). According to the PCARRD (2000), organic production is the traditional
method used by the farmers to practice the diverse farming which avoided the use of
synthetic chemicals.
Organic farming conserves and maintains the ecological balance of the
environment. It avoids the contamination of the air, soil, water, and the crop itself.
According to Balfour (2000), organic farming preserves and enhances top soil and it
increases the chances that future generation can continue growing food.
Organic production is highly recommended in the Cordillera. This production
strategy enhances safety and quality, environmental sustainability and gives concern to
the health and welfare of the farmer in the future (Briones, 1997).
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
4
Varietal Evaluation on Organic Production
Varietal evaluation or crop selection in agronomic crops is important for
managing crops under organic production. There is need to evaluate the variety under
organic contest to know what variety is good for organic production. According to Wang,
et.al. (2001), the desirable method in organic production is the cultivation of resistant
varieities.
In wheat, Lammerts van Bueren (2002), suggested to implement plant traits
evaluation through recovery from mechanical harrowing, tillering, speed of closing the
crop, canopy density, canopy habit, green index, distance of ear-flag leaf, compactness of
the ear and resistance to sprouting.
Similarly, DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) (2006)
as cited by Bueren (2002), suggests that cereal varieties for organic production are
characterized by growth habit and weed suppression capacity, in early vigor, long straw,
and tolerance to weeds.
Furthermore, sweetpotato for being one of agronomic crops is evaluated in
California under organic production. One variety found to be suitable for organic
production was the White Regal potato. The White Regal is resistant to fusarium wilt and
the southern root-knot nematode and it can be stored also for several months (Adam,
2006).
In China, studies have shown that sweetpotato yield can be increased by as much
as 30%-40% without adding of fertilizer, using of pesticide or genetic improvement
(Adam, 2006).
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
5
Varietal Evaluation on Organic Potato Production
HARRDEC (1996), stated that achieving maximum production requires the best
variety to be selected in the locality. Series of varietal evaluation must be conducted in
order to determine the adapted variety and the performance of newly introduced varieties.
Lem-ew (2007), found that CIP 13.1.1 and CIP 5.119.2.2 are the best potato
entries under organic production at Bakun, Benguet exhibiting resistance to late blight
and high yield. In a related study by Montes (2006), potato genotype CIP 676089 is the
best under organic production at Puguis, La Trinidad, Benguet as evidenced by highly
vigorous and tall plants, high yield, high dry matter content of tubers and resistance to
late blight.
During the wet season, Laweng (2006), found that the potato entry Catani
produced high yield but susceptible to late blight. CIP 676089 is resistant to late blight
and had comparable yield with Catani.
The study of Gayomba (2006), revealed that CIP 13.1.1 is the best genotype for
organic production at Sinipsip, Buguias due to its canopy cover, high resistance to late
blight and high total yield. Genotype 13.1.1 also had the highest ROCE (Return On Cash
Expense) for both seed and table potato production.
Balas (2006), also found that canopy cover at 75 DAP, number of secondary
stem and haulm weight could be used as indices for selection of varieties or genotypes for
organic production.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
6
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The farm
The study was conducted at Cosmic Farm, Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet. It has
an area of 5000 m2. Cosmic farm is operating as an organic farm for the last 11 years and
member of OPTA (Organic Producers Traders Association) of the Philippines and
produces mainly vegetables.
The owner is Mr. Rogel Marzan, 49 years old and an organic practitioner for 11
years. Mr. Marzan practices organic production in all his crops produced.
Land Preparation
An area of 90 m2 was first cleared of weeds. Plots were prepared measuring 1 m x
5 m (Fig. 1).
Organic Fertilizer Preparation and Application
Grasses of different species were collected within the locality. These grasses were
shredded and composted within 10 days with the aid of effective microorganisms.
Compost was applied at a rate of 8 kg/ 5 m2 two weeks before planting (Fig. 2).
The fermented plant juice (FPG) composed of “Kangkong” chopped thinly and
molasses fermented for seven days. The ratio was 4 kg of chopped “Kangkong” in 1
gallon of molasses. Application was one cup of fermented plant juice in one basin of
water every seven days (Fig. 4).
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
7
Figure 1. Preparation of plot
Figure 2. Application of compost
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
8
Figure 3. Making of compost
Figure 4. Finished fermented plant juice
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
9
Lay-out of the Experiment
The experiment was laid-out following the randomized complete block design
(RCBD) with three replications.
Code
Entry
E1
MLUSA 2
E2
MLUSA 3
E3
MLUSA 5
E4
MLUSA 8
E5
IGOROTA
E6
CIP
380241.17
Cultural Management Practices
Cultural practices such as hilling up, weeding, and irrigation were uniformly done
in all the treatments.
Data Gathered
A. Vegetative Characters
1. Plant survival (%). The number of plants that survived were counted 30 days
after panting (DAP) and calculated using the formula.
% Plant Survival = No of Plant Survived
x 100
Total Number of Plants Planted
2. Plant Height. Height was taken at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP using a meter stick.
3. Canopy cover. This was gathered at 30, 45, 60, and 75 DAP using a wooden
frame which measures 120 cm x 60 cm having equal size 12 cm x 6 cm grids.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
10
4. Plant vigor. Plants were rated at 30, 45, 50, 60, and 75 days DAP based on a
rating scale by CIP (Gonzales et al; 2004)
Scale Description Reaction
5
Plants are strong with robust stem and
Highly vigorous
leaves, light color to dark green in color.
4
Plants are moderately strong with robust
Moderately vigorous
stem and leaves were light green in color.
3
Better than less vigorous
Vigorous
2
Plants are weak with few thin stems and
Less Vigorous
leaves, pale.
1
Plants are weak with few stems and leaves,
Poor Vigorous
very pale.
B. Reaction to Pest and Disease
1. Reaction to leaf miner. The reaction to leaf miner was recorded at 30, 45, 60,
and 75 DAP using the following rating scale (CIP, 2001):
Scale Description Reaction
1
Leaf infested (1-20%)
Highly Resistant
2
Infested (20-40%)
Moderately Resistant
3
Moderately infested (41-60%)
Susceptible
4
Severely infested (61-80%)
Moderately Susceptible
5
Most Serious (81-100%)
Very Susceptible
2. Reaction to late blight. Ratings were done at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP using the
CIP (Henfling, 1987) rating scale as follows:
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
11
Blight Scale Description
1
1
No blight to be seed
01-1
2
Very few plants in larger treatment with lesions
not more than 2 lesions 10m or row (+/-30
plants).
1.1-2
2
Up to 10 lesions per plant.
3.1-10
3
Up to 30 small lesions per plant or up to 1 inch
leaflets attacked.
10.1-24
4
Most plants are visibly attacked and 1 m 3
leaflets infected. Multiple infections per leaflets.
5-49
5
Nearly every leaflets with lesion. Multiple
infections per leaflets are common. Field of plot
look green, but all plants are pots are blighted.
50-74
6
Every plant blighted and half the leaf area
destroyed by blight fields look green, flecked,
and brown, blight is very obvious.
75-90
7
As previous but ¾ of each plant blighted. Lower
branches may be overwhelmingly killed off, and
the only green leaves, if any, are spindly due to
extensive foliage loss, field looks neither brown
nor green.
91-97
8
Some leaves and most stems are green, filed
looks brown with some leaves patches.
97.1-99.9
9
Few green leaves almost all with blight lesions
remain. Many stems lesions field look brown.
100
9
All leaves and stem dead.
Description: 1- highly resistant, 2-3 -resistant, 4-5- moderately resistant, 6-7-
moderately susceptible, 8-9- susceptible.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
12
C. Yield and Yield Components
1. Number and weight of marketable tubers per plot (kg). All tubers that were of
marketable size, not malformed, free from cuts, cracks and with out more than 10%
greening of the total surface was counted and weighed at harvest.
2. Number and weight of non-marketable tubers per plot (kg). This was obtained
by counting and weighing all tubers that are malformed, damaged by pests and diseases
and with more than 10% greening.
3. Total yield plot (kg). This is sum of the weight of marketable and non-
marketable tubers.
4. Computed yield (tons/ha). This was computed on a hectare basis using the
formula:
Computed
Yield
= Total Yield per Plot (kg) x 2
*where: 2 is the factor use to convert yield in tons per hectare assuming one
hectare effective area.
D. Dry matter content of tubers (%). Twenty gram tubers were weighed and sliced
into cubes and oven dried at 80oC for 24 hours. This was recorded and computed using
the following formula:
Dry Matter = 100 - % moisture content
Where: % moisture content= Fresh Weight- Oven Dry Weight x 100
Fresh Weight
E.
ROCE. This was computed using the formula:
Net Income
ROCE=
x 100
Total Cost of Production
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
13
Data Analysis
All quantitative data were analyzed using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for
Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. The significance of
difference among the treatment means was tested using the Duncan’s Multiple Range
Test (DMRT) at 5% level of significance.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
14
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Meteorological Data
Table 1 shows the temperature, relative humidity, rain fall and sunshine duration
during the conduct of the study. Results show that temperature ranged from 13.6 ºC to
25.2 ºC. In the month of March high relative humidity was observed. Rainfall amount of
0.10 mm, 0.03 mm, 3. 45 mm and 1.6 mm were recorded in December, January, February
and March, respectively. Potato production was best with temperature ranging from 17 to
22 ºC and with an average relative humidity of 86 % (HARRDEC, 1996).
Chemical Properties of the Soil
Chemical properties of the soil before and after taken at the experimental area are
shown in Table 2. It was observed that pH decreased after planting, the soil pH in the
place where the study was conducted may not favor in the growth of potato since the
optimum pH for potato production ranged from 5.6 to 6.5.
The organic matter present in the soil is 2 % before and after planting. According
to Lambert (1996), organic matter present in the soil is sufficient since the optimum
content of organic matter for potato production is ranges from 1-4 %.
As shown in Table 2, there was a decrease in the phosphorus content of the soil
after harvest. This could be due to high phosphorus requirement of the potato plants.
Potassium content of the soil increased after harvest which could be due to the
compost applied.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
15
Table 1. Temperature, relative humidity, rainfall and sunshine duration during the conduct
Of the study
TEMPERATURE
RELATIVE RAINFALL SUNSHINE
MONTH_________ºC__________ HUMIDITY(%)_ AMOUNT(mm)_DURATION (kj)
MAX MIN
December 24.4 13.6 82.0
0.10 369.8
January 24.6
13.4 85.0 0.03 349.0
February 24.5 14.05 85.25 3.45 387.2
March 25.8 17.0 86 1.6 310.9
.
Table 2. Chemical properties of the soil taken before and after planting.
SAMPLING PH ORGANIC PHOSPHORUS POTASSIUM
TIME MATTER (ppm) (ppm)
______________________________(%)_______________________________________
Before planting 6.8 2 47 340
After planting 6.7 2 13 384
Plant Survival
The percent survival of the entries taken a 30 DAP is shown in Table 3. No
significant differences were observed among the entries. Generally, there was low
percent survival which could be attributed to unfavorable weather conditions such as low
temperature and low sunshine duration.
Plant Height at 30 and 75 DAP
Highly significant differences were observed on the plant height of the different
potato entries at 30 and 75 DAP (Table 4). CIP 380241.17 produced tallest plants at 30
and 75 DAP which was not significantly different with MLUSA 5 and MLUSA 8. At 75
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
16
DAP, CIP 380241.17 also produced tallest plants followed by MLUSA 5. MLUSA 5
produced shortest plant at 30 and 75 DAP.
The differences of height among the entries could be due to genotypic
characteristics and response of potato entries to the low temperature as shown in Table 1.
Canopy cover
Table 5 shows the canopy cover of the six potato entries. Numerically, at 30 DAP
CIP 380241.17 has the highest canopy cover of 19, this is followed by MLUSA 5 and
MLUSA 8 trailing at 12. MLUSA 3 produced the lowest canopy cover. All entries
increased in canopy cover at 45 DAP,
The decrease of canopy cover could be due to senescence of potato entries due to
the attack of pest (red ants) and late blight infection during the period
Table 3. Plant survival of the different potato entries at 30 days after planting
ENTRY
PLANT SURVIVAL
(%)
MLUSA 2
61
MLUSA 3
71
MLUSA 5
88
MLUSA 8
85
CIP 380241.17
90
Igorota
83
CV (%)
20.07
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
17
Table 4 . Plant height of the different potato entries at 30 and 75 DAP
PLANT SURVIVAL
ENTRY
(cm)
30 DAP
75 DAP
MLUSA 2
3.09c
13.22b
MLUSA 3
2.6c
2.93c
MLUSA 5
6.46a
24.99a
MLUSA 8
5.44ab
19.2ab
CIP 380241.17
6.89a
26.32a
Igorota
4.17bc
21.96a
CV (%)
18.57
27.58
Means with the same letter are not significant by DMRT (P>0.05)
Table 5. Canopy cover of the potato entries at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP
ENTRY CANOPY
COVER
30 DAP
45 DAP
60 DAP
75 DAP
MLUSA 2
8bc
17
35a
28bc
MLUSA 3
5c
11
9b
9c
MLUSA 5
12b
27
52a
42ab
MLUSA 8
12b
20
42a
38ab
CIP 380241.17
19a
32
51a
46ab
Igorota
9bc
21
46a
53a
CV (%)
23.08
15.98
20.49
22.09
Means with the same letter are not significantly different by DMRT (P>0.05)
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
18
Plant Vigor
Table 6 shows the plant vigor of thedifferent potato entries at 30, 45, 60 and 75
DAP. CIP 380241.17 and MLUSA 5 were found to be moderately vigorous while
MLUSA 3, MLUSA 8 and Igorota were vigorous while MLUSA 2 was less vigorous.
CIP 380241.17 was found to be highly vigorous followed by MLUSA 5 and MLUSA 8
for being moderately vigorous at 45 DAP. MLUSA 3 produced the lowest vigor. Plant
vigor of potato entries consistently increased at 60 DAP except MLUSA 3 which had
decreased in vigor. At 75 DAP, CIP 380241.17 and MLUSA 5 had decreased vigor while
the other entries retaind in their vigor
There was decrease in vigor of some entries which might be due to late blight at
75 DAP, and senescence of some plants due to the attack of red ants
Table 6. Plant vigor of the different potato entries at 30, 45, 60 and 75 days after planting.
ENTRY CANOPY
COVER
30 DAP
45 DAP
60 DAP
75 DAP
MLUSA 2
2b
3bc
3bc
3ab
MLUSA 3
3ab
2c
2c
2b
MLUSA 5
4a
4ab
5a
4a
MLUSA 8
3ab
4ab
4ab
4a
CIP 380241.17
4a
5a
5a
4a
Igorota
3ab
3bc
4ab
4a
CV (%)
13.23
22.74
20.31
24.47
Means with the same letter are not significantly different by DMRT (P>0.05)
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
19
Late Blight Incidence
Table 5 shows late blight ratings of the six potato entries at 75 DAP. It was
observed that entries MLUSA 3 and Igorota are highly resistant while the other entries
are resistant to late blight.
The resistance of the entries could be due to the organic matter applied to the
plants, and the organic fungicide (fermented plant juice and seaweed extract) sprayed on
the plants.
Leaf Miner Incidence
Table 6 shows the leaf miner incidence of the six potato entries at 75DAP. It was
observed that all the entries at 30, 45 and 60 days after planting were no incidence of leaf
miner while in 75 DAP all entries were moderately resistant.
The occurrence of leaf miner incidence at 75 days after plating could be due to the
aging of the plants
Number and weight of Marketable Tubers per Plot
Significant differences among the six entries of potato on the number of
marketable tubers were observed (Table 7). MLUSA 5 produced highest number of
marketable tubers while MLUSA 3 produced the lowest.
On weight, CIP 380241.17 produced the heaviest marketable tubers while
MLUSA 2 produced the lowest.
More tubers produced in MLUSA 5 and Igorota could be due to high percent of
survival and highly vigorous plants.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
20
a. MLUSA 2 at vegetative stage
b. MLUSA 5 at vegetative stage
c. MLUSA 8 at vegetative stage
d. Igorota at vegetative stage
e. CIP 380241.17 at vegetative stage
Figure 5, a-e. Vegetative growth of the potato entries
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
21
Table 7. Number and weight of marketable tubers of the six potato entries
MARKETABLE TUBER
ENTRY
NUMBER WEIGHT
(g)
MLUSA 2
56b
242
MLUSA 3
28b
548
MLUSA 5
207a
1248
MLUSA 8
78b
1238
CIP 380241.17
82b
1983
Igorota
112ab
1283
CV (%)
29.26
20.07
Means with the same letter are not significant by DMRT (P>0.05)
Number and Weight of Non-marketable Tubers per Plot
Table 8 shows the number and weight of non-marketable tubers of six potato
entries. Numerically, MLUSA 5 produced highest number and weight of non-marketable
tubers while MLUSA 3 produced the lowest number and weight
Total Yield per Plot
Statistical analysis shows highly significant differences among the entries in terms
of total yield (Table 9). CIP 380241.17 produced the highest yield per plot 2.08 kg
followed by MLUSA 5, Igorota and MLUSA 8 of 1.37 kg, 1.32 kg and 1.28 kg,
respectively. MLUSA 2 produced the lowest yield per plot. Low yield of entries could be
due to the effect of low temperature from December to February and high relative
humidity which may not favor to the optimum yield of the potato.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
22
Since, management practices were done uniformly in all entries, the genotypic
characteristic as influenced by the environment might have contributed the low yield.
Computed Yield (tons/ha)
Statistical analysis show that there were no significant differences among the six
entries of potato in terms of computed yield (tons/ha) as shown in table 9. CIP 380241.17
produced the highest yield of 4.15 tons followed by MLUSA 5, Igorota and MLUSA 8
with yields of 2.74, 2.65 and 2.56 tons respectively. The other entries produced a yield
ranging from 0.59 to 1.17 tons. Figure 6 shows the tubers harvested from the different
entries.
Table 8. Number and weight of non- marketable tubers of the six potato entries.
NON-MARKETABLE TUBER
ENTRY
NUMBER WEIGHT
(g)
MLUSA 2
41b
32b
MLUSA 3
8b
38b
MLUSA 5
88a
123a
MLUSA 8
16b
42b
CIP 380241.17
11b
93ab
Igorota
27b
42b
CV (%)
26.30
21.39
Means with the same letter are not significant by DMRT (P>0.05)
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
23
Table 9. Total yield and computed yield of the six potato entries.
ENTRY TOTAL
YIELD
COMPUTED YIELD
(kg/plot)
(tons/ha)
MLUSA 2
0.27 b
.547
MLUSA 3
0.59 b
1.17
MLUSA 5
1.37 b
2.74
MLUSA 8
1.28 b
2.56
CIP 380241.17
2.08 a
4.15
Igorota
1.32 b
2.65
CV (%)
15.38
25.01
Means with the same letter are not significant by DMRT (P>0.05)
Dry Matter Content
There were no significant differences amongthe six potato entries in terms of dry
matter content. It was observed that all entries are good for processing. According to
Montes (2006), DMC of tuber ranged from 18-24% is an indication of good processing
type of potato.
Sugar Content
There were no significant differences for sugar content among the six potato
entries. However, the results show that entries MLUSA 3 and Igorota obtained the
highest sugar content while remaining entries had the same sugar content of 3 OBrix.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
24
Table 10.Dry matter and sugar content of the six potato entries.
ENTRY DMC
SUGAR CONTENT
(%)
(OBrix)
MLUSA 2
22
3
MLUSA 3
22
4
MLUSA 5
20
3
MLUSA 8
22
3
CIP 380241.17
20
3
Igorota
23
4
CV (%)
10.16
16.46
Means with the same letter are not significantly different by DMRT (P>0.05)
Return of Cash Expense
Positive ROCE was obtained from the entries CIP 380241.17, MLUSA 5,
MLUSA 8 and Igorota. CIP 380241.17 had a highest ROCE with 103.13 % followed by
Igorota, MLUSA 5, and MLUSA 8 of 31.44 %, 27.85 % and 26.83 %, respectively.
Mlusa 2 and MLUSA 3 obtained negative ROCE
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
25
Table 11. Return on cash expense of the six potato entries.
ENTRY COST OF
GROSS
PRODUCTION
NET INCOME ROCE
INCOME
(Php.)
(Php) (%)
(Php.)
MLUSA 2 234.33
58.00 -184.33
-78.00
MLUSA 3 234.33
131.6
-102.73 -43.84
MLUSA 5 234.33
299.6
65.27 27.85
MLUSA 8 234.33
297.2
62.87 26.83
CIP 380241.17 234.33 476.00 241.67 31.44
Igorota 234.33
308.00 73.67 103.13
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
26
a. MLUSA 2 tubers
b. MLUSA 3 tubers
c. MLUSA 5 tubers
d. MLUSA 8 tubers
e. Igorota tubers
f. CIP 380241.17
Figure 6, a-f. Tubers of six potato entries
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
27
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The study was conducted at the Cosmic Farm, Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet from
December 2008 to March 2009 to evaluate the growth and yield of potato entries under
organic production and to identify the best potato entries based on yield and resistance to
diseases and insects.
CIP 380241.17 and MLUSA 5 had a highest percent of survival, tallest plant
which was not significantly different with MLUSA 5. Igorota produced the highest
canopy cover at 75 DAP. CIP 380241.17 MLUSA 5, MLUSA 8 and Igorota were rated
moderately vigorous at 75 DAP. Igorota and MLUSA 3 were highly resistant to late
blight and all entries were rated moderately resistant to leaf miner at 75 DAP. MLUSA 5
produced the highest number of marketable tubers. CIP 380241.17 produced the heaviest
weight of marketable tubers and highest total yield. CIP 380241.17 had the highest
ROCE.
Conclusion
CIP 380241.17 produced the heaviest weight of marketable tubers followed by
MLUSA 5. CIP 380241.17 obtained the highest ROCE. MLUSA 2 produced the lowest
yield.
Recommendation
Under the condition of the study CIP 380241.17, MLUSA 5, MLUSA 8 and
Igorota are adopted to organic production at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet. However,
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
28
further evaluation of potato entries should be conducted to further determine their
adaptability and stability in terms of yield and resistance to diseases and insects.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
29
LITERATURE CITED
ADAM, 2006. K.L. Sweet potato: Organic Production. Retrieved data December 14,
2008 from http://aattar.Neat.Org/attar-pub/sweetpotato.html
ANONYMOUS. 2008. Potato Pre-inca Inca,s food. Retrieved data December 14 from
http://geometry.com/potato_pre_inca _global_food.Html
BALAS, M.B. 2006. Correlation of morphological and marketable yield in potato
genotype (Solanum tuberosum) grown organically. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad,
Benguet. P.50
BALFOUR, S. B. 2000. Real Benefits of Organic Farming. Retrived data November 24,
2008 from http//: www. Geodata. Soton. Ac. v/4. Ensci 2000. html
BRIONES, A 1997. Sustainable Development Through Organic Agriculture Department
of Science and Technology. Pp. 18-19.
BUEREN, L V. 2006. Retrived data Nvember 2008 from Seedquality.
http://www.organic_reversion.org/pub/D_5_2_quality_report-final.pdf.
CAN/CGSB -32. 310. 2006. Organic production- General principles and management
standards Retrived data December 2008 from http://tpsgc-
pwgsc.gc.ca/casb/on_the_net//organic/032_0310_206-e.pdf.
CIP. 2001. Facts sheet. International Potato Center (CIP).
GAYOMBA, H.C. 2006. Growth and yield of promising potato genotypes grown in
organic farm at Sinipsip, Buguias. BS. Thesis. BSU La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 23-
24.
GONZALES, I. C., O. BADOL, D. K. SIMONGO, T. D. MASANGKAY, A. T.
BOTANGEN and F. S. BALOG-AS. 2004. Potato clone IP84004.7: A variety
release in the Philippine highlands. BSU research journal, La Trinidad, Benguet.
No. 42 and 43. P. 73.
HARRDEC. 1996. High land potato technoguide (3rd edition). Benguet State University,
La Trinidada, Benguet. Pp. 1-5.
HENFLING, J.W. 1987. Technical info bulletin 4: Late blight of potato. CIP, peru.
LAMBERT,K. 1996. Soil fertility evaluation advirdary aspects. Philippines, Belgian
Corporation project. Benguet State University. Pp. 3-30.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
30
LAWENG, J.A. 2006. Wet season evaluation of potato entries for organic production
under La Trinidad, Benguet condition. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Pp. 23-24.
LEM-EW, J.A. 2007. Growth and yield of organically grown potato entries in two
locations of Benguet. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. P.52.
MONTES. F. R. 2006. Growth and yield of potato genotypes in organic farm at Puguis,
La Trinidad, Benguet. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. xi.
PCARRD. 2000. Sustainable development through organic agriculture. Laguna,
Philippines. P. 5.
PETZOLDT, C. 2005. Integrated crop and pest management: guidelines for commercial
vegetable production. A Cornell Cooperative Extension Publication, New york.
http:// www. Nysaes. Cornell. Edu/reccomends/51_frames_html.
RAZZAQ, T. 2008. Building open opportunity structure. Retrived data November 2009
from http://tim razzaq.blogspot.com/008/04/sludging poor fertilizer-tested-in-
poor.html
TABON, C.S. 2007. Agronomic characters of potato accession grown organically under
Mid and High elevation in Benguet. BS. Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. P.7.
WANG, S.W, W. Carlson and K.D. HEINS. 2001. Pushing proven winner. Green house
grower. Pp. 115-118.
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
31
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Plant survival at 30 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ__________ΙΙΙ_____________________________
MLUSA 2
31
38 71 183 61
MLUSA 3
81
53 78 212 71
MLUSA 5
96 78 90 256 88
MLUSA 8
81 75 100 256 85
IGOROTA
100 71 78 249 83
TAWID _____84__________87___________100____________271________90
TOTAL
473 445 517 1435 80
ANALYSIS
OF
VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
439.111 219.556
Treatment
5 1967.611 393.522
1.55 ns
3.33 5.74
Error_____________ 10 2544.889 254.489_____________________________
TOTAL
17
4951.611
ns= Not significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 20.01
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
32
Appendix Table 2. Initial plant height at 30 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
3.06 3.3 2.9 9.26 3.09 c
MLUSA 3
3.3 2.2 2.3 7.8 2.6 c
MLUSA 5
6.42 6.6 6.36 19.38 6.46 a
MLUSA 8
4.94 4.68 6.7 16.32 5.44 ab
IGOROTA
6 2.3 4.2 12.5 4.17 bc
TAWID ____7.4 6.16____________7.1_________20.66______6.89 a
TOTAL
31.12 25.24 29.56 85.92 4.76
ANALYSIS
OF
VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
8.093 1.546
Treatment
5 47.075 9.415
11.98**
3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 7.858 0.786_______________________________
TOTAL
17
58.026
**=highly
significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 18.57
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
33
Appendix Table 3. Final plant height at 75 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
9 17 13.66 39.66 13.22 b
MLUSA 3
0 4.8 4 8.8 2.93 c
MLUSA 5
30.6 22 22.38 74.98 24.99 a
MLUSA 8
26.4 17.34 13.86 57.6 19.2 ab
IGOROTA
29.3 17.48 19.2 65.88 21.96 a
TAWID 29.2 19.68 16.28 63.96 26.32 a
TOTAL
123.2 98.3 89.38 310.88 18.10
ANALYSIS
OF
VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
102.409 51.205
Treatment
5 971.148 194.230 8.56** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 226.966 22.697_____________________________
TOTAL
17
1300.523
**=highly
significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 27.58
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
34
Appendix Table 4. Canopy Cover at 30 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
8 8 7 23 8 bc
MLUSA 3
4 8 4 16 5 c
MLUSA 5
11 10 14 35 12 b
MLUSA 8
10 12 13 35 12 b
IGOROTA
13 5 8 26 9bc
TAWID 21 17 20 58 19 a
TOTAL
67 60 66 193 11
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
5.776 2.889
Treatment
5 357.778 71.556 12.43** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 57.556 5.756______________________________
TOTAL
17
421.111
**=highly
significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 23.08
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
35
Appendix Table 5. Canopy Cover at 45 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
12 23 16 51 17
MLUSA 3
7 20 5 32 11
MLUSA 5
24 29 27 80 27
MLUSA 8
22 16 23 61 20
IGOROTA
27 9 26 62 21
TAWID 40 28 28 96 32
TOTAL
132 125 125 382 21
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
5.444 2.722
Treatment
5 828.444 165.689 3.12** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 531.222 53.122_____________________________
TOTAL
17
1365.111
ns= Not significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 15.98
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
36
Appendix Table 6. Canopy Cover at 60 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
28 46 30 104 35 a
MLUSA 3
0 24 4 28 9 b
MLUSA 5
57 55 44 156 52 a
MLUSA 8
52 43 32 127 42 a
IGOROTA
57 37 43 137 46 a
TAWID 76 37 40 153 51 a
TOTAL
270 242 193 705 39
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
506.333 253.167
Treatment
5 3801.833 760.367 5.17* 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 1470.333 147.033_______________________
TOTAL
17
5778.500
*= significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 20.49
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
37
Appendix Table 7. Canopy Cover at 75 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
30 30 24 84 28 b
MLUSA 3
0 24 2 26 9 c
MLUSA 5
50 40 36 126 42ab
MLUSA 8
49 45 21 115 38 ab
IGOROTA
65 53 42 160 53 a
TAWID 72 30 36 138 46 ab
TOTAL
266 222 161 649 36
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
926.778 463.389
Treatment
5 3758.944 751.789 5.73** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 1311.222 131.122____________________________
TOTAL
17
5996.944
**=highly
significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 22.09
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
38
Appendix Table 8. Plant vigor at 30 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
1 3 3 7 2 b
MLUSA 3
3 3 3 9 3 ab
MLUSA 5
3 4 4 11 4 a
MLUSA 8
3 3 4 10 3 ab
IGOROTA
3 2 3 8 3 ab
TAWID 4 4 4 12 4 a
TOTAL
17 19 21 57 3
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
1.333 .0667
Treatment
5 5.533 1.167 3.5* 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 3.333 0.333___________
TOTAL
17
10.500
*= Significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 18.23
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
39
Appendix Table 9. Plant vigor at 45 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
3 4 3 10 3 bc
MLUSA 3
2 3 1 6 2c
MLUSA 5
4 4 5 13 4 ab
MLUSA 8
4 3 4 11 4 ab
IGOROTA
4 2 3 9 3bc
TAWID 5 4 5 14 5 a
TOTAL
22 20 21 63 4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.333 0.167
Treatment
5 13.833 2.767 4.37* 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 6.333 0.633______________________________
TOTAL
17
20.500
*= Significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 22.74
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
40
Appendix Table 10. Plant vigor at 60 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
3 4 3 10 3 bc
MLUSA 3
1 3 1 5 2c
MLUSA 5
5 5 5 15 5a
MLUSA 8
4 4 4 12 4ab
IGOROTA
5 3 4 12 4ab
TAWID 5 4 5 14 5 a
TOTAL
23 23 22 68 4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.111 0.056
Treatment
5 21.111 4.222 7.17** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 5.889 0.589_____________________________
TOTAL
17
21.111
**=
Highly
Significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 20.31
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
41
Appendix Table 11. Plant vigor at 75 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
3 4 3 10 3 ab
MLUSA 3
1 3 1 5 2b
MLUSA 5
5 4 4 13 4 a
MLUSA 8
4 4 3 11 4 a
IGOROTA
5 3 4 12 4a
TAWID 5 3 4 12 4 a
TOTAL
23 21 19 63 4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
1.333 0.667
Treatment
5 13.833 2.767 3.77* 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 7.333 0.733_____________________________
TOTAL
17
22.500
*=
Significant
Coefficient
of
Variation
(%)=
24.47
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
42
Appendix Table 12. Late blight incidence at 75 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
1 2 3 6 2
MLUSA 3
1 1 1 3 1
MLUSA 5
1 3 2 6 2
MLUSA 8
1 1 4 6 2
IGOROTA
1 1 1 3 1
TAWID 1 2 3 6 2__
TOTAL
6 10 14 30 2
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
43
Appendix Table 13. Leaf miner at 75 days after planting
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
2 2 2 6 2
MLUSA 3
1 2 2 5 2
MLUSA 5
2 3 2 7 2
MLUSA 8
2 1 2 5 2
IGOROTA
2 2 2 6 2
TAWID 2 2 2 6 2__
TOTAL
11 12 12 35 2
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
44
Appendix Table 14. Number of marketable tubers of six potato entries
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
60 73 36 169 56b
MLUSA 3
5 72 7 84 28 b
MLUSA 5
356 136 130 622 207 a
MLUSA 8
90 89 55 234 78 b
IGOROTA
198 55 82 335 112 ab
TAWID _ 93 68 84 245 82 b
TOTAL
803 493 394 1689 94
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
15097.000 7548.500
Treatment
5 58017.833 11603.567 3.37* 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 34343.667 3434.367___________________________
TOTAL
17
107458.500
*=
Significant
Coefficient
of
Variation
(%)=
29.26
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
45
Appendix Table 15. Number of non-marketable tubers of six potato entries
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
24 43 57 124 41b
MLUSA 3
4 17 4 25 8 b
MLUSA 5
129 94 42 265 88 a
MLUSA 8
12 16 21 49 16b
IGOROTA
28 32 20 80 27b
TAWID _ 16 17 1 34 11 b
TOTAL
213 219 145 577 32
ANALYSIS
OF
VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
563.111 281.556
Treatment
5 13564.944 2712.989 6.45** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 4206.889 420.689___________________________
TOTAL
17
18334.944
**= Highly
significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 26.30
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
46
Appendix Table 16. Weight of marketable tubers of six potato entries
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
325 300 100 725 242
MLUSA 3
20 1600 25 1645 548
MLUSA 5
2325 620 800 3745 1248
MLUSA 8
2300 1065 350 3715 1238
IGOROTA
2800 350 700 3850 1283
TAWID _ 2850 1500 1600 5950 1983
TOTAL
10620 5435 3575 19630 1091
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
4443103.778 2221551.389
Treatment
5 5686694.444 1137338.889 2.02ns 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 5590997.222__559099.722_________________________
TOTAL 17
15720794.4444
ns = Significant
Coefficient
of
Variation
(%)=
20.07
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
47
Appendix Table 17. Total yield per plot of six potato entries
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
350 350 120 820 273.03
MLUSA 3
30 1700 30 1760 587.00
MLUSA 5
2475 770 870 4115 1372
MLUSA 8
2375 1105 360 3840 1280
IGOROTA
2850
400 725 3975 1325
TAWID _ 2950 1675 1605 6230 2077_
TOTAL
11030 6000 3710 20740 1152
ANALYSIS
OF
VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2 21798233.333 10899116.667
Treatment
5 117307333.333 23461466.667 9.91** 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 23669083.333 2366908.333_________________________
TOTAL
17 162774650.000
**= Highly
significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 15.38
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
48
Appendix Table 18. Weight of non-marketable tubers of six potato entries
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
25 50 20 95 32b
MLUSA 3
10 100 5 115 38 b
MLUSA 5
150 150 70 370 123 a
MLUSA 8
75 40 10 125 42 b
IGOROTA
50 50 25 125 42b
TAWID _ 100 175 5 280 93ab
TOTAL
410 565 135 1110 62
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
15808.333 7904.167
Treatment
5 21150.000 4230.000 3.60* 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 11741.667 1174.167___________________________
TOTAL
17
48700.000
*=
Significant
Coefficient
of
Variation
(%)=
21.39
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
49
Appendix Table 19. Dry matter content
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
25 20 20 65 22
MLUSA 3
20 25 20 65 22
MLUSA 5
20 20 20 60 20
MLUSA 8
20 25 20 65 22
IGOROTA
25 25 20 70 23
TAWID _ 20 20 20 60 20
TOTAL
130 135 120 385 21
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
19.444 9.722
Treatment
5 23.611 4.722 1.0 ns 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 47.222 4.722______________________________
TOTAL
17
90.278
ns = Not Significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 10.16
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
50
Appendix Table 20. Computed yield (tons/ha)
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
.7 .7 2.04 1.64 .547
MLUSA 3
.06 3.4 .06 3.52 1.173
MLUSA 5
4.95 1.54 1.74 8.23 2.743
MLUSA 8
4.75 2.21 .720 7.68 2.560
IGOROTA
5.7 .8 1.45 7.95 2.650
TAWID _ 5.9 3.35 3.21 12.46 4.153
TOTAL
22.06 12.00 7.42 41.48 23.04
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
15.211 7.605
Treatment
5 19.067 3.813 1.37 ns 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 27.802 2.780______________________________
TOTAL
17
62.080
ns = Not Significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 25.01
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
51
Appendix Table 21. Sugar content (% Brix) of six potato entries
ENTRIES ____________REPLICATION_________________ TOTAL MEAN
_________________Ι____________ΙΙ______________ΙΙΙ_________________________
MLUSA 2
3.2 3.2 3.9 10.3 3
MLUSA 3
4.1 4 4.6 12.7 4
MLUSA 5
3.8 2.2 2.4 8.4 3
MLUSA 8
3.1 3.3 3.9 10.3 3
IGOROTA
4.4 3.8 3.9 12.1 4
TAWID _ 2.3 3 4.1 9.4 3
TOTAL
20.9 19.00 22.8 63.2 4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF SQUARES SQUARE F ____F______
FREEDOM 0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.914 0.457
Treatment
5 4.364 0.873 2.61 ns 3.33 5.64
Error_____________ 10 3.339 0.334______________________________
TOTAL
17
8.618
ns = Not Significant
Coefficient of Variation (%)= 16.46
Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic Production
at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet / Benjie Z. Imarga. 2009
Document Outline
- Growth and Yield of Potato Entries Under Organic
Production at Beckel, La Trinidad, Benguet
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- ABSTRACT
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES