BIBLIOGRAPHY

CAMBONG, ROSENDA T. APRIL 2007. Response of Organically Grown
Potato Entries Intercropped with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks. Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Prof. Esther Josephine D. Sagalla, BSc
ABSTRACT

The study aimed to identify the most suitable cropping system for potato under
organic production, identify the best potato entry that can be grown organically under La
Trinidad condition, determine the interaction between the potato entries and cropping
systems, and determine the economic benefit of growing different potato entries
organically and intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks.

Based on the results, monocropping of potatoes produced the highest yield.
Potatoes intercropped with bush beans also produced high yield.

Among the potato entries, 5.19.2.2, 13.1.1 and 96-06 were the most resistant to
leafminer and late blight and produced the highest yield. These entries were also
vigorous and had wide canopies.

To effect maximum yield, monocropping of entries 5.19.2.2, 13.1.1 and 96-06 is
best.

The highest ROCE was obtained from growing potatoes intercropped with bush
beans. Although intercropped potatoes had lesser yield than monocrop, income from the
intercrop supplemented the gross income, thus resulting to higher ROCE.

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS


Page
Bibliography...………………………………………………………………….. i
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………
i
Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………….
ii

INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………...
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE …………………………………………………..
3

Description of Intercropping …………………………………………..
3

Effects of Intercropping ……………………………………………….
3

Legumes as Intercrop ………………………………………………….
4

Onion Leeks as Intercrop ……………………………………………...
4

Management in an Intercrop Combination …………………………….
5

Importance of Organic Fertilizer ………………………………………
5
MATERIALS AND METHODS ……………………………………………….
7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ………………………………………………..
14

Climatic Data ………………………………………………………….
14

Soil Chemical Properties ………………………………………………
15

Plant Survival ………………………………………………………….
16
Plant
Vigor
…………………………………………………………….
19

Canopy Cover ………………………………………………………….
20

Plant Height ……………………………………………………………
23

Leaf Miner Incidence ………………………………………………….
24
ii

---

Late
Blight
…………………………………………………………….
25
Haulm
Weight
…………………………………………………………
26

Percent Hills Harvested ………………………………………………..
30
Number
of
Marketable and Non-Marketable
Tubers Per Plot ………………………………………………………...
33

Weight of Marketable and Non-Marketable
Tubers Per Plot ………………………………………………………..
36


Total Yield Per Plot ……………………………………………………
39

Computed Yield Tons Per Hectare …………………………………….
39

Harvest Index ………………………………………………………….
40

Yield of Bush Beans and Onion
Leeks Per Plot ………………………………………………………….
42


Return on Cash Expense ………………………………………………
43
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ………………
44
Summary
………………………………………………………………
44
Conclusions
……………………………………………………………
45
Recommendation
……………………………………………………… 46
LITERATURE CITED …………………………………………………………
47
APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………….
49

iii

---

INTRODUCTION


Potato
(Solanum tuberosum L.) is an important agricultural crop in terms of
nutritional and economic value (FRLD, 1995). In fact, the potato tuber contains protein,
minerals and vitamins. Potato production also provides a high profit to the farmers due to
its many uses. Potatoes may be used as substitute for rice, source of starch, animal feeds,
chips and other derivatives (CIP, 1984).

As agricultural modernization progressed, potatoes are grown under conventional
farming where excessive cultivation, use of chemicals and synthetic fertilizers are
practiced. Such practices often lead to reduced soil productivity, loss of organic matter,
growing pest resistance to pesticides, low yield and others.

Potato intercropping might be an alternative solution to help alleviate such
problems. Intercropping is the growing of two or more crops simultaneously in alternate
rows in the same field. It may provide higher yield, reduced soil erosion and degradation,
and lesser pest and disease incidence. In other countries, potatoes were intercropped with
Faba beans and corn. As a result, the potatoes had higher yield (Roder et al., 1992).
Thus, intercropping of potatoes in Benguet might be worthwhile to study.

Furthermore, potatoes which are organically grown may also help in the build-up
of soil fertility, reduction of pest and disease incidence, increased yield and profit.
However, varieties suitable to organic farming are not yet identified. Thus, evaluation
and selection of the appropriate variety must be considered for a profitable farming
enterprise.


Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

2

The study was conducted to:
1. identify the most suitable cropping system for potato under organic
production;
2. determine the best potato entry that can be grown organically under La
Trinidad condition;
3. determine the interaction between the potato entries and different cropping
systems; and
4. determine the economic benefit of growing different potato entries organically
and intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks.
The study was conducted at Benguet State University, Balili, La Trinidad,
Benguet from November 2006 to February 2007.













Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Description of Intercropping

Intercropping is the growing of two or more crops simultaneously in alternate
rows or separate rows on the same field. It is practiced to avoid total crop failure, to
maximize productivity, and to supply the need of the farm family (Gupta, 1986).

Intercropping is one way of conserving natural resources, improving soil fertility,
and protecting the land from soil erosion. A good cropping system also make more
efficient use of the environment, considering that space, light, moisture and nutrients are
available anytime (Beets, 1982).

Effects of Intercropping

Intercropping either onion or garlic in between double rows of potato did not
significantly affect the growth and yield of potato. Moreover, higher return per peso
invested was obtained and less infestation of insect was observed (Mangaser et al., 1985).

Intercropping potato with corn or cowpea, had significantly reduced the
marketable yield of potato. This unfavorable effect obtained was caused by complete
shading of the intercrop used (Mangaser et al., 1985).

Generally, individual crop yield decreased when intercropped, but total
productivity is higher than monoculture. Total dry matter production is closely related to
leaf area and the dry matter accumulation per unit leaf area of intercropped corn and rice
(Gupta, 1986).

Intercropping two or more crops does not only increase income but also accounts
much in reducing or controlling insect and disease in the main crop. In addition, the yield
of potato was not affected by the different intercrops (e.g. celery, lettuce, onion leeks, and
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

4
carrot) due to the larger canopy, longer stem as well as its root system. As an example,
intercropping lettuce and onion leeks with potato has the highest yield; less yield was
obtained from onion leeks only (Fernandez, 1981).

Intercropping techniques can maximize production per unit area per year.
Multiple cropping accompanied by proper fertilizer application will result in more
efficient use of land area and sunlight, consequently greater total outputs (Bautista,
1983).

Legumes as Intercrop

Legumes are good for intercropping purposes despite the low nutrient
consumption. In addition, legumes supply nitrogen to the soil because it is associated
with nitrogen-fixing bacteria.

Legumes as intercrop can capture light that filters down through the canopy to
shade the ground. The shading discourages weeds from growing (Bautista, 1983).

Onion Leeks as Intercrop

Onion leeks (Allium fistolum L.) is a widely grown vegetable that belongs to the
genus Alium. Almost all the parts of plant is strongly flavored and has a sharp odor. The
bulb does not develop and the neck of the bulbous root remains thick according to Dow
(1984) as cited by Aya-os (2003). It may be propagated by divisions of the bulb or by
seeds.

Onion leeks ranks as one of the world’s most popular food cooked and dehydrated
(Hudges, 1990).

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

5
Management in an Intercrop Combination

Many combination of crops have been grown or experimented as mixed or relay
intercrops. Some of these include sunflowers grown with black lentils, wheat with flax
and others that thrive in many places (Toyan, 2003).

Farmers do combination of crops especially with the limited area. Mixed
cropping usually done in high land includes strawberry grown with onions and others
(Toyan, 2003).

Planning fertilization of intercrops can be challenging, as the full needs of both
crops must be met. Generally, there is little information available on how to go about
this. One possibility would be to ask for soil test for each crop separately, then formulate
a recommendation that will cover the needs of both crops to be grown. Such
recommendations are generally 10% to 30% higher than rates for individual crops
(Thorne, 1979).

Weed and pest needs in intercrop will likely be different from those in
monocropping. Some disease incidence, such as a soybean or mungbean rust, may
increase when aggravated with high corn population and over fertilization. In many
cases, insect pest population is lower when two or more crops are grown together
(Altiere, 1994).

Importance of Organic Fertilizer

White (2004) as cited by Balas (2006) states that organic production is a food
production system which relies on the use of crop residues, animal and green manures,
legumes, crop rotation and biological pest control to maintain soil productivity, supply
nutrients and to control insects and diseases and weeds.
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

6

Organic manure can increase the proportion of water stable aggregates and
increase water holding capacity of the soil. The addition of organic manure can also
counteract the harmful effect of continuous use of inorganic fertilizers on soil bulk
density. The improved physical condition of soils resulting from the addition of organic
matter may increase crop yield as compared to using the same rates of inorganic fertilizer
alone (Pears, 2005).

Organic material addition also increases soil cation exchange capacity. An
increase in total C is noticed especially in flooded soils, while an increase in potentially
available N can be expected with the application of organic matter. Phosphorous
availability is increased by organic manure, which are also good sources of
micronutrients (Eusebio, 2001). Moreover, soil fed in this way tends to produce healthier
plants that are better able to withstand attack from pest and disease, or have much better
chance of recovery (Pears, 2005).

Green manures are plants grown to improve the soil, rather than for food or
ornament. The beneficial characteristics include N-fixing, dense foliage for weed
suppression and or penetrative roots, ideal for opening up heavy soil and improving light
soils (Pears, 2005).

Organic fertilizer can be used where necessary to supply additional nutrients to
the soil, other mineral-based compounds can be used to change the pH of the soil.
Organic gardening also emphasizes on soil health and our own health (Pears, 2005).




Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

7
MATERIALS AND METHODS


An area of 315m2 was cleaned, cultivated and divided into three blocks
representing three replications (Figure 1). Each block consisted of 21 plots measuring 1
x 5 m2. Each plot was planted with potato tuberlets previously produced from a
greenhouse.

The treatments were laid out using split-plot design as follows:

Main plot: (Cropping Systems)
CODE
CROPPING
SYSTEM

CS0
Potato
alone

CS1

Potato + Bush bean

CS2

Potato + Onion leaks
Sub plot: (Potato Entries)
CODE
ENTRY SOURCE

PA1
13.1.1
CIP,
Peru

PA2 387021.17
(96.06
CIP,
Peru

PA3
573275 CIP,
Peru

PA4
5.19.2.2 Philippines

PA5
676089 CIP,
Peru

PA6


Ganza


CIP, Peru
PA7
Granola Germany


One tuberlet per hill was planted at a distance of 30 cm x 30 cm between rows
and hills. Bush bean seeds and onion, on the other hand, were planted in between rows of
potato as shown in the diagram:
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

8















Figure 1. Overview of the area at Balili, La Trinidad








Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

9
Legend: x – Potato



O – Bush bean or onion
Illustration:







30 cm

X
X
X
X




O

O

O


30 cm
X
X
X
X

The plants were equally applied with compost. All cultural management such as
irrigation, hilling-up, pest control, and weeding were employed for better plant growth.

The data gathered were the following:
I. Potato
A. Growth Performance
1. Plant survival (%). The number of plants that survived was taken 30 days
after planting and computed using the formula:
Number of surviving plants


% Survival=



X 100



Total number of plants sown

2. Plant vigor. This was taken at 30, 45, 60 and 70 days after planting (DAP)
using the CIP rating scale (Palamor et al., 1994):
SCALE DESCRIPTION



REMARKS
1
Plants are weak with few stems and leaves;
Poor vigor
very
pale

2
Plants are weak with few thin stems and leaves:
Less vigor
pale


3
Better than less vigor



Vigorous

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

10


4
Plants are moderately strong with robust

Moderately vigorous


stem and leaves; light green in color


5
Plants are strong with robust stems, leaves;
Highly vigorous


leaves are light to dark green in color

3. Canopy cover. This was gathered at 30, 45, 60 and 70 DAP using a wooden
frame measuring 120 x 60 cm having equally-sized 12 x 16 grids. Grids covered with
effective leaves were counted.
4. Height maturity (cm). The height of the plants were measured before harvest
using ten sample plants per plot. Plants were measured from the base to the tip of the
tallest shoot.
B. Pest and Disease Incidence
1. Leaf miner incidence. This was recorded by observing the appearance of leaf
miner at 30, 40, 60 and 75 DAP using the following scale (CIP, 2001):
SCALE DESCRIPTION


REMARKS
1
Less than 20% of plants per plot infected
Highly resistant


2
21 – 40% of plants per plot infected
Moderately resistant


3
41 – 60% of plants per plot infected
Susceptible


4
61 – 80% of plants per plot infected
Moderately susceptible




5
81 – 100% of plants per plot infected
Very susceptible

2. Late blight incidence. Late blight was observed during the growth stage of the
plant at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP using the following rating scale (Henfling, 1987):



Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

11
BLIGHT
CIP SCALE
DESCRIPTION
(%)
0
1
No late blight observable



Traces - < 5
2
Late blight present. Maximum 10 lesions per plant.



5 - < 15
3
Plants look healthy, but lesions are easily seen at
closer distance. Maximum foliage area affected by
lesions or destroyed corresponds to no more than 20
leaflets



15 - < 35
4
Late blight easily seen on most plants. About 25% of
foliage is covered with lesions or destroyed.



35 - < 65
5
Plot looks green; however, all plants are affected.
Lower leaves are dead. About half the foliage of the
plants destroyed.



65 - < 85
6
Plot looks green with brown flecks. About 75% of
each plant is affected. Leaves of the lower half of the
plants destroyed.



85 - < 95
7
Plot neither predominantly green nor brown. Only top
leaves are green. Many stems have large lesions.



95 - < 100
8
Plot is brown-colored. A few top leaves still have
green areas. Most have lesions or are dead.



100
9
All leaves and stems dead

Description: 1 – Highly resistant; 2-3 Resistant; 4-5 Moderately resistant; 6-7 Moderately
susceptible; 8-9 Susceptible






C. Yield and Yield Components
1. Number and weight of marketable tubers per plot (kg). All tubers with
marketable quality were counted and weighed.
2. Number and weight of non-marketable tubers per plot (kg). All tubers that
were malformed, damaged by pest and disease, injured with greening etc. were counted
and weighed.
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

12
3. Total yield per plot (kg). The total weight of marketable and non-marketable
tubers were taken.
4. Computed yield (ton/ha). This was computed using the formula:
Total yield per plot
Yield
(tons/ha)
=
X
10,000



Plot
size
(m2)

D. Return on cash expense. This was computed by dividing the net profit over the
total cost of production multiplied by 100.
Net Profit



ROCE =


X 100




Total cost of production

E. Chemical properties of the soil. The pH, organic matter, nitrogen, phosphorus
and potassium of the soil were gathered before planting and after harvesting through soil
analysis at the Bureau of Soils, Pacdal, Baguio City.
F. Meteorological data. The temperature, relative humidity and rainfall of the area
were taken from Benguet State University PAG-ASA.
II. Bush Bean
1. Weight of marketable pods per plot (kg). All pods without damage were
weighed during harvest time.
2. Weight of non-marketable pods (kg). Weight of pods which were short,
abnormal, over matured and damaged by pest and diseased were taken.
3. Total yield per plot (kg). Total weight of pods harvested per plot was
measured.
III. Onion Leeks
1. Weight of suitable planting materials per plot (kg). All leaves with
marketable quality were weighed during harvest time.
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

13
2. Weight of unsuitable planting materials per plot (kg). All leaves with
marketable quality were weighed during harvest time.
3. Total weight of planting materials per plot (kg). Weight of suitable and
unsuitable planting materials were taken.




















Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

14
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Meteorological Data

The temperature in the site, which ranged from 18.10C to 20.60C was well within
the optimum temperature range (17-220C) for potatoes (NPRCRTC, N. D.).

The relative humidity ranged from 77 to 80% during the conduct of the study
(Table 1). The rainfall also ranged from 0.03 mm to 2.5 mm. Highest rainfall was
observed during the months of November to December. Sunshine duration was highest
in February and lowest in November.

These environmental factors may greatly affect the yield of potatoes. For
instance, relative humidity must be 86% or lower for better yield and tuber development.
Light intensity must also be enough to positively affect photosynthesis and yield of
potatoes (NPRCRTC, N.D.).

Table 1. Temperature, relative humidity, rainfall amount, and sunshine duration at Balili,
La Trinidad from November to February

MONTH TEMPERATURE
RELATIVE
RAINFALL
SUNSHINE
0C
HUMIDITY
AMOUNT
DURATION
MAX MIN MEAN
(%)
(mm)
(minutes)
November 23.5
15.2
19.4
80 2.5
381.4
December 24.5
16.6
20.55
78 2.5
387.0
January 23.9
13.9
18.9
77
0.03
386.6
February 23.6
12.6
18.1
77 0
521.6
MEAN 23.8
16.33
20.07
78
1.26
419.15




Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

15
Soil Chemical Properties

Soil analysis is very important to determine the ideal texture and physical nature
of the soil that may influence the yield, shape and general appearance of the tubers
(NPRCRTC, N. D.).

The relative high pH of the soil might be attributed to the organic matter present
in the soil (Table 2). Ample supply of organic matter helps to keep the soil loose, enables
roots of crops to penetrate, and increase soil water holding capacity (NPRCRTC, N. D.).
Nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium are required for growing potatoes. Potato
is best grown in soils with 120-120-120 NPK kg/ha and a pH of 5.5 – 6.0 (NPRCRTC, N.
D.). The soil in Balili have low amounts of N and P which may be supplied with organic
fertilizers such as compost to effect maximum yield.

Table 2. Initial chemical properties of the soil at Balili, La Trinidad
pH ORGANIC
NITROGEN
PHOSPHOROUS POTASSIUM
MATTER
(%)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(%)
6.72 2.5 0.125 90 312

Plant Survival

Effect of cropping system. No significant differences were observed on the plant
survival of potatoes planted under different cropping systems. Plant survival was highest
in potatoes intercropped with onions (Table 3).

Effect of potato entry. Highly significant differences were observed in the plant
survival of the potato entries used. Entry 13.1.1 had the highest survival but comparable
with entries 5.19.2.2 and 96-06. Plant survival may be affected by factors such as
emergence and sprout size. Small sprouts at planting may delay emergence from the
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

16
ground (CIP, 1984) and thus, decrease plant survival. Entry 573275 with the lowest
survival may have emerged late.

Table 3. Plant survival of organically grown potato entries intercropped with bush beans
and onion leeks

TREATMENT
PLANT SURVIVAL (%)
30 DAP
Cropping systems (CS)



Potato alone
73


Potato + Beans
76


Potato + Onions
79


Potato entries (PE)


13.1.1
99a


96-06
87ab


573275
21c


5.19.2.2
96a


676089
77b


Ganza
77b


Granola
74b


CS x PE
**
CV(a)% 13.49
CV(b)% 13.59
Means followed by common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT





Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

17
Interaction
effect. The interaction between the cropping systems and potato
entries were highly significant in terms of plant survival (Figure 2). Entries 13.1.1 and
96-06 intercropped with bush beans and onions had the highest plant survival. Higher
plant survival might have been brought about by wider spaces between potato plants
(Gupta, 1986).



















Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

18




120



100





80




60




40




20





0

Potato
Potato + Beans
Potato + Onions


13.1.1
96-06
573275
5.19.22
676089
Ganza
Granola




Figure 2. Plant survival of organically grown potato entries intercropped with bush beans
and onion leeks


Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

19
Plant Vigor

Effect of cropping system. There were no significant differences in the plant
vigor of potatoes grown under different cropping systems at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP
(Table 4). The plants grown under different cropping systems were vigorous to
moderately vigorous.

Table 4. Plant vigor at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks


PLANT VIGOR
TREATMENT
(DAP)

30 45 60 75
Cropping systems (CS)









Potato alone
4
4
4
4





Potato + Beans
3
4
4
4





Potato + Onions
3
4
4
4





Potato entries (PE)





13.1.1
4a
5a
5a
4b





96-06
3ab
5a
5a
4b





573275
2b
3c
4b
4b





5.19.2.2
4a
5a
5a
5a




676089
3ab
4b
5a
5a





Ganza
3ab
4b
4b
4b





Granola
2b
3c
2c
0c





CS x PE
ns
ns
ns
ns
CV(a)% 20.18
10.79
8.39
38.06
CV(b)% 19.21
11.10
7.37
38.94
Means followed by common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT.
Rating Scale: 1 – Poor vigor 3 - Moderately Vigorous 5 – Highly Vigorous
2 – Less vigor 4 - Vigorous
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

20

Effect of potato entry. Highly significant differences are observed in the plant
vigor of the different entries. Entries 13.1.1, 5.19.2.2 and 676089 had consistently
moderate to high vigor. Granola, on the other hand, had less to poor vigor at 75 DAP.

High plant vigor in some entries may be due to resistance to late blight and wide
canopy. Poor vigor in Granola may be due to susceptibility to late blight.
Interaction
effect. The interaction between cropping systems and potato entries
did not significantly differ in terms of plant vigor.

Canopy Cover

Effect of cropping system. There were no significant differences obtained in the
canopy cover of the potatoes grown under different cropping systems. Wider canopy was
observed in the potatoes intercropped with beans and onion leeks at 60 and 75 DAP
(Table 5). Intercropping may widen canopy in main crops due to wider spaces
(Fernandez, 1981).
Effect of potato entry. Canopy cover among the potato entries was highly
significant. Canopy cover of all entries increased until 60 DAP but decreased at 75 DAP
which may be due to infection of late blight.

Widest canopy was also exhibited by entry 5.19.2.2 but comparable with the
canopy of entries 13.1.1 and 96-06. Wide canopy cover of these entries may indicate
resistance to late blight.

Granola with the narrowest canopy was found to be very susceptible to leafminer.
Interaction effect. There was no significant interaction observed in the canopy of
potatoes and cropping systems at 30, 45, and 60 DAP. However, significant interaction is
observed in the canopy of potatoes at 75 DAP (Figure 3). Entry 13.1.1 intercropped with
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

21
bush beans had the widest canopy. The intercrop may have served as alternative host to
leafminer and late blight thus, not affecting the canopy of the potato plants.

Table 5. Canopy cover at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks


CANOPY COVER
TREATMENT
(DAP)
30
45
60
75
Cropping systems (CS)









Potato alone
20
31
42
26





Potato + Beans
11
22
44
29





Potato + Onions
12
24
44
29





Potato entries (PE)





13.1.1
23a
38a
57ab
38ab





96-06
24a
41a
61a
39ab





573275
4b
11c
23d
15d





5.19.2.2
24a
38a
65a
44a





676089
12b
26b
47bc
34bc





Ganza
10b
19bc
40c
26c





Granola
5b
9c
10d
0e





CS x PE
ns
ns
ns
**
CV(a)%
35.99 23.40 18.45 18.93
CV(b)%
34.93 22.89 16.93 19.16
Means followed by common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT





Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

22




60



50



40




30



20




10




0


Potato
Potato + Beans
Potato + Onions


13.1.1
96-06
573275
5.19.22
676089
Ganza
Granola




Figure 3. Canopy cover at 75 DAP of organically grown potato entries intercropped with
bush beans and onion leeks
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

23
Plant Height

Effect of cropping system. There were no significant differences on the height of
potatoes grown under different cropping systems. Potatoes intercropped with beans were
the tallest, which might be due to wide canopy (Table 6).

Table 6. Height at 30 and 90 DAP of organically grown potato entries intercropped with
bush beans and onion leeks


PLANT HEIGHT
TREATMENT
(cm)
30 DAP INITIAL
90 DAP FINAL
Cropping systems (CS)





Potato alone
12.67
31.43



Potato + Beans
11.52
31.57



Potato + Onions
12.05
30.95



Potato entries (PE)



13.1.1
17.78ab
44.00ab



96-06
12.33ab
41.44bc



573275
6.8ab
33.33d



5.19.2.2
19.89a
48.44a



676089
9.56ab
36.78cd



Ganza
5.44ab
15.22e



Granola
4.33b
0.00f



CS x Pe
ns
ns



CV(a)%
25.81
9.89



CV(b)%
24.97
9.71
Means followed by common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

24

Effect of potato entry. Highly significant differences were observed among the
potato entries in terms of their height at 30 and 90 DAP. Entry 5.19.2.2 had the tallest
plant but comparable with 13.1.1. These entries had the widest canopy cover which
might have led to increased plant height.

Granola was susceptible to leafminer leading to death of some plants and absence
of final height.
Interaction
effect. Cropping systems and potato entries had no significant
interaction in terms of initial and final height.

Leaf Miner Incidence

Effect of cropping system. Plants grown under different cropping systems were
all susceptible to leafminer at 75 DAP, which might be due to varying temperatures and
relative humidity in the site.

Effect of potato entry. Entries 573275 and Ganza were moderately resistant to
leafminer at 75 DAP (Table 7). Granola was moderately resistant during the early stages
of growth but later became susceptible to leafminer. Resistance to pest in potatoes may
be attributed to their genetic characteristics.














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

25
Table 7. Leaf miner rating at 30, 45, 60, and 75 DAP of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT
LEAF MINER RATING

DAP
30
45 60 75





Cropping systems (CS)





Potato alone
1
2
2
3





Potato + Beans
1
2
2
3





Potato + Onions
1
1
2
3





Potato Entries (PE)





13.1.1
1
2
2
3





96-06
1
2
2
3





573275
1
2
2
2





5.19.2.2
1
1
2
3





676089
1
1
2
3





Ganza
1
1
2
2





Granola
2
2
2
5
Leaf miner rating scale: 1 - Highly resistant 4 – Moderately susceptible
2 – Moderately resistant 5 – Very susceptible
3 - Susceptible


Late Blight

Effect of cropping system. Potatoes grown under different cropping systems were
highly resistant to late blight (Table 8). Late blight incidence is low which might be due
to the relatively low relative humidity and rainfall during the conduct of the study.

Effect of potato entry. All of the potato entries were highly resistant except
Granola which was resistant to late blight. Resistance among the accessions might be
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

26
Table 8. Late blight infection at 60 and 75 DAP of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks


LATE BLIGHT RATING
TREATMENT
(%)
60 DAP
75 DAP



Cropping systems (CS)



Potato alone
1
1



Potato + Beans
1
2



Potato + Onions
1
1



Potato entries (PE)



13.1.1
1
1



96-06
1
1



573275
1
1



5.19.2.2
1
1



676089
1
1



Ganza
1
1



Granola
2
3
Late blight rating scale: 1 – Highly resistant 6-7 – Moderately susceptible
2-3 – Resistant 8-9 - Susceptible
4-5 – Moderately resistant


due to their genetic characteristics. Low incidence of late blight might also be due to the
application of a bio-fungicide (Virtouso) at 30 DAP.

Haulm Weight


Effect of cropping system. No significant differences were observed on the
haulm weight of potatoes grown under different cropping systems. Numerically, potato
alone had the heaviest haulms which may be attributed to higher plant density (Table 9).
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

27
Table 9. Haulm weight of organically grown potato entries intercropped with
bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT
HAULM WEIGHT
(g)


Cropping systems (CS)


Potato alone
44.40


Potato + Beans
37.97


Potato + Onions
42.21


Potato entries (PE)


13.1.1
41.88b


96-06
45.92b


573275
38.11b


5.19.2.2
70.60a


676089
52.89b


Ganza
38.20b


Granola
3.08c


CS x PE
**


CV(a)%
24.45


CV(b)%
24.37
Means followed by common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT

Effect of potato entry. Highly significant differences were observed on the haulm
weight of the different potato entries. Entry 5.19.2.2 obtained the heaviest haulms which
may be due to its wide canopy, high vigor, and resistance to leaf miner and late blight.
Granola, on the other hand was susceptible to leafminer thus low haulm weight.
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

28
Interaction
effect. The interaction between cropping systems and potato entries
was highly significant. Monocropping of 5.19.2.2 had the highest haulm weight due to
wide canopy (Figure 4).





















Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

29





100

90


80

70



60


50



40



30


20



10



0

Potato
Potato + Beans
Potato + Onions


13.1.1
96-06
573275
5.19.22
676089
Ganza
Granola



Figure 4. Haulm weight of organically grown potato entries intercropped with bush
beans and onion leeks

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

30
Percent Hills Harvested

Effect of cropping system. No significant differences were observed on the
percent hills harvested of plants grown under different cropping systems (Table 10).
Percent hills harvested was highest in potatoes intercropped with beans (90%).

Table 10. Percent hills harvested of organically grown potato entries intercropped with
bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT HILLS
HARVESTED

(%)


Cropping systems (CS)


Potato alone
84


Potato + Beans
90


Potato + Onions
89


Potato entries (PE)



13.1.1
100a


96-06
99a


573275
54b


5.19.2.2
99a


676089
98a


Ganza
99a


Granola
69b


CS x PE
**


CV(a)%
11.92

CV(b)% 11.17

Means followed by common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

31
Effect of potato entry. Entry 13.1.1 had significantly the highest percent hills
harvested but not different with the other entries except 573275 and Granola. Low
percent hills harvested may be due to poor vigor and low plant survival.
Interaction
effect. Interaction between cropping systems and potato entries was
highly significant (Figure 5). Entries 5.19.2.2 intercropped with bush beans had the
highest percent hills harvested. Intercropping of potatoes with other crops enhances
productivity due to wider canopy and better root system (Fernandez, 1981).

















Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

32




120


100



80




60




40




20





0

Potato
Potato + Beans
Potato + Onions


13.1.1
96-06
573275
5.19.22
676089
Ganza
Granola



Figure 5. Percent hills harvested of organically grown potatoes intercropped with bush
beans and onion leeks


Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

33
Number of Marketable and Non-Marketable
Tubers Per Plot


Effect of cropping system. Potato alone obtained the highest number of large,
medium, and marble-sized tubers while potato intercropped with beans had the highest
number of small tubers (Table 11). Under intercropping conditions, potato plants
produced only few and mostly small-sized tubers (Kuruppuarachchi, 1990).
No significant differences were observed on the number of non-marketable tubers
of potatoes grown as monocrop and with intercrops.

Effect of potato entry. Entry 13.1.1 significantly obtained the highest number of
XL, large, medium, and small tubers but comparable with the tubers of entries 96-06 and
5.19.2.2. High number of tubers of these entries may be due to high canopy cover, high
plant survival and resistance to leafminer and late blight. Granola which had the lowest
number of tubers, might be due to its poor vigor, narrow canopy, and susceptibility to leaf
miner and late blight.
No significant differences were observed in the number of marble-sized and non-
marketable tubers of the different entries.
Interaction effect. Interaction between cropping systems and potato entries was
not significant in terms of the number of XL, medium, marble-sized and non-marketable
tubers. Significant interaction was however observed in the number of large and small
tubers of potatoes grown as monocrop and with intercrops (Figure 6 and 7). Entry 13.1.1
grown as monocrop obtained the highest number of large tubers. This result implies that
both factors must be considered in growing potatoes with more number of tubers.


Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

34
Table 11. Number of marketable and non-marketable tubers of organically grown potato
entries intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks


MARKETABLE TUBERS
NON-MARKETABLE
TREATMENT
TUBERS
XL
L
M
S
MS







Cropping systems (CS)







Potato alone
5
14a
24a
14b
15a
20







Potato + Beans
5
10ab
9b
23a
8b
17







Potato + Onions
5
8b
12ab
12b
5b
19







Potato entries (PE)








13.1.1
9a
21a
27a
24a
16
18







96-06
7ab
14ab
21a
21a
9
28







573275
3bc
7bc
12ab
8bc
3
18







5.19.2.2
8a
13ab
19a
20ab
12
18







676089
3bc
10b
14ab
20ab
11
15







Ganza
5ab
9bc
13ab
18ab
9
21







Granola
0c
0c
0b
5c
5
12







CS x PE
ns
*
ns
**
ns
ns







CV(a)%
21.19 48.29 44.12 41.75 28.18
41.75







CV(b)%
24.66 49.32 28.49 41.11 22.24
34.25
Means followed by common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Legend: XL – extra large

L – large

M – medium

S – small

MS – marble-sized



Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

35

35
30

25

20

15

10
5
0
Potato
Potato + Beans
Potato + Onions

13.1.1
96-06
573275
5.19.22
676089
Ganza
Granola

Figure 6. Number of large tubers of organically grown potatoes intercropped with
bush beans and onion leeks


35

30

25

20

15

10
5
0
Potato
Potato + Beans
Potato + Onions

13.1.1
96-06
573275
5.19.22
676089
Ganza
Granola

Figure 7. Number of small tubers of organically grown potatoes intercropped with
bush beans and onion leeks

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

36
Weight of Marketable and Non-Marketable
Tubers Per Plot


Effect of cropping system. No significant differences were observed on the
weight of XL, medium, small, marble-sized, and non-marketable tubers of potatoes
grown as monocrop and with intercrops (Table 12). However, potato alone significantly
obtained the highest weight of large tubers but comparable with the tubers of potato
intercropped with bush beans. Fig. 8 shows the tubers harvested from the different potato
entries.
Effect of potato entry. Entries 5.19.2.2, 13.1.1 and 96-06 significantly obtained
the heaviest XL and medium tubers (Figure 8). Granola obtained the lowest size of
tubers probably due to its susceptibility to leafminer and poor vigor.
No significant differences were observed in the weight of small, marble-sized,
and non-marketable tubers of the different accessions.
Interaction
effect. No significant interaction was noted between the cropping
systems and potato accessions on the weight of marketable and non-marketable tubers.


















Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

37

Table 12. Weight of marketable and non-marketable tubers of organically grown potato
entries intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks


MARKETABLE TUBERS
NON-
TREATMENT
(kg/plot)
MARKETABLE
TUBERS
XL
L
M
S
MS
(kg/plot)
Cropping systems






(CS)







Potato alone
0.46
0.76a
0.82
0.56
0.19
0.08







Potato + Beans
0.43
0.66ab
0.49
0.25
0.08
0.07







Potato + Onions
0.50
0.47b
0.45
0.36
0.06
0.07







Potato entries (PE)








13.1.1
0.65ab
1.08a
0.88a
0.43
0.17
0.11







96-06
0.74ab
0.90ab
0.91a
0.50
0.13
0.11







573275
0.20ab
0.34cd
0.20b
0.16
0.04
0.12







5.19.2.2
0.80a
0.97ab
0.90a
0.55
0.28
0.04







676089
0.37bcd 0.63abc
0.77a
0.41
0.10
0.05







Ganza
0.48abc 0.50bc
0.45ab
0.37
0.09
0.05







Granola
0d
0d
0.10b
0.05
0.03
0.02







CS x PE
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns







CV(a)%
36.19
45.01
25.80
27.33
38.69
20.94







CV(b)%
34.15
45.89
22.34
24.19
28.23
23.12
Means followed by common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Legend: XL – extra large

L – large

M – medium

S – small

MS – marble sized


Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

38












































Figure 8. Potato tubers of the different entries separated into different sizes
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

39
Total Yield Per Plot

Effect of cropping system. Potato alone significantly obtained the highest
computed yield per plot but comparable with the yield of potatoes intercropped with bush
beans (Table 13). High yield under these cropping systems is due to the higher weight of
large and medium tubers. The bush beans may have also contributed to the nitrogen
requirement of the potato plants, thus producing comparable yield.

Effect of potato entry. Entries 13.1.1, 96-06, and 5.19.2.2 significantly obtained
the highest yield per plot. Lowest yield was obtained from Granola due to its
susceptibility to leafminer and low number of tubers at harvest. Variations in yield are
related to genetic characteristics of the entries (Midmore, 1990).
Interaction
effect. The interaction between cropping systems and potato entries
did not significantly affect total yield.

Computed Yield Tons Per Hectare

Effect of cropping system. Potato alone significantly obtained the highest
computed yield per hectare due to higher number and weight of marketable tubers (Table
13). Potatoes intercropped with onions had the lowest yield per hectare.

Effect of potato entry. Highly significant differences were observed in the
computed yield of the different potato entries. Entries 5.19.2.2, 13.1.1 and 96-06
obtained high computed yields per hectare due to their high total yield per plot, resistance
to leafminer and late blight.
Interaction
effect. Interaction between the cropping systems and potato entries
did not significantly affect computed yield per hectare.

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

40
Table 13. Total yield and computed yield of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT
TOTAL YIELD
COMPUTED YIELD
(kg/plot)
(t/ha)
Cropping systems (CS)





Potato alone
2.81a
5.62a



Potato + Beans
2.00ab
4.01ab



Potato + Onions
1.80b
3.60b



Potato entries (PE)




13.1.1
3.30a
6.61a



96-06
3.37a
6.75a



573275
0.97cd
1.95cd



5.19.2.2
3.51a
7.02a



676089
2.30ab
4.60b



Ganza
1.87bc
3.73bc



Granola
0.10d
0.21d



CS x PE
ns
ns
CV(a)% 36.19
24.90
CV(b)% 34.15
25.14
Means followed by common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT


Harvest Index

Effect of cropping system. No significant differences were obtained in the
harvest index of potatoes grown as monocrop and with intercrops. Potato alone obtained
the highest harvest index (Table 14).


Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

41
Table 14. Harvest index of organically grown potato entries intercropped with bush beans
and onion leeks

TREATMENT HARVEST
INDEX
Cropping systems (CS)



Potato alone
0.19


Potato + Beans
0.17


Potato + Onions
0.18


Potato entries (PE)

13.1.1
0.20ab


96-06
0.20ab


573275
0.15bc


5.19.2.2
0.24a


676089
0.18b


Ganza
0.16bc


Granola
0.11c


CS x PA
ns
CV(a)% 8.29
CV(b)% 8.30
Means followed by common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT


Effect of potato entry. Significant differences were observed in the harvest index
of the potato entries used. Entry 5.19.2.2 obtained the highest harvest index but
comparable to the harvest index of 13.1.1 and 96-06. High harvest index of the entries
may be related to their high yield. Granola on the other hand, had the lowest harvest
index.
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

42
Interaction
effect. There was no significant interaction observed between the
cropping system and potato entries on harvest index.

Yield of Bush Beans and Onion Leeks Per Plot
Bush
beans. Yield of bush beans per plot was low due to the attack of insects
such as white flies, beetles, leaf miner and bean rust (Table 15). Bush bean may,
however, be a good intercrop to potatoes due to the nitrogen it might contribute and the
comparable yield of potatoes obtained (Table 13). The bush bean crop may also provide
the farmers with a second marketable commodity that would help them diversify their
production and meet nutritional requirements of their main crop (Beets, 1982).
Onion
leeks. All onion leeks obtained were suitable as planting materials.
However, using onion leeks as intercrops may not be best due to the low yield obtained in
potatoes.

Table 15. Weight of marketable and non-marketable pods of bush beans per plot grown
organically


YIELD (kg)

INTERCROP
MARKETABLE
NON-MARKETABLE
TOTAL
Bushbeans 1.20 0.72 1.92
Onions 2.05
0.00
2.05
CV(a)% 22.95
18.60
CV(b)% 17.22
0.00








Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

43
Return on Cash Expense

Effect of cropping system. Potatoes intercropped with beans obtained the highest
ROCE while potato alone obtained the lowest (Table 16). The lower yield in
intercropped potatoes is supplemented by the sales from the intercrop.

Effect of potato entry. Entry 5.19.2.2 obtained the highest ROCE due to high
yield of the plants. Entries 12.1.1 and 96-06 also obtained high ROCE while Granola
obtained the lowest and negative ROCE. Negative ROCE in Granola is due to its low
yield.

Table 16. Return on cash expense of organically grown potato entries intercropped with
bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT
TOTAL YIELD
VARIABLE
GROSS
NET
ROCE
OF
COSTS (Php)
SALE
INCOME
(%)
MARKETABLE
(Php)
(Php)
TUBERS
Cropping





systems (CS)

Potato alone
2.79
91.13
111.60
20.47
22.46
Potato + beans
1.91
66.24
100.40
33.46
49.99
Potato + onions
1.84
65.03
94.10
29.07
44.70






Potato entries





(PE)

13.1.1 3.21
91.13
128.40
37.27
40.90
96-06 3.18
91.13
127.20
36.07
35.58
573275 0.94
91.13
37.60
-53.53
-58.74
519.2.2 3.50
91.13
140.00
48.87
53.63
676089 2.28
91.13
91.20
0.07
0.08
Ganza
1.89
91.13
75.60
15.53
-17.04
Granola 0.18
91.13
7.20
83.93
-92.10
Prevailing price:

Potato = Php 40.00/kg

Beans = Php 20.00/kg

Onion leeks = Php 10.00/kg

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

44
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

Summary

The study was conducted to identify the most suitable cropping system for
potatoes under organic production; determine the best potato entry that can be grown
organically under La Trinidad, Benguet condition; determine the interaction between
potato entries and cropping systems; and determine the economic benefit of growing
different potato entries organically and intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks.
Results of the study showed that the different cropping systems did not
significantly affect plant survival, canopy cover, plant height, haulm weight, percent hills
harvested, number and weight of XL, medium, small and marble-sized potato tubers,
number and weight of non-marketable tubers, and harvest index. Potatoes grown as
monocrop and with intercrops were all susceptible to leafminer at 75 DAP but resistant to
late blight.

Significant differences among the cropping systems exist in the number of large,
medium, small and marble-sized tubers, weight of marketable tubers, total yield per plot,
and computed yield per hectare.

Potato intercropped with bush beans gained the highest ROCE while the lowest
ROCE was obtained from potato alone.

Among the seven potato entries, significant differences were observed in plant
survival, plant vigor, canopy cover, plant height, haulm weight, percent hills harvested,
number of XL, large, medium and small tubers, weight of XL, large, medium tubers, total
yield per plot, computed per hectare yield, and harvest index.
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

45

All potato entries were highly resistant to late blight except for granola which was
only resistant to late blight. Most of the potato entries were susceptible to very
susceptible to leafminer except entries 573275 and Ganza which were moderately
resistant at 75 DAP.

Potato entries 5.19.2.2, 13.1.1, and 96-06 had the highest total and computed yield
and ROCE.
Significant interaction between cropping systems and potato entries were noted in
plant survival, canopy cover at 75 DAP, haulm weight, percent hills harvested, and
number of large and small marketable tubers.

Conclusions

Based on the results, potato alone produced the highest yield but comparable with
the yield of potatoes intercropped with beans. Bush beans might be a good intercrop to
potato under organic production.

Among potato entries, 5.19.2.2, 13.1.1 and 96-06 were the best performers due to
their high yield and resistance to leafminer and late blight.

The best treatment combination based on yield and resistance to pest is
monocropping of entries 5.19.2.2, 13.1.1 and 96-06.

In terms of economic benefit, organic production of potatoes intercropped with
bush beans is best to obtain high ROCE. The yield of intercropped potatoes is
supplemented with the income from the intercrop, thus resulting to higher ROCE.




Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

46
Recommendation

Based on the conditions of the study, monocropping of potatoes is recommended.
Among the potato entries, 5.19.2.2, 13.1.1 and 96-06 are recommended for high yield and
resistance to pest under organic production.

In terms of economic benefit, however, intercropping of potatoes with bush beans
is recommended for higher ROCE.


















Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

47
LITERATURE CITED

ALTIERE, M. A. 1994. Biodiversity and pest management in Agro-ecosystem. Haworth
Press, Inc., New York. P 63.

AYA-OS, R. D. 2003. Yield performance and profitability of celery intercropped with
green onions. BS Thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 3-
4, 10-11.

BALAS, M. B. 2006. Correlation of morphological and marketable in potato genotypes
grown organically. BS Thesis . Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
P. 4.

BAUTISTA, O. K., VAL MAYOR, H. V., TABORA, P. C. and R. E. ESPINO. 1983.
Introduction to tropical horticulture. UPLB, Laguna. Pp. 195-198.

BEETS W. C. 1982. Multiple cropping and tropical farming system. Grower Publishing
Company. England. Pp. 17, 37.

CIP. 2001. Facts Sheets. International Potato Center (CIP). Pp. 10-11.

EUSEBIO, J. A. 2001. Food security integrated farming system. JMC Press. Quezon
City. Pp. 17, 37

FERNANDEZ, L. 1981. Intercropping of potato, lettuce, green onion, celery and carrot.
BS Thesis . MSAC, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 4-5.

FOUNDATION FOR RESOURCE LINKAGE AND DEVELOPMENT, INC (FRLD).
1995. The potato: FRLD, DA, ASAP, USAID. Pp. 1,5,30.

GUPTA, P. C. 1986. Upland rice: A global perspective. IRRI. UPLB, Laguna, P. 63.

HENFLING, J. W. 1987. Technical Infobulletin 4: Late blight of potato – 1987. CIP,
Peru.

HUDGES, H. A. 1990. Conservation farming. Moline, Illinois. P. 135.

INTERNATIONAL POTATO CENTER (CIP). 1984. Potatoes for the developing world.
Lima, Peru. Pp. 15-20.

KURUPPUARACHCHI, D. P. 1990. Intercropped potato: Effect of shade growth and
tuber yield in the North Western Regosol belt of Sri Lanka. Agricultural Research
Station, Kalpitiya, Sri Lanka. 25:64-65

MANGASER, V. T., VALDEZ, J. P., OREDINA, M. C. and M. C. MENGUETA. 1985.
Influence of intercropping system on the growth and yield characteristic of
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

48
lowland potato. Don Mariano Marcos Memorial Sate University, Bacnotan, La
Union. II (I):2

MIDMORE, D. J. 1990. A review of potato intercropping practice in Western Hubei,
China. 25:41-50.

NPRCRTC, N. D. Guide to Potato Production, Post Harvest Handling and Utilization in
the Philippines. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 12, 15.

PALAMOR, M. K. and S. Talatala. 1994. Standard Procedure and Guidelines for
National Cooperative Testing (NCT). National Seed Industry Council,
Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant Industry. P. 29.

PEARS, P. 2005. Radales illustrated encyclopedia of organic gardening. Dorling
Kindersley Inc., London, New York, Munich, Melbourne and Delhi. Pp. 15, 39-
56.

RODER, W., ANDERHALDEN, E., GURUNG, P. and P. DUKPA. 1992. Potato
intercropping system with maize and faba bean. Potato Association of America
Orono, Maine, USA. 69 (3): 195

THORNE, D. A. 1979. Soil, water and production. AVI Publishing Co., Inc.
Connecticut. P. 10

TOYAN, F. D. 2003. Performance of peanut intercrop with corn, sweetpotato and onion.
BS Thesis . Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 18-20.





















Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

APPENDICES


APPENDIX TABLE 1. Plant survival of organically grown potato entries intercropped
with bush beans and onion leeks (%)

TREATMENT REPLICATION
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
93
100
100
293 98
PE2
87
90
77
254 85
PE3
13
17
60
90 30
PE4
97
97
97
291 97
PE5
73
73
80
226 75
PE6 77
77
67
221
74
PE7 50
30
70
150
50
Sub - Total
490
484
551
1525
509
CS1
PE1
100
100
100
300 100
PE2
94
88
94
276 92
PE3
25
13
13
51 17
PE4
100
94
100
294 98
PE5
75
81
81
237 79
PE6 81
63
75
219
73
PE7 69
81
75
225
75
Sub - Total
544
520
538
1602
534
CS2
PE1
100
100
100
300 100
PE2
88
94
75
257 86
PE3
13
0
38
51 17
PE4
100
100
81
281 94
PE5
69
88
69
226 75
PE6 75
88
88
251
97
PE7 94
100
100
294
98
Sub – Total
539
570
551
1160
567
GRAND TOTAL
1583
1574
1640
4287










Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

50
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2
PE1
98
100
100
298 99a
PE2
85
92
86
263 87ab
PE3
30
17
17
64 21c
PE4
97
98
94
289 96a
PE5
75
79
75
229 77b
PE6 74
73
97
244
77b
PE7 50
75
98
223
74b
TOTAL 509
534
567
1610
MEAN 73
76
79

76


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
140.41
70.21







Cropping
2
436.79
218.40
2.38ns
6.94 18.00
System (CS)







Error (a)
4
366.64
91.66
Potato Entries






(PE)
6
36641.87
6106.98
57.31**
2.36
3.35







CS x PE
12
3736.98
311.42
2.92**
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
3836.29
106.56
TOTAL 62
45158.98




C.V. (A)% = 13.49 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 13.59 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

51
APPENDIX TABLE 2. Plant vigor at 30 DAP of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
CS0
PE1
5
5
5
15
5
PE2
5
4
3
12
4
PE3
2
3
3
8
3
PE4
5
5
4
14
5
PE5
4
4
3
11
4
PE6 3
4
4
11

4
PE7
2
3
3
8
3
Sub - Total
26
28
25
79

28
CS1
PE1
4
4
4
12
4
PE2
3
3
3
9
3
PE3
2
2
3
7
2
PE4
5
4
3
12
4
PE5
3
4
3
10
3
PE6
3
4
3
10

3

PE7
3
2
2
7

2

Sub - Total
23
23
21
67

21

CS2
PE1
4
4
4
12
4
PE2
4
3
3
10
3
PE3
2
0
3
5
2
PE4
5
4
3
12
4
PE5
3
2
3
8
3
PE6 4
3
3
10

3
PE7
3
2
2
7

2
Sub – Total
25
18
21
64

21
GRAND TOTAL
74
69
67
210














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

52
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2


13

PE1
5
4
4
4a


10

PE2
4
3
3
3ab


7

PE3
3
2
2
2b


13

PE4
5
4
4
4a


10

PE5
4
3
3
3ab


10

PE6
4
3
3
3ab


7

PE7
3
2
2
2b
TOTAL 28
21
21
70


MEAN 4
3
3


3


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
1.24
0.62






Cropping
2
6.00
3.00
3.60ns
6.94 18.00
System (CS)







Error (a)
4
3.33
0.83







Potato entries
6
34.67
5.78
14.09**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
2.00
0.17
0.41ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
14.76
0.41
TOTAL
62
62.00




C.V. (A)% = 20.18 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 19.21 ns – not significant

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

53
APPENDIX TABLE 3. Plant vigor at 45 DAP of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
5 5 5 15 5
PE2
5 5 4 14 5
PE3
4 3 4 11 4
PE4
5 5 5 15 5
PE5
4 4 4 12 4
PE6
5 5 4 14 5
PE7
3 3 3

9 3
Sub - Total 31
30
29
90
31
CS1
PE1
5 5 5 15 5
PE2
5 4 4 13 4
PE3
3 4 3 10 3
PE4
5 4 4 14 5
PE5
5 3 5 13 4
PE6
4 4 4 12 4
PE7
3 3 3

9 3
Su5b - Total 30
27
28
85
28
CS2
PE1
5 4 5 14 5
PE2
5 5 4 14 5
PE3
3 3 4 10 3
PE4
5 5 5 15 5
PE5
4 4 4 12 4
PE6
4 4 4 12 4
PE7
3 3 3

9 3
Sub – Total 29
28
29
86
29
GRAND TOTAL
90
85
86
261














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

54
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
5
5
5
15
5a






PE2
5
4
5
14
5a






PE3
4
3
3
10
3c






PE4
5
5
5
15
5a






PE5
4
4
4
12
4b






PE6
5
4
4
13
4b






PE7
3
3
3
8
3c
TOTAL
31
28
29
88

MEAN 4 4 4
4


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
0.67
0.33
Cropping






System (CS)
2
0.67
0.33
3.5ns
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
0.38
0.10







Potato entries
6
26.38
4.40
20.78**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
2.00
0.17
0.78ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
7.62
0.21
TOTAL
62
37.71




C.V. (A)% = 10.79 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 11.10 ns – not significant

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

55
APPENDIX TABLE 4. Plant vigor at 60 DAP of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
5 5 5 15 5
PE2
5 5 4 14 5
PE3
4 4 4 12 4
PE4
5 5 5 15 5
PE5
5 5 5 15 5
PE6
5 5 4 14 5
PE7
2 2 2

6 2
Sub - Total 31
31
29
91
31
CS1
PE1
5 5 5 15 5
PE2
5 5 4 14 5
PE3
4 4 3 11 4
PE4
5 5 5 15 5
PE5
5 5 5 15 5
PE6
5 4 4 13 4
PE7
2 2 2
6 2
Sub - Total 31
30
28
89
30
CS2
PE1
5 5 5 15 5
PE2
5 5 5 15 5
PE3
4 4 5 13 4
PE4
5 5 5 15 5
PE5
4 5 5 14 5
PE6
4 4 4 12 4
PE7
2 2 3
7 2
Sub – Total 29
30
32
91
30
GRAND TOTAL
91
91
89
271














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

56
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
5
5
5
15
5a






PE2
5
5
5
15
5a






PE3
4
4
4
12
4b






PE4
5
5
5
15
5a






PE5
5
5
5
15
5a






PE6
5
4
4
13
4b






PE7
2
2
2
6
2c
TOTAL
31
30
30
91

MEAN 4 4 4
4


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
0.13
0.06
Cropping





System (CS)
2
0.13
0.06
0.16ns
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
1.59
0.40







Potato entries
6
57.94
9.66
2.36**
2.36
3.35
(PE)






CS x PE
12
1.87
0.16
2.03
2.75




1.20ns


Error (b)
36
3.62
0.10
TOTAL
62
65.27




C.V. (A)% = 8.39 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 7.37 ns – not significant

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

57
APPENDIX TABLE 5. Plant vigor at 75 DAP of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
4 4 4 12 4
PE2
4 4 5 13 4
PE3
5 5 5 15 5
PE4
5 5 5 15 5
PE5
5 5 5 15 5
PE6
5 5 4 14 5
PE7 0
0
0

0
0
Sub - Total 28
28
28
84
28
CS1
PE1
4 4 4 12 4
PE2
4 4 4 12 4
PE3
4 5 4 13 4
PE4
5 5 5 15 5
PE5
4 5 5 14 5
PE6
4 5 4 13 4
PE7
0 0 0 0 0
Sub - Total 25
28
26
79
26
CS2
PE1
4 4 4 12 4
PE2
4 4 5 13 4
PE3
3 5 4 12 4
PE4
5 5 5 15 5
PE5
4 4 5 13 4
PE6
4 4 5 13 4
PE7
0 0 0 0 0
Sub – Total
24
26
28
78
25
GRAND
TOTAL
77 82 82 241 79













Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

58
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
4
4
4
12
4b






PE2
4
4
4
12
4b






PE3
5
4
4
13
4b






PE4
5
5
5
15
5a





PE5
5
5
4
14
5a






PE6
5
4
4
13
4b






PE7
0
0
0
0
0c
TOTAL 28 26 25 79
MEAN 4 4 4
4

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01



0.06

Replication
2
0.13







Cropping
2
0.13
0.06
0.16ns
6.94 18.00
System (CS)







Error (a)
4
1.59
0.40







Potato entries
6
57.92
9.66
172.79**
2.36
3.35
(PE)






CS x PE
12
1.87
0.16
0.91ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
3.62
0.10
TOTAL
62
65.27




C.V. (A)% = 10.57 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 10.24 ns – not significant

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

59
APPENDIX TABLE 6. Canopy cover at 30 DAP of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
CS0
PE1
27
25
26
78
26
PE2
45
26
29
100

33
PE3
3
5
16
24

8
PE4
38
18
39
95
32
PE5
25
17
14
56
19
PE6 23
12
21
56

19
PE7
2
2
14
18

6
Sub - Total
161
105
159
427
143
CS1
PE1
13
19
23
55

18
PE2
24
9
17
50
17
PE3
3
2
3
8

3
PE4
32
20
20
72

24
PE5
11
8
6
25

8
PE6
4
5
6
15

5
PE7
3
6
4
13

4
Sub - Total
90
69
79
238

79
CS2
PE1
30
22
20
72
24

PE2
25
20
24
69
23

PE3
2
0
2


4
1
PE4
25
12
11
48
16

PE5
16
9
2
27
9

PE6
5
8
5
18
6

PE7
6
5
4
15
5

Sub – Total
109
76
68
253
84

GRAND TOTAL
360
250
306
918















Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

60
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
26
18
24
68
23s






PE2
33
17
23
73
24a






PE3
8
3
1
12
4b






PE4
32
24
16
72
24a






PE5
19
8
9
36
12b






PE6
19
5
6
30
10b






PE7
6
4
5
15
5b
TOTAL
143
79
84
306

MEAN 20 11 12 40
15


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
298.67
149.33
Cropping






System (CS)
2
1051.14
525.57
12.54ns
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
167.62
41.91







Potato entries
6
4313.21
718.87
27.76**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
464.41
38.70
1.49ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
932.38
25.90
TOTAL
62
7227.43




C.V. (A)% = 35.99 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 34.93 ns – not significant

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

61
APPENDIX TABLE 7. Canopy cover at 45 DAP of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
45 36 36 117 39
PE2
55 44 35 134 45
PE3
18 13 20 51 17
PE4
54 26 45 125 41
PE5
48 33 25 106 35
PE6
36 20 36 92 31
PE7
10
4
13
27
9
Sub - Total 266
176
210
652
217
CS1
PE1
28 40 35 103 34
PE2
43 34 28 105 35
PE3
10
6
9
25
8
PE4
50 37 35 122 41
PE5
25 15 15 55 18
PE6
13 13 10 36 12
PE7
7
12
6
25
8
Sub - Total 176
157
138
471
156
CS2
PE1
40 43 37 120 40
PE2
53 35 40 128 43
PE3
6
6
8
20
7
PE4
45 25 25 95 32
PE5
33 20 20 73 24
PE6
13 14 12 39 13
PE7
10
10
6
26
9
Sub – Total 200
153
112
501
168
GRAND TOTAL
642
486
460
1624














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

62
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
39
34
40
113
38a






PE2
45
35
43
123
41a






PE3
17
8
7
32
11c






PE4
41
41
32
114
38a






PE5
35
18
24
77
26b






PE6
31
12
13
56
19bc






PE7
9
8
9
26
9c
TOTAL
217
156
168
541

MEAN 31 22 24 26


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
726.22
363.11
Cropping






System (CS)
2
896.22
448.11
8.86ns
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
202.16
50.54








Potato entries
6
9825.56
1637.59
47.05**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
789.78
65.82
1.89ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
1252.95
34.80
TOTAL 62
13692.89




C.V. (A)% = 25.40 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 22.89 ns – not significant

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

63
APPENDIX TABLE 8. Canopy cover at 60 DAP of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
57 41 57 155 52
PE2
68 50 42 160 53
PE3
30 30 30 90 30
PE4
65 55 51 171 57
PE5
55 44 41 140 47
PE6
57 43 43 143 48
PE7
16
6
6
28
9
Sub - Total 348
269
270
887
296
CS1
PE1
59 62 71 192 64
PE2
60 52 60 172 57
PE3
23 28 20
71 24
PE4
74 69 65 208 69
PE5
65 40 40 145 48
PE6
30 30 33

93 31
PE7
9
13
17
39
13
Sub - Total 320
294
306
920
306
CS2
PE1
53 45 70 168 56
PE2
58 76 79 213 71
PE3
14 16 14

44 15
PE4
71 55 80 206 69
PE5
48 51 43 142 47
PE6
31 49 40 120 40
PE7
9
12
4
25
8
Sub – Total 284
304
330
918
306
GRAND TOTAL
952
857
906
2725














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

64
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
52
64
56
172
57ab






PE2
53
57
71
181
61a






PE3
30
24
15
69
23d






PE4
57
69
69
195
65a






PE5
47
48
47
142
47bc






PE6
48
31
40
119
40c






PE7
9
13
8
30
10d
TOTAL
296
306
306
881

MEAN 42 44 44 43


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
72.41
86.21







Cropping
2
32.60
16.30
0.11ns
6.94 18.00
System (CS)







Error (a)
4
614.92
153.73







Potato entries
6
22580.60
3763.43
70.15**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
1820.06
151.67
2.82ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
1931.33
53.65
TOTAL
62
27151.94




C.V. (A)% = 18.45 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 16.83 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

65
APPENDIX TABLE 9. Canopy cover at 75 DAP of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
32 30 38 100 33
PE2
30 35 30 95 32
PE3
20 23 15 58 19
PE4
41 33 40 114 38
PE5
37 25 30 92 31
PE6
40 25 30 95 32
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub - Total 200
171
183
554
185
CS1
PE1
40 45 55 140 47
PE2
45 30 39 114 38
PE3
15 19 13 47 16
PE4
50 45 40 135 45
PE5
45 30 30 105 35
PE6
20 20 20 60 20
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub - Total 215
189
197
601
201
CS2
PE1
35 23 41 99 33
PE2
40 55 51 146 48
PE3
10 10 10 30 10
PE4
51 43 50 144 48
PE5
36 40 30 106 35
PE6
24 30 27
81 27
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub – Total 196
201
209
606
201
GRAND TOTAL
611
561
589
1761














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

66
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
33
47
33
113
38ab






PE2
32
38
48
118
39ab






PE3
19
16
10
45
15d






PE4
38
45
48
131
44a






PE5
31
35
35
101
34bc






PE6
32
20
27
79
26c






PE7
0
0
0
0
0e






TOTAL
185
201
201
587






MEAN
29
29
29
28


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED

VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
TABULAR F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
59.81
29.91
Cropping






System (CS)
2
78.38
39.19
2.46ns
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
63.81
15.95
Potato entries






(PE)
6
13132.08
2787.18
76.27**
2.36
3.35







CS x PE
12
1267.40
105.62
3.68**
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
1032.38
28.68
TOTAL 62
15624.86




C.V. (A)% = 18.73 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 19.16 ns – not significant

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

67
APPENDIX TABLE 10. Initial height of organically grown potato entries intercropped
with bush beans and onion leeks (cm)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
CS0
PE1
19
19
18
56 19
PE2
15
14
10
39 13
PE3
4
3
4
11
4
PE4
20
20
15
55 18
PE5
12
9
10
31 10
PE6 7
7
8
22

7
PE7 5
5
6
16

5
Sub - Total
82
77
65
230

76
CS2
PE1
14
17
21
52 15

PE2
12
11
13
36 12

PE3
31
5
3
39 13

PE4
25
18
24
68 23

PE5
10
6
8
24
8

PE6 5
5
4
14

5

PE7 3
4
3
10

3

Sub - Total
100
66
76
243

79

CS2
PE1
17
18
17
52
17
PE2
14
13
9
36
12
PE3
4
4
4
12
4
PE4
21
20
16
57
19
PE5
12
9
10
31
10
PE6 4
4
5
13

4
PE7 6
3
4
13

4
Sub – Total
78
71
65
214

70
GRAND TOTAL
260
214
206
687














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

68
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
19.00
15.00
17.00
51.00
17.78ab






PE2
13.00
12.00
12.00
37.00
19.89a






PE3
4.00
13.00
4.00
21.00
12.33ab






PE4
18.00
23.00
19.00
60.00
6.8ab






PE5
10.00
8.00
10.00
28.00
9.56ab






PE6
7.00
5.00
4.00
16.00
5.44ab






PE7
5.00
3.00
4.00
12.00
4.33b
TOTAL 76.00 79.00 70.00


225.00
MEAN
12.67 11.52 12.05 10.88


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
3.46
1.73







Cropping
2
13.75
6.87
0.09ns
6.94 18.00
System (CS)







Error (a)
4
370.83
77.71







Potato entries
6
1924.16
320.69
5.21**
2.36
3.35
(PE)






CS x PE
12
77.37
6.45
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
2217.05
61.58
0.10ns
TOTAL
62
4546.60




C.V. (A)% = 25.81 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 24.97 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

69
APPENDIX TABLE 11. Final height of organically grown potato entries intercropped
with bush beans and onion leeks (cm)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
40 45 39 124 41
PE2
49 44 37 130 43
PE3
38 39 32 109 36
PE4
45 52 44 141 47
PE5
38 40 29 107 36
PE6
17 18 14

49 16
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub - Total 227
238
195
660
136
CS1
PE1
51 50 42 143 48
PE2
43 38 37 118 39
PE3
33 36 28 97 32
PE4
54 46 51 151 50
PE5
40 42 30 112 37
PE6
15 14 13 42 14
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub - Total 236
226
201
663
220
CS2
PE1
44 39 46 129 43
PE2
45 41 39 125 42
PE3
28 34 32

94 31
PE4
52 48 44 134 45
PE5
39 40 33 112 37
PE6
18 14 14

46 15
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub – Total 226
216
208
640
213
GRAND TOTAL
689
680
604
1963














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

70

TWO
WAY
TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
CROPPING CROPPING
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2
SYSTEM
SYSTEM






PE1
41.00
48.00
43.00
132.00
44.00ab






PE2
43.00
39.00
42.00
124.00
41.44bc






PE3
36.00
32.00
31.00
99.00
33.33d






PE4
47.00
50.00
45.00
142.00
48.44a






PE5
36.00
37.00
37.00
110.00
36.78cd






PE6
16.00
14.00
15.00
45.00
15.22e






PE7
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00f
TOTAL
219.00
220.00
213.00
652.00

MEAN
31.43
31.57
30.95

31.32


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
207.66
103.83
Cropping






System (CS)
2
4.41
2.21
0.17ns
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
51.02
12.75








Potato entries
6
16474.09
2745.68
297.12**
2.36
3.35
(PE)






CS x PE
12
157.81
13.15
1.42ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
332.67
9.24
TOTAL 62
17227.65




C.V. (A)% = 9.89 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 9.71 ns – not significant

Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

71
APPENDIX TABLE 12. Leaf miner rating at 30 DAP of organically grown potato
entries intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
1 1 1 3 1
PE2
1 1 1 3 1
PE3
1 1 1 3 1
PE4
1 1 1 3 1
PE5
1 1 1 3 1
PE6
1 1 1 3 1
PE7
2 2 2 6 2
Sub - Total
8
8
8
24
8
CS1
PE1
1 1 1 3 1
PE2
1 1 1 3 1
PE3
1 1 1 3 1
PE4
2 1 1 3 1
PE5
1 1 1 3 1
PE6
1 1 1 3 1
PE7
1 2 2 6 2
Sub - Total
8
8
8
24
8
CS2
PE1
1 1 1 3 1
PE2
1 1 1 3 1
PE3
1 1 1 3 1
PE4
1 1 1 3 1
PE5
1 1 1 3 1
PE6
1 1 1 3 1
PE7
2 2 2 6 2
Sub – Total
8
8
8
24
8
GRAND TOTAL
24
24
24
72














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

72
APPENDIX TABLE 13. Leaf miner rating at 45 DAP of organically grown potato
entries intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
1 1 2 4 1
PE2
2 2 2 6 2
PE3
1 1 2 4 1
PE4
1 1 2 4 1
PE5
1 1 1 3 1
PE6
1 2 2 5 2
PE7
2 2 2 6 2
Sub - Total
9
10
13
32
10
CS1
PE1
1 2 2 5 2
PE2
1 2 2 5 2
PE3
1 2 1 5 2
PE4
1 1 1 3 1
PE5
1 1 1 3 1
PE6
1 1 2 5 2
PE7
2 2 2 6 2
Sub - Total
8
11
11
30
12
CS2
PE1
2 2 1 5 2
PE2
2 2 1 5 2
PE3
2 2 2 6 2
PE4
1 1 1 3 1
PE5
2 2 2 6 2
PE6
1 1 2 5 2
PE7
2 2 2 6 2
Sub – Total 12
12
11
35
13
GRAND TOTAL
29
33
35
97














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

73

APPENDIX TABLE 14. Leaf miner rating at 60 DAP of organically grown potato
entries intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
2 2 2 6 2
PE2
2 2 2 6 2
PE3
1 1 2 4 1
PE4
2 2 2 6 2
PE5
2 2 2 6 2
PE6
2 2 2 6 2
PE7
2 2 2 6 2
Sub - Total 13
13
14
40
13
CS114
PE1
1 2 2 5 2
PE2
2 2 2 6 2
PE3
1 2 1 5 2
PE4
2 2 2 6 2
PE5
2 2 2 6 2
PE6
1 2 2 5 2
PE7
2 3 2 8 3
Sub - Total 11
15
13
39
15
CS2
PE1
2 2 2 6 2
PE2
2 2 2 6 2
PE3
2 2 2 6 2
PE4
2 2 2 6 2
PE5
2 2 2 6 2
PE6
2 2 2 6 2
PE7
3 3 2 8 3
Sub – Total 15
15
14
44
15
GRAND TOTAL
39
43
41
123













Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

74
APPENDIX TABLE 15. Leaf miner rating at 75 DAP of organically grown potato
entries intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS1
PE1
3 3 3 9 3
PE2
3 3 3 9 3
PE3
1 1 2 4 1
PE4
2 3 3 8 3
PE5
3 2 3 8 3
PE6
2 2 2 6 2
PE7
5
5
5
15
5
Sub - Total 19
19
19
59
25
CS1
PE1
3 3 3 9 3
PE2
3 3 3 9 3
PE3
2 1 1 4 1
PE4
3 3 3 9 3
PE5
3 3 2 8 3
PE6
2 2 2 6 2
PE7
5
5
5
15
5
Sub - Total 21
20
19
60
15
CS2
PE1
3 3 3 9 3
PE2
3 3 3 9 3
PE3
2 2 2 6 2
PE4
2 2 2 6 2
PE5
3 3 3 9 3
PE6
2 2 2 6 2
PE7
5
5
5
15
5
Sub – Total 20
20
20
60
15
GRAND TOTAL
60
59
58
179














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

75
APPENDIX TABLE 16. Late blight infection at 60 DAP of organically grown potato
entries intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
1 1 1 3 1
PE2
2 1 1 4 1
PE3
2 1 1 4 1
PE4
2 1 1 4 1
PE5
2 2 1 4 2
PE6
2 2 1 5 2
PE7
2 1 2 5 2
Sub - Total 15
10
8
30
11
CS1
PE1
1 1 1 3 1
PE2
1 2 1 4 1
PE3
1 1 2 4 1
PE4
1 1 1 3 1
PE5
1 1 1 3 1
PE6
2 1 1 4 1
PE7
1 2 2 5 2
Sub - Total
8
9
9
26
8
CS21
PE1
1 1 1 3 1
PE2
3 1 1 5 2
PE3
1 1 1 3 1
PE4
1 1 1 3 1
PE5
1 1 1 3 1
PE6
1 1 1 3 1
PE7
3 1 1 5 2
Sub – Total 11
7
7
25
9
GRAND TOTAL
26
26
24
81














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

76
APPENDIX TABLE 17. Late blight infection at 75 DAP of organically grown potato
entries intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
1 1 1 3 1
PE2
1 1 1 3 1
PE3
1 1 1 3 1
PE4
1 1 1 3 1
PE5
1 1 2 4 1
PE6
1 1 1 3 1
PE7
4
4
3
11
4
Sub - Total 10
10
10
30
10
CS11
PE1
1 1 1 3 1
PE2
3 1 2 6 3
PE3
1 1 2 4 1
PE4
1 1 1 3 1
PE5
3 1 1 5 2
PE6
1 1 1 3 1
PE7
4
4
4
12
4
Sub - Total 14
10
12
36
13
CS2
PE1
1 1 1 3 1
PE2
2 1 1 3 1
PE3
1 1 1 3 1
PE4
2 2 1 5 2
PE5
1 2 1 5 2
PE6
2 1 1 4 1
PE7
4 2 2 8 3
Sub – Total 13
10
8
31
11
GRAND TOTAL
37
30
30
97














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

77
APPENDIX TABLE 18. Haulm weight of organically grown potato entries intercropped
with bush beans and onion leeks (g)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
40.80 29.80 15.00

85.60 28.50
PE2
86.40 83.20 41.10 210.70 70.20
PE3
21.90 30.20 35.90

88.00 29.30
PE4
100.80
109.10
69.80
297.70
93.20
PE5
63.00 57.00 57.30 177.30 59.10
PE6
29.70 29.20 22.80

81.70 27.20
PE7
3.30
3.20
2.90
9.20
3.10
Sub - Total
345.90 243.50
244.80
932.20
310.60
CS1
PE1
56.60 47.30 40.00 143.90 48.00
PE2
23.60 30.10 32.00 85.70 28.60
PE3
53.60 45.10 29.80 128.30 42.80
PE4
30.50 56.20 40.60 127.30 42.40
PE5
35.30 56.20 47.00 138.50 46.20
PE6
59.00 55.20 51.10 165.30 55.10
PE7
3.20
2.00
3.00
8.20
2.70
Sub - Total 261.80
292.10
243.50
1097.40
223.40
CS2
PE1
43.40 57.20 147.00 147.40 49.10
PE2
50.10 38.00 28.80 116.90 39.00
PE3
46.80 41.90 37.80 126.50 42.20
PE4
67.80 69.90 90.70 228.40 76.10
PE5
41.80 68.80 49.60 130.20 53.40
PE6
38.50 27.40 30.90

86.80 29.30
PE7
2.30
3.70
3.10
9.10
3.00
Sub – Total 290.70
306.90
287.70
875.30
292.10
GRAND TOTAL
898.40
942.50
776.00
2904.90














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

78
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
28.50
48.00
49.10
125.60
41.88b






PE2
70.20
28.60
39.00
137.80
45.92b






PE3
29.30
42.80
42.20
114.30
38.11b






PE4
93.20
42.40
76.10
211.70
70.60a






PE5
59.10
46.20
53.40
158.70
52.89b






PE6
27.20
55.10
29.30
111.60
38.20b






PE7
3.10
2.70
3.00
8.80
3.08c
TOTAL
310.60
223.40
292.10
868.50

MEAN 44.40
37.97

42.21
41.53


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
699.34
349.68







Cropping
2
448.47
224.23
2.05ns
6.94 18.00
System (CS)







Error (a)
4
436.79
109.20







Potato entries
6
22453.67
3742.28
36.55**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
91681.86
759.07
7.41**
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
3685.57
102.38
TOTAL 62
36833.72




C.V. (A)% = 24.45 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 24.37 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

79
APPENDIX TABLE 19. Percent hills harvested of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
100 100 100 300 100
PE2
100 100 100 300 100
PE3
37
77
67
181
60
PE4
100 100 100 300 100
PE5
100 100 100 300 100
PE6
100 100 100 300 100
PE7
43
33
57
126
26
Sub - Total
58
610
617
1807
576
CS1
PE1
100 100 100 300 100
PE2
100 100 100 300 100
PE3
81
56
25
162
54
PE4
100
94
100
294
98
PE5
100 100 100 300 100
PE6
100
94
94
288
96
PE7
94
81
75
250
83
Sub - Total
575
625
594
1894
631
CS2
PE1
100 100 100 300 100
PE2
94
100
100
294
98
PE3
38
75
31
144
48
PE4
100 100 100 300 100
PE5
100
100
82
281
93
PE6
100 100 100 300 100
PE7
81
100
62
243
81
Sub – Total 607
675
580
1862
620
GRAND TOTAL
1762
1910
1791
5563














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

80
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2





PE1
100 100
100
300
100a





PE2
100
100
98
298
99a





PE3
60
54
48
162
54b




PE4
100 98
100
298
99a





PE5
100 100
93
293
98a





PE6
100
96
100
296
99a





PE7
26
83
81
190
69b






TOTAL
586 631
620
1837






MEAN
84
90
89
74


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
341.63
170.68
Cropping






System (CS)
2
184.41
92.21
0.39ns
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
930.92
232.73







Potato entries
6
19167.94
3194.66
32.86**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
3406.92
283.91
2.92**
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
3499.71
97.21







TOTAL
62
27531.27

C.V. (A)% = 11.92 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 11.17 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

81
APPENDIX TABLE 20. Number of marketable extra large tubers per plot of organically
grown potato entries intercropped with bush beans and onion
leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
8
3

19
30

10
PE2
7
5

9
2 1

7

PE3
2
6

5
1 3

4

PE4
7
6

9
2 2

7

PE5
2
4

5
1 1

4

PE6
4
4

9
17

6


PE7
0

0
0




0

0
Sub - Total
30
28
56
114

38
CS1
PE1
13
4
11
28
9
PE2
11
7
5
23
8
PE3
1
8
0


9
3
PE4
7
7
4
18
6
PE5
1
3
0


4
1
PE6 8
6
0
14

5
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub - Total
41
35
20
96

32
CS2
PE1
3
10
6
19
6
PE2
9
7
7
23
8
PE3
0
2
1


3
1
PE4
12
8
9
29
10
PE5
4
6
6
16
5
PE6 2
6
7
15

5
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub – Total
30
39
36
105

35
GRAND TOTAL
101
102
113
315












Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

82
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
10
9
6
25
9a






PE2
7
8
8
23
7ab






PE3
4
3
1
8
3bc






PE4
7
6
10
23
8a






PE5
4
1
5
10
3bc






PE6
6
5
5
16
5ab






PE7
0
0
0
0
0c






TOTAL
38
32
35
105






MEAN
5
5
5
5


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
3.52
1.76







Cropping
2
7.71
3.86
0.15ns
6.94 18.00
System (CS)







Error (a)
4
105.62
26.41
Potato entries






(PE)
6
522.89
87.15
11.67**
2.36
3.35







CS x PE
12
79.40
6.62
0.89ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
268.86
7.47







TOTAL
62
988.00
C.V. (A)% = 21.19 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 24.66 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

83
APPENDIX TABLE 21. Number of marketable large tubers per plot of organically
grown potato entries intercropped with bush beans and onion
leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
38
46
13
97 32
PE2
9
21
11
41

14
PE3
7
17
11
34

11
PE4
14
18
9
41 14
PE5
9
10
15
34

11
PE6 11
15
10
36

12
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub - Total
88
127
69
283

94
CS1
PE1
27
30
13
70 23
PE2
19
11
12
42 14
PE3
7
7
1
15
5
PE4
13
17
10
40 13
PE5
8
14
6
28
9
PE6 7
13
1
21

7
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub - Total
81
92
43
216

71
CS2
PE1
7
13
5
25
8
PE2
14
23
6
43 14
PE3
0
5
9
14
5
PE4
17
15
4
36 12
PE5
7
9
12
28
9
PE6 6
9
9
24

8
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub – Total
51
74
45
110

56
GRAND TOTAL
220
293
157
669














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

84
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
32
23
23
78
21a






PE2
14
14
14
42
14ab






PE3
11
5
5
21
7bc






PE4
14
13
12
39
13ab






PE5
11
9
9
29
10b






PE6
12
7
8
27
9bc






PE7
0
0
0
0
0c






TOTAL
94
71
56
236






MEAN
14
10
8
11


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
441.18
220.59
Cropping





System (CS)
2
313.27
156.63
9.97*
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
64.44
16.11







Potato entries
6
2339.71
389.95
14.17**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
717.62
59.80
2.17*
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
990.38
27.51







TOTAL
62
4866.60
C.V. (A)% = 48.29 * - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 49.32 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

85
APPENDIX TABLE 22. Number of marketable medium tubers per plot of organically
grown potato entries intercropped with bush beans and onion
leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
24
48
52
124
41
PE2
21
43
24
88
29
PE3
50
15
10
75
25
PE4
17
50
23
90
30
PE5
26
41
17
84
28
PE6 22
14
14
50

17
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub - Total
160
211
140
511

170
CS1
PE1
15
26
14
55
18
PE2
24
11
8
43
14
PE3
5
3
3
11
4
PE4
17
12
13
42
14
PE5
5
3
3
11
4
PE6 18
6
6
30

10
PE7
0
0
0
0
0
Sub - Total
84
61
47
192

64
CS2
PE1
20
17
28
65
22
PE2
18
27
15
60
20
PE3
2
4
12
18
6
PE4
18
13
8
39
13
PE5
9
18
6
33
11
PE6 9
13
11
33

11
PE7
2
2
0
4
1
Sub – Total
78
94
80
252

84
GRAND TOTAL
322
366
267
955














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

86
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
41
18
22
81
27a






PE2
29
14
20
63
21a






PE3
25
4
6
35
12ab






PE4
30
14
13
57
19a






PE5
28
4
11
43
14ab






PE6
17
10
11
38
13ab






PE7
0
0
1
1
0b






TOTAL
170
64
84
318






MEAN
24A
9B
12B
15


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
234.32
117.16
Cropping






System (CS)
2
2737.17
7368.59
20.27**
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
270.06
67.52







Potato entries
6
3883.75
647.29
8.24**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
917.49
76.46
0.97ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
2829.62
78.60







TOTAL
62
10872.41
C.V. (A)% = 44.17 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 27.49 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

87
APPENDIX TABLE 23. Number of marketable small tubers per plot of organically
grown potato entries intercropped with bush beans and onion
leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
20 30 29 79 26
PE2
43 26 13 52 17
PE3
10
9
5
24
8
PE4
14 12 14 43 14
PE5
10
13
9
32
11
PE6
12 15 16 43 14
PE7
5
7
4
16
5
Sub - Total
84
112
90
289
95
CS1
PE1
25 43 13 81 27
PE2
44 30 24 98 33
PE3
10 11 13 34 11
PE4
43 19 11 73 24
PE5
39 42 33 11 38
PE6
45 34 10 89 30
PE7
3
5
2
10
3
Sub - Total
209
184
106
396
166
CS2
PE1
32 9 11 52 17
PE2
12 17

8 37 12
PE3
6
12
0
18
6
PE4
29 24 12 65 22
PE5
14
9
9
32
11
PE6
19
6
7
32
11
PE7
6
13
4
22
7
Sub – Total 118
90
51
258
86
GRAND TOTAL
411
386
247
943













Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

88
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
26
27
17
70
24a






PE2
17
33
12
62
21a






PE3
8
11
6
25
8bc






PE4
14
24
22
60
20ab






PE5
11
38
11
60
20ab






PE6
14
30
11
55
18ab






PE7
5
3
7
15
5c






TOTAL
95
166
86
347






MEAN
14
23
12
17


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
743.52
371.76
Cropping






System (CS)
2
1646.00
823.00
7.05*
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
466.76
116.69







Potato entries
6
2516.54
419.42
9.04**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
1575.56
131.30
2.3**
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
1671.05
46.42







TOTAL
62
8619.43
C.V. (A)% = 41.75 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 41.11 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

89
APPENDIX TABLE 24. Number of marketable marble tubers per plot of organically
grown potato entries intercropped with bush beans and onion
leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
18
0
60
78 26
PE2
30
12
14
56 19
PE3
0
8
12
50
7
PE4
15
15
38
68 23
PE5
10
9
16
35 12
PE6 10
28
8
46

15
PE7 3
4
6
13

4
Sub - Total
86
76
154
316

106
CS1
PE1
14
0
16
30 10
PE2
0
9
5
14
5
PE3
0
0
0


0
0
PE4
8
10
6


24
8
PE5
12
13
16
41 14
PE6 10
4
10
24

8
PE7 7
9
11
27

9
Sub - Total
111
45
64
160

55
CS2
PE1
9
12
11
32 11
PE2
0
0
10
10
3
PE3
0
7
2


9
3
PE4
0
10
10
20
7
PE5
0
14
9


23
8
PE6 0
5
8
13

4
PE7
0
0
8
8
3
Sub – Total
9
48
58
115

39
GRAND TOTAL
206
169
276
591














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

90
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2





PE1
26
10
11
47 16





PE2
19
5
3
27 9





PE3
7
0
3
10 3





PE4
23
8
7
38 12





PE5
12
14
8
34 11





PE6 15
8
4
27 9





PE7
4
9
3
16 5





TOTAL 106
55
39
199





MEAN 15
8
5
9


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
466.67
233.33
Cropping






System (CS)
2
1026.00
573.00
7.02*
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
292.48
73.12







Potato entries
6
924.89
154.15
2.08ns
2.36
3.35
(PE)






CS x PE
12
687.78
57.31
0.78ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
2668.19
74.12







TOTAL
62
6066.00
C.V. (A)% = 28.18 ns – not significant
C.V. (B)% = 22.24
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

91
APPENDIX TABLE 25. Number of non-marketable tubers per plot of organically grown
potato entries intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
71 21 30 58 19
PE2
50 22 20 92 31
PE3
16 19 19 54 18
PE4
11 23 17 51 17
PE5

5 32 30 67 22
PE6
29 21 14 64 21
PE7 13

9
10
32
11
Sub - Total 131
147
140
418
139
CS1
PE1
20 21 13 54 18
PE2
17 15 21 53 18
PE3
16 27 15 58 19
PE4
12 12
5 29 10
PE5
10 21 13 44 15
PE6 18
21

6
45
15
PE7
13
9 10 32 11
Sub - Total 106
126
833
315
106
CS2
PE1
25 18 10 53 18
PE2
15 31
6 42 14
PE3
18 19 13 50 17
PE4
4
17
10
31
10
PE5
9
10
7
26
9
PE6

9 19
5 33 11
PE7 14
20

6
40
13
Sub – Total
94
134
57
275
92
GRAND TOTAL
331
407
580
1008














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

92
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
19
18
18
55
18






PE2
31
18
14
63
28






PE3
18
19
17
54
18






PE4
17
10
10
37
18






PE5
22
15
9
46
15






PE6
21
15
11
47
21






PE7
11
11
13
35
12






TOTAL
139
106
92
337






MEAN
20
17
19
19


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
267.56
133.78
Cropping






System (CS)
2
72.03
36.02
1.07ns
6.94
18.00







Error (a)
4
134.54
33.64







Potato entries
6
1400.38
246.73
1.73ns
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
1370.19
114.18
0.80ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
5134.57
142.64







TOTAL
62
84.27
C.V. (A)% = 41.75 ** - not significant
C.V. (B)% = 34.25
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

93
APPENDIX TABLE 26. Weight of marketable extra large tubers per plot of organically
grown potato entries intercropped with bush beans and onion
leeks (kg)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
0.55 0.35 1.05 1.95 0.65
PE2
0.75 0.50 0.69 1.94 0.65
PE3
0.15 0.55 0.30 1.00 0.33
PE4
0.85 0.85 0.78 2.48 0.83
PE5
0.20 0.35 0.40 0.95 0.32
PE6
0.30 0.40 0.72 1.42 0.47
PE7
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sub - Total
2.80
3.00
4.39
10.19
3.25
CS1
PE1
0.85 0.55 0.90 2.30 0.77
PE2
1.30 0.75 0.25 2.30 0.77
PE3
0.10 0.40 0.00 0.50 0.17
PE4
1.15 0.10 0.50 1.75 0.58
PE5
0.20 0.40 0.00 0.60 0.20
PE6
0.90 0.60 0.00 1.50 0.50
PE7
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sub - Total
4.50
2.78
1.65
8.95
2.99
CS2
PE1
0.25 0.75 0.60 1.60 0.53
PE2
0.90 0.65 0.90 2.45 0.82
PE3
0.00 0.20 0.07 0.27 0.09
PE4
1.10 0.80 1.10 3.00 1.00
PE5
0.40 0.70 0.68 1.78 0.59
PE6
0.42 0.45 0.60 1.47 0.59
PE7
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sub – Total
3.07
3.55
4.58
10.57
3.62
GRAND
TOTAL
11.00 9.33 10.62 29.71













Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

94
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
0.65
0.77
0.52
1.95
0.65ab






PE2
0.65
0.77
0.82
2.24
0.74ab






PE3
0.33
0.17
0.09
1.40
0.20ad






PE4
0.83
0.58
1.00
2.40
0.80a






PE5
0.32
0.20
0.59
1.11
0.37bcd






PE6
0.47
0.50
0.59
1.56
0.48abc






PE7
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0d






TOTAL
3.25
2.99
3.62
10.66






MEAN
0.46
0.43
0.50
0.46


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
0.03
0.01
Cropping






System (CS)
2
0.06
0.03
0.17ns
6.94
18.00







Error (a)
4
0.72
0.18







Potato entries
6
4.71
0.79
15.30**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
0. 67
0.06
1.08ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
1.85
0.05







TOTAL
62
8.04
C.V. (A)% = 24.57 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 28.79 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

95
APPENDIX TABLE 27. Weight of marketable large tubers per plot of organically
grown potato entries intercropped with bush beans and onion
leeks (kg)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
1.90 2.05 0.60 4.55 1.52
PE2
0.65 1.40 0.48 2.53 0.84
PE3
0.35 0.90 0.51 1.76 0.59
PE4
1.00 1.50 0.64 3.14 1.05
PE5
0.35 0.65 0.90 1.90 0.63
PE6
0.75 0.85 0.47 2.07 0.69
PE7
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sub - Total
5.00
7.80
3.60
16.40
4.32
CS1
PE1
1.25 1.80 0.60 3.63 1.22
PE2
1.25 0.95 0.85 3.05 1.02
PE3
0.45 0.20 0.07 0.72 0.24
PE4
1.10 1.15 0.80 3.05 1.02
PE5
0.65 1.00 0.40 2.05 0.68
PE6
0.50 0.70 0.10 1.30 0.43
PE7
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sub - Total
5.20
5.80
3.45
15.17
4.97
CS2
PE1
0.45 0.75 0.31 1.51 0.50
PE2
0.80 1.50 0.20 2.50 0.83
PE3
0.00 0.25 0.31 0.56 0.19
PE4
1.00 1.05 0.45 2.50 0.83
PE5
0.40 0.55 0.74 1.69 0.56
PE6
0.30 0.50 0.36 1.16 0.39
PE7
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sub – Total
2.95
5.05
2.37
9.92
3.30
GRAND TOTAL
13.15
19.10
9.42
41.49













Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

96
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
1.52
1.22
0.50
3.24
1.08d






PE2
0.84
1.02
0.83
2.69
0.90ab






PE3
0.59
0.24
0.19
1.02
0.34cd






PE4
1.05
1.o2
0.83
2.9
0.97ab






PE5
0.63
0.68
0.56
1.87
0.63abc






PE6
0.69
0.43
0.39
1.51
0.50bc






PE7
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0d






TOTAL
4.32
4.97
3.30
13.23






MEAN
0.76
0.66
0.47
0.60


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
1.91
0.95
Cropping






System (CS)
2
0.89
0.44
8.54*
6.94
18.00







Error (a)
4
0.21
0.05







Potato entries
6
7.96
1.33
15.87**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
1.35
0.11
1.34ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
3.01
0.08







TOTAL
62
15.32
C.V. (A)% = 45.01 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 45.89 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

97
APPENDIX TABLE 28. Weight of marketable medium tubers per plot of organically
grown potato entries intercropped with bush beans and onion
leeks (kg)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
0.75 1.30 1.60 3.65 1.22
PE2
1.20 1.80 0.88 3.88 1.29
PE3
0.10 0.50 0.28 0.88 0.29
PE4
0.95 2.25 0.96 4.16 1.39
PE5
0.15 1.90 0.75 3.80 1.27
PE6
1.05 0.55 0.24 1.84 0.61
PE7
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sub - Total
4.65
8.30
4.71
18.06
6.07
CS1
PE1
0.45 0.90 0.45 1.80 0.60
PE2
0.85 0.75 0.35 1.95 0.65
PE3
0.20 0.10 0.10 0.40 0.13
PE4
0.90 0.60 0.73 2.23 0.74
PE5
0.90 0.90 0.95 2.75 0.92
PE6
0.70 0.15 0.30 1.15 0.38
PE7
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sub - Total
4.00
3.40
2.88
10.28
3.42
CS2
PE1
0.75 0.55 1.16 2.46 0.82
PE2
0.70 0.95 0.70 2.35 0.78
PE3
0.10 0.15 0.24 0.49 0.16
PE4
0.70 0.70 0.25 1.65 0.55
PE5
0.30 0.75 0.30 135 0.45
PE6
0.30 0.45 0.30 1.05 0.35
PE7
0.05 0.06 0.00 0.11 0.04
Sub – Total
3.35
4.15
2.95
8.91
3.15
GRAND
TOTAL
12.00 15.85 10.59 37.79













Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

98
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
1.22
0.60
0.82
2.64
0.88a






PE2
1.29
0.65
0.78
2.72
0.91a






PE3
0.29
0.13
0.16
0.58
0.20b






PE4
1.39
0.74
0.55
2.68
0.90a






PE5
1.27
0.92
0.45
2.64
0.77a






PE6
0.61
0.38
0.35
1.34
0.45ab






PE7
0.00
0.00
0.04
0.04
0.10b






TOTAL
6.07
3.42
3.15
12.64






MEAN
0.82
0.49
0.45
0.60


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
0.65
0.32
Cropping






System (CS)
2
1.73
0.86
5.04ns
6.94
18.00







Error (a)
4
0.91
0.23







Accessions (A)
6
7.35
1.23
4.38**
2.36
3.35







Potato entries
12
1.32
0.11
1.44ns
2.03
2.75
(PE)







CS x PE
36
3.38
0.09







TOTAL
62
15.35
C.V. (A)% = 25.80 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 22.34 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

99
APPENDIX TABLE 29. Weight of marketable small tubers per plot of organically
grown potato entries intercropped with bush beans and onion
leeks (kg)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
0.05 0.65 0.55 1.25 0.42
PE2
1.80 0.70 0.62 3.12 1.04
PE3
0.15 0.20 0.26 0.61 0.20
PE4
1.60 0.40 0.37 2.37 0.79
PE5
1.00 0.30 0.80 2.10 0.70
PE6
1.20 0.80 0.10 2.10 0.70
PE7
0.05 0.05 0.03 0.13 0.04
Sub - Total
5.85
3.10
2.73
11.68
389.00
CS1
PE1
0.30 0.50 0.60 1.40 0.47
PE2
0.20 0.15 0.25 0.60 0.40
PE3
0.15 0.15 0.12 0.42 0.14
PE4
0.35 0.30 0.45 1.10 0.37
PE5
0.35 0.35 0.20 0.90 0.30
PE6
0.20 0.15 0.25 0.60 0.40
PE7
0.05 0.06 0.03 0.14 0.05
Sub - Total
1.60
1.66
1.90
5.16
1.66
CS2
PE1
0.76 0.20 0.28 1.24 0.41
PE2
0.30 0.30 0.20 0.80 0.27
PE3
0.10 0.30 0.00 0.40 0.13
PE4
0.60 0.70 0.20 1.50 0.50
PE5
0.30 0.20 0.20 0.70 0.23
PE6
0.40 0.10 0.12 0.62 0.21
PE7
0.05 0.10 0.03 0.18 0.06
Sub – Total
2.51
1.90
1.03
5.44
1.81
GRAND
TOTAL
9.96 6.66 5.66 22.28












Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

100
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
0.42
0.47
0.41
1.30
0.43ab






PE2
1.04
0.40
0.27
1.71
0.50ab






PE3
0.20
0.14
0.13
0.47
0.16ab






PE4
0.79
0.37
0.50
1.66
0.55a






PE5
0.70
0.30
0.23
0.33
0.41ab






PE6
0.70
0.40
0.21
0.32
0.37ab






PE7
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.15
0.05b






TOTAL
3.89
1.66
1.81
7.36






MEAN
0.56
0.25
0.26
0.35


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
0.48
0.24
Cropping






System (CS)
2
1.29
0.65
4.55ns
6.94
18.00







Error (a)
4
0.51
0.13







Potato entries
6
1.81
0.30
1.55ns
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
2.19
0.10
0.25ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
2.48
0.07







TOTAL
62
7.77
C.V. (A)% = 27.33 ** - not significant
C.V. (B)% = 24.19
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

101
APPENDIX TABLE 30. Weight of marketable marble-sized tubers per plot of
organically grown potato entries intercropped with bush
beans and onion leeks (kg)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
0.00 0.00 0.91 1.06 0.35
PE2
0.50 0.10 0.20 0.80 0.27
PE3
0.00 0.07 0.15 0.22 0.07
PE4
0.25 0.15 0.80 1.20 0.40
PE5
0.10 0.10 0.10 0.30 0.10
PE6
0.15 0.30 0.04 0.49 0.16
PE7
0.02 0.04 0.03 0.09 0.03
Sub - Total
1.02
0.76
2.23
4.16
1.38
CS1
PE1
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.10
PE2
0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.07
PE3
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PE4
0.15 0.10 0.10 0.35 0.12
PE5
0.15 0.10 0.20 0.45 0.15
PE6
0.05 0.10 0.05 0.20 0.07
PE7
0.00 0.05 0.08 0.13 0.04
Sub - Total
0.45
0.45
0.73
1.63
0.55
CS2
PE1
0.08 0.15 0.11 0.34 0.11
PE2
0.00 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.05
PE3
0.00 0.15 0.02 0.17 0.06
PE4
0.00 0.12 0.10 0.22 0.01
PE5
0.00 0.10 0.07 0.17 0.06
PE6
0.00 0.05 0.07 0.12 0.04
PE7
0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.01
Sub – Total
0.08
0.57
0.55
1.20
0.34
GRAND
TOTAL
1.47 1.78 3.51 6.98













Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

102
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
0.35
0.10
0.11
0.56
0.17






PE2
0.27
0.07
0.05
0.39
0.13






PE3
0.07
0.00
0.06
0.13
0.04






PE4
0.40
0.12
0.01
0.33
0.28






PE5
0.10
0.15
0.06
0.31
0.10






PE6
0.16
0.07
0.04
0.27
0.09






PE7
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.08
0.03






TOTAL
1.38
0.34
0.34
2.27






MEAN
0.19
0.08
0.06
0.12


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
0.11
0.06
Cropping






System (CS)
2
0.22
0.11
4.55ns
6.94
18.00







Error (a)
4
0.10
0.02







Potato entries
6
0.21
0.03
1.55ns
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
0.19
0.01
00.68ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
0.81
0.02







TOTAL
62
1.63
C.V. (A)% = 38.69 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 28.23 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

103
APPENDIX TABLE 31. Weight of non-marketable tubers per plot of organically grown
potato entries intercropped with bush beans and onion leek
(kg)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
0.05 0.10 0.13 0.28 0.09
PE2
0.20 0.05 0.11 0.36 0.12
PE3
0.25 0.05 0.07 0.37 0.12
PE4
0.05 0.05 0.06 0.16 0.05
PE5
0.02 0.10 0.10 0.22 0.07
PE6
0.15 0.04 0.05 0.24 0.08
PE7
0.03 0.02 0.03 0.08 0.03
Sub - Total
1.80
2.30
2.44
2.43
0.56
CS1
PE1
0.35 0.05 0.05 0.45 0.15
PE2
0.07 0.10 0.13 0.30 0.10
PE3
0.07 0.20 0.10 0.37 0.12
PE4
0.02 0.05 0.04 0.11 0.04
PE5
0.05 0.05 0.02 0.12 0.04
PE6
0.05 0.05 0.01 0.11 0.04
PE7
0.03 0.02 0.01 0.07 0.02
Sub - Total
3.25
2.50
1.45
1.53
0.43
CS2
PE1
0.20 0.07 0.03 0.30 0.10
PE2
0.15 0.10 0.05 0.30 0.10
PE3
0.20 0.05 0.08 0.33 0.11
PE4
0.03 0.08 0.02 0.13 0.04
PE5
0.06 0.03 0.02 0.13 0.04
PE6
0.02 0.10 0.01 0.13 0.04
PE7
0.05 0.05 0.01 0.11 0.04
Sub – Total
0.72
0.43
0.22
1.42
0.47
GRAND
TOTAL
5.77 5.23 4.105 5.37













Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

104
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
0.09
0.15
0.10
0.34
0.11






PE2
0.12
0.10
0.10
0.34
0.11






PE3
0.12
0.12
0.11
0.353
0.12






PE4
0.07
0.04
0.04
0.129
0.04






PE5
0.08
0.04
0.01
0.122
0.05






PE6
0.08
0.04
0.04
0.159
0.05






PE7
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.087
0.02






TOTAL
5.63
0.43
0.34
6.53







MEAN
0.08
0.07
0.07
0.07


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
0.02
0.01
Cropping






System (CS)
2
0.00
0.00
0.60ns
19.25 99.25







Error (a)
4
0.01
0.00







Potato entries
6
0.08
0.01
2.30ns
6.94
18.00
(PE)







CS x PE
12
0.01
0.00
0.25ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
0.14
0.00







TOTAL
62
0.26
C.V. (A)% = 20.94 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 23.12 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

105
APPENDIX TABLE 32. Total yield per plot of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks (kg)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
3.45 4.45 4.84 12.38 4.13
PE2
5.15 4.55 2.94 12.64 4.21
PE3
0.80 2.27 1.56

4.63 1.54
PE4
4.85 5.20 3.66 13.71 4.57
PE5
2.47 3.40 2.15

8.02 2.67
PE6
3.60
2.19
1.62
7.41
2.47
PE7
0.10 0.11 0.09 0.20 0.07
Sub - Total 20.42
22.17
16.86
59.05
19.67
CS1
PE1
3.20 3.90 2.80 9.90 3.30
PE2
3.82 3.40 2.00 9.22 3.07
PE3
0.92 0.90 0.33 2.15 0.72
PE4
3.67 2.25 2.81 8.73 2.90
PE5
2.30 2.80 1.77 6.87 2.29
PE6
2.40 1.75 0.71 4.86 1.62
PE7
0.08 0.13 0.13 0.23 0.11
Sub - Total 15.56
15.13
10.55
42.07
11.72
CS2
PE1
2.49 2.47 2.49 7.45 2.50
PE2
2.90 3.45 2.15 8.50 2.80
PE3
0.23 1.13 0.66 2.02 0.67
PE4
3.55 3.47 2.15 9.17 3.10
PE5
1.48 2.33 2.01 5.81 1.90
PE6
1.42 1.65 1.46 4.53 1.51
PE7
0.10 0.15 0.07 0.32 0.11
Sub – Total 12.16
14.65
10.95
37.78
12.59
GRAND TOTAL
48.14
51.95
38.36
129.89














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

106
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
4.13
3.30
2.50
9.93
3.30a






PE2
1.21
3.07
2.80
7.08
3.37a






PE3
1.54
0.72
0.67
3.0
0.97cd






PE4
4.57
2.90
3.10
10.57
3.51a






PE5
2.67
2.29
1.90
6.86
2.30ab






PE6
2.47
1.62
1.51
5.6
1.87bc






PE7
0.07
0.11
0.11
0.287
0.10d






TOTAL
19.66
11.72
12.59
43.97






MEAN
2.81a
2.00ab
1.80b
2.20


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
5.49
2.75
Cropping






System (CS)
2
20.84
10.42
8.06*
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
5.17
1.29







Potato entries
6
74.67
12.44
21.45**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
5.10
0.42
0.73ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
20.88
0.58







TOTAL
62
132.15
C.V. (A)% = 36.19 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 34.15 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

107
APPENDIX TABLE 33. Computed yield of organically grown potato entries
intercropped with bush beans and onion leeks (tons/ha)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS0
PE1
6.90 8.90 8.96 24.76 8.25
PE2
10.30
9.10
5.88
25.28
8.43
PE3
1.60 4.54 3.12

9.26 3.09
PE4
9.70
10.40
7.32
27.42
9.14
PE5
4.94 6.80 4.30 16.04 5.35
PE6
7.20 4.38 3.24 14.82 4.94
PE7
0.20 6.22 0.18

0.60 0.20
Sub - Total 40.84
44.34
32.92
118.80
39.40
CS1
PE1
6.40 7.80 5.60 19.80 6.60
PE2
7.64 6.80 4.00 18.44 5.82
PE3
1.84 1.80 0.66

4.30 1.43
PE4
7.34 4.50 5.62 17.46 5.82
PE5
4.60 5.60 3.54 13.74 4.58
PE6
4.80 3.50 1.42

9.72 3.24
PE7
0.16 0.26 0.25

0.67 0.22
Sub - Total 32.78
30.26
21.09
33.51
27.71
CS2
PE1
4.98 4.94 4.98 14.90 4.97
PE2
5.80 6.90 4.30 17.00 5.70
PE3
0.45 2.26 1.32

4.03 1.34
PE4
7.10 6.94 4.30 18.34 6.11
PE5
2.95 4.66 4.02 11.63 3.88
PE6
2.84 3.30 2.92

9.06 3.02
PE7
0.20 0.30 0.14

0.64 0.21
Sub – Total 24.32
29.30
21.98
75.60
25.23
GRAND TOTAL
97.94
103.91
75.99
277.91














Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

108
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2






PE1
8.25
6.60
4.97
19.82
6.61a






PE2
8.41
5.82
5.70
19.95
6.75a






PE3
3.09
1.43
1.34
5.86
1.95cd






PE4
9.14
5.82
6.11
21.07
7.02a






PE5
5.35
4.58
3.88
13.81
4.60b






PE6
4.94
3.24
3.02
11.2
3.73bc






PE7
0.20
0.22
0.21
0.63
0.21d






TOTAL
39.40
27.71
25.23
92.34






MEAN
5.62
4.01
3.60
4.41


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
20.45
10.23
Cropping





System (CS)
2
48.34
24.17
24.22**
6.94 18.00







Error (a)
4
3.99
0.10







Potato entries
6
371.40
61.99
50.33**
2.36
3.35
(PE)







CS x PE
12
16.82
1.40
1.14ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
44.27
1.23







TOTAL
62
505.28
C.V. (A)% = 24.90 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 25.14 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

109
APPENDIX TABLE 34. Harvest index of organically grown potato entries intercropped
with bush beans and onion leeks

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
Potato
PE1
0.17 0.24 0.24 0.65 0.21
PE2
0.18 0.24 0.23 0.65 0.21
PE3
0.15 0.14 0.14 0.43 0.14
PE4
0.25 0.26 0.25 0.76 0.25
PE5
0.18 0.20 0.17 0.55 0.18
PE6
0.17 0.18 0.16 0.51 0.17
PE7
0.12 0.11 0.11 0.34 0.11
Sub - Total
1.22
1.37
1.30
3.89
1.27
Potato + Beans
PE1
0.18 0.21 0.21 0.60 0.20
PE2
0.19 0.22 0.18 0.60 0.20
PE3
0.15 0.13 0.15 0.43 0.14
PE4
0.23 0.25 0.24 0.72 0.24
PE5
0.19 0.18 0.17 0.54 0.18
PE6
0.17 0.15 0.15 0.47 0.17
PE7
0.10 0.10 0.10 0.31 0.10
Sub - Total
1.21
1.24
1.20
3.65
1.23
Potato + Onions
PE1
0.19 0.20 0.20 0.59 0.20
PE2
0.20 0.21 0.17 0.58 0.19
PE3
0.16 0.17 0.16 0.49 0.16
PE4
0.23 0.22 0.23 0.68 0.23
PE5
0.18 0.19 0.18 0.55 0.18
PE6
0.17 0.17 0.16 0.50 0.17
PE7
0.11 0.12 0.10 0.33 0.11
Sub – Total
1.24
1.28
1.20
3.72
1.24
GRAND
TOTAL
3.67 3.89 3.70 11.26













Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

110
TWO WAY TABLE

POTATO
CROPPING SYSTEM
TOTAL
MEAN
ACCESSIONS
CS0
CS1
CS2





PE1
0.21
0.20
0.20
0.61
0.20ab






PE2
0.21
0.20
0.19
0.60
0.20ab






PE3
0.14
0.14
0.16
0.44
0.15bc






PE4
0.25
0.24
0.23
0.72
0.24a






PE5
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.54
0.18b






PE6
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.51
0.16bc






PE7
0.11
0.10
0.11
0.32
0.11c






TOTAL
1.27
1.23
1.24
3.74






MEAN
0.19
0.17
0.18
0.18


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIANCE
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F

FREEDOM
0.05 0.01







Replication
2
0.01
0.00






Cropping
2
0.00
0.00
0.12ns
19.25 99.25
System (CS)







Error (a)
4
0.01
0.00
Potato entries






(PE)
6
0.02
0.00
2.72*
2.36
3.35







CS x PE
12
0.01
0.00
0.69ns
2.03
2.75







Error (b)
36
0.05
0.00
TOTAL 62
0.10



C.V. (A)% = 28.39 ** - highly significant
C.V. (B)% = 23.40 ns – not significant
Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

111
APPENDIX TABLE 35. Weight of marketable pods per plot of bush beans grown
organically (kg)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS1A1
0.17 0.11 0.16 0.44 0.15
CS2A2
0.25 0.08 0.13 0.46 0.15
CS3A3
0.23 0.14 0.28 0.15 0.22
CS4A4
0.24 0.13 0.18 0.55 0.18
CS5A5
0.23 0.11 0.23 0.57 0.19
CI6A7
0.15 0.09 0.23 0.47 0.16
CS7A7
0.22 0.11 0.13 0.46 0.15


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREE OF SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARE SQUARE
F

.05 .01







Replication
2
0.04
0.02







Treatment
6
0.01
0.00
1.29ns
3.00
4.82







Error
12
0.02
0.00
TOTAL 20
0.07




CV% = 22.95











Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

112
APPENDIX TABLE 36. Weight of non-marketable pods per plot of bush beans per plot
grown organically (kg)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS1A1
0.14 0.07 0.08 0.29 0.10
CS2A2
0.20 0.05 0.09 0.34 0.11
CS3A3
0.19 0.05 0.10 0.34 0.11
CS4A4
0.15 0.04 0.04 0.23 0.08
CS5A5
0.16 0.03 0.07 0.26 0.09
CI6A7
0.20 0.02 0.08 0.30 0.10
CS7A7
0.21 0.06 0.11 0.38 0.13


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREE OF SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARE SQUARE
F


.05
.01







Replication
2
0.07
0.03







Treatment
6
0.01
0.00
2.4ns
3.00
4.82







Error
12
0.00
0.00







TOTAL
20
0.08
CV% = 18.60











Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

113
APPENDIX TABLE 37. Total pods per plot of bush beans per plot grown organically
(kg)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS1A1
0.31 0.18 0.24 0.73 0.24
CS2A2
0.45 0.13 0.22 0.80 0.27
CS3A3
0.42 0.19 0.38 0.99 0.33
CS4A4
0.39 0.17 0.22 0.78 0.26
CS5A5
0.39 0.14 0.30 0.83 0.28
CI6A7
0.35 0.11 0.31 0.77 0.26
CS7A7
0.43 0.17 0.2 0.84 0.28


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREE OF SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARE SQUARE
F
.05 .01







Replication
2
0.19
0.10







Treatment
6
0.01
0.00
1.05ns
3.00
4.82







Error
12
0.03
0.00
TOTAL 20
0.23




CV% = 17.22












Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

114
APPENDIX TABLE 38. Weight of suitable planting materials per plot of onion grown
organically (kg)

TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
CS1A1
0.25 0.25 0.20 0.70 0.23
CS2A2
0.40 0.25 0.30 0.95 0.32
CS3A3
0.45 0.25 0.25 0.95 0.32
CS4A4
0.30 0.30 0.30 0.90 0.30
CS5A5
0.35 0.30 0.15 0.80 0.27
CI6A7
0.35 0.20 0.30 0.85 0.28
CS7A7
0.20 0.35 0.45 1.00 0.33


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF
DEGREE OF SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARE SQUARE
F
.05 .01







Replication
2
0.01
0.01







Treatment
6
0.02
0.00
0.47ns
3.00
4.82







Error
12
0.09
0.01







TOTAL
20
0.12
CV% = 29.81









Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped
with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks / Rosenada T. Cambong. 2007

---

Document Outline

• Response of Organically Grown Potato Entries Intercropped with Bush Beans and Onion Leeks
  • BIBLIOGRAPHY
  • ABSTRACT
  • TABLE OF CONTENTS
  • INTRODUCTION
  • REVIEW OF LITERATURE
  • MATERIALS AND METHODS
  • RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
  • SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
  • LITERATURE CITED
  • APPENDICES

---