BIBLIOGRAPHY BAG-AYAN, JULIUS S. OCTOBER 2009....
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BAG-AYAN, JULIUS S. OCTOBER 2009. Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries
in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet. Benguet State University, La Trinidad Benguet.
Adviser: Janet P. Pablo, MSc.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to evaluate the growth and yield of different potato
entries, to determine the entries that are best adapted in terms of growth and yield under
Sagpat, Kibungan condition and, to determine the profitability of growing potato under
Sagpat, Kibungan.
Potato entries CIP 380241.17, PHIL 2.21.6.2, PHIL 5.19.2.2 and CIP 676070
produced highly vigorous plants at 30 to 60 days after planting and registered the widest
canopy cover at 45 to 75 days after planting. These entries also were highly resistant to
late blight. All the potato entries evaluated had comparable harvest index including the
check varieties Ganza, Granola and Igorota.
CIP 380241.17 produced the highest total yield, highest and heaviest super extra
large tubers while PHIL 2.21.6.2 and PHIL 5.19.2.2 produced the heaviest extra big, big
and super extra large tubers.
For tuber production, CIP 380241.17 produced the highest return on cash
expense.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………… i
Abstract………………………………………………………………………. i
Table of Contents………………………………………………………………
ii
INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE………………………………………………...
3
Varietal Evaluation and Selection………………………………………...
3
Environmental Requirements of Potato Production………………………
3
MATERIALS AND METHODS…………………………………………….
7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION……………………………………………..
15
Temperature, Relative Humidity and Rainfall……………………………
15
Plant Survival……………………………………………………………..
15
Plant Vigor………………………………………………………………..
16
Plant Height……………………………………………………………….
16
Canopy Cover…………………………………………………………….
17
Reaction to Leaf Miner……………………………………………………
19
Reaction to Late Blight……………………………………………………
19
Number of Marketable and Non-marketable Tubers……………………...
19
Weight of Marketable and Non-marketable Tubers………………………
20
Total Yield (kg/m2) and Computed Yield (T/ha-1) ………………………
22
ii
Harvest Index and Dry Matter Content……………………………………
23
Production Cost Analysis………………………………………………….
24
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS……………
26
LITERATURE CITED………………………………………………………
28
APPENDICES……………………………………………………………….. 30
iii
INTRODUCTION
Potato
(Solanum tuberosum L.) is one of the most intensively cultivated crops in
the country and widely grown here in the Cordillera particularly in Benguet and
Mountain Province. The production of this crop is more profitable as compared to other
vegetables in the highland. Most farmers in Benguet Province are engaged in potato
production not because of its adaptability to local growing conditions but also its non-
perishable characteristics after harvest. It ranks first among the annually grown
vegetables and one of the farmers source of income here in Benguet and some parts of
Mountain Province.
Potato production in the Philippines is a highly profitable activity, producers in
Benguet are among the wealthier small farmers in the country as reported by Waibel
(1981). Among the BPI seed potato cooperators, it was found out that net returns for
seed potato production triple those of table potatoes and are nearly ten times greater than
those of cabbage or carrots.
According to the Highland Agriculture and Resources Research and Development
Consortium (HARRDEC, 1996), the first decision in planting potato is to know the best
variety to plant. To achieve maximum production, the best variety that is adapted to the
locality must be selected, and even excellent cultural management practices will not
compensate for a poor choice of variety. Using the right variety ensures high yield and
better quality of produced. Inorder to determine the best suited variety, a series of
varietal evaluation must be conducted to determine the performance of a previous untried
variety in several locations of different elevations.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
2
In addition, Rasco and Amante (1994) stated that the success in varietal
evaluation is ultimately measured in terms of the acceptability of the variety that passed
the evaluation process by the end users. A farmer may initially accept a new variety
because it suits his farming practice and he finds it to be better yielding than his
traditional variety but may stop growing it if the consumers and traders are not willing to
buy it. Thus, the study was conducted to evaluate the growth and yield of different potato
entries and determine the entries best adapted under Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet
condition and to determine the highest return on cash expense (ROCE).
The study was conducted in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet from July 2008 to
September 2008.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Varietal Evaluation and Selection
Sunil (1990) stated that the first decision in planting is to know the best variety
suited to the locality. Using the right variety ensures a high yield and better quality of
produce. Trial planting is done to test new varieties suitable for a certain locality before
planting in a wide scale. Furthermore, he reported that varietal evaluation is a process in
crop breeding which provides comparison of promising cultivars developed by breeders.
Through varietal evaluation, the breeder selects the best performing variety among the
developed cultivars in terms of yield, quality, adaptability and resistant to pest and
diseases.
Environmental Requirements of Potato Production
Simongo (2007) cited that the environment for growing potatoes markedly affects
the yield. Aside from production technology, the highlands obtained high yields due to
favorable temperature. Likewise, she reported that the major potato production in the
Philippines is concentrated in high elevations with a temperature below 21oC, which is
suitable for growth and development of quality potato tubers. The potato has a wide
range of soil adaptation. For optimum, yields, a deep well drained loam and sandy loam
with a pH of 5.5 to 6.0 is required for potato cultivars, maximum yields are normally
obtained when the average temperature through out the growing season ranges between
15-18oC. A cool night temperature appears to be more important than a cool day time
temperature. High temperature during the day reduces yield (PCARRD, 1985).
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
4
According
to
Tad-awan,
et al. (2008), the agro ecological zones are classified
according to elevation such as: low mountain zone (1001 – 1500 masl), mid mountain
zone (1501 – 2000 masl) and high mountain zone (above 2000 masl). These three agro
ecological zones are all suited for potato production. Moreover, Gonzales, et al., (2006)
reported that before a clone will be released for variety, it should be conducted in three or
more locations representing the low, mid and high elevation for wet and dry in order to
obtain stable growth, yield and processing qualities.
As cited by Gayao, (1989) higher yields were obtained during the dry seasons due
to great solar radiation and canopy cover and lower late blight infection. Likewise,
Simongo, (2007) cited that the potato grow best with temperatures ranging from 17 to
22oC and with an average relative humidity requirement of 86%.
Assimilation depends on the light available and the light intercepted by the green
leaves (Beukema and Vander Zaag, 1979). Furthermore, findings of Sano (1980)
revealed that if large foliage developed before the tuber initiation, the ultimate potential
yield will be higher. Conversely, if small foliage has developed before the tuber
production, this results to lower tuber yields.
In the highlands, BSU P03 (Igorota) and BSU P04 (Solibao) are the potato
varieties recommended by the Northern Philippine Root Crops Research and Training
Center (NPRCRTC, 1985). Because of their yield, resistance to blight and acceptable
traits, the varieties are used for potato chips and french fries.
On the average, approximately 20,000 clones are evaluated annually in various
tests. From ten years of testing, several of these have shown outstanding performance
(HARRDEC, 1977).
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
5
New varieties have greater yield potential than old varieties even under the best
conditions. Use of fertilizers and improved farming practices will increase yield more in
new varieties than in the old ones (Vergara, 1992).
Montes and Tad-awan (2006) reported that at low elevation, genotypes 676089
produced the heaviest tubers and IP84007.67, and 13.1.1 were resistant to blight at 60 and
75 DAP. Although, genotype 380251.17 produced the highest return on cash expense.
Dagdag and Tandang (2005) found that Agria and Igorota significantly produced
the highest number and weight of marketable tuber per plot and total yield per hectare
when planted at Abra. These varieties produced a total yield of 22.88 t/ha and 20.53 t/ha
giving more than 121% and 109% return on cash expense. Raniag had the significantly
highest dry matter content (DMC) of 26% which was statistically similar with Granola,
Donald, Signal and Baraka with 23-25%.
Findings also showed that Igorota, Signal and Donald were the most preferred
varieties by the farmers because of their good growth and yield. Farmers preferred
potatoes that have uniform robust stems, good vigor and resistant to late blight, high yield
and high quality that are marketable.
Gonzales
et. al., (2006) conducted trials across locations and different elevations
in Benguet and found out that clones 13.8.1 and 13.1.1 consistently produced high yields
across locations under different elevations and under dry and wet seasons. The said
clones were resistant to blight and their performance was comparable to Igorota variety.
Likewise, their dry matter content and chipping quality were comparable with those
check varieties.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
6
Bolislis (2005) found out that potato accession 2.21.6.1 had the highest percent
survival, the most vigorous, highest canopy, highest haulm weight and produced the
highest number and weight of marketable tubers in Madaymen, Kibungan.
In a study conducted by Boguiles (2002) at Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet he found
out that clone IP8400.7 produced the highest yield, significantly outyielding the check
variety, Igorota. Findings indicate that clones IP84004.7 and check variety Igorota were
the best performing clones in terms of yield.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
7
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of 140 square meters was thoroughly prepared and divided into three
blocks (Figure 1). Each block was composed of eight plots measuring 1 m x 5 m.
After land preparation one can of chicken manure per plot was applied basally.
Triple 14 inorganic fertilizer as supplemental was applied during hilling-up at the
recommended of 140-140-140-N-P205-K20 T/ha. One pre-sprouted potato tuberlet was
planted per hill at a distance of 25 cm x 30 cm between hills and rows. All the necessary
cultural practices such as weeding, pest control, irrigation and hilling-up were strictly and
equally employed to all the treatments. The experiment was laid out following the
Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications.
Figure 1. Land preparation and planting
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
8
The different potato entries that served as treatments were as follows:
Treatment
Entry Source
T1 380241.17
CIP,
Peru
T2 5.19.2.2 NPRCRTC
T3 2.21.6.2 NPRCRTC
T4 573275 CIP,
Peru
T5 676070 CIP,
Peru
T6 Igorota
(check)
NPRCRTC
T7
Granola (check)
CIP, Peru
T8
Ganza (check)
CIP, Peru
Data Gathered
1. Plant survival (%). This was the number of plants that survived at 30 days
after planting (DAP).
Number of plants survived
% survival =
x 100
Total of number of plants planted
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
9
2. Plant vigor. This was gathered at 30, 45 and 60 DAP using CIP rating scale
(CIP, 2004).
Scale Description
Reaction
1
Plants are weak with few stems and leaves;
Poor Vigor
very pale
2
Plants are weak with few thin stems and
Less Vigorous
leaves; pale
3
Better than less vigorous
Vigorous
4
Plants are moderately strong with robust
Moderately
stems and leaves; leaves are light green in
Vigorous
color
5
Plants are strong with robust stems and
Highly Vigorous
leaves; leaves are light to dark green in
color
3. Canopy cover. This was gathered at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP using a wooden
frame having equal sized grids of 12 x 6. Done by holding the grid over the foliage of
four previously marked plants and the grids covered with effective leaves was counted.
4. Initial height (cm). This was measured using ten sample plants selected at
random per plot at 30 DAP from the base to the tip of the longest shoots.
5. Final height (cm). This was measured using the ten sample plants used in
getting the initial height. Plants were measured from the base up to the two of the tallest
shoot one week before harvesting.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
10
6. Reaction to leaf miner and late blight.
a. Leaf miner. The reaction to leaf miner was observed at 45, 60 and 75 DAP
using the following rating scale (CIP, 2001).
Scale Description
Reaction
1
Less than 20% of plants per plot Highly resistant
infested
2
21 – 40% of the plants per plot Moderately resistant
infested
3
41 – 60% of the plants per plot Susceptible
infested
4
61 – 80% of the plants per plot Moderately susceptible
infested
5
81 – 100% of the plants per plot Very susceptible
infested
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
11
b. Late blight. This was gathered at 45, 60 and 75 DAP using the CIP Scale
(Henfling, 1982).
Blight (%)
CIP Scale Description Symptoms
1
No late blight observe.
Traces - <
2
Late blight present. Maximum 10 lesions per plant.
5 - < 13
3
Plants look healthy but lesions are easily seen at closer
distance. Maximum foliage are 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 look green; however, all plants are affected lower
leaves are dead. About half the foliage are destroyed.
65 - < 85
6
Plot looks green with brown flecks. At about 75% of each
plant is affected. Leaves of the lower-half of the plants are
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 stems have lesions of 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
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
12
7. Yield and Yield Components.
a. Number and weight of marketable tubers per plot. All tubers free from
insects and diseases damage and with less than 10% greening of total surface area was
considered. The tuber was classified and weighed base on the following grades:
Size Grams
Extra large tubers
96 g and above
Large tubers
66 to 65 g
Medium tubers
46 to 65 g
Small tubers
25 to 45 g
Marble tubers
Less than 25 g
b. Number and weight of non-marketable tubers/plot (kg). This was the
tubers which are malformed, damaged by pest and diseases and marble are with 10%
greening and weighing less than 20 grams was considered non-marketable. The non-
marketable tubers were classified and weighed based on the following grades: XL, large,
medium, and marbles.
c. Total yield per plot (kg). This was the weight of marketable and non-
marketable tubers per plot.
d. Computed yield per hectare. This was computed using the formula:
Total yield/plot
x 10,000
Plot size (m
Yield (tons/ha) =
2)
e. Dry matter content (DMC). This was taken by slicing thinly and weighing
50 grams of tubers of assorted sizes. The samples were oven dried at 60oC for 72 hours.
The dry matter was computed using the formula:
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
13
% Dry Matter Content (DMC) = 100% - % MC
Where:
% Moisture Content (MC) = Fresh weight – Oven dry weight x 100
Fresh weight
f. Harvest index. This was obtained from the different entries using the
formula:
HI = Economic yield
Biological yield
8. Return on Cash Expense. The cost of production, gross sales, net profit and return on
cash expense was determined using the following formula:
ROCE = Net Profit
x 100
Total cost production
g. Cost of Production
h. Selling price
i. Gross income = total production volume x price
j. Net income = gross income – expenses
Cost and return analysis. This was obtained using the formula:
ROCE = Gross sales – total expenses
x 100
Total
expenses
9. Meteorological Data. The temperature and relative humidity was taken using the
psychrometer. Rainfall was measured by putting a pail or can in the field and measured
by using graduated cylinder.
Analysis of Data
All quantitative data was analyzed using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for
Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications, the significance off
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
14
differences among the treatment means was tested using the Duncan’s Multiple Range
Test (DMRT).
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
15
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Meteorological data
Table 1 shows the meteorological data from July to September 2008 at Sagpat,
Kibungan, Benguet. At the time of the study, the temperature ranged from 17 to 20 0C.
The highest relative humidity was recorded in the month of July while the lowest relative
humidity was recorded in the month of September with 84 and 80%, respectively.
Rainfall was noted from the months of July to September and the highest was recorded in
July (1.500 L) while the lowest reading was during the month of September with a
rainfall amount of 1.079 Liters
Simongo (2007) cited that potato grows best with temperatures ranging from 17 to
22 0C and with an average relative humidity of 86%. Therefore, the temperature and
relative humidity during the conduct of the study is favorable for potato production in
Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet.
Plant survival (%)
Percent survival of different potato entries revealed significant differences at 75
DAP. One hundred percent plant survival was obtained from entries CIP 380241.17, CIP
573275, and Granola while Igorota had the lowest percent plant survival of 61%. All the
potato entries were able to withstand the erratic rainfall pattern.
Table 1. Meteorological data from July 2008 to September 2008 at Sagpat, Kibungan
MONTH AIR
TEMPERATURE
RELATIVE
RAINFALL AMT.
(oC)
HUMIDITY (%)
L
July 20 84
1.500
August 17
81 1.217
September 18
80 1.079
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
16
Table 2. Plant survival of potato the eight potato entries grown in Sagpat, Kibungan
ENTRY
PLANT SURVIVAL
(%)
CIP 380241.17
100a
PHIL 2.21.6.2
95ab
PHIL 5.19.2.2
89ab
CIP 573275
100a
CIP 676070
99a
Igorota (check variety)
74bc
Ganza (check variety)
98a
Granola (check variety)
100a
CV (%)
9.95
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
Rating Scale:
5 = Highly vigorous
4 = Moderately vigorous
3 = Vigorous
2 = Less vigorous
1 = Poor vigor
Plant vigor
All the entries except CIP 5.19.2.2 had high vigor at 30 days after planting (DAP)
which is comparable with check varieties Granola and Ganza. Most of the potato entries
were highly vigorous even at 30 up to 60 days after planting.
Plant height (cm)
The potato entries showed significant differences on the initial and final plant
height taken at 30 and 75 DAP (Table 3). CIP 380241.17 significantly produced the
tallest plants of 35.9 cm at 30 DAP but comparable with the check variety Ganza and
Granola with an initial plant height of 26.3 cm and 24.5 cm respectively.
At 75 DAP, 5.19.2.2 significantly registered the tallest plants (93.8 cm),
outranking the check varieties Ganza, Igorota and Granola.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
17
Table 3. Plant height at 30 and 75 DAP of eight the potato entries grown at Sagpat,
Kibungan
ENTRY PLANT
HEIGHT
INITIAL (cm)
FINAL (cm)
CIP 380241.17
35.9a 89.2a
PHIL 2.21.6.2
27.2b 82.2a
PHIL 5.19.2.2
8.20d 93.8a
CIP 573275
23.8b 89.2c
CIP 676070
17.3c 80.6a
Igorota (check variety)
7.2d 79.7bc
Ganza (check variety)
26.3b 82.9ab
Granola (check variety)
24.5b 45.00a
CV (%)
17.36
11.00
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
It was observed that most of the potato entries are all tall at 75 DAP except for
granola indicating that the entries were affected by the long photoperiods. Simongo and
Gayao (2006) reported that this growth pattern in most of the entries validated the
observations of some farmers that during the wet season, varieties Igorota and Raniag had
tall vegetative growth and longer maturity (120 days).
Canopy Cover
Canopy cover of different potato entries shows significant differences at 30, 45,
and 60 days after planting (DAP) as shown in Table 4 and Figure 2. An increasing
canopy cover was noted from 30 to 75 DAP in all of the entries including the check
varieties Igorota, Ganza and Granola. At 75 DAP, all the potato entries including the
check varieties attained full canopy cover of 100% at 75 DAP. The high canopy cover
might indicate favorable environmental condition for potato production.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
18
Table 4. Canopy cover of the eight potato entries grown at Sagpat, Kibungan
ENTRY CANOPY
COVER
(%)
30 DAP
CIP 380241.17
62a
PHIL 2.21.6.2
64a
PHIL 5.19.2.2
31b
CIP 573275
65a
CIP 676070
36b
Igorota (check variety)
26b
Ganza (check variety)
66a
Granola (check variety)
77a
CV (%)
24.29
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
380241.17 573275 5.19.2.2 676070
2.21.2.6
Igorota Ganza
Granola
Figure 2. The eight potato entries at vegetative stage
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
19
Reaction to Leaf Miner and Late Blight
Leaf miner incidence was not observed during the conduct of the study. In
addition, the potato entries were recorded to be highly resistant to late blight at 30 to 75
DAP except for Granola variety which showed moderate resistance at 75 DAP. The
occurrence of pest and disease was not observed, may be because the area planted was
newly planted and surrounded with trees. Furthermore, this might be due to continuous
rainfall during the conduct of study which is not favorable to leaf miner.
Number of Marketable and Non-Marketable Tubers
Table 5 shows that CIP 380241.17 produced the highest number of super extra-
large tubers (130) followed by entry 676070 (102) significantly outnumbering the check
varieties Granola (98), Ganza (97) and Igorota (22). However, the rest of the entries
produced a super extra large size tuber, ranging from 54 to 79 outnumbering Igorota that
produced 22 super xl tubers.
Significant differences were noted on the number of extra big and big tubers.
PHIL 2.21.6.2 produced the highest number of extra big, big, and marble tubers. Igorota
produced significantly the lowest number of tubers in all sizes.
Non-Marketable Tubers
No significant differences were observed on the number of non-marketable tubers
on the different entries evaluated. The variability on the number of tubers could be
associated with the genetic characteristics of the different potato entries.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
20
Table 5. Number of marketable and non-marketable tubers of the eight potato entries
grown at Sagpat, Kibungan
MARKETABLE
Super
Extra
NON-
ENTRY
TOTAL
Extra-
Big
Big
Marble
MARKETABLE
large
CIP 380241.17
130a 58bc 36c 27b 251
51
PHIL 2.21.6.2
54bc 94a 113a 88a 349
54
PHIL 5.19.2.2
79ab 45bc 28c 17b 169
21
CIP 573275
68bc 94a 50bc 46b 258
46
CIP 676070
102ab 63b 75b 38b 278
33
Igorota (check variety)
22c 29c 32c 23b 106
46
Ganza (check variety)
97ab 60b 47bc 47b 251
53
Granola (check variety)
98ab 53bc 47bc 23b 221
30
CV (%)
18.06
26.22
13.55
22.35 24.92
21.77
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
Weight of Marketable and Non-Marketable Tubers
Results showed significant differences on the marketable weight of super extra-
large and extra big for the different potato entries (Table 6 and Figure 3). Entry
380241.17 produced the heaviest super xl tuber with a weight of 13.0 kg outranking the
check varieties Ganza (9.90 kg), Granola (9.10 kg) and Igorota (2.38 kg). Entry 5.19.2.2
(10.30 kg) had the second heaviest harvested tubers significantly outyielding Igorota
(check) (2.88 kg) but comparable with check varieties Ganza (9.90 kg) and Granola (9.10
kg).
Entry 2.21.6.2 produced the heaviest extra big tuber weight of 4.20 kg outranking
the check varieties Ganza and Igorota with extra big tuber weighing 2.43 kg and 1.42 kg,
respectively but comparable with Granola with extra big tuber of 3.27 kg. No significant
differences were observed among the potato entries evaluated on the weight of non-
marketable tubers produced.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
21
Table 6. Weight of marketable and non-marketable tubers of the eight potato entries
grown at Sagpat, Kibungan
MARKETABLE (15m2)
Super
Extra
NON-
ENTRY
TOTAL
Extra-
Large
Big
Marble
MARKETABLE
large
CIP 380241.17
13.00a 2.57abcd 1.30 0.43 17.3
1.02
PHIL 2.21.6.2
4.54cd 4.20a 2.73
1.28
12.75
0.77
PHIL 5.19.2.2
10.30a 1.88cd 0.67
0.17 13.02
0.64
CIP 573275
5.30bcd 3.63ab 1.03
0.57 10.53
0.77
CIP 676070
9.37ab 2.15bcd 2.25 0.48 14.25
0.93
Igorota (check variety)
2.38d 1.42d 1.28
0.37 5.45
0.57
Ganza (check variety)
9.90ab 2.43bcd 1.13 0.37 13.83
2.03
Granola (check variety)
9.10abc 3.27abc 0.82 0.35 13.54
1.08
CV (%)
17.54
14.16
17.33
14.12
24.52
21.08
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
380241.17 573275 676070 2.21.2.2
573275 Ganza Igorota Granola
Figure 3. Harvested potato tubers at 90 DAP
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
22
The variation observed among the size classification of the different entries was
greatly affected by the genetic characteristics associated with the environmental factors.
Earlier results showed that the potato entries with good vegetative growth as to height
and canopy cover had the highest number and weight of harvested tubers.
Total and Computed Yield
Table 7 showed significant differences on the total and computed yield of the
eight potato entries evaluated. Potato entry 380241.17 had the highest total and computed
yield of 18.32 kg per 5m2 and 36.64 tons per hectare significantly outyielding the check
variety Igorota (12.04 Tha-1), although comparable with Ganza (31.72 Tha-1) and Granola
(29.24 Tha-1). The rest of the entries had a total yield ranging from 22.60 to 30.36 Tha-1
which is either comparable or outyielding the check varieties Ganza (31.72 T/ha),
Granola (29.24 T/ha) and Igorota (12.04 T/ha). As an affect of the wet season planting,
some of the tubers during harvesting were not fully matured thus, affecting the yield.
Vander Zaag and Burton (1978) reported that in most countries with high average yield,
the increases in yield during the last decades in potato were probably obtained by
prolonged growth period but delayed harvesting.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
23
Table 7. Total yield (kg) and computed yield T ha-1 of the eight potato entries grown at
Sagpat, Kibungan
ENTRY TOTAL
YIELD
(kg/5m2)
COMPUTED YIELD (T/ha)
CIP 380241.17
18.32
36.64
PHIL 2.21.6.2
13.52
27.04
PHIL 5.19.2.2
13.66
27.32
CIP 573275
11.30
22.60
CIP 676070
15.18
30.36
Igorota (check variety)
6.02
12.54
Ganza (check variety)
15.86
31.72
Granola (check variety)
14.62
29.24
CV (%)
18.49
18.53
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
Harvest Index
Significant differences on the harvest index were observed among the eight potato
entries as shown in Table 8. Granola (check) had the highest harvest index but
comparable with CIP 573275, CIP 67670. PHIL 5.19.2.2, on the other hand, had the
lowest harvest index. Low harvest indices of the potato entries evaluated is due to the
high herbage yield or biological yield.
Dry Matter Content (%)
Results showed no significant differences on the dry matter content of the potato
entries grown at Sagpat, Kibungan condition.
The dry matter content of the eight potato entries was not affected by the adverse
climatic conditions, as the dry matter content is attributed to its genetic characteristics.
Results validated the findings of Rastovski (1981) that dry matter content which is a very
important factor in processing potatoes is mainly determined genetically and thus,
depends on the variety.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
24
Table 8. Harvest index and dry matter content (%) of the eight potato entries grown at
Sagpat, Kibungan
ENTRY
HARVEST INDEX
DRY MATTER CONTENT
CIP 380241.17
0.77ab 19
PHIL 2.21.6.2
0.74bc 23
PHIL 5.19.2.2
0.64c 19
CIP 573275
0.88a 20
CIP 676070
0.87ab 19
Igorota (check variety)
0.82ab 21
Ganza (check variety)
0.77ab 20
Granola (check variety)
0.90a 18
CV (%)
8.78
8.24
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
Return on cash expenses (ROCE)
Profitability of the eight potato entries is shown in Table 9. CIP 380241.17
obtained the highest return on cash expense followed by CIP 676070 while Igorota
(check) had the lowest return on cash expense. The high return on cash expense is
attributed to the high yield. On the other hand, the vegetative growth of most entries may
have contributed to the increase cost of production. Simongo and Gayao (2006) stated
that the very tall vegetative growth of potato plants may results in enhanced stem rot and
breakage and entailed higher labor and pesticide cost (Table 9).
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
25
Table 9. Cost analysis of potato production at Sagpat, Kibungan
ENTRY COST
OF
MARKETABLE
GROSS
NET
ROCE
PRODUCTION
TUBERS
SALE
INCOME
%
(Php/5m2)
(kg/5m2)
(Php)
CIP 380241.17
136.70
18.32
549.62
268.9
302.04
PHIL 2.21.6.2
136.70
13.53
405.6
273.1
196.70
PHIL 5.19.2.2
136.70
13.66
409.8
202.3
199.78
CIP 573275
136.70
11.30
339
318.7
147.48
CIP 676070
136.70
15.18
455.4
43
233.13
Igorota (cv)
136.70
6.02
180.6
339.1
31.45
Ganza (cv)
136.70
15.86
475.8
316.3
248.06
Granola (cv)
136.70
14.62
438.6
301.9
231.38
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5 %
probability levels (DMRT)
= Potato tubers was sold at PhP 30.00 per kilo
= Total cost of production includes planting materials, insecticides, fertilizers and labor
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
26
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The study was conducted to evaluate the growth and yield of the different potato
entries and to determine the potato entries that are best adapted in terms of growth and
yield at Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet and to determine the profitability of growing potato
at Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet. The study was conducted from July to September 2008.
Significant differences among the potato entries evaluated were noted on plant
survival, vigor, height, canopy cover, number and weight of marketable tuber, total yield
and harvest index.
Among the potato entries, CIP 380241.17 had a hundred percent survival, tallest
initial plant height, highest and heaviest super extra large tubers, comparable harvest
index, highest total and computed yield, and the highest return on cash expense.
PHIL 5.19.2.2 was the tallest at maturity, had the highest dry matter content,
highest number of extra big tubers, comparable highest total and computed yield. PHIL
2.21.6.2 produced the highest number of big and marble sized potato tubers and the
heaviest extra big tubers. CIP 676070 had comparable total and computed yield.
On the reaction to leaf miner and late blight, all of the potato entries evaluated
showed high resistance.
As to the performance of the check varieties, comparable total yield was noted in
Ganza and Granola. Igorota was the lowest yielder.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
27
Conclusions
The best performing potato entries are CIP 380241.17, PHIL 2.21.6.2, and PHIL
5.19.2.2 and CIP 676070 based on yield and resistance to late blight.
CIP 380241.17, PHIL 2.21.6.2, PHIL 5.19.2.2 and 676070 are best adapted at
Sagpat, Kibungan.
CIP 380241.17 is more profitable to grow at Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet.
Recommendations
CIP 380241.17, PHIL 2.21.6.2, PHIL 5.19.2.2 and CIP 676070 could be
recommended for potato production at Sagpat, Kibungan condition.
There should be continuous evaluation and selection of potato entries until a variety
with stable performance will be recommended at Sagpat, Kibungan condition in various
planting seasons.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
28
LITERATURE CITED
BEUKEMA and VANDER ZAAG. 1979. Potato Improvement. Wageningen, the
Netherlands: International Agriculture Center. Pp. 11-16.
BOGUILES, C. E. 2002. Evaluation of Potato Clones at Bano-oy Buguias, Benguet. BS
Thesis (Unpub.) Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 15.
BOLISLIS, M. D. 2005. Response of Potato Accessions to Frost Condition at
Madaymen, Kibungan, Benguet. BS Thesis. Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet. P. 29.
CIP. 2001. Fact Sheets. International Potato Center (CIP). P.13.
CIP. 2004. Fact sheets. International Potato Center (CIP). P.11.
EUFEM T. KASCO et. al., 1992. SAPPRAD (Southeast Asian Program for Potato
Research and Development) P. 191.
GAYAO, S.T. 1989. Potato Germplasm evaluation for late blight resistance at diverse
highland locations during different seasons. MS. Thesis. Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 37.
GONZALES, I. C. et. Al., 2006. Multi – locational Yield Trial of Potential Potato Clones
Across Location. BSU Research Journal. P. 74.
HARRDEC. 1996. Highland Potato Technoguide (3rd edition). Benguet State University,
La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 4 – 5.
HARRDEC. 1977. Highland Potato Technoguide. Benguet State University, La Trinidad,
Benguet. Pp. 1-7.
HENFLING, J. W. 1982. Field screening procedures to evaluate resistance to late blight.
Technology evaluation series no. 1982-05. International Potato Center (CIP). P.
11.
MONTES, F. R. and TAD-AWAN, B. A. 2006. Growth and Yield of Potato Genotypes
in an Organic Farm at Puguis, La Trinidad, Benguet. BSU Research Journal. P. 6.
NPRCRTC, 1985. Potato Techno-guide. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
P. 24.
PCARRD, 1985. Higland Potato Technoguide, Published in Laguna. P. 3.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
29
RASCO, E. T. JR. and D. D. AMANTE. 1994. Sweetpotato Variety Evaluation.
Southeast Asia. Program for Potato Research and Development. Vol. I. Pp. 42 –
43.
RASTOVSKI, A. VAN. 1981. Storage of Potatoes postharvest behavior, store design,
storage practice, handling. Wageningen. P. 37.
SANO, E., 1980. Rate of tuber production of three white potato varieties grown under six
fertility levels. MS Thesis, Mountain State Agricultural College La Trinidad,
Benguet. P. 5.
SIMONGO, D. K. 2007. growth and yield and dry matter partitioning of potato
genotypes under organic production at La Trinidad, Benguet. PhP Dissertation.
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 1.
SIMONGO, D. K. and B. T. GAYAO. 2006. Farmer variety management practices in the
production of Igorota, Solibao, and Raniag potatoes. The potato seed production
technologies in the Highland of Northern Philippines: An Assessment. Pp. 116-
130.
SUNIL, R.R. 1990. Varietal evaluation of promising lines and path coefficient analysis in
pole snap beans. BS Thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
P.86.
TAD-AWAN, B. A. et al., 2008. Organic Potatoes: varieties and practices in Benguet,
Philippines. STVRDC. Benguet State University La Trinidad Benguet. P. 1.
TANDANG, L.L. and DAGDAG, D.D., Varietal evaluation and farmer’s preference on
potato grown under post-rice condition in Batayan, Alangtin, Tubo, Abra.
Benguet State University Research Journal. Pp. 106-108.
VANDER ZAAG, D.E. and BURTON, D. 1987. Potato production and utilization in
world perspective with special references to the tropics and sub tropics. Potato
Reseach. 26. Pp. 323-362.
VERGARA, 1992. Raising the yield potential of rice. Philippines. Journal techno guide.
Retrieved July 24, 2009 from http://books.google.com.ph/books.id/fulltext.
WAIBEL, H., 1981. An economic study on need potato production in the province of
Benguet. Philippines. Institute of Agricultural Economics. Pp. 140-143.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
30
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Plant survival
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
100
100
100 300 100
2.21.6.2
100
97
87 284 95
5.19.2.2
100
95
72 267 89
573275
100
100
100 300 100
676070
100
97
100 297 99
Igorota
100
55
67 222 74
Ganza
100
100
95 295 98
Granola
100
100
100 300 100
TOTAL 800 744 721 2265 94
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
432.083
215.042
Treatment
7
1706.958
243.851
2.70ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
1219.917
87.137
TOTAL
23
3356.958
ns =Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 9.95
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
31
Appendix Table 2. Plant vigor at 30 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
5
5
5 15 5
2.21.6.2
5
5
4 14 5
5.19.2.2
4
3
2 9 3
573275
5
5
5 15 5
676070
5
5
5 15 5
Igorota
3
2
2 7 2
Ganza
5
5
5 15 5
Granola
5
5
4 14 5
TOTAL 37 35 32 104 4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
1.583
0.792
Treatment
7
23.333
3.333
19.31**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
2.417
0.173
TOTAL
23
27.333
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 9.59
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
32
Appendix Table 3. Plant vigor at 45 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
5
5
5 15 5
2.21.6.2
5
5
5 15 5
5.19.2.2
5
5
5 15 5
573275
5
5
3 13 4
676070
5
5
5 15 5
Igorota
4
5
5 14 5
Ganza
5
5
5 15 5
Granola
5
5
5 15 5
TOTAL 39 40 38 117 5
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.250
0.125
Treatment
7
1.292
0.185
0.84ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
3.083
0.220
TOTAL
23
4.625
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 9.63
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
33
Appendix Table 4. Plant vigor at 60 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
5
5
5 15 5
2.21.6.2
5
5
5 15 5
5.19.2.2
5
5
5 15 5
573275
5
5
3 13 4
676070
5
5
5 15 5
Igorota
4
5
5 14 5
Ganza
5
5
5 15 5
Granola
5
5
5 15 5
TOTAL 39 40 38 117 5
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.083
0.042
Treatment
7
0.292
0.042
1.0ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
0.583
0.042
TOTAL
23
0.958
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 4.12
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
34
Appendix Table 5. Canopy cover at 30 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
85
61
39 185 62
2.21.6.2
93
61
38 192 64
5.19.2.2
47
28
19 94 31
573275
76
76
44 196 65
676070
46
27
35 108 36
Igorota
21
35
23 79 26
Ganza
90
70
39 199 66
Granola
87
73
42 202 67
TOTAL 545 431 279 1255 52
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
4452.333
2226.167
Treatment
7
6590.958
941.565
6.93**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
1901.667
135.833
TOTAL
23
12944.958
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 22.29
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
35
Appendix Table 6. Canopy cover 45 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
100
100
100 300 100
2.21.6.2
100
100
100 300 100
5.19.2.2
100
100
100 300 100
573275
100
100
100 300 100
676070
100
100
100 300 100
Igorota
100
100
100 300 100
Ganza
100
100
100 300 100
Granola
94
95
100 289 96
TOTAL 794 795 800 2389 100
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
2.583
1.292
Treatment
7
35.292
5.042
3.90*
2.77
4.28
Error
14
18.083
1.292
TOTAL
23
55.958
* = Significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 1.14
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
36
Appendix Table 7. Canopy cover at 60 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
100
100
100 300 100
2.21.6.2
100
100
100 300 100
5.19.2.2
100
100
100 300 100
573275
100
100
100 300 100
676070
100
100
100 300 100
Igorota
100
100
100 300 100
Ganza
100
100
100 300 100
Granola
97
98
100 295 98
TOTAL 797 798 800 2395 100
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.583
0.292
Treatment
7
7.292
1.042
3.57*
2.77
4.28
Error
14
4.083
0.292
TOTAL
23
11.958
* = Significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 0.54
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
37
Appendix Table 8. Canopy cover at 75 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
100
100
100 300 100
2.21.6.2
100
100
100 300 100
5.19.2.2
100
100
100 300 100
573275
100
100
100 300 100
676070
100
100
100 300 100
Igorota
100
100
100 300 100
Ganza
100
100
100 300 100
Granola
100
100
99 299 100
TOTAL 800 800 799 2399 100
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.083
0.042
Treatment
7
0.292
0.042
1.0
2.77
4.28
Error
14
0.583
0.042
TOTAL
23
0.958
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 0.20
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
38
Appendix Table 9. Late blight at 30 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
1
1
1 3 1
2.21.6.2
1
1
1 3 1
5.19.2.2
1
1
1 3 1
573275
1
1
1 3 1
676070
1
1
1 3 1
Igorota
1
1
1 3 1
Ganza
1
1
1 3 1
Granola
1
1
1 3 1
TOTAL 8 8 8 24 1
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
39
Appendix Table 10. Late blight at 45 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
1
1
1 3 1
2.21.6.2
1
1
1 3 1
5.19.2.2
1
1
1 3 1
573275
1
1
1 3 1
676070
1
1
1 3 1
Igorota
1
1
1 3 1
Ganza
1
1
1 3 1
Granola
1
1
1 3 1
TOTAL 8 8 8 24 1
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
40
Appendix Table 11. Late blight at 60 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
1
1
1 3 1
2.21.6.2
1
1
1 3 1
5.19.2.2
1
1
1 3 1
573275
1
1
1 3 1
676070
1
1
1 3 1
Igorota
1
1
1 3 1
Ganza
1
1
1 3 1
Granola
1
1
1 3 1
TOTAL 8 8 8 24 1
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
41
Appendix Table 12. Late blight at 75 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
1
1
1 3 1
2.21.6.2
1
1
1 3 1
5.19.2.2
1
1
1 3 1
573275
1
1
2 4 1
676070
2
1
1 4 1
Igorota
2
1
1 4 1
Ganza
1
1
1 3 1
Granola
3
4
3 10 3
TOTAL 12 11 11 34 1
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
42
Appendix Table 13. Initial Plant height
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
29.7
27.1
16.8 73.6 24.5
2.21.6.2
32.7
23.3
25.6 81.6 27.2
5.19.2.2
12.0
8.7
3.9 24.6 8.2
573275
30.7
22.6
18.2 71.5 23.8
676070
15.8
18.0
18.0 51.8 17.3
Igorota
3.85
8.9
8.9 21.65 7.2
Ganza
30.6
24.1
24.1 78.8 26.3
Granola
38.8
34.5
34.5 107.8 35.9
TOTAL 194.15 167.2 150 511.35 21.3
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
124.319
62.159
Treatment
7
2027.184
289.598
21.18**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
191.389
13.671
TOTAL
23
2342.892
** = Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 17.36
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
43
Appendix Table 14. Final Plant height
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
56.3
35.5
43.2 135.0 45.0
2.21.6.2
86.4
84.6
75.6 246.6 82.2
5.19.2.2
94.1
103.7
83.6 281.4 93.8
573275
85.5
97.3
84.8 267.6 89.2
676070
72.4
98.5
71.0 241.9 80.6
Igorota
74.7
78.0
86.3 239 79.7
Ganza
73.9
98.5
76.3 248.7 82.9
Granola
86.6
93.5
87.4 267.5 89.2
TOTAL 629.9 689.6 608.2 1927.7 80.3
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
444.206
222.103
Treatment
7
4791.140
684.449
8.77**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
1092.394
78.028
TOTAL
23
6327.740
** = Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 11.00
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
44
Appendix Table 15 .SXL number
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
148
131
110 389 130
2.21.6.2
86
41
34 161 54
5.19.2.2
116
75
47 238 79
573275
87
61
56 204 68
676070
109
80
117 306 102
Igorota
17
33
17 67 22
Ganza
136
75
80 291 97
Granola
182
91
21 294 98
TOTAL 881 587 482 1950 81
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
10694.250
5347.125
Treatment
7
23143.833
3306.262
4.27*
2.77
4.28
Error
14
10842.417
774.458
TOTAL
23
11680.500
* = Significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 18.06
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
45
Appendix Table 16. Extra big number
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
47
66
62 175 58
2.21.6.2
106
104
72 282 94
5.19.2.2
35
63
36 134 45
573275
115
81
85 281 94
676070
81
67
42 190 63
Igorota
15
44
27 86 29
Ganza
62
45
72 179 60
Granola
38
62
60 160 53
TOTAL 499 532 456 1487 62
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
363.083
181.542
Treatment
7
10602.292
1514.613
5.74**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
3693.583
263.827
TOTAL
23
14658.958
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 26.22
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
46
Appendix Table 17 . Big number
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
43
39
26 108 36
2.21.6.2
95
101
143 339 113
5.19.2.2
26
34
25 85 28
573275
52
67
32 151 50
676070
56
115
54 225 75
Igorota
36
33
26 95 32
Ganza
38
49
53 140 47
Granola
48
46
46 140 47
TOTAL 394 484 405 1283 53
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
602.583
301.292
Treatment
7
16566.625
2366.661
7.95**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
4166.750
297.625
TOTAL
23
21335.958
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 13.55
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
47
Appendix Table 18. Marble number
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
37
26
18 81 27
2.21.6.2
90
57
118 265 88
5.19.2.2
10
28
12 50 17
573275
48
43
48 139 46
676070
45
54
16 115 38
Igorota
15
35
18 68 23
Ganza
25
78
38 141 47
Granola
13
40
15 68 23
TOTAL 283 361 283 927 39
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
507.000
253.500
Treatment
7
11181.625
1597.375
4.71**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
4751.000
339.357
TOTAL
23
16439.625
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 22.35
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
48
Appendix Table 19. Non-marketable number
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
75
68
9 152 51
2.21.6.2
70
58
35 163 54
5.19.2.2
32
21
11 64 21
573275
55
55
28 138 46
676070
25
45
30 100 33
Igorota
26
36
22 84 28
Ganza
96
45
18 159 53
Granola
32
24
34 90 30
TOTAL 411 352 187 950 40
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
3370.083
1685.042
Treatment
7
3479.167
497.024
1.69ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
4112.583
293.756
TOTAL
23
10961.833
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 21.77
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
49
Appendix Table 20. Total marketable number
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
275
262
216 753 251
2.21.6.2
377
303
367 1047 349
5.19.2.2
187
200
120 507 169
573275
302
252
221 775 258
676070
291
318
229 838 279
Igorota
83
145
88 316 105
Ganza
259
317
243 819 273
Granola
281
239
142 662 221
TOTAL 2055 2036 1626 5717 238
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
14687.583
7343.792
Treatment
7
115495.292 16499.327
13.41**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
17219.083
1229.935
TOTAL
23
147401.958
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 14.72
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
50
Appendix Table 21. Sxl weight
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
15.8
11.7
11.5 39 13.00
2.21.6.2
6.2
4.51
2.9 13.61 4.54
5.19.2.2
13.25
9.15
8.5 30.9 10.30
573275
7.25
5.15
3.5 15.9 5.30
676070
9.7
6.7
11.7 28.1 9.37
Igorota
1.6
3.9
1.65 7.15 2.38
Ganza
13.15
10.3
6.25 29.7 9.90
Granola
16.4
8.2
2.7 27.3 9.10
TOTAL 83.35 59.61 48.7 191.66 7.99
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
78.468
39.234
Treatment
7
263.423
37.632
5.57**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
94.311
6.737
TOTAL
23
436.203
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 17.54
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
51
Appendix Table 22.Extra big weight
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
2.0
2.5
3.2 7.7 2.57
2.21.6.2
4.4
4.5
3.7 12.6 4.20
5.19.2.2
1.7
2.95
1.0 5.65 1.88
573275
4.7
3.2
3.0 10.9 3.63
676070
3.4
1.45
1.6 6.45 2.15
Igorota
0.9
1.7
1.65 4.25 1.42
Ganza
2.2
2.4
2.7 7.3 2.43
Granola
1.6
4.7
3.5 9.8 3.27
TOTAL 20.9 23.4 20.35 64.65 2.69
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.661
0.330
Treatment
7
18.442
2.635
3.10*
2.77
4.28
Error
14
11.894
0.850
TOTAL
23
30.997
* = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 14.16
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
52
Appendix Table 23. Big weight
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
1.30
1.2
1.4 3.90 1.30
2.21.6.2
2.3
2.1
3.8 8.20 2.73
5.19.2.2
0.7
0.9
0.4 2.00 0.67
573275
1
1.3
1.1 3.40 1.13
676070
1.2
4.55
1 6.75
2.25
Igorota
1.2
0.85
1.8 3.85 1.28
Ganza
1.3
1.3
0.5 3.10 1.03
Granola
1
0.75
0.7 2.45 0.82
TOTAL 10.00 12.95 10.7 33.65 1.40
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.594
0.297
Treatment
7
10.822
1.546
2.12ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
10.221
0.730
TOTAL
23
21.637
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 17.33
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
53
Appendix Table 24. Marble weight
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
0.55
0.45
0.3 1.3 0.43
2.21.6.2
1.15
2.5
0.2 3.85 1.28
5.19.2.2
0.1
0.3
0.1 0.5 0.17
573275
0.6
0.6
0.5 1.7 0.57
676070
0.5
0.55
0.4 1.45 0.48
Igorota
0.2
0.5
0.4 1.1 0.37
Ganza
0.3
0.4
0.4 1.1 0.37
Granola
0.4
0.45
0.2 1.05 0.35
TOTAL 3.80 5.75 2.5 12.05 0.50
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.669
0.334
Treatment
7
2.376
0.339
2.19ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
2.168
0.155
TOTAL
23
5.212
ns =Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 14.12
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
54
Appendix Table 25. non-marketable weight
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
1.35
1.05
0.65 3.05 1.02
2.21.6.2
1.45
0.65
0.2 2.3 0.77
5.19.2.2
1.15
0.625
0.15 1.925 0.64
573275
1.15
0.65
0.5 2.3 0.77
676070
1.00
1.2
0.6 2.8 0.93
Igorota
0.35
0.7
0.65 1.7 0.57
Ganza
4.5
1.4
0.2 6.1 2.03
Granola
1.1
0.85
1.3 3.25 1.08
TOTAL 12.05 7.125 4.25 23.425 0.98
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
3.890
1.945
Treatment
7
4.500
0.643
1.11ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
8.097
0.578
TOTAL
23
16.487
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 21.10
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
55
Appendix Table 26. Total weight
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
21.00
16.90
17.05 54.95 18.32
2.21.6.2
15.50
14.26
10.80
40.56 13.52
5.19.2.2
16.90
13.92
10.15
40.97 13.66
573275
14.70
10.90
8.60
34.20 11.40
676070
15.80
14.45
15.30
45.55 15.18
Igorota
4.25
7.65
6.15
18.05 6.02
Ganza
21.45
15.80
10.50 47.30 15.77
Granola
20.50
14.95
8.40 43.85 14.62
TOTAL 130.10
108.83 86.95 325.43 13.56
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
116.378
5.189
Treatment
7
280.522
40.075
6.36**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
88.247
6.303
TOTAL
23
485.147
* * = Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 18.49
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
56
Appendix Table 27. Computed yield
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
42.00
33.80
34.10 109.90 36.63
2.21.6.2
31.00
38.52
21.60 81.12 27.04
5.19.2.2
33.80
27.84
20.30 81.94 27.32
573275
29.40
21.80
16.40 67.60 22.53
676070
31.60
28.90
30.60 91.10 30.36
Igorota
8.50
15.30
12.30 36.10 12.04
Ganza
42.90
31.60
21.00
95.50
31.83
Granola
41.00
29.90
16.80 87.70 29.24
TOTAL 260.20 217.66 173.10 650.96 27.12
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
474.236
237.118
Treatment
7
1128.244
161.321
6.39**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
353.651
25.26
TOTAL
23
1957.131
**= Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 18.59
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
57
Appendix Table 28. Harvest Index
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
0.83
0.65
0.82 2.3 0.77
2.21.6.2
0.68
0.77
0.76 2.21 0.74
5.19.2.2
0.73
0.48
0.72 1.93 0.64
573275
0.89
0.89
0.87 2.65 0.88
676070
0.86
0.83
0.91 2.6 0.87
Igorota
0.79
0.83
0.83 2.45 0.82
Ganza
0.72
0.76
0.84 2.32 0.77
Granola
0.93
0.92
0.84 2.69 0.90
TOTAL 6.43 6.13 6.59 19.15 0.80
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.014
0.007
Treatment
7
0.154
0.003
4.48**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
0.069
0.005
TOTAL
23
0.236
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 8.78
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
58
Appendix Table 29.Dry matter content
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
20
19
18 57 19
2.21.6.2
21
25
22 68 23
5.19.2.2
17
19
22 58 19
573275
20
19
21 60 20
676070
18
20
19 57 19
Igorota
20
20
23 63 21
Ganza
21
21
18 60 20
Granola
18
17
18 53 18
TOTAL 155 160 161 476 20
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
2.583
1.292
Treatment
7
47.333
6.762
2.53ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
37.417
2.673
TOTAL
23
87.333
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 8.24
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
59
CA-UR Form 9
Benguet State University
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE
La Trinidad, Benguet
Date: March 2009
APPLICATION FOR THESIS MANUSCRIPT ORAL DEFENSE
Name: JULIUS BAG-AYAN
Degree (Major Field): BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN AGRICULTURE (Agronomy)
Title of Research: EVALUATION OF POTATO ENTRIES IN SAGPAT, KIBUNGAN,
BENGUET CONDITION.
Date and time of Defense: October 21 2009
Place of Defense: College of Agriculture (Room 201)
Endorsed: JANET P.PABLO
Adviser and Chairperson, Advisory Committee
Approved: ESTHER JOSEPHINE D. SAGALLA
Member, advisory committee and
Department Chairman
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESULT OF ORAL DEFENSE
Name and Signature Remarks (Passed/Failed)
GUERZON A. PAYANGDO __________________
Member, Advisory Committee
DANILO P. PADUA __________________
Member, Advisory Committee
JANET P. PABLO __________________
Adviser and Chairperson, Advisory Committee
ESTHER JOSEPHINE D. SAGALLA __________________
Member, Advisory Committee and
Department Chairman
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
BAG-AYAN, JULIUS S. OCTOBER 2009. Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries
in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet. Benguet State University, La Trinidad Benguet.
Adviser: Janet P. Pablo, MSc.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to evaluate the growth and yield of different potato
entries, to determine the entries that are best adapted in terms of growth and yield under
Sagpat, Kibungan condition and, to determine the profitability of growing potato under
Sagpat, Kibungan.
Potato entries CIP 380241.17, PHIL 2.21.6.2, PHIL 5.19.2.2 and CIP 676070
produced highly vigorous plants at 30 to 60 days after planting and registered the widest
canopy cover at 45 to 75 days after planting. These entries also were highly resistant to
late blight. All the potato entries evaluated had comparable harvest index including the
check varieties Ganza, Granola and Igorota.
CIP 380241.17 produced the highest total yield, highest and heaviest super extra
large tubers while PHIL 2.21.6.2 and PHIL 5.19.2.2 produced the heaviest extra big, big
and super extra large tubers.
For tuber production, CIP 380241.17 produced the highest return on cash
expense.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………… i
Abstract………………………………………………………………………. i
Table of Contents………………………………………………………………
ii
INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE………………………………………………...
3
Varietal Evaluation and Selection………………………………………...
3
Environmental Requirements of Potato Production………………………
3
MATERIALS AND METHODS…………………………………………….
7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION……………………………………………..
15
Temperature, Relative Humidity and Rainfall……………………………
15
Plant Survival……………………………………………………………..
15
Plant Vigor………………………………………………………………..
16
Plant Height……………………………………………………………….
16
Canopy Cover…………………………………………………………….
17
Reaction to Leaf Miner……………………………………………………
19
Reaction to Late Blight……………………………………………………
19
Number of Marketable and Non-marketable Tubers……………………...
19
Weight of Marketable and Non-marketable Tubers………………………
20
Total Yield (kg/m2) and Computed Yield (T/ha-1) ………………………
22
ii
Harvest Index and Dry Matter Content……………………………………
23
Production Cost Analysis………………………………………………….
24
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS……………
26
LITERATURE CITED………………………………………………………
28
APPENDICES……………………………………………………………….. 30
iii
INTRODUCTION
Potato
(Solanum tuberosum L.) is one of the most intensively cultivated crops in
the country and widely grown here in the Cordillera particularly in Benguet and
Mountain Province. The production of this crop is more profitable as compared to other
vegetables in the highland. Most farmers in Benguet Province are engaged in potato
production not because of its adaptability to local growing conditions but also its non-
perishable characteristics after harvest. It ranks first among the annually grown
vegetables and one of the farmers source of income here in Benguet and some parts of
Mountain Province.
Potato production in the Philippines is a highly profitable activity, producers in
Benguet are among the wealthier small farmers in the country as reported by Waibel
(1981). Among the BPI seed potato cooperators, it was found out that net returns for
seed potato production triple those of table potatoes and are nearly ten times greater than
those of cabbage or carrots.
According to the Highland Agriculture and Resources Research and Development
Consortium (HARRDEC, 1996), the first decision in planting potato is to know the best
variety to plant. To achieve maximum production, the best variety that is adapted to the
locality must be selected, and even excellent cultural management practices will not
compensate for a poor choice of variety. Using the right variety ensures high yield and
better quality of produced. Inorder to determine the best suited variety, a series of
varietal evaluation must be conducted to determine the performance of a previous untried
variety in several locations of different elevations.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
2
In addition, Rasco and Amante (1994) stated that the success in varietal
evaluation is ultimately measured in terms of the acceptability of the variety that passed
the evaluation process by the end users. A farmer may initially accept a new variety
because it suits his farming practice and he finds it to be better yielding than his
traditional variety but may stop growing it if the consumers and traders are not willing to
buy it. Thus, the study was conducted to evaluate the growth and yield of different potato
entries and determine the entries best adapted under Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet
condition and to determine the highest return on cash expense (ROCE).
The study was conducted in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet from July 2008 to
September 2008.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Varietal Evaluation and Selection
Sunil (1990) stated that the first decision in planting is to know the best variety
suited to the locality. Using the right variety ensures a high yield and better quality of
produce. Trial planting is done to test new varieties suitable for a certain locality before
planting in a wide scale. Furthermore, he reported that varietal evaluation is a process in
crop breeding which provides comparison of promising cultivars developed by breeders.
Through varietal evaluation, the breeder selects the best performing variety among the
developed cultivars in terms of yield, quality, adaptability and resistant to pest and
diseases.
Environmental Requirements of Potato Production
Simongo (2007) cited that the environment for growing potatoes markedly affects
the yield. Aside from production technology, the highlands obtained high yields due to
favorable temperature. Likewise, she reported that the major potato production in the
Philippines is concentrated in high elevations with a temperature below 21oC, which is
suitable for growth and development of quality potato tubers. The potato has a wide
range of soil adaptation. For optimum, yields, a deep well drained loam and sandy loam
with a pH of 5.5 to 6.0 is required for potato cultivars, maximum yields are normally
obtained when the average temperature through out the growing season ranges between
15-18oC. A cool night temperature appears to be more important than a cool day time
temperature. High temperature during the day reduces yield (PCARRD, 1985).
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
4
According
to
Tad-awan,
et al. (2008), the agro ecological zones are classified
according to elevation such as: low mountain zone (1001 – 1500 masl), mid mountain
zone (1501 – 2000 masl) and high mountain zone (above 2000 masl). These three agro
ecological zones are all suited for potato production. Moreover, Gonzales, et al., (2006)
reported that before a clone will be released for variety, it should be conducted in three or
more locations representing the low, mid and high elevation for wet and dry in order to
obtain stable growth, yield and processing qualities.
As cited by Gayao, (1989) higher yields were obtained during the dry seasons due
to great solar radiation and canopy cover and lower late blight infection. Likewise,
Simongo, (2007) cited that the potato grow best with temperatures ranging from 17 to
22oC and with an average relative humidity requirement of 86%.
Assimilation depends on the light available and the light intercepted by the green
leaves (Beukema and Vander Zaag, 1979). Furthermore, findings of Sano (1980)
revealed that if large foliage developed before the tuber initiation, the ultimate potential
yield will be higher. Conversely, if small foliage has developed before the tuber
production, this results to lower tuber yields.
In the highlands, BSU P03 (Igorota) and BSU P04 (Solibao) are the potato
varieties recommended by the Northern Philippine Root Crops Research and Training
Center (NPRCRTC, 1985). Because of their yield, resistance to blight and acceptable
traits, the varieties are used for potato chips and french fries.
On the average, approximately 20,000 clones are evaluated annually in various
tests. From ten years of testing, several of these have shown outstanding performance
(HARRDEC, 1977).
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
5
New varieties have greater yield potential than old varieties even under the best
conditions. Use of fertilizers and improved farming practices will increase yield more in
new varieties than in the old ones (Vergara, 1992).
Montes and Tad-awan (2006) reported that at low elevation, genotypes 676089
produced the heaviest tubers and IP84007.67, and 13.1.1 were resistant to blight at 60 and
75 DAP. Although, genotype 380251.17 produced the highest return on cash expense.
Dagdag and Tandang (2005) found that Agria and Igorota significantly produced
the highest number and weight of marketable tuber per plot and total yield per hectare
when planted at Abra. These varieties produced a total yield of 22.88 t/ha and 20.53 t/ha
giving more than 121% and 109% return on cash expense. Raniag had the significantly
highest dry matter content (DMC) of 26% which was statistically similar with Granola,
Donald, Signal and Baraka with 23-25%.
Findings also showed that Igorota, Signal and Donald were the most preferred
varieties by the farmers because of their good growth and yield. Farmers preferred
potatoes that have uniform robust stems, good vigor and resistant to late blight, high yield
and high quality that are marketable.
Gonzales
et. al., (2006) conducted trials across locations and different elevations
in Benguet and found out that clones 13.8.1 and 13.1.1 consistently produced high yields
across locations under different elevations and under dry and wet seasons. The said
clones were resistant to blight and their performance was comparable to Igorota variety.
Likewise, their dry matter content and chipping quality were comparable with those
check varieties.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
6
Bolislis (2005) found out that potato accession 2.21.6.1 had the highest percent
survival, the most vigorous, highest canopy, highest haulm weight and produced the
highest number and weight of marketable tubers in Madaymen, Kibungan.
In a study conducted by Boguiles (2002) at Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet he found
out that clone IP8400.7 produced the highest yield, significantly outyielding the check
variety, Igorota. Findings indicate that clones IP84004.7 and check variety Igorota were
the best performing clones in terms of yield.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
7
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of 140 square meters was thoroughly prepared and divided into three
blocks (Figure 1). Each block was composed of eight plots measuring 1 m x 5 m.
After land preparation one can of chicken manure per plot was applied basally.
Triple 14 inorganic fertilizer as supplemental was applied during hilling-up at the
recommended of 140-140-140-N-P205-K20 T/ha. One pre-sprouted potato tuberlet was
planted per hill at a distance of 25 cm x 30 cm between hills and rows. All the necessary
cultural practices such as weeding, pest control, irrigation and hilling-up were strictly and
equally employed to all the treatments. The experiment was laid out following the
Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications.
Figure 1. Land preparation and planting
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
8
The different potato entries that served as treatments were as follows:
Treatment
Entry Source
T1 380241.17
CIP,
Peru
T2 5.19.2.2 NPRCRTC
T3 2.21.6.2 NPRCRTC
T4 573275 CIP,
Peru
T5 676070 CIP,
Peru
T6 Igorota
(check)
NPRCRTC
T7
Granola (check)
CIP, Peru
T8
Ganza (check)
CIP, Peru
Data Gathered
1. Plant survival (%). This was the number of plants that survived at 30 days
after planting (DAP).
Number of plants survived
% survival =
x 100
Total of number of plants planted
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
9
2. Plant vigor. This was gathered at 30, 45 and 60 DAP using CIP rating scale
(CIP, 2004).
Scale Description
Reaction
1
Plants are weak with few stems and leaves;
Poor Vigor
very pale
2
Plants are weak with few thin stems and
Less Vigorous
leaves; pale
3
Better than less vigorous
Vigorous
4
Plants are moderately strong with robust
Moderately
stems and leaves; leaves are light green in
Vigorous
color
5
Plants are strong with robust stems and
Highly Vigorous
leaves; leaves are light to dark green in
color
3. Canopy cover. This was gathered at 30, 45, 60 and 75 DAP using a wooden
frame having equal sized grids of 12 x 6. Done by holding the grid over the foliage of
four previously marked plants and the grids covered with effective leaves was counted.
4. Initial height (cm). This was measured using ten sample plants selected at
random per plot at 30 DAP from the base to the tip of the longest shoots.
5. Final height (cm). This was measured using the ten sample plants used in
getting the initial height. Plants were measured from the base up to the two of the tallest
shoot one week before harvesting.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
10
6. Reaction to leaf miner and late blight.
a. Leaf miner. The reaction to leaf miner was observed at 45, 60 and 75 DAP
using the following rating scale (CIP, 2001).
Scale Description
Reaction
1
Less than 20% of plants per plot Highly resistant
infested
2
21 – 40% of the plants per plot Moderately resistant
infested
3
41 – 60% of the plants per plot Susceptible
infested
4
61 – 80% of the plants per plot Moderately susceptible
infested
5
81 – 100% of the plants per plot Very susceptible
infested
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
11
b. Late blight. This was gathered at 45, 60 and 75 DAP using the CIP Scale
(Henfling, 1982).
Blight (%)
CIP Scale Description Symptoms
1
No late blight observe.
Traces - <
2
Late blight present. Maximum 10 lesions per plant.
5 - < 13
3
Plants look healthy but lesions are easily seen at closer
distance. Maximum foliage are 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 look green; however, all plants are affected lower
leaves are dead. About half the foliage are destroyed.
65 - < 85
6
Plot looks green with brown flecks. At about 75% of each
plant is affected. Leaves of the lower-half of the plants are
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 stems have lesions of 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
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
12
7. Yield and Yield Components.
a. Number and weight of marketable tubers per plot. All tubers free from
insects and diseases damage and with less than 10% greening of total surface area was
considered. The tuber was classified and weighed base on the following grades:
Size Grams
Extra large tubers
96 g and above
Large tubers
66 to 65 g
Medium tubers
46 to 65 g
Small tubers
25 to 45 g
Marble tubers
Less than 25 g
b. Number and weight of non-marketable tubers/plot (kg). This was the
tubers which are malformed, damaged by pest and diseases and marble are with 10%
greening and weighing less than 20 grams was considered non-marketable. The non-
marketable tubers were classified and weighed based on the following grades: XL, large,
medium, and marbles.
c. Total yield per plot (kg). This was the weight of marketable and non-
marketable tubers per plot.
d. Computed yield per hectare. This was computed using the formula:
Total yield/plot
x 10,000
Plot size (m
Yield (tons/ha) =
2)
e. Dry matter content (DMC). This was taken by slicing thinly and weighing
50 grams of tubers of assorted sizes. The samples were oven dried at 60oC for 72 hours.
The dry matter was computed using the formula:
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
13
% Dry Matter Content (DMC) = 100% - % MC
Where:
% Moisture Content (MC) = Fresh weight – Oven dry weight x 100
Fresh weight
f. Harvest index. This was obtained from the different entries using the
formula:
HI = Economic yield
Biological yield
8. Return on Cash Expense. The cost of production, gross sales, net profit and return on
cash expense was determined using the following formula:
ROCE = Net Profit
x 100
Total cost production
g. Cost of Production
h. Selling price
i. Gross income = total production volume x price
j. Net income = gross income – expenses
Cost and return analysis. This was obtained using the formula:
ROCE = Gross sales – total expenses
x 100
Total
expenses
9. Meteorological Data. The temperature and relative humidity was taken using the
psychrometer. Rainfall was measured by putting a pail or can in the field and measured
by using graduated cylinder.
Analysis of Data
All quantitative data was analyzed using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for
Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications, the significance off
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
14
differences among the treatment means was tested using the Duncan’s Multiple Range
Test (DMRT).
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
15
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Meteorological data
Table 1 shows the meteorological data from July to September 2008 at Sagpat,
Kibungan, Benguet. At the time of the study, the temperature ranged from 17 to 20 0C.
The highest relative humidity was recorded in the month of July while the lowest relative
humidity was recorded in the month of September with 84 and 80%, respectively.
Rainfall was noted from the months of July to September and the highest was recorded in
July (1.500 L) while the lowest reading was during the month of September with a
rainfall amount of 1.079 Liters
Simongo (2007) cited that potato grows best with temperatures ranging from 17 to
22 0C and with an average relative humidity of 86%. Therefore, the temperature and
relative humidity during the conduct of the study is favorable for potato production in
Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet.
Plant survival (%)
Percent survival of different potato entries revealed significant differences at 75
DAP. One hundred percent plant survival was obtained from entries CIP 380241.17, CIP
573275, and Granola while Igorota had the lowest percent plant survival of 61%. All the
potato entries were able to withstand the erratic rainfall pattern.
Table 1. Meteorological data from July 2008 to September 2008 at Sagpat, Kibungan
MONTH AIR
TEMPERATURE
RELATIVE
RAINFALL AMT.
(oC)
HUMIDITY (%)
L
July 20 84
1.500
August 17
81 1.217
September 18
80 1.079
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
16
Table 2. Plant survival of potato the eight potato entries grown in Sagpat, Kibungan
ENTRY
PLANT SURVIVAL
(%)
CIP 380241.17
100a
PHIL 2.21.6.2
95ab
PHIL 5.19.2.2
89ab
CIP 573275
100a
CIP 676070
99a
Igorota (check variety)
74bc
Ganza (check variety)
98a
Granola (check variety)
100a
CV (%)
9.95
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
Rating Scale:
5 = Highly vigorous
4 = Moderately vigorous
3 = Vigorous
2 = Less vigorous
1 = Poor vigor
Plant vigor
All the entries except CIP 5.19.2.2 had high vigor at 30 days after planting (DAP)
which is comparable with check varieties Granola and Ganza. Most of the potato entries
were highly vigorous even at 30 up to 60 days after planting.
Plant height (cm)
The potato entries showed significant differences on the initial and final plant
height taken at 30 and 75 DAP (Table 3). CIP 380241.17 significantly produced the
tallest plants of 35.9 cm at 30 DAP but comparable with the check variety Ganza and
Granola with an initial plant height of 26.3 cm and 24.5 cm respectively.
At 75 DAP, 5.19.2.2 significantly registered the tallest plants (93.8 cm),
outranking the check varieties Ganza, Igorota and Granola.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
17
Table 3. Plant height at 30 and 75 DAP of eight the potato entries grown at Sagpat,
Kibungan
ENTRY PLANT
HEIGHT
INITIAL (cm)
FINAL (cm)
CIP 380241.17
35.9a 89.2a
PHIL 2.21.6.2
27.2b 82.2a
PHIL 5.19.2.2
8.20d 93.8a
CIP 573275
23.8b 89.2c
CIP 676070
17.3c 80.6a
Igorota (check variety)
7.2d 79.7bc
Ganza (check variety)
26.3b 82.9ab
Granola (check variety)
24.5b 45.00a
CV (%)
17.36
11.00
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
It was observed that most of the potato entries are all tall at 75 DAP except for
granola indicating that the entries were affected by the long photoperiods. Simongo and
Gayao (2006) reported that this growth pattern in most of the entries validated the
observations of some farmers that during the wet season, varieties Igorota and Raniag had
tall vegetative growth and longer maturity (120 days).
Canopy Cover
Canopy cover of different potato entries shows significant differences at 30, 45,
and 60 days after planting (DAP) as shown in Table 4 and Figure 2. An increasing
canopy cover was noted from 30 to 75 DAP in all of the entries including the check
varieties Igorota, Ganza and Granola. At 75 DAP, all the potato entries including the
check varieties attained full canopy cover of 100% at 75 DAP. The high canopy cover
might indicate favorable environmental condition for potato production.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
18
Table 4. Canopy cover of the eight potato entries grown at Sagpat, Kibungan
ENTRY CANOPY
COVER
(%)
30 DAP
CIP 380241.17
62a
PHIL 2.21.6.2
64a
PHIL 5.19.2.2
31b
CIP 573275
65a
CIP 676070
36b
Igorota (check variety)
26b
Ganza (check variety)
66a
Granola (check variety)
77a
CV (%)
24.29
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
380241.17 573275 5.19.2.2 676070
2.21.2.6
Igorota Ganza
Granola
Figure 2. The eight potato entries at vegetative stage
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
19
Reaction to Leaf Miner and Late Blight
Leaf miner incidence was not observed during the conduct of the study. In
addition, the potato entries were recorded to be highly resistant to late blight at 30 to 75
DAP except for Granola variety which showed moderate resistance at 75 DAP. The
occurrence of pest and disease was not observed, may be because the area planted was
newly planted and surrounded with trees. Furthermore, this might be due to continuous
rainfall during the conduct of study which is not favorable to leaf miner.
Number of Marketable and Non-Marketable Tubers
Table 5 shows that CIP 380241.17 produced the highest number of super extra-
large tubers (130) followed by entry 676070 (102) significantly outnumbering the check
varieties Granola (98), Ganza (97) and Igorota (22). However, the rest of the entries
produced a super extra large size tuber, ranging from 54 to 79 outnumbering Igorota that
produced 22 super xl tubers.
Significant differences were noted on the number of extra big and big tubers.
PHIL 2.21.6.2 produced the highest number of extra big, big, and marble tubers. Igorota
produced significantly the lowest number of tubers in all sizes.
Non-Marketable Tubers
No significant differences were observed on the number of non-marketable tubers
on the different entries evaluated. The variability on the number of tubers could be
associated with the genetic characteristics of the different potato entries.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
20
Table 5. Number of marketable and non-marketable tubers of the eight potato entries
grown at Sagpat, Kibungan
MARKETABLE
Super
Extra
NON-
ENTRY
TOTAL
Extra-
Big
Big
Marble
MARKETABLE
large
CIP 380241.17
130a 58bc 36c 27b 251
51
PHIL 2.21.6.2
54bc 94a 113a 88a 349
54
PHIL 5.19.2.2
79ab 45bc 28c 17b 169
21
CIP 573275
68bc 94a 50bc 46b 258
46
CIP 676070
102ab 63b 75b 38b 278
33
Igorota (check variety)
22c 29c 32c 23b 106
46
Ganza (check variety)
97ab 60b 47bc 47b 251
53
Granola (check variety)
98ab 53bc 47bc 23b 221
30
CV (%)
18.06
26.22
13.55
22.35 24.92
21.77
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
Weight of Marketable and Non-Marketable Tubers
Results showed significant differences on the marketable weight of super extra-
large and extra big for the different potato entries (Table 6 and Figure 3). Entry
380241.17 produced the heaviest super xl tuber with a weight of 13.0 kg outranking the
check varieties Ganza (9.90 kg), Granola (9.10 kg) and Igorota (2.38 kg). Entry 5.19.2.2
(10.30 kg) had the second heaviest harvested tubers significantly outyielding Igorota
(check) (2.88 kg) but comparable with check varieties Ganza (9.90 kg) and Granola (9.10
kg).
Entry 2.21.6.2 produced the heaviest extra big tuber weight of 4.20 kg outranking
the check varieties Ganza and Igorota with extra big tuber weighing 2.43 kg and 1.42 kg,
respectively but comparable with Granola with extra big tuber of 3.27 kg. No significant
differences were observed among the potato entries evaluated on the weight of non-
marketable tubers produced.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
21
Table 6. Weight of marketable and non-marketable tubers of the eight potato entries
grown at Sagpat, Kibungan
MARKETABLE (15m2)
Super
Extra
NON-
ENTRY
TOTAL
Extra-
Large
Big
Marble
MARKETABLE
large
CIP 380241.17
13.00a 2.57abcd 1.30 0.43 17.3
1.02
PHIL 2.21.6.2
4.54cd 4.20a 2.73
1.28
12.75
0.77
PHIL 5.19.2.2
10.30a 1.88cd 0.67
0.17 13.02
0.64
CIP 573275
5.30bcd 3.63ab 1.03
0.57 10.53
0.77
CIP 676070
9.37ab 2.15bcd 2.25 0.48 14.25
0.93
Igorota (check variety)
2.38d 1.42d 1.28
0.37 5.45
0.57
Ganza (check variety)
9.90ab 2.43bcd 1.13 0.37 13.83
2.03
Granola (check variety)
9.10abc 3.27abc 0.82 0.35 13.54
1.08
CV (%)
17.54
14.16
17.33
14.12
24.52
21.08
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
380241.17 573275 676070 2.21.2.2
573275 Ganza Igorota Granola
Figure 3. Harvested potato tubers at 90 DAP
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
22
The variation observed among the size classification of the different entries was
greatly affected by the genetic characteristics associated with the environmental factors.
Earlier results showed that the potato entries with good vegetative growth as to height
and canopy cover had the highest number and weight of harvested tubers.
Total and Computed Yield
Table 7 showed significant differences on the total and computed yield of the
eight potato entries evaluated. Potato entry 380241.17 had the highest total and computed
yield of 18.32 kg per 5m2 and 36.64 tons per hectare significantly outyielding the check
variety Igorota (12.04 Tha-1), although comparable with Ganza (31.72 Tha-1) and Granola
(29.24 Tha-1). The rest of the entries had a total yield ranging from 22.60 to 30.36 Tha-1
which is either comparable or outyielding the check varieties Ganza (31.72 T/ha),
Granola (29.24 T/ha) and Igorota (12.04 T/ha). As an affect of the wet season planting,
some of the tubers during harvesting were not fully matured thus, affecting the yield.
Vander Zaag and Burton (1978) reported that in most countries with high average yield,
the increases in yield during the last decades in potato were probably obtained by
prolonged growth period but delayed harvesting.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
23
Table 7. Total yield (kg) and computed yield T ha-1 of the eight potato entries grown at
Sagpat, Kibungan
ENTRY TOTAL
YIELD
(kg/5m2)
COMPUTED YIELD (T/ha)
CIP 380241.17
18.32
36.64
PHIL 2.21.6.2
13.52
27.04
PHIL 5.19.2.2
13.66
27.32
CIP 573275
11.30
22.60
CIP 676070
15.18
30.36
Igorota (check variety)
6.02
12.54
Ganza (check variety)
15.86
31.72
Granola (check variety)
14.62
29.24
CV (%)
18.49
18.53
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
Harvest Index
Significant differences on the harvest index were observed among the eight potato
entries as shown in Table 8. Granola (check) had the highest harvest index but
comparable with CIP 573275, CIP 67670. PHIL 5.19.2.2, on the other hand, had the
lowest harvest index. Low harvest indices of the potato entries evaluated is due to the
high herbage yield or biological yield.
Dry Matter Content (%)
Results showed no significant differences on the dry matter content of the potato
entries grown at Sagpat, Kibungan condition.
The dry matter content of the eight potato entries was not affected by the adverse
climatic conditions, as the dry matter content is attributed to its genetic characteristics.
Results validated the findings of Rastovski (1981) that dry matter content which is a very
important factor in processing potatoes is mainly determined genetically and thus,
depends on the variety.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
24
Table 8. Harvest index and dry matter content (%) of the eight potato entries grown at
Sagpat, Kibungan
ENTRY
HARVEST INDEX
DRY MATTER CONTENT
CIP 380241.17
0.77ab 19
PHIL 2.21.6.2
0.74bc 23
PHIL 5.19.2.2
0.64c 19
CIP 573275
0.88a 20
CIP 676070
0.87ab 19
Igorota (check variety)
0.82ab 21
Ganza (check variety)
0.77ab 20
Granola (check variety)
0.90a 18
CV (%)
8.78
8.24
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5%
probability levels (DMRT)
Return on cash expenses (ROCE)
Profitability of the eight potato entries is shown in Table 9. CIP 380241.17
obtained the highest return on cash expense followed by CIP 676070 while Igorota
(check) had the lowest return on cash expense. The high return on cash expense is
attributed to the high yield. On the other hand, the vegetative growth of most entries may
have contributed to the increase cost of production. Simongo and Gayao (2006) stated
that the very tall vegetative growth of potato plants may results in enhanced stem rot and
breakage and entailed higher labor and pesticide cost (Table 9).
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
25
Table 9. Cost analysis of potato production at Sagpat, Kibungan
ENTRY COST
OF
MARKETABLE
GROSS
NET
ROCE
PRODUCTION
TUBERS
SALE
INCOME
%
(Php/5m2)
(kg/5m2)
(Php)
CIP 380241.17
136.70
18.32
549.62
268.9
302.04
PHIL 2.21.6.2
136.70
13.53
405.6
273.1
196.70
PHIL 5.19.2.2
136.70
13.66
409.8
202.3
199.78
CIP 573275
136.70
11.30
339
318.7
147.48
CIP 676070
136.70
15.18
455.4
43
233.13
Igorota (cv)
136.70
6.02
180.6
339.1
31.45
Ganza (cv)
136.70
15.86
475.8
316.3
248.06
Granola (cv)
136.70
14.62
438.6
301.9
231.38
For each column, treatment means with different letter are significantly different at 5 %
probability levels (DMRT)
= Potato tubers was sold at PhP 30.00 per kilo
= Total cost of production includes planting materials, insecticides, fertilizers and labor
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
26
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The study was conducted to evaluate the growth and yield of the different potato
entries and to determine the potato entries that are best adapted in terms of growth and
yield at Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet and to determine the profitability of growing potato
at Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet. The study was conducted from July to September 2008.
Significant differences among the potato entries evaluated were noted on plant
survival, vigor, height, canopy cover, number and weight of marketable tuber, total yield
and harvest index.
Among the potato entries, CIP 380241.17 had a hundred percent survival, tallest
initial plant height, highest and heaviest super extra large tubers, comparable harvest
index, highest total and computed yield, and the highest return on cash expense.
PHIL 5.19.2.2 was the tallest at maturity, had the highest dry matter content,
highest number of extra big tubers, comparable highest total and computed yield. PHIL
2.21.6.2 produced the highest number of big and marble sized potato tubers and the
heaviest extra big tubers. CIP 676070 had comparable total and computed yield.
On the reaction to leaf miner and late blight, all of the potato entries evaluated
showed high resistance.
As to the performance of the check varieties, comparable total yield was noted in
Ganza and Granola. Igorota was the lowest yielder.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
27
Conclusions
The best performing potato entries are CIP 380241.17, PHIL 2.21.6.2, and PHIL
5.19.2.2 and CIP 676070 based on yield and resistance to late blight.
CIP 380241.17, PHIL 2.21.6.2, PHIL 5.19.2.2 and 676070 are best adapted at
Sagpat, Kibungan.
CIP 380241.17 is more profitable to grow at Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet.
Recommendations
CIP 380241.17, PHIL 2.21.6.2, PHIL 5.19.2.2 and CIP 676070 could be
recommended for potato production at Sagpat, Kibungan condition.
There should be continuous evaluation and selection of potato entries until a variety
with stable performance will be recommended at Sagpat, Kibungan condition in various
planting seasons.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
28
LITERATURE CITED
BEUKEMA and VANDER ZAAG. 1979. Potato Improvement. Wageningen, the
Netherlands: International Agriculture Center. Pp. 11-16.
BOGUILES, C. E. 2002. Evaluation of Potato Clones at Bano-oy Buguias, Benguet. BS
Thesis (Unpub.) Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 15.
BOLISLIS, M. D. 2005. Response of Potato Accessions to Frost Condition at
Madaymen, Kibungan, Benguet. BS Thesis. Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet. P. 29.
CIP. 2001. Fact Sheets. International Potato Center (CIP). P.13.
CIP. 2004. Fact sheets. International Potato Center (CIP). P.11.
EUFEM T. KASCO et. al., 1992. SAPPRAD (Southeast Asian Program for Potato
Research and Development) P. 191.
GAYAO, S.T. 1989. Potato Germplasm evaluation for late blight resistance at diverse
highland locations during different seasons. MS. Thesis. Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 37.
GONZALES, I. C. et. Al., 2006. Multi – locational Yield Trial of Potential Potato Clones
Across Location. BSU Research Journal. P. 74.
HARRDEC. 1996. Highland Potato Technoguide (3rd edition). Benguet State University,
La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 4 – 5.
HARRDEC. 1977. Highland Potato Technoguide. Benguet State University, La Trinidad,
Benguet. Pp. 1-7.
HENFLING, J. W. 1982. Field screening procedures to evaluate resistance to late blight.
Technology evaluation series no. 1982-05. International Potato Center (CIP). P.
11.
MONTES, F. R. and TAD-AWAN, B. A. 2006. Growth and Yield of Potato Genotypes
in an Organic Farm at Puguis, La Trinidad, Benguet. BSU Research Journal. P. 6.
NPRCRTC, 1985. Potato Techno-guide. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
P. 24.
PCARRD, 1985. Higland Potato Technoguide, Published in Laguna. P. 3.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
29
RASCO, E. T. JR. and D. D. AMANTE. 1994. Sweetpotato Variety Evaluation.
Southeast Asia. Program for Potato Research and Development. Vol. I. Pp. 42 –
43.
RASTOVSKI, A. VAN. 1981. Storage of Potatoes postharvest behavior, store design,
storage practice, handling. Wageningen. P. 37.
SANO, E., 1980. Rate of tuber production of three white potato varieties grown under six
fertility levels. MS Thesis, Mountain State Agricultural College La Trinidad,
Benguet. P. 5.
SIMONGO, D. K. 2007. growth and yield and dry matter partitioning of potato
genotypes under organic production at La Trinidad, Benguet. PhP Dissertation.
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 1.
SIMONGO, D. K. and B. T. GAYAO. 2006. Farmer variety management practices in the
production of Igorota, Solibao, and Raniag potatoes. The potato seed production
technologies in the Highland of Northern Philippines: An Assessment. Pp. 116-
130.
SUNIL, R.R. 1990. Varietal evaluation of promising lines and path coefficient analysis in
pole snap beans. BS Thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
P.86.
TAD-AWAN, B. A. et al., 2008. Organic Potatoes: varieties and practices in Benguet,
Philippines. STVRDC. Benguet State University La Trinidad Benguet. P. 1.
TANDANG, L.L. and DAGDAG, D.D., Varietal evaluation and farmer’s preference on
potato grown under post-rice condition in Batayan, Alangtin, Tubo, Abra.
Benguet State University Research Journal. Pp. 106-108.
VANDER ZAAG, D.E. and BURTON, D. 1987. Potato production and utilization in
world perspective with special references to the tropics and sub tropics. Potato
Reseach. 26. Pp. 323-362.
VERGARA, 1992. Raising the yield potential of rice. Philippines. Journal techno guide.
Retrieved July 24, 2009 from http://books.google.com.ph/books.id/fulltext.
WAIBEL, H., 1981. An economic study on need potato production in the province of
Benguet. Philippines. Institute of Agricultural Economics. Pp. 140-143.
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
30
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Plant survival
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
100
100
100 300 100
2.21.6.2
100
97
87 284 95
5.19.2.2
100
95
72 267 89
573275
100
100
100 300 100
676070
100
97
100 297 99
Igorota
100
55
67 222 74
Ganza
100
100
95 295 98
Granola
100
100
100 300 100
TOTAL 800 744 721 2265 94
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
432.083
215.042
Treatment
7
1706.958
243.851
2.70ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
1219.917
87.137
TOTAL
23
3356.958
ns =Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 9.95
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
31
Appendix Table 2. Plant vigor at 30 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
5
5
5 15 5
2.21.6.2
5
5
4 14 5
5.19.2.2
4
3
2 9 3
573275
5
5
5 15 5
676070
5
5
5 15 5
Igorota
3
2
2 7 2
Ganza
5
5
5 15 5
Granola
5
5
4 14 5
TOTAL 37 35 32 104 4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
1.583
0.792
Treatment
7
23.333
3.333
19.31**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
2.417
0.173
TOTAL
23
27.333
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 9.59
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
32
Appendix Table 3. Plant vigor at 45 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
5
5
5 15 5
2.21.6.2
5
5
5 15 5
5.19.2.2
5
5
5 15 5
573275
5
5
3 13 4
676070
5
5
5 15 5
Igorota
4
5
5 14 5
Ganza
5
5
5 15 5
Granola
5
5
5 15 5
TOTAL 39 40 38 117 5
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.250
0.125
Treatment
7
1.292
0.185
0.84ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
3.083
0.220
TOTAL
23
4.625
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 9.63
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
33
Appendix Table 4. Plant vigor at 60 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
5
5
5 15 5
2.21.6.2
5
5
5 15 5
5.19.2.2
5
5
5 15 5
573275
5
5
3 13 4
676070
5
5
5 15 5
Igorota
4
5
5 14 5
Ganza
5
5
5 15 5
Granola
5
5
5 15 5
TOTAL 39 40 38 117 5
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.083
0.042
Treatment
7
0.292
0.042
1.0ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
0.583
0.042
TOTAL
23
0.958
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 4.12
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
34
Appendix Table 5. Canopy cover at 30 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
85
61
39 185 62
2.21.6.2
93
61
38 192 64
5.19.2.2
47
28
19 94 31
573275
76
76
44 196 65
676070
46
27
35 108 36
Igorota
21
35
23 79 26
Ganza
90
70
39 199 66
Granola
87
73
42 202 67
TOTAL 545 431 279 1255 52
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
4452.333
2226.167
Treatment
7
6590.958
941.565
6.93**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
1901.667
135.833
TOTAL
23
12944.958
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 22.29
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
35
Appendix Table 6. Canopy cover 45 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
100
100
100 300 100
2.21.6.2
100
100
100 300 100
5.19.2.2
100
100
100 300 100
573275
100
100
100 300 100
676070
100
100
100 300 100
Igorota
100
100
100 300 100
Ganza
100
100
100 300 100
Granola
94
95
100 289 96
TOTAL 794 795 800 2389 100
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
2.583
1.292
Treatment
7
35.292
5.042
3.90*
2.77
4.28
Error
14
18.083
1.292
TOTAL
23
55.958
* = Significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 1.14
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
36
Appendix Table 7. Canopy cover at 60 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
100
100
100 300 100
2.21.6.2
100
100
100 300 100
5.19.2.2
100
100
100 300 100
573275
100
100
100 300 100
676070
100
100
100 300 100
Igorota
100
100
100 300 100
Ganza
100
100
100 300 100
Granola
97
98
100 295 98
TOTAL 797 798 800 2395 100
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.583
0.292
Treatment
7
7.292
1.042
3.57*
2.77
4.28
Error
14
4.083
0.292
TOTAL
23
11.958
* = Significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 0.54
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
37
Appendix Table 8. Canopy cover at 75 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
100
100
100 300 100
2.21.6.2
100
100
100 300 100
5.19.2.2
100
100
100 300 100
573275
100
100
100 300 100
676070
100
100
100 300 100
Igorota
100
100
100 300 100
Ganza
100
100
100 300 100
Granola
100
100
99 299 100
TOTAL 800 800 799 2399 100
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.083
0.042
Treatment
7
0.292
0.042
1.0
2.77
4.28
Error
14
0.583
0.042
TOTAL
23
0.958
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 0.20
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
38
Appendix Table 9. Late blight at 30 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
1
1
1 3 1
2.21.6.2
1
1
1 3 1
5.19.2.2
1
1
1 3 1
573275
1
1
1 3 1
676070
1
1
1 3 1
Igorota
1
1
1 3 1
Ganza
1
1
1 3 1
Granola
1
1
1 3 1
TOTAL 8 8 8 24 1
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
39
Appendix Table 10. Late blight at 45 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
1
1
1 3 1
2.21.6.2
1
1
1 3 1
5.19.2.2
1
1
1 3 1
573275
1
1
1 3 1
676070
1
1
1 3 1
Igorota
1
1
1 3 1
Ganza
1
1
1 3 1
Granola
1
1
1 3 1
TOTAL 8 8 8 24 1
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
40
Appendix Table 11. Late blight at 60 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
1
1
1 3 1
2.21.6.2
1
1
1 3 1
5.19.2.2
1
1
1 3 1
573275
1
1
1 3 1
676070
1
1
1 3 1
Igorota
1
1
1 3 1
Ganza
1
1
1 3 1
Granola
1
1
1 3 1
TOTAL 8 8 8 24 1
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
41
Appendix Table 12. Late blight at 75 DAP
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
1
1
1 3 1
2.21.6.2
1
1
1 3 1
5.19.2.2
1
1
1 3 1
573275
1
1
2 4 1
676070
2
1
1 4 1
Igorota
2
1
1 4 1
Ganza
1
1
1 3 1
Granola
3
4
3 10 3
TOTAL 12 11 11 34 1
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
42
Appendix Table 13. Initial Plant height
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
29.7
27.1
16.8 73.6 24.5
2.21.6.2
32.7
23.3
25.6 81.6 27.2
5.19.2.2
12.0
8.7
3.9 24.6 8.2
573275
30.7
22.6
18.2 71.5 23.8
676070
15.8
18.0
18.0 51.8 17.3
Igorota
3.85
8.9
8.9 21.65 7.2
Ganza
30.6
24.1
24.1 78.8 26.3
Granola
38.8
34.5
34.5 107.8 35.9
TOTAL 194.15 167.2 150 511.35 21.3
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
124.319
62.159
Treatment
7
2027.184
289.598
21.18**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
191.389
13.671
TOTAL
23
2342.892
** = Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 17.36
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
43
Appendix Table 14. Final Plant height
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
56.3
35.5
43.2 135.0 45.0
2.21.6.2
86.4
84.6
75.6 246.6 82.2
5.19.2.2
94.1
103.7
83.6 281.4 93.8
573275
85.5
97.3
84.8 267.6 89.2
676070
72.4
98.5
71.0 241.9 80.6
Igorota
74.7
78.0
86.3 239 79.7
Ganza
73.9
98.5
76.3 248.7 82.9
Granola
86.6
93.5
87.4 267.5 89.2
TOTAL 629.9 689.6 608.2 1927.7 80.3
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
444.206
222.103
Treatment
7
4791.140
684.449
8.77**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
1092.394
78.028
TOTAL
23
6327.740
** = Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 11.00
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
44
Appendix Table 15 .SXL number
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
148
131
110 389 130
2.21.6.2
86
41
34 161 54
5.19.2.2
116
75
47 238 79
573275
87
61
56 204 68
676070
109
80
117 306 102
Igorota
17
33
17 67 22
Ganza
136
75
80 291 97
Granola
182
91
21 294 98
TOTAL 881 587 482 1950 81
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
10694.250
5347.125
Treatment
7
23143.833
3306.262
4.27*
2.77
4.28
Error
14
10842.417
774.458
TOTAL
23
11680.500
* = Significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 18.06
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
45
Appendix Table 16. Extra big number
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
47
66
62 175 58
2.21.6.2
106
104
72 282 94
5.19.2.2
35
63
36 134 45
573275
115
81
85 281 94
676070
81
67
42 190 63
Igorota
15
44
27 86 29
Ganza
62
45
72 179 60
Granola
38
62
60 160 53
TOTAL 499 532 456 1487 62
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
363.083
181.542
Treatment
7
10602.292
1514.613
5.74**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
3693.583
263.827
TOTAL
23
14658.958
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 26.22
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
46
Appendix Table 17 . Big number
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
43
39
26 108 36
2.21.6.2
95
101
143 339 113
5.19.2.2
26
34
25 85 28
573275
52
67
32 151 50
676070
56
115
54 225 75
Igorota
36
33
26 95 32
Ganza
38
49
53 140 47
Granola
48
46
46 140 47
TOTAL 394 484 405 1283 53
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
602.583
301.292
Treatment
7
16566.625
2366.661
7.95**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
4166.750
297.625
TOTAL
23
21335.958
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 13.55
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
47
Appendix Table 18. Marble number
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
37
26
18 81 27
2.21.6.2
90
57
118 265 88
5.19.2.2
10
28
12 50 17
573275
48
43
48 139 46
676070
45
54
16 115 38
Igorota
15
35
18 68 23
Ganza
25
78
38 141 47
Granola
13
40
15 68 23
TOTAL 283 361 283 927 39
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
507.000
253.500
Treatment
7
11181.625
1597.375
4.71**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
4751.000
339.357
TOTAL
23
16439.625
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 22.35
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
48
Appendix Table 19. Non-marketable number
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
75
68
9 152 51
2.21.6.2
70
58
35 163 54
5.19.2.2
32
21
11 64 21
573275
55
55
28 138 46
676070
25
45
30 100 33
Igorota
26
36
22 84 28
Ganza
96
45
18 159 53
Granola
32
24
34 90 30
TOTAL 411 352 187 950 40
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
3370.083
1685.042
Treatment
7
3479.167
497.024
1.69ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
4112.583
293.756
TOTAL
23
10961.833
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 21.77
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
49
Appendix Table 20. Total marketable number
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
275
262
216 753 251
2.21.6.2
377
303
367 1047 349
5.19.2.2
187
200
120 507 169
573275
302
252
221 775 258
676070
291
318
229 838 279
Igorota
83
145
88 316 105
Ganza
259
317
243 819 273
Granola
281
239
142 662 221
TOTAL 2055 2036 1626 5717 238
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
14687.583
7343.792
Treatment
7
115495.292 16499.327
13.41**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
17219.083
1229.935
TOTAL
23
147401.958
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 14.72
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
50
Appendix Table 21. Sxl weight
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
15.8
11.7
11.5 39 13.00
2.21.6.2
6.2
4.51
2.9 13.61 4.54
5.19.2.2
13.25
9.15
8.5 30.9 10.30
573275
7.25
5.15
3.5 15.9 5.30
676070
9.7
6.7
11.7 28.1 9.37
Igorota
1.6
3.9
1.65 7.15 2.38
Ganza
13.15
10.3
6.25 29.7 9.90
Granola
16.4
8.2
2.7 27.3 9.10
TOTAL 83.35 59.61 48.7 191.66 7.99
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
78.468
39.234
Treatment
7
263.423
37.632
5.57**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
94.311
6.737
TOTAL
23
436.203
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 17.54
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
51
Appendix Table 22.Extra big weight
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
2.0
2.5
3.2 7.7 2.57
2.21.6.2
4.4
4.5
3.7 12.6 4.20
5.19.2.2
1.7
2.95
1.0 5.65 1.88
573275
4.7
3.2
3.0 10.9 3.63
676070
3.4
1.45
1.6 6.45 2.15
Igorota
0.9
1.7
1.65 4.25 1.42
Ganza
2.2
2.4
2.7 7.3 2.43
Granola
1.6
4.7
3.5 9.8 3.27
TOTAL 20.9 23.4 20.35 64.65 2.69
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.661
0.330
Treatment
7
18.442
2.635
3.10*
2.77
4.28
Error
14
11.894
0.850
TOTAL
23
30.997
* = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 14.16
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
52
Appendix Table 23. Big weight
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
1.30
1.2
1.4 3.90 1.30
2.21.6.2
2.3
2.1
3.8 8.20 2.73
5.19.2.2
0.7
0.9
0.4 2.00 0.67
573275
1
1.3
1.1 3.40 1.13
676070
1.2
4.55
1 6.75
2.25
Igorota
1.2
0.85
1.8 3.85 1.28
Ganza
1.3
1.3
0.5 3.10 1.03
Granola
1
0.75
0.7 2.45 0.82
TOTAL 10.00 12.95 10.7 33.65 1.40
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.594
0.297
Treatment
7
10.822
1.546
2.12ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
10.221
0.730
TOTAL
23
21.637
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 17.33
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
53
Appendix Table 24. Marble weight
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
0.55
0.45
0.3 1.3 0.43
2.21.6.2
1.15
2.5
0.2 3.85 1.28
5.19.2.2
0.1
0.3
0.1 0.5 0.17
573275
0.6
0.6
0.5 1.7 0.57
676070
0.5
0.55
0.4 1.45 0.48
Igorota
0.2
0.5
0.4 1.1 0.37
Ganza
0.3
0.4
0.4 1.1 0.37
Granola
0.4
0.45
0.2 1.05 0.35
TOTAL 3.80 5.75 2.5 12.05 0.50
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.669
0.334
Treatment
7
2.376
0.339
2.19ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
2.168
0.155
TOTAL
23
5.212
ns =Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 14.12
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
54
Appendix Table 25. non-marketable weight
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
1.35
1.05
0.65 3.05 1.02
2.21.6.2
1.45
0.65
0.2 2.3 0.77
5.19.2.2
1.15
0.625
0.15 1.925 0.64
573275
1.15
0.65
0.5 2.3 0.77
676070
1.00
1.2
0.6 2.8 0.93
Igorota
0.35
0.7
0.65 1.7 0.57
Ganza
4.5
1.4
0.2 6.1 2.03
Granola
1.1
0.85
1.3 3.25 1.08
TOTAL 12.05 7.125 4.25 23.425 0.98
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
3.890
1.945
Treatment
7
4.500
0.643
1.11ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
8.097
0.578
TOTAL
23
16.487
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 21.10
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
55
Appendix Table 26. Total weight
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
21.00
16.90
17.05 54.95 18.32
2.21.6.2
15.50
14.26
10.80
40.56 13.52
5.19.2.2
16.90
13.92
10.15
40.97 13.66
573275
14.70
10.90
8.60
34.20 11.40
676070
15.80
14.45
15.30
45.55 15.18
Igorota
4.25
7.65
6.15
18.05 6.02
Ganza
21.45
15.80
10.50 47.30 15.77
Granola
20.50
14.95
8.40 43.85 14.62
TOTAL 130.10
108.83 86.95 325.43 13.56
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
116.378
5.189
Treatment
7
280.522
40.075
6.36**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
88.247
6.303
TOTAL
23
485.147
* * = Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 18.49
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
56
Appendix Table 27. Computed yield
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
42.00
33.80
34.10 109.90 36.63
2.21.6.2
31.00
38.52
21.60 81.12 27.04
5.19.2.2
33.80
27.84
20.30 81.94 27.32
573275
29.40
21.80
16.40 67.60 22.53
676070
31.60
28.90
30.60 91.10 30.36
Igorota
8.50
15.30
12.30 36.10 12.04
Ganza
42.90
31.60
21.00
95.50
31.83
Granola
41.00
29.90
16.80 87.70 29.24
TOTAL 260.20 217.66 173.10 650.96 27.12
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
474.236
237.118
Treatment
7
1128.244
161.321
6.39**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
353.651
25.26
TOTAL
23
1957.131
**= Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 18.59
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
57
Appendix Table 28. Harvest Index
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
0.83
0.65
0.82 2.3 0.77
2.21.6.2
0.68
0.77
0.76 2.21 0.74
5.19.2.2
0.73
0.48
0.72 1.93 0.64
573275
0.89
0.89
0.87 2.65 0.88
676070
0.86
0.83
0.91 2.6 0.87
Igorota
0.79
0.83
0.83 2.45 0.82
Ganza
0.72
0.76
0.84 2.32 0.77
Granola
0.93
0.92
0.84 2.69 0.90
TOTAL 6.43 6.13 6.59 19.15 0.80
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.014
0.007
Treatment
7
0.154
0.003
4.48**
2.77
4.28
Error
14
0.069
0.005
TOTAL
23
0.236
** =Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 8.78
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
58
Appendix Table 29.Dry matter content
Entries BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
380241.17
20
19
18 57 19
2.21.6.2
21
25
22 68 23
5.19.2.2
17
19
22 58 19
573275
20
19
21 60 20
676070
18
20
19 57 19
Igorota
20
20
23 63 21
Ganza
21
21
18 60 20
Granola
18
17
18 53 18
TOTAL 155 160 161 476 20
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block
2
2.583
1.292
Treatment
7
47.333
6.762
2.53ns
2.77
4.28
Error
14
37.417
2.673
TOTAL
23
87.333
ns = Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) = 8.24
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
59
CA-UR Form 9
Benguet State University
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE
La Trinidad, Benguet
Date: March 2009
APPLICATION FOR THESIS MANUSCRIPT ORAL DEFENSE
Name: JULIUS BAG-AYAN
Degree (Major Field): BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN AGRICULTURE (Agronomy)
Title of Research: EVALUATION OF POTATO ENTRIES IN SAGPAT, KIBUNGAN,
BENGUET CONDITION.
Date and time of Defense: October 21 2009
Place of Defense: College of Agriculture (Room 201)
Endorsed: JANET P.PABLO
Adviser and Chairperson, Advisory Committee
Approved: ESTHER JOSEPHINE D. SAGALLA
Member, advisory committee and
Department Chairman
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESULT OF ORAL DEFENSE
Name and Signature Remarks (Passed/Failed)
GUERZON A. PAYANGDO __________________
Member, Advisory Committee
DANILO P. PADUA __________________
Member, Advisory Committee
JANET P. PABLO __________________
Adviser and Chairperson, Advisory Committee
ESTHER JOSEPHINE D. SAGALLA __________________
Member, Advisory Committee and
Department Chairman
Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet / Julius S. Bag-ayan. 2009
Document Outline
- Varietal Evaluation of Potato Entries
in Sagpat, Kibungan, Benguet
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- ABSTRACT
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- Varietal Evaluation and Selection
- Environmental Requirements of Potato Production
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- Meteorological data
- Plant survival (%)
- Plant vigor
- Plant height (cm)
- Canopy Cover
- Reaction to Leaf Miner and Late Blight
- Number of Marketable and Non-Marketable Tubers
- Non-Marketable Tubers
- Weight of Marketable and Non-Marketable Tubers
- Total and Computed Yield
- Harvest Index
- Dry Matter Content (%)
- Return on cash expenses (ROCE)
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
- Summary
- Conclusions
- Recommendations
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES