BIBLIOGRAPHY TIPAYNO, MELBA T. APRIL 2006....
BIBLIOGRAPHY
TIPAYNO, MELBA T. APRIL 2006. Agronomic Characters of Five Bush
Snapbeans Varieties Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N. Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Leoncia L. Tandang, PhD
ABSTRACT
Five bush snapbeans varieties were inoculated and observed for their agronomic
characters. The study was conducted at Benguet State University-Institute of Plant
Breeding Highland Crops Research Station from December 2005 to February 2006.
The study aimed to determine the response of bush snapbeans varieties to
different inoculants; to determine which among the inoculants used will give favorable
results in bush snapbean production; and to determine the interaction effect between
inoculation and variety on the agronomic character of bush snapbean.
Inoculation had no significance effect in all the agronomic characters measured in
the study in bush snapbean production. Highly significant differences among the five
varieties of bush snapbean evaluated were observed on the number of flowers per cluster,
number of pods per plant, pod length and pod width. The number of pods per cluster
among the five varieties of bush snapbeans differed significantly. Torrent was
significantly the highest ranking variety based on the aforementioned agronomic
characters. No significant interaction between inoculations and the variety was noted in
all the characters considered except for the number of flower per cluster. BBL 274 got the
significantly highest number of flowers per cluster when inoculated with Vital N. Based
on the ROCE, higher profit could be realized by using Bio N as inoculant. Growing
Torrent inoculated with Vital N is recommended for profitable bush snapbean production.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………. i
Abstract………… …………………………………………………………. .
i
Table of Contents …………………………………………………………….
iii
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………… 1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE ………………………………………………..
4
MATERIALS AND METHODS……………………………………………..
7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………………
12
Days to emergence…………………………………………………….
12
Days from planning to flowering………………………………………
12
Number of flower per cluster…………………………………………
12
Number of days to pod setting………………………………………..
14
Days from planting to first harvest……………………………………
14
Days from planting to last harvest ……………………………………
16
Numbers of pods per cluster …………………………………………
15
Number of pods per plant …………………………………………….
16
Length of pods at harvest …………………………………………….
18
Width of pods at harvest ……………………………………………
18
Weight of marketable pods …………………………………………
19
Weight of non-marketable pods ……………………………………
20
Total yield per slot …………………………………………………
20
Computed yield per hectare…………………………………………
22
iii
Number of nodules per plant ……………………………………….
22
Reaction to bean rust………………………………………………...
23
Reaction to pod borer ……………………………………………….
25
Return to Cash Expense (ROCE) ……………………………………
26
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION……………….
28
LITERATURE CITED ……………………………………………………….
30
APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………..
32
iv
1
INTRODUCTION
Snapbean
(Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is a common source of plant protein for human
diet as well as feed supplement for animals. It is also rich in vitamins and soluble
carbohydrates. Snapbean thrives well in cool medium to high altitude in tropical
countries. Further, it is one of the farmer’s main sources of income (Pog-ok, 2001).
This crop has the ability to fix nitrogen from the atmosphere through the action of
nitrogen -fixing bacteria present in its roots known as Rhizobium. This ability of legumes
gives them the advantage over any other crops for enabling to supply themselves partially
with nitrogen and helps in the maintenance of soil fertility level (Pog-ok, 2001).
Continuous cultivation of soils due to continuous cropping will deplete its
nutrients especially nitrogen. Nitrogen is easily lost through leaching, crop removal,
denitrification and volatilization processes. Because of these factors that affect nitrogen
loss, most farmers apply nitrogenous fertilizer to cover up losses and increase production.
Some researchers however have shown that continuous and excessive application of
nitrogenous fertilizers increases soil acidity, a result that renders most nutrient elements
in the soil unavailable for plant use (Piha and Munns, 1987).
Inoculation is known to have important role in legume production. Inoculation or
introducing proper strain of bacteria to legume seeds intended for planting by adding
Rhizobium will create the legume to secure nitrogen from the air (Pog-ok, 2001).
According to Butler (1955), inoculation should be practiced to hasten the trapping
of the atmospheric nitrogen. Inoculation introduces to the plant the bacteria, Rhizobium
which is capable of trapping atmospheric nitrogen for plant use at early stage.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
2
The bacteria that multiply and grow on the roots of legumes change the nitrogen in the
soil air biochemically into a fixed form attached to the root nodules.
There are many benefits derived from effective inoculation such as the reduction
of demand for soil nitrogen, prevention of early nitrogen starvation and improvement of
the grain and protein yield (PCCARRD, 1975).
Proper inoculation also improves or maintains fertility of the soil and lessens the
need of nitrogen fertilizer. Also, seed inoculation lessens input of production aside from
giving possible favorable effects on the fertility of the soil for succeeding crops
(PCCARRD, 1975).
The economic and environmental cost of the heavy use of chemical nitrogen
fertilizer in agriculture is a global concern. Sustainability mandates that alternatives to
nitrogen fertilizers. Nitrogen inputs, through Biological Nitrogen Fixation (BNF) helps
reduce fertilizer use and potential or legume varieties will therefore be an important
component of sustainable agricultural systems (Atos, 1997).
With the rising world1 population and the declining supply of fossils required to
manufacture nitrogen fertilizer, it may be necessary to rely more on microorganisms
associated with legume to supply plant need for nitrogen. To satisfy the demand for snap
beans, it is time to evaluate the response of common varieties of bean to inoculation to
lessen cost of production, waste of time, labor and to increase productivity of the crop
(Puyongan, 1997).
The study could help local farmers in selecting snapbean varieties with higher
biological nitrogen fixation to promote better profits.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
3
The study was undertaken to determine the response of the bush snapbean
varieties to different inoculants; to determine which among the inoculants would give
favorable results in bush snapbeans production; to determine the interaction effect
between the inoculant and the variety on agronomic characters of bush snapbeans.
The study was conducted at Benguet State University-Institute of Plant Breeding
Highland Crops Research Station from October 2005 to March 2006.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
4
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Inoculation was found to increase nodulation, bacteroid and leghemoglubin
contents in the nodules (Kumar, 1976), nodule weight yield (Sali, 1981; Tilo, 1977), bean
yield (Tilo, 1977; Nahaul, 1980), percent nitrogen in seed (Sali, 1981) nitrogen uptake by
plants (Nahaul, 1980), number of pods per plant, number of seed per pod, and
consequently, increased yield (Navarro, 1984). Krootha (1971) reported that inoculation
with rhizobium increased the yield and nitrogen content of the legumes at all pH levels.
Legumes and Rhizobium
Legumes are crucial to the balance of nature. They convert nitrogen from the air
into ammonia, a soluble form of nitrogen, which is readily utilized by plants. Thus, the
nitrogen contributions of legumes can be vital for maintaining soil productivity over long
periods. A leguminous crop can add up to 500 kg nitrogen to the soil per hectare a year in
association with Rhizobium (NAS, 1979).
Nitrogen fixation occurs within the roots nodules where the symbiotic bacteria
rhizobium lives. The active nodules contain a red pigment, like hemoglobin of the blood
of higher animals, which is essential to the biochemical phenomenon of nitrogen fixation
(Iswaran, 1974).
Merestela (1989) stated that the symbiotic association of Rhizobium and legume
to form nitrogen-fixing mechanism is a symbiont selective process in which only certain
combination of host Rhizobium pairing characteristics of nodule formation is expressed at
the early stage of root initiation process. Moreover, A.W. Faizah, et. al. (1989) explained
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
5
that growing legumes in agricultural system reflect their potential capacity to fix large
amounts of atmospheric nitrogen and formation of symbiosis between legume and
Rhizobium species is dependent on many factors such as calcium level and nitrate content
of the soil.
Manguiat,
et. al. (1985) further noted that rhizobial inoculation significantly
increase the nodule weight and number during the first cropping but the effect of
rhizobial inoculation on nodulation was no longer detected during the succeeding legume
crop.
The ability of legume crops to fix atmospheric nitrogen often results in a lower
utilization of inorganic nitrogen sources in the soil profile as compared to non-fixing
crops. In this way, inorganic nitrogen is conserved for the following crops unless it is lost
by volatilization, leaching, or denitrification (Jensen, 1989; Evans, 1991)
As cited by Fiarawan (2001) on her study of rice bean, she noted that in terms of
plant height, pod yield and seed yield, there is significant interaction affect between the
rhizobial strains and rice bean varieties. The variety inoculated with TAL 899 or TAL
117 produced the best potential for nodulation, nitrogen fixation and yield production.
Inoculation of legume seed is usually recommended in order to obtain the highest rate of
fixation.
Amok (2003) found that snapbean plants applied with organic fertilizer performed
better than the plants without fertilizer in terms of 100 seed weight, nodule count, fresh
and dry weight of leaves and yield performances.
In 1990, Tandang recommended Blue Lake, BSU # 1, Patig, Burik and Alno for
commercial production in Cordillera Region and Regions I, II, III and X of the
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
6
Philippines. Atos (1987) as cited by Manuel (1997) evaluated the growth and yield
performance of five pole snapbean cultivars. Results showed that Stonehill (“Patig”) and
Blue Lake, Prime Pak yielded the most.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
7
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of 245 m2 was thoroughly prepared and divided into three blocks. Each
block contained sixteen plots including border plot with a dimension of 1 x 5 m2. The
experiment was laid out following 3 x 5 factor factorial in split plot design with three
replications. Three seeds were sown per hill in a double row plot following a distance of
30 cm between hills. Crop protection and other management practices were employed
from planting up to last harvesting when necessary.
Treatments: Inoculants were assigned to the main plot as follows:
Main plot (Inoculation)
T1 – no inoculation (control)
T2 – Vital N (Azospirillum – based fertilizer)
T3 – Bio-N
Vital N is a wettable powder containing dried new strains of Azospirillum sp.,
vitamins and minerals. It was developed for seed/seedling inoculation. Azospirillum spp
are free-living bacteria growing around roots and reported to fix atmospheric nitrogen,
promote plant growth by producing IAA for root proliferation and cytokinins for shoot
growth. They can also solubilize soil phosphorous and potassium.
Inoculation
and
planting. Seeds were moistened with just enough water before
inoculation. The seeds and the inoculants were mixed thoroughly until seeds were
uniformly coated. Afterwards, seeds were spread on a clean bond paper separately and
air dried just before planting.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
8
Snap bean varieties were assigned to the sub-plot as follows:
Sub –plot (Varieties)
V1 – Torrent
V2 – BBL 274
V3 – HAB 63
V4 – HAB 323
V5 – Landmark
Data gathered
The data gathered were the following:
1. Days to emergence. This was recorded when 75% of the plants per plot have
emerged.
2. Days from planting to flowering. This was obtained by counting the number of
days from planting up to the time when 50% of the plant per plot started to produce
flowers.
3. Number of flower per cluster. This was the number of flower per cluster that
was developed per plant. It was taken from three sample clusters per plot.
4. Number of days to pod setting. This was the number of days when 50 % of the
flower break up and pod measures one inch long.
5. Days from planting to first harvest. This was recorded by counting the number
of days from planting to first harvest.
6. Days from planting to last harvest. This was recorded by counting the number
of days from planting to last harvest.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
9
7. Number of pod set per cluster. This was recorded from three sample clusters
per plant per plot used in gathering number of flower per cluster.
8. Number of pods per plant. This was gathered using the formula.
Total no. of pods harvested per plot
Number of pods per plant =---------------------------------------------
Total no. of plants harvested per plot
9. Length of pods at harvest (cm). Ten random sample pods were obtained per
treatment and were measured from pedicel end to distal end using a foot ruler.
10. Width of pods at harvest (cm). This was measured from the ten samples used
in getting the length of pod from its middle portion using a foot ruler.
11. Weight of marketable pods (kg). This was the weight of marketable pods
harvested per plot. Marketable pods are free from disease and insect damage and not
deformed.
12.
Weight
of
non-marketable pods per plot (kg). All deformed, undersized, and
abnormal pods were discarded and weighed.
13. Total yield per plot (kg). This was the total weight of marketable and non-
marketable pods from the first to last harvest per plot.
14. Computed yield per hectare (t). This was obtained by using the data on yield
per plot in kg/3m3 x 3.33, which is a factor to be used to convert yield in kg/3m2 to ton
per hectare.
15. Number of nodules per plant per treatment. This was the number of nodules
per plant per treatment
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
10
16. Reaction to Bean Rust. This was recorded using the rating scale by Agayao in
2002 as follows:
Scale
Description
Remarks
1
No infection
High resistance
2
1-2% total plant/plot is Mild resistance
infected
3
25-5-% of the total
Moderate resistance
plant/plot is infected
4
51-75% of the total
Susceptible
plant/plot is infected
5
76-100% of the total Very susceptible
plant/plot is infected
17. Reaction to Pod Borer. This was rated using the rating scale used by Agayao
in 2002 as follows:
Scale
Description
Remarks
1
No infestation
High resistance
2
1-2% total plant/plot is Mild resistance
infested
3
25-5-% of the total
Moderate resistance
plant/plot is infested
4
51-75% of the total
Susceptible
plant/plot is infested
5
76-100% of the total Very susceptible
plant/plot is infested
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
11
18. Return on Cash Expense (ROCE). This was obtained using the
following formula per plot basis.
Gross sales – Total expense
ROCE
=-------------------------------------- X 100
Total
Expense
All quantitative data were analyzed using the Analysis of Variance for 3 X 5
factor factorial in Split-plot Design with three replications. The significance of
differences among treatment means was tested using DMRT at 95% level of significance.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
12
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Days to Emergence
Effect of inoculation. Inoculation did not affect the number of days to emergence.
All treatments emerged eight days after planting (DAP).
Effect of variety. Similarly, all the varieties tested emerged eight DAP.
Interaction
effect. No interaction effect between inoculants and varieties on the
days to emergence was observed.
Days from Planting to Flowering.
Effect of inoculation. All inoculation treatment induced flowering at 38 DAP.
Effect of variety. All varieties responded similarly as to the days from planting
to flowering. Flowering was observed 38 DAP.
Interaction
effect. No interaction effect between inoculant and variety on the days
to flowering was observed. Inoculation did not affect the number of days to flowering.
Number of Flowers per Cluster.
Effect of inoculation. Table 1 shows no significant differences on the number of
flowers per cluster among the inoculants used. All inoculated plants had five flowers per
cluster.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
13
Table 1. Number of flower per cluster of five bush snapbeans varieties as affected by
inoculation.
TREATMENT
NO. FLOWERS PER CLUSTER
________________________________________________________________________
Inoculation (I)
No
Inoculation 5
Vital N
5
Bio N
5
Varieties (V)
Torrent
6b
BBL
6b
HAB 63
5a
HAB 323
6b
Landmark
6b
I x V
*
_______________________________________________________________________
CV (a) %
13.44
CV (b) %
6.03
_______________________________________________________________________
Means within the column, followed by the same letter are not significantly different from
each other within a factor at 95% level of significance using DMRT.
Effect of variety. Significant differences were observed on the number of flowers
per cluster among the five varieties of bush snapbeans evaluated. Torrent, BBL 274,
HAB 323 and Landmark had six flowers per cluster. HAB 63 had significantly fewer
flower per cluster (5).
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
14
Interaction effect. Different varieties respond differently to different inoculation
treatments. Torrent and HAB 323 in uninoculated plots produced the highest number of
flowers per cluster, followed by BBL 274 and Landmark. Using Vital N, BBL 274 gave
the highest number of flowers per cluster followed by Landmark. HAB 323 and Torrent
and HAB 63 had significantly fewer flowers per cluster. Using Bio N, BBL 274, HAB
323 and Landmark similarly had high number of flowers per cluster followed by Torrent.
HAB 63 responded similarly in all the inoculation treatments (Fig 1).
Number of Days to Pod Setting.
Effect of inoculation. All treatments were observed to take 47 DAP to pod
setting. Result of statistical analysis indicates that inoculation did not significantly affect
the number of days to pod setting in bush snapbeans.
Effect of variety. Similarly, the varieties had 47 DAP to pod setting.
Interaction
effect. No interaction effect was observed between inoculant and
variety.
Days from Planting to First Harvest
Effect of inoculation. All inoculation treatments were first harvested at 57 DAP.
Effect of variety. All varieties were also first harvested at 57 DAP.
Interaction effect. No interaction effect was observed between inoculant and
variety.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
15
6.2
6
5.8
cluster
V1
5.6
per
er
V2
5.4
flow
V3
5.2
V4
Number of
5
V5
4.8
4.6
4.4
I1
I2
I3
Fig 1. Interaction effect of inoculation and varieties of bush snapbeans
on number of flowers per cluster.
Legend: I – Inoculation
I1
-
No
inoculation
I2 - Inoculated with Vital N
I3 - Inoculated with Bio N
V – Variety
V1
–
Torrent
V2
–
BBL
274
V3 – HAB 63
V4-
-
HAB
323
V5 – Landmark
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
16
Days from Planting to Last Harvest
Effect of inoculation. All inoculation treatments were last harvested at 74 DAP.
Effect of variety. Similarly, all the five varieties were last harvested at 74 DAP.
Interaction
effect. No interaction effect on days from planting to last harvesting
was observed between inoculant and variety.
Number of Pods per Cluster.
Effect of inoculation. No significant differences were observed on the number of
pods per cluster.
Effect of variety. Torrent, BBL 274, HAB 63 and Landmark had significantly
greater number of pods per cluster than HAB 323 that produced the significantly fewer
number of pods per cluster (Table 2).
Interaction
effect. Statistically, no significant difference was observed between
the inoculant and variety on the number of pods per cluster (Table 2).
Number of Pods per Plant.
Effect of inoculation. No significant differences were observed on the number of
pods per plant.
Effect of variety. Highly significant differences were observed in the number of
pods per plant. Torrent had significantly the highest number of pods per plant than HAB
323, BBL 274 and HAB 63 (Table 2).
Interaction
effect. No significant interaction effect was observed between the
inoculant and the variety on the number of pods per plant.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
17
Table 2. Number of pods per cluster and per plant of five variety of bush snapbean as
affected by inoculation.
POD NUMBER______________
TREATMENTS
PER CLUSTER PER PLANT
Inoculation (I)
No inoculation
5
22
Vital N
5
21
Bio N
5
20
Varieties (V)
Torrent
5a
23a
BBL 274
5a 21bc
HAB 63
5a
21bc
HAB 323
4b
22b
Landmark
5a
20c
I x V
ns
ns
CV (a)%
10.99
7.19
CV (b)%
11.71
5.87
Means with common letter are not significance different at 95% level of
significance using DMRT.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
18
Length of Pods at Harvest.
Effect of inoculation. No significant differences were observed among the
inoculation treatments on the length of pods. It ranged only from 15.34 to 15.48 cm
(Table 3).
Effect of variety. Highly significant differences among the varieties tested were
observed on the length of pods (Table 3). Torrent registered the longest pods (16.76 cm),
followed by BBL 274 of 15.15 and was comparable to HAB 63 and HAB 323.
Landmark recorded the shortest (14.64 cm).
Interaction effect. No significant interaction was observed among the inoculants
and the variety on the length of pods.
Width of Pods at Harvest.
Effect of inoculation. Inoculation had no significant effect on the width of pods
of bush snapbeans (Table 3).
Effect of variety. Statistics showed no significant differences on the width of
pods among the varieties tested.
Interaction effect. No interaction effect between the inoculant and the variety was
observed.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
19
Table 3. Length and width of pods of five varieties of bush snapbeans as affected by
Inoculation.
POD___________
TREATMENTS
LENGTH WIDTH
Inoculation (I)
No inoculation
15.48
0.93
Vital N
15.34
0.89
Bio N
15.43
0.89
Varieties (V)
Torrent
16.76a 0.99
BBL
15.15a 0.85
HAB 63
15.33bc 0.89
HAB 323
15.21bc 0.86
Landmark
14.64c 0.94
I x V
Ns
ns
CV (a)%
4.14
8.37
CV (b)%
3.67
8.00
Weight of Marketable Pods
Effect of inoculation. Inoculation did not significantly affect the weight of
marketable pods (Table 4).
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
20
Effect of variety. No significant differences were observed among the five
varieties of bush snapbeans. Torrent was observed to have the highest weight (4.04 kg)
and was comparable to HAB 63, HAB 323 and Landmark.
Interaction
effect. No significant interaction was observed between the inoculant
and the variety.
Weight of Non-marketable Pods
Effect of inoculation. No significant differences were observed among the
inoculation treatments on the weight of non-marketable pods. Non marketable yield
ranged from 0.54 to 0.75 kg (Table 4)
Effect of variety. Among the varieties, Torrent and HAB 323 gave the least
weight of non-marketable pods ranging from 0.59 to 0.69 kg (Table 4).
Interaction
effect. No significant interaction effect was noted between the variety
and inoculation on the weight of non-marketable pods
Total Yield per Plot.
Effect of inoculation. There was no significant difference on the total yield per
plot (Table 5) ranging from 3.97 to 4.30 kg.
Effect of variety. There was no significant difference on the total yield per plot.
Torrent produced the highest yield of 4.65 and BBL 274 produced the lowest (Table5).
Interaction effect. No significant interaction effect was noted between the variety
and inoculant on the total yield per plot.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
21
Table 4. Weight of marketable pods per plot of five variety of bush snapbean as affected
By inoculation
POD WEIGHT/PLOT (kg/3m2)
TREATMENTS
MARKETABLE NON-MARKETABLE
Inoculation (I)
No inoculation
3.39
0.75
Vital N
3.44
0.54
Bio N
3.71
0.63
Varieties (V)
Torrent
4.04
0.59
BBL
3.14
0.69
HAB 63
3.42
0.69
HAB 323
3.58
0.59
Landmark
3.40
0.64
I x V
ns
ns
CV (a)%
25.91
74.93
CV (b)%
21.43
47.34
Computed Yield per Hectare.
Effect of inoculation. No significant differences were observed among the
inoculation treatments ranging from 13.21 to 14.52 t/ha (Table 5).
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
22
Effect of variety. Among the varieties, Torrent gave the highest yield per hectare
of 15.46 t/ha. It was followed by HAB 323. However, no significant differences were
noted among the five varieties evaluated (Table 5).
Interaction
effect. No significant interaction effect between inoculation and the
variety of bush snapbean was noted on computed yield per hectare (Table 5).
Nodules per Plant per Treatment.
Nodulation was assessed at 40 DAP. The number of nodules that were formed in
the roots of the two sample plants was counted separately per treatment.
Effect of inoculation. No significant differences among the three treatments were
noted on the number of nodules per plant (Table 6). Inoculation did not significantly
induce nodulation in bush snapbean. However, numerically, Vital N inoculated plants
registered the highest number of nodules per treatment.
Effect of variety. Result showed that there was no significant difference on the
nodule score among the varieties used. The number of nodules per plant among the
varieties, ranged from 32 to 44 (Table 6).
Interaction effect. No significant interaction effect was noted between the
inoculant and the variety on the number of nodules per plant.
The presence of nodules in uninoculated plots indicates the presence of native
strains, which might have been introduced by the cultivation of snapbeans in the area.
Continuous cultivation might have allowed population build up of the native strains.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
23
Table 5. Total yield per plot and computed yield per hectare.
TREATMENT
TOTAL YIELD
PER PLOT PER HECTRARE
(kg/3m2) (t/ha))
Inoculation (I)
No inoculation
4.16
13.81
Vital N
3.97
13.21
Bio N
4.30
14.52
Varieties (V)
Torrent
4.65
15.46
BBL
3.68
12.62
HAB 63
4.12
13.69
HAB 323
4.20
14.00
Landmark
4.05
13.48
I x V
ns
ns
CV (a)%
22.76
24.87
CV (b)%
21.77
21.31
Reaction to Bean Rust
Effect of Inoculation. Regardless of inoculation, all treatments and varieties tested
exhibited mild resistance to bean rust (Table 7).
Effect of variety. All the varieties tested exhibited mild resistance to bean rust.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
24
Interaction effect. No significant interaction between the inoculant and the
variety.
Table 6. Number of nodules per plant of five variety of bush snapbean as affected by
inoculation
TREATMENT NODULE
NUMBER
Inoculation (I)
No inoculation
34
Vital N
40
Bio N
32
Varieties (V)
Torrent
35
BBL
34
HAB 63
44
HAB 323
32
Landmark
33
I x V
ns
CV (a)%
27.42
CV (b)%
36.63
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
25
Reaction to Pod borer
Visual rating for the resistance to pod borer among the five varieties of bush snap
bean was done.
Effect of Inoculation. Mild resistance was visibly observed on the inoculated
plots, while in the control, it was observed to exhibit moderate resistance (Table 7).
Effect of variety. BBL 274, HAB 323 and Landmark were mildly resistant,
Torrent and HAB 63 were moderately resistant (Table 7).
Interaction effect. No interaction effect was observed between the variety and the
inoculant.
Table 7. Reaction of five bush snap bean varieties to bean rust and pod borer treated with
different inoculants.
TREATMENT
REACTION TO BEAN
REACTION TO POD
RUST
BORER
Inoculated (I)
No
inoculation
Mild
Resistance Moderate
resistance
Vital
N
Mild
Resistance Mild
Resistance
Bio
N
Mild
Resistance Mild
Resistance
Varieties (V)
Torrent Mild
Resistance Moderate
resistance
BBL
274
Mild
Resistance Mild
Resistance
HAB
63 Mild
Resistance Moderate
resistance
HAB
323
Mild
Resistance Mild
Resistance
Landmark
Mild
Resistance Mild
Resistan
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
26
Return on cash expense (ROCE)
Effect of inoculation. Among the inoculation treatments, Bio N had the highest
economic return (15.38%).
Effect of variety. Torrent showed the highest return on cash expense (25.87%)
followed by HAB 323 (Table 8).
Interaction
effect. Based on treatment combination, Torrent inoculated with Vital
N registered the highest return on cash expense (Table 8).
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
27
Table 8. Return on cash expenses of producing marketable fresh pods of five bush
snapbeans varieties as affected inoculation.
TREATMENT YIELD (kg) GROSS SALES TOTAL
NET
ROCE
(PhP)
EXPENSES
INCOME
(%)
(PhP)
Inoculation (I)
No Inoculation
16.98
237.70
219.50
18.20
8.30
Vital N
17.22
241.10
227.50
13.60
6.00
Bio N
18.22
262.50
227.50
35.00
15.38
Varieties
Torrent 12.13 169.80 134.90 34.90 25.87
BBL
274
9.42 131.90 134.90 -3.00 -2.22
HAB 63
10.27
143.80
134.90
8.90
6.60
HAB 323
10.74
150.35
134.90
15.45
11.45
Landmark 10.21 143.00
134.90
8.10
6.00
Selling price: PhP 14
Total; expenses include labor, fertilizers, seeds and inoculants
TREATMENT YIELD
(kg)
GROSS TOTAL
NET
ROCE
SALES
EXPENSES INCOME
(%)
(PhP)
(PhP)
Control
Torrent
3.78
52.90
43.90
9.00
20.50
BBL 274
3.02
42.25
43.90
-1.65
-3.75
HAB
63
3.36 47.00 43.90 3.10 7.06
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
28
HAB 323
3.48
48.70
43.90
4.80
10.09
Landmark
3.34
46.75
43.90
2.85
6.49
Vital N
Torrent
4.43 62.00 45.50 16.50 36.26
BBL 274
2.92
40.85
45.50
-4.65
-10.22
HAB 63
3.10
43.40
45.50
-2.10
-4.61
HAB 323
3.75
52.50
45.50
7.00
15.38
Landmark
3.02
42.25
45.50
-3.00
-6.59
Bio N
Torrent
3.92 54.85 45.50 9.35 20.55
BBL 274
3.48
48.70
45.50
3.20
7.03
HAB 63
3.81
53.30
45.50
7.70
17.14
HAB 323
3.51
49.15
45.50
3.65
8.03
Landmark
3.85
53.90
45.50
8.40
18.46
Table 9. Return on cash expenses of producing marketable fresh pods of five bush
snapbean as affected inoculation.
Selling price: Php 14
Total expenses include labor, fertilizers, seeds, and inoculants
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
29
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
This study aimed to determine the response of five bush snapbean varieties to
different inoculants, to determine which among the inoculants used will give favorable
results in bush snapbean production and to determine the interaction effect between
inoculation and the variety on the agronomic characters of bush snapbeans, and to
evaluate the economic importance of inoculation in bush snapbean production. This was
conducted from December 2005 to February 2006 at Benguet State University-Institute
for Plant Breeding Highland Crop Research Station.
Inoculation had no significant effect in all the agronomic characters measured in
this study in bush snapbean production. Highly significant differences among the five
varieties of bush snapbean evaluated were observed on the number of flowers per cluster,
number of pods per plant, pod length and pod width. The number of pods per cluster
among the five varieties of bush snapbeans differed significantly. Torrent was
significantly the highest ranking variety based on the aforementioned agronomic
characters. No significant interaction between inoculation and the variety was noted in all
the characters considered except for the number of flowers per cluster. BBL 274 got the
significantly highest number of flowers per cluster when inoculated with Vital N. Based
on the ROCE, higher profit could be realized by using Bio N as inoculant. Growing
Torrent inoculated with Vital N was the best among the treatment combinations in terms
of yield and ROCE.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
30
Conclusion
The agronomic characters of bush snapbean were not significantly affected by
inoculation. Inoculation of Bio N gave higher return on cash expense (15.38%) than Vital
N and the control.
The five varieties of bush snapbeans significantly differed only in number of
flowers per cluster, number of pods per cluster, number of pods per plant, pod length and
pod width. Among the varieties studied based on agronomic characters measured, Torrent
was the significantly highest and also exhibited the highest ROCE (25.87%).
Among the treatment combinations tested, Torrent inoculated with Bio N, Vital N
and uninoculated recorded the highest ROCE. More than 20% ROCE could be realized
by growing Torrent without inoculation and with Bio N inoculation. However, growing
Vital N inoculated Torrent resulted in higher ROCE of more than 36%.
.
Recommendation
Based on return on cash expense (ROCE), Bio N can be recommended because it
gave the highest economic return among the inoculants used. Among the varieties tested,
Torrent can be recommended as commercial variety because it registered the highest
profit and performed well in La Trinidad, Benguet. The treatment combination of Vital N
and Torrent is highly recommended for pod production to get higher ROCE.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
31
LITERATURE CITED
AGAYAO, M. 2002. Seeds production of bush beans in a farmer’s field as affected by
different organic fertilizers. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp.10-11.
AMOK, M. 2003. Nodulation and seed yield of new varieties of snapbean as influenced
by organic fertilizer. BS Thesis.BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp.15, 17, 27-28.
ATOS, C. 1997. Growth and yield performance of five bean cultivars. BS Thesis.BSU,
La Trinidad, Benguet. P.5.
BUTLER, E .J. 1955. Plant Pathology. The Lowa State College Press, Inc. Pp.16-17.
EVANS, J. 1991. Wheat response after temperate crop legumes in South Eastern
Australia. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research. Pp. 43, 155-156.
FAIZAH, A. W., B.I. RERKASEM and D. F. HERRIDGE. 1989. Methods for evaluating
nitrogen fixation by nodulated legumes in the field. Peoples, M.B. ACIAR.
Pp. 2-7.
FIARAWAN, K. 2001. Nodulation of rice bean (Vigna umbellata) under La Trinidad
condition. BS Thesis.BSU, La Trinidad,. Benguet. P21.
ISWARAN, V. 1973. Inoculate grain legumes with Rhizobium for higher yields. Sci.,
14 (1): 13 -14.
JENSEN, E.S. 1989. The roll of pea cultivation in the nitrogen economy of soils and
succeeding crops. In Legumes in Farming Systems. Pp. 3-15.
KROOTAH, P. 1971. Effect on pH on the growth of rhizobia and N fixation in some
Rhizobium – legume association. MS Thesis. University of the Philippines. Los
Baños, Laguna. P. 93
KUMAR, S. 1976. Response of different genotypes of soybean to inoculation with
various composite cultures of Rhizobium japonicum. Panthagar J. Res. 1(1): 30-
32.
MANGUIAT, T.J., D.M., MENDOSA, and S.M. TILO 1985. Influence of Legume
Rhizobia Symbiosis on the Nitrogen Economy of a Legume based on a cropping
system. Phils. J. 68 (7) 36-38.
MANUEL, R. S. 1997. Response of bush snapbean cv. Bush Blue Lake 274 to the
frequency of nitrogen fertlizer application during vegetative growth. BS Thesis.
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. Department of Crop Science.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
32
MERESTELA, T. M. 1989. Symbiotic nitrogen fixation in some cultivated legumes in
the Philippine. PhD. Dissertation. University of Tokyo, Japan. P. 119.
MERESTELA, T., Y. MARUYAMA, E. DAYAP, R. RAMOS and D. PADUA 1993.
Host cultivar and rhizobial strain interaction effects on N2 – fixation in pole
beans. (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Benguet State University. Grad. School Res. J. Pp.
25-33.
NAHAUL, C. H. 1980. Effect of inoculation and different rates of lime on the growth
and yield of Baguio Bean. BS Thesis. MSAC, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 53.
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE. 1979. Tropical Legume Resources for the
Future. Washington, D. C. US Government Printing Office. Pp. 5-6.
NAVARRO, L. D. 1984. Response of inoculation and tillage practices. MS Thesis.
Mountain State Agricultural College, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 81.
PCARRD, 1975. The Philippine Recommends for Vegetables Los Baños, Laguna.
University of the Philippines, College of Agriculture p. 13.
PIHA, M. I. and D. N. MUNNS. 1987. Nitrogen fixation potentials of beans compared
with other grain legumes under controlled conditions. Plant and soil. Pp. 98, 168-
182.
POG-OK, J. F. 2001. On farm evaluation of potential varieties of pole snapbean at Pico,
La Trinidad, Benguet.BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 1.
PUYONGAN, A. 1997. Evaluation of different rhizobial strains for biological nitrogen
fixation ability in two varieties of snapbeans. (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) , BS Thesis.
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
SALI, H. 1981. The effect of level of CaCO3, inoculation beans, lime and phosphorous
on the growth and nodulation of ipil-ipil cultivars in three soils. Abstract
Bibliography of Forage, Pasture and Grassland Researches. P. 26.
TANDANG, L. L. 1990. Promising varieties if snapbean in the highlands. A paper
presented during the highlights at Regional Science Development Center. BSU,
La Trinidad, Benguet.
TILO, S. N. 1977. Effects of inoculation, lime and phosphorous on the growth of ipl-ipil
cultivars in three soils. Abstract Bibliography of Forage, Pasture and Grassland
Researches. P. 26.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
33
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Number of flowers per cluster
TREATMENT
BLOCK
I II III
TOTAL
MEAN
No
inoculation
Torrent
6
5
6
17.00
5.67
BBL 274
5
5
6
16.00
5.67
HAB 63
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
HAB 323
6
5
6
17.00
5.67
Landmark
5
5
6
16.00
5.33
Vital
N
Torrent
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
BBL 274
6
6
6
18.00
6.00
HAB 63
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
HAB 323
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
Landmark
5
6
5
16.00
5.33
Bio
N
Torrent
6
5
5
16.00
5.33
BBL 274
6
5
6
17.00
5.67
HAB 63
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
HAB 323
6
5
6
17.00
5.67
Landmark
6
5
6
17.00
5.67
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
34
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
TOTAL MEAN
Control 5.67 5.33 5.00 5.67 5.33 27 5.4
Vital
N
5.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 5.33 26.33 5.27
Bio
N
5.33 5.67 5.00 5.67 5.67 27.34 5.47
TOTAL
16 17 15
16.34
16.33
MEAN
5.33 5.67 5.00 5.45 5.44
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 1.377
0.688
Factor A
2
0.311
0.155
0.30ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
2.088
0.522
Factor B
4
2.133
0.533
5.05** 2.78
4.22
AB 8
21.33
0.266
2.53* 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
2.533
0.105
TOTAL 44
10.577
**-highly significant
*-significant
ns-non-significant
Coefficient of variation (a) = 13.44%
Coefficient of variation (b) = 6.03%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
35
Appendix Table 1. Number of pods per cluster
TREATMENT
BLOCK
I II III
TOTAL
MEAN
No
inoculation
Torrent
6
6
5
17.00
5.67
BBL 274
4
5
5
14.00
4.67
HAB 63
5
5
6
16.00
5.33
HAB 323
4
4
5
13.00
4.33
Landmark
5
5
4
14.00
4.67
Vital
N
Torrent
6
5
5
16.00
5.33
BBL 274
5
4
4
13.00
4.33
HAB 63
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
HAB 323
4
5
5
14.00
4.67
Landmark
5
4
5
14.00
4.67
Bio
N
Torrent
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
BBL 274
4
6
6
15.00
5.00
HAB 63
5
5
5
16.00
5.33
HAB 323
4
4
5
13.00
4.33
Landmark
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
36
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
TOTAL MEAN
Control 5.67 4.67 5.33 4.33 4.67 24.67 4.93
Vital
N
5.33 4.33 5.00 4.67 4.67 24.00 4.80
Bio
N
5.00 5.00 5.33 4.33 5.00 24.66 4.93
TOTAL 16
14
15.66
13.33
14.34
MEAN
5.33 4.67 5.22 4.44 4.78
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 0.311
0.155
Factor A
2
0.177
0.088
0.31ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
1.155
0.288
Factor B
4
5.111
1.277
3.90* 2.78
4.22
AB 8
1.822
0.277
0.69ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
7.866
0.327
TOTAL 44
16.444
*-significant
ns-non-significant
Coefficient of variation (a) = 10.99%
Coefficient of variation (b) = 11.71%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
37
Appendix Table 3. Number of pods per plant
TREATMENT
BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
28
24
22
74.00
24.67
BBL 274
20
21
20
61.00
20.33
HAB 63
24
20
21
65.00
21.67
HAB 323
25
21
22
68.00
22.67
Landmark
20
22
20
62.00
20.67
Vital
N
Torrent
26
22
23
71.00
23.67
BBL 274
22
20
22
64.00
21.33
HAB 63
24
21
21
66.00
22.00
HAB 323
24
20
20
64.00
21.33
Landmark
20
20
21
61.00
20.33
Bio
N
Torrent
20
20
21
61.00
20.33
BBL 274
21
21
20
62.00
20.67
HAB 63
20
19
20
59.00
19.67
HAB 323
22
20
21
63.00
21.00
Landmark
20
20
20
30.00
20.00
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
38
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS VARIETIES TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control 24.67 20.33 21.67 22.67 20.67 110.01 22.00
Vital
N
23.67 21.33 22.00 21.33 20.33 108.66 21.73
Bio
N
20.33 20.67 19.67 21.00 20.00 101.67 20.33
TOTAL
68.67 62.33 63.34 65.00 61.00
MEAN
22.89 20.78 21.11 21.67 20.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 1.377
0.688
Factor A
2
0.311
0.155
5.10ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
2.088
0.522
Factor B
4
2.133
0.533
5.56** 2.36
4.22
AB 8
21.33
0.266
1.85ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
2.533
0.105
TOTAL 44
10.577
**-highly significant
ns-non-significant
Coefficient of variation (a) = 7.19%
Coefficient of variation (b) = 5.87%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
39
Appendix Table 2. Length of pods at harvest (cm)
TREATMENT
BLOCK
I II III
TOTAL
MEAN
No
inoculation
Torrent
17.07
16.45
16.78
50.30
16.77
BBL 274
15.18
15.39
15.14
45.71
15.24
HAB 63
15.74
15.75
15.19
46.68
15.56
HAB 323
15.18
14.62
15.20
45.00
15.00
Landmark
15.05
15.20
14.26
44.51
14.84
Vital
N
Torrent
17.47
16.60
16.39
50.46
16.82
BBL 274
15.04
13.89
15.60
44.53
14.84
HAB 63
15.78
14.98
14.09
44.80
14.93
HAB 323
15.48
14.60
16.42
46.50
15.50
Landmark
15.34
14.53
14.01
43.88
14.63
Bio
N
Torrent
16.63
16.11
17.35
50.09
16.70
BBL 274
15.45
15.69
15.00
46.14
15.38
HAB 63
15.45
15.45
15.61
46.51
15.50
HAB 323
15.65
14.64
15.10
45.39
15.13
Landmark
13.49
14.91
15.00
43.40
14.47
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
40
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control 16.77 15.24 15.56 15.00 14.84 77.41 15.48
Vital
N
16.82 14.84 14.93 15.50 14.63 76.72 15.34
Bio
N
16.70 15.38 15.50 15.13 14.47 77.18 15.44
TOTAL
50.29 45.46 45.99 45.63 43.94
MEAN
16.76 15.15 15.33 15.21 14.65
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 2.844
1.422
Factor A
2
0.311
0.155
0.81ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
0.355
0.088
Factor B
4
0.755
0.188
17.68** 2.78
4.22
AB 8
1.244
0.155
0.65ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
4.800
0.200
TOTAL 44
10.311
**-highly significant
ns-non- significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) = 4.14%
Coefficient of Variation (b) = 3.67%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
41
Table 6. Width of pods at harvest (cm)
TREATMENT
BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
1
1
1
3.0
1.00
BBL 274
0.9
0.95
0.9
2.75
0.92
HAB 63
0.9
0.95
0.85
2.70
0.90
HAB 323
0.9
0.85
0.9
2.65
0.88
Landmark
1
1
0.9
2.9
0.97
Vital
N
Torrent
1.1
1
0.95
3.05
1.02
BBL 274
0.8
0.79
0.85
2.44
0.81
HAB 63
0.95
0.8
0.79
2.54
0.85
HAB 323
0.87
0.78
0.9
2.55
0.85
Landmark
1
0.96
0.9
2.86
0.95
Bio
N
Torrent
1
0.94
1
2.94
0.98
BBL 274
1
0.85
0.6
2.45
0.82
HAB 63
1.1
0.8
0.89
2.79
0.93
HAB 323
0.9
0.79
0.85
2.54
0.85
Landmark
0.88
0.95
0.9
2.73
0.91
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
42
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS VARIETIES TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control 1.00 0.92 0.90 0.88 0.97 4.67 0.93
Vital
N
1.02 0.81 0.85 0.85 0.95 4.48 0.90
Bio
N
0.98 0.82 0.93 0.85 0.91 4.49 0.90
TOTAL
1.96 2.55 2.68 2.66 2.83 1.96
MEAN
0.65 0.85 0.89 0.89 0.94 0.65
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 0.047
0.023
Factor A
2
0.014
0.007
1.17ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
0.023
0.006
Factor B
4
0.140
0.035
6.57** 2.78
4.22
AB 8
0.027
0.003
0.64ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
0.128
0.005
TOTAL 44 44
0.379
**-highly significant
ns- non-significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) = 8.37%
Coefficient of Variation (b) = 8.00%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
43
Table 7. Weight of marketable pods (kg)
TREATMENT
BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
5.49
2.04
3.81
11.34
3.78
BBL 274
2.78
2.48
3.79
9.05
3.02
HAB 63
4.06
3.30
2.72
10.08
3.36
HAB 323
4.00
2.55
3.90
10.45
3.48
Landmark
3.00
3.42
3.61
10.03
3.34
Vital
N
Torrent
5.02
4.00
4.28
13.30
4.43
BBL 274
2.75
3.02
2.98
8.75
2.92
HAB 63
3.98
3.28
2.04
9.30
3.10
HAB 323
4.02
4.20
3.04
11.26
3.75
Landmark
3.52
3.02
2.52
9.06
3.02
Bio
N
Torrent
3.33
4.01
4.52
11.76
3.92
BBL 274
2.38
3.56
4.50
10.44
3.48
HAB 63
4.51
3.60
3.27
11.44
3.81
HAB 323
4.02
2.76
3.75
10.53
3.51
Landmark
4.27
4.25
3.03
11.55
3.85
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
44
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control
3.78 3.02 3.36 3.48 3.34 16.98 3.40
Vital
N
4.43 2.92 3.10 3.75 3.02 17.22 3.44
Bio
N
3.92 3.48 3.81 3.51 3.85 18.75 3.71
TOTAL
12.13 9.42 10.27 10.74 10.21
MEAN
4.04 3.14 3.42 3.58 3.40
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2
2.029
1.015
Factor A
2
0.882
0.441
0.53ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
3.326
0.832
Factor B
4
4.027
1.007
1.77ns 2.36
4.22
AB 8 2.335
0.292
0.51ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
13.660
0.569
TOTAL 44
44
26.260
ns- non-significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) =25.91%
Coefficient of Variation (b) =21.43%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
45
Appendix Table 4. Weight of non-marketable pods (kg)
TREATMENT BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
1.5
0.75
0.75
3
1
BBL 274
0.6
1.6
0.8
3
1
HAB 63
0.5
0.5
0.75
1.75
0.58
HAB 323
0.8
0.75
0.5
2.05
0.68
Landmark
0.3
0.5
0.7
105
0.5
Vital
N
Torrent
0.5
0.5
0.25
1.25
0.42
BBL 274
0.3
0.25
0.75
1.3
0.43
HAB 63
0.75
0.25
0.77
1.52
0.51
HAB 323
0.5
0.8
1.00
2.3
0.77
Landmark
0.5
0.8
1.00
2.3
0.77
Bio
N
Torrent
0.3
0.5
0.25
1.05
0.35
BBL 274
0.2
0.75
1.00
1.95
0.96
HAB 63
0.25
1.7
0.78
2.73
0.91
HAB 323
0.5
0.75
0.5
1.75
0.58
Landmark
0.25
1.00
0.75
2.00
0.67
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
46
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control 1.0 1.0 0.58 0.68 0.5 3.76 0.75
Vital
N
0.42 0.43 0.59 0.51 0.77 2.72 0.54
Bio
N
0.35 0.65 0.91 0.58 0.67 3.16 0.63
TOTAL
1.77 2.08 2.08 1.77 1.94
MEAN
0.59 0.69 0.69 0.59 0.63
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
0.05 0.01
VARIATION FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.367
0.183
Factor A
2
0.335
0.168
0.72ns
6.94 18.00
Error (a)
4
0.929
0.232
Factor B
4
0.098
0.024
0.27ns
2.78 4022
AB 8
1.287
0.161
1.74ns 2036
3.36
Error (b)
24
2.221
0.092
TOTAL 44
5.238
ns- non-significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) = 74.93%
Coefficient of Variation (b) = 47.34%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
47
Appendix Table 5. Total Yield per plot (kg/3m 2)
TREATMENT
BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
7.09
2.79
4.56
14.44
4.81
BBL 274
3.28
4.08
4.59
11.95
3.98
HAB 63
4.56
3.8
3.47
11.91
3.97
HAB 323
4.8
3.3
4.4
15.50
4.17
Landmark
3.3
3.92
4.31
11.53
3.84
Vital
N
Torrent
5.52
4.5
4.53
14.55
4.85
BBL 274
2.78
3.27
3.73
9.78
3.26
HAB 63
4.73
3.53
2.81
12.78
4.26
HAB 323
4.52
4.45
3.81
12.78
4.26
Landmark
4.02
3.82
3.52
11.36
3.79
Bio
N
Torrent
3.53
4.51
4.77
12.86
4.29
BBL 274
2.58
4.31
5.5
11.39
3.80
HAB 63
4.76
5.3
4.05
14.11
4.70
HAB 323
4.52
3.51
4.53
12.56
4.19
Landmark
4.52
5.25
3.78
13.55
4.52
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
48
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control 4.81 3.98 3.97 4.17 3.84 20.77 4.15
Vital
N
4.85 3.2 3.69 4.36 3.79 19.85 3.97
Bio
N
4.29 3.80 4.70 4.19 4.52 21.5 4.3
TOTAL
13.95 11.04 12.36 12.62 12.15
MEAN
4.65 3.68 4.12 4.21 4.05
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 0.887
0.443
Factor A
2
0.815
0.407
0.46ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
3.552
0.888
Factor B
4
4.361
1.090
1.34ns 2.78
4.22
AB 8
3.274
0.409
0.50ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
19.501
0.813
TOTAL 44
32.389
ns- non-significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) = 22.76%
Coefficient of Variation (b) = 21.77%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
49
Table 8. Computed yield per hectare (t/ha)
TREATMENT
BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
23.61
9.29
15.8
48.08
16.03
BBL 274
10.92
13.59
15.28
39.79
13.26
HAB 63
15.18
12.65
11.56
39.39
13.13
HAB 323
15.98
10.99
14.65
41.62
13.87
Landmark
10.99
13.05
14.35
38.39
12.80
Vital
N
Torrent
18.38
14.99
15.08
48.45
16.15
BBL 274
9.26
70.89
12.42
32.57
10.86
HAB 63
15.75
11.75
9.36
36.86
12.29
HAB 323
15.05
14.82
12.69
42.58
14.19
Landmark
13.39
12.72
11.72
37.83
12.61
Bio
N
Torrent
11.75
15.02
15.88
42.65
14.22
BBL 274
8.59
14.35
18.32
41.26
13.75
HAB 63
15.85
17.65
13.49
46.99
15.66
HAB 323
15.05
11.63
15.08
41.82
13.94
Landmark
15.05
17.48
12.59
45.12
15.04
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
50
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control
16.03 13.26 13.13 13.87 12.80 69.09 13.82
Vital
N
16.15 10.86 12.29 14.19 12.61 66.1 13.22
Bio
N
14.22 13.75 15.66 13.94 15.04 72.61 14.52
TOTAL
46.4 37.87 41.08 42.00 40.45
MEAN
15.47 12.62 13.69 14.00 13.48
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 6.414
3.207
Factor A
2
12.793
6.397
0.54ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
47.448
11.862
Factor B
4
38.616
9.654
1.11ns 2.78
4.22
AB 8
38.324
4.791
0.55ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
209.130
8.714
TOTAL 44
352.727
ns- non-significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) = 24.87%
Coefficient of Variation (b) = 21.31%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
51
Appendix Table 10. Number of nodules per plant
TREATMENT
BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
35
24
42
101.00
33.67
BBL 274
39
17
24
80.00
26.67
HAB 63
66
35
40
141.00
47.00
HAB 323
35
32
21
38.00
29.33
Landmark
26
13
68
107.00
35.67
Vital
N
Torrent
44
33
30
107.00
35.67
BBL 274
57
25
60
142.00
47.33
HAB 63
50
52
53
155.00
51.67
HAB 323
35
67
38
110.00
36.67
Landmark
32
29
30
91.00
30.33
Bio
N
Torrent
22
34
51
107.00
35.67
BBL 274
36
18
32
86.00
28.67
HAB 63
45
39
19
103.00
34.33
HAB 323
38
35
17
90.00
30.00
Landmark
21
35
44
100.00
33.33
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
52
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control
33.67 26.67 47.00 29.33 35.67 172.34 34.47
Vital
N
35.67 47.33 51.67 36.67 30.33 201.67 40.33
Bio
N
35.67 28.64 34.33 30.00 33.33 162 32.4
TOTAL
105.01 102.67 133
96
99.33
MEAN
35.00 34.22 44.33 32
33.11
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 613.200
306.600
Factor A
2
508.133
254.066
2.65ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
383.866
95.966
Factor B
4
878.355
219.588
1.28ns 2.78
4.22
AB 8
903.644
112.955
0.66ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
4111.600
171.316
TOTAL 44
7398.800
ns-non-significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) = 27.42%
Coefficient of Variation (b) = 36.63%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
TIPAYNO, MELBA T. APRIL 2006. Agronomic Characters of Five Bush
Snapbeans Varieties Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N. Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Leoncia L. Tandang, PhD
ABSTRACT
Five bush snapbeans varieties were inoculated and observed for their agronomic
characters. The study was conducted at Benguet State University-Institute of Plant
Breeding Highland Crops Research Station from December 2005 to February 2006.
The study aimed to determine the response of bush snapbeans varieties to
different inoculants; to determine which among the inoculants used will give favorable
results in bush snapbean production; and to determine the interaction effect between
inoculation and variety on the agronomic character of bush snapbean.
Inoculation had no significance effect in all the agronomic characters measured in
the study in bush snapbean production. Highly significant differences among the five
varieties of bush snapbean evaluated were observed on the number of flowers per cluster,
number of pods per plant, pod length and pod width. The number of pods per cluster
among the five varieties of bush snapbeans differed significantly. Torrent was
significantly the highest ranking variety based on the aforementioned agronomic
characters. No significant interaction between inoculations and the variety was noted in
all the characters considered except for the number of flower per cluster. BBL 274 got the
significantly highest number of flowers per cluster when inoculated with Vital N. Based
on the ROCE, higher profit could be realized by using Bio N as inoculant. Growing
Torrent inoculated with Vital N is recommended for profitable bush snapbean production.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………. i
Abstract………… …………………………………………………………. .
i
Table of Contents …………………………………………………………….
iii
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………… 1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE ………………………………………………..
4
MATERIALS AND METHODS……………………………………………..
7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………………
12
Days to emergence…………………………………………………….
12
Days from planning to flowering………………………………………
12
Number of flower per cluster…………………………………………
12
Number of days to pod setting………………………………………..
14
Days from planting to first harvest……………………………………
14
Days from planting to last harvest ……………………………………
16
Numbers of pods per cluster …………………………………………
15
Number of pods per plant …………………………………………….
16
Length of pods at harvest …………………………………………….
18
Width of pods at harvest ……………………………………………
18
Weight of marketable pods …………………………………………
19
Weight of non-marketable pods ……………………………………
20
Total yield per slot …………………………………………………
20
Computed yield per hectare…………………………………………
22
iii
Number of nodules per plant ……………………………………….
22
Reaction to bean rust………………………………………………...
23
Reaction to pod borer ……………………………………………….
25
Return to Cash Expense (ROCE) ……………………………………
26
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION……………….
28
LITERATURE CITED ……………………………………………………….
30
APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………..
32
iv
1
INTRODUCTION
Snapbean
(Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is a common source of plant protein for human
diet as well as feed supplement for animals. It is also rich in vitamins and soluble
carbohydrates. Snapbean thrives well in cool medium to high altitude in tropical
countries. Further, it is one of the farmer’s main sources of income (Pog-ok, 2001).
This crop has the ability to fix nitrogen from the atmosphere through the action of
nitrogen -fixing bacteria present in its roots known as Rhizobium. This ability of legumes
gives them the advantage over any other crops for enabling to supply themselves partially
with nitrogen and helps in the maintenance of soil fertility level (Pog-ok, 2001).
Continuous cultivation of soils due to continuous cropping will deplete its
nutrients especially nitrogen. Nitrogen is easily lost through leaching, crop removal,
denitrification and volatilization processes. Because of these factors that affect nitrogen
loss, most farmers apply nitrogenous fertilizer to cover up losses and increase production.
Some researchers however have shown that continuous and excessive application of
nitrogenous fertilizers increases soil acidity, a result that renders most nutrient elements
in the soil unavailable for plant use (Piha and Munns, 1987).
Inoculation is known to have important role in legume production. Inoculation or
introducing proper strain of bacteria to legume seeds intended for planting by adding
Rhizobium will create the legume to secure nitrogen from the air (Pog-ok, 2001).
According to Butler (1955), inoculation should be practiced to hasten the trapping
of the atmospheric nitrogen. Inoculation introduces to the plant the bacteria, Rhizobium
which is capable of trapping atmospheric nitrogen for plant use at early stage.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
2
The bacteria that multiply and grow on the roots of legumes change the nitrogen in the
soil air biochemically into a fixed form attached to the root nodules.
There are many benefits derived from effective inoculation such as the reduction
of demand for soil nitrogen, prevention of early nitrogen starvation and improvement of
the grain and protein yield (PCCARRD, 1975).
Proper inoculation also improves or maintains fertility of the soil and lessens the
need of nitrogen fertilizer. Also, seed inoculation lessens input of production aside from
giving possible favorable effects on the fertility of the soil for succeeding crops
(PCCARRD, 1975).
The economic and environmental cost of the heavy use of chemical nitrogen
fertilizer in agriculture is a global concern. Sustainability mandates that alternatives to
nitrogen fertilizers. Nitrogen inputs, through Biological Nitrogen Fixation (BNF) helps
reduce fertilizer use and potential or legume varieties will therefore be an important
component of sustainable agricultural systems (Atos, 1997).
With the rising world1 population and the declining supply of fossils required to
manufacture nitrogen fertilizer, it may be necessary to rely more on microorganisms
associated with legume to supply plant need for nitrogen. To satisfy the demand for snap
beans, it is time to evaluate the response of common varieties of bean to inoculation to
lessen cost of production, waste of time, labor and to increase productivity of the crop
(Puyongan, 1997).
The study could help local farmers in selecting snapbean varieties with higher
biological nitrogen fixation to promote better profits.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
3
The study was undertaken to determine the response of the bush snapbean
varieties to different inoculants; to determine which among the inoculants would give
favorable results in bush snapbeans production; to determine the interaction effect
between the inoculant and the variety on agronomic characters of bush snapbeans.
The study was conducted at Benguet State University-Institute of Plant Breeding
Highland Crops Research Station from October 2005 to March 2006.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
4
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Inoculation was found to increase nodulation, bacteroid and leghemoglubin
contents in the nodules (Kumar, 1976), nodule weight yield (Sali, 1981; Tilo, 1977), bean
yield (Tilo, 1977; Nahaul, 1980), percent nitrogen in seed (Sali, 1981) nitrogen uptake by
plants (Nahaul, 1980), number of pods per plant, number of seed per pod, and
consequently, increased yield (Navarro, 1984). Krootha (1971) reported that inoculation
with rhizobium increased the yield and nitrogen content of the legumes at all pH levels.
Legumes and Rhizobium
Legumes are crucial to the balance of nature. They convert nitrogen from the air
into ammonia, a soluble form of nitrogen, which is readily utilized by plants. Thus, the
nitrogen contributions of legumes can be vital for maintaining soil productivity over long
periods. A leguminous crop can add up to 500 kg nitrogen to the soil per hectare a year in
association with Rhizobium (NAS, 1979).
Nitrogen fixation occurs within the roots nodules where the symbiotic bacteria
rhizobium lives. The active nodules contain a red pigment, like hemoglobin of the blood
of higher animals, which is essential to the biochemical phenomenon of nitrogen fixation
(Iswaran, 1974).
Merestela (1989) stated that the symbiotic association of Rhizobium and legume
to form nitrogen-fixing mechanism is a symbiont selective process in which only certain
combination of host Rhizobium pairing characteristics of nodule formation is expressed at
the early stage of root initiation process. Moreover, A.W. Faizah, et. al. (1989) explained
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
5
that growing legumes in agricultural system reflect their potential capacity to fix large
amounts of atmospheric nitrogen and formation of symbiosis between legume and
Rhizobium species is dependent on many factors such as calcium level and nitrate content
of the soil.
Manguiat,
et. al. (1985) further noted that rhizobial inoculation significantly
increase the nodule weight and number during the first cropping but the effect of
rhizobial inoculation on nodulation was no longer detected during the succeeding legume
crop.
The ability of legume crops to fix atmospheric nitrogen often results in a lower
utilization of inorganic nitrogen sources in the soil profile as compared to non-fixing
crops. In this way, inorganic nitrogen is conserved for the following crops unless it is lost
by volatilization, leaching, or denitrification (Jensen, 1989; Evans, 1991)
As cited by Fiarawan (2001) on her study of rice bean, she noted that in terms of
plant height, pod yield and seed yield, there is significant interaction affect between the
rhizobial strains and rice bean varieties. The variety inoculated with TAL 899 or TAL
117 produced the best potential for nodulation, nitrogen fixation and yield production.
Inoculation of legume seed is usually recommended in order to obtain the highest rate of
fixation.
Amok (2003) found that snapbean plants applied with organic fertilizer performed
better than the plants without fertilizer in terms of 100 seed weight, nodule count, fresh
and dry weight of leaves and yield performances.
In 1990, Tandang recommended Blue Lake, BSU # 1, Patig, Burik and Alno for
commercial production in Cordillera Region and Regions I, II, III and X of the
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
6
Philippines. Atos (1987) as cited by Manuel (1997) evaluated the growth and yield
performance of five pole snapbean cultivars. Results showed that Stonehill (“Patig”) and
Blue Lake, Prime Pak yielded the most.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
7
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of 245 m2 was thoroughly prepared and divided into three blocks. Each
block contained sixteen plots including border plot with a dimension of 1 x 5 m2. The
experiment was laid out following 3 x 5 factor factorial in split plot design with three
replications. Three seeds were sown per hill in a double row plot following a distance of
30 cm between hills. Crop protection and other management practices were employed
from planting up to last harvesting when necessary.
Treatments: Inoculants were assigned to the main plot as follows:
Main plot (Inoculation)
T1 – no inoculation (control)
T2 – Vital N (Azospirillum – based fertilizer)
T3 – Bio-N
Vital N is a wettable powder containing dried new strains of Azospirillum sp.,
vitamins and minerals. It was developed for seed/seedling inoculation. Azospirillum spp
are free-living bacteria growing around roots and reported to fix atmospheric nitrogen,
promote plant growth by producing IAA for root proliferation and cytokinins for shoot
growth. They can also solubilize soil phosphorous and potassium.
Inoculation
and
planting. Seeds were moistened with just enough water before
inoculation. The seeds and the inoculants were mixed thoroughly until seeds were
uniformly coated. Afterwards, seeds were spread on a clean bond paper separately and
air dried just before planting.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
8
Snap bean varieties were assigned to the sub-plot as follows:
Sub –plot (Varieties)
V1 – Torrent
V2 – BBL 274
V3 – HAB 63
V4 – HAB 323
V5 – Landmark
Data gathered
The data gathered were the following:
1. Days to emergence. This was recorded when 75% of the plants per plot have
emerged.
2. Days from planting to flowering. This was obtained by counting the number of
days from planting up to the time when 50% of the plant per plot started to produce
flowers.
3. Number of flower per cluster. This was the number of flower per cluster that
was developed per plant. It was taken from three sample clusters per plot.
4. Number of days to pod setting. This was the number of days when 50 % of the
flower break up and pod measures one inch long.
5. Days from planting to first harvest. This was recorded by counting the number
of days from planting to first harvest.
6. Days from planting to last harvest. This was recorded by counting the number
of days from planting to last harvest.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
9
7. Number of pod set per cluster. This was recorded from three sample clusters
per plant per plot used in gathering number of flower per cluster.
8. Number of pods per plant. This was gathered using the formula.
Total no. of pods harvested per plot
Number of pods per plant =---------------------------------------------
Total no. of plants harvested per plot
9. Length of pods at harvest (cm). Ten random sample pods were obtained per
treatment and were measured from pedicel end to distal end using a foot ruler.
10. Width of pods at harvest (cm). This was measured from the ten samples used
in getting the length of pod from its middle portion using a foot ruler.
11. Weight of marketable pods (kg). This was the weight of marketable pods
harvested per plot. Marketable pods are free from disease and insect damage and not
deformed.
12.
Weight
of
non-marketable pods per plot (kg). All deformed, undersized, and
abnormal pods were discarded and weighed.
13. Total yield per plot (kg). This was the total weight of marketable and non-
marketable pods from the first to last harvest per plot.
14. Computed yield per hectare (t). This was obtained by using the data on yield
per plot in kg/3m3 x 3.33, which is a factor to be used to convert yield in kg/3m2 to ton
per hectare.
15. Number of nodules per plant per treatment. This was the number of nodules
per plant per treatment
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
10
16. Reaction to Bean Rust. This was recorded using the rating scale by Agayao in
2002 as follows:
Scale
Description
Remarks
1
No infection
High resistance
2
1-2% total plant/plot is Mild resistance
infected
3
25-5-% of the total
Moderate resistance
plant/plot is infected
4
51-75% of the total
Susceptible
plant/plot is infected
5
76-100% of the total Very susceptible
plant/plot is infected
17. Reaction to Pod Borer. This was rated using the rating scale used by Agayao
in 2002 as follows:
Scale
Description
Remarks
1
No infestation
High resistance
2
1-2% total plant/plot is Mild resistance
infested
3
25-5-% of the total
Moderate resistance
plant/plot is infested
4
51-75% of the total
Susceptible
plant/plot is infested
5
76-100% of the total Very susceptible
plant/plot is infested
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
11
18. Return on Cash Expense (ROCE). This was obtained using the
following formula per plot basis.
Gross sales – Total expense
ROCE
=-------------------------------------- X 100
Total
Expense
All quantitative data were analyzed using the Analysis of Variance for 3 X 5
factor factorial in Split-plot Design with three replications. The significance of
differences among treatment means was tested using DMRT at 95% level of significance.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
12
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Days to Emergence
Effect of inoculation. Inoculation did not affect the number of days to emergence.
All treatments emerged eight days after planting (DAP).
Effect of variety. Similarly, all the varieties tested emerged eight DAP.
Interaction
effect. No interaction effect between inoculants and varieties on the
days to emergence was observed.
Days from Planting to Flowering.
Effect of inoculation. All inoculation treatment induced flowering at 38 DAP.
Effect of variety. All varieties responded similarly as to the days from planting
to flowering. Flowering was observed 38 DAP.
Interaction
effect. No interaction effect between inoculant and variety on the days
to flowering was observed. Inoculation did not affect the number of days to flowering.
Number of Flowers per Cluster.
Effect of inoculation. Table 1 shows no significant differences on the number of
flowers per cluster among the inoculants used. All inoculated plants had five flowers per
cluster.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
13
Table 1. Number of flower per cluster of five bush snapbeans varieties as affected by
inoculation.
TREATMENT
NO. FLOWERS PER CLUSTER
________________________________________________________________________
Inoculation (I)
No
Inoculation 5
Vital N
5
Bio N
5
Varieties (V)
Torrent
6b
BBL
6b
HAB 63
5a
HAB 323
6b
Landmark
6b
I x V
*
_______________________________________________________________________
CV (a) %
13.44
CV (b) %
6.03
_______________________________________________________________________
Means within the column, followed by the same letter are not significantly different from
each other within a factor at 95% level of significance using DMRT.
Effect of variety. Significant differences were observed on the number of flowers
per cluster among the five varieties of bush snapbeans evaluated. Torrent, BBL 274,
HAB 323 and Landmark had six flowers per cluster. HAB 63 had significantly fewer
flower per cluster (5).
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
14
Interaction effect. Different varieties respond differently to different inoculation
treatments. Torrent and HAB 323 in uninoculated plots produced the highest number of
flowers per cluster, followed by BBL 274 and Landmark. Using Vital N, BBL 274 gave
the highest number of flowers per cluster followed by Landmark. HAB 323 and Torrent
and HAB 63 had significantly fewer flowers per cluster. Using Bio N, BBL 274, HAB
323 and Landmark similarly had high number of flowers per cluster followed by Torrent.
HAB 63 responded similarly in all the inoculation treatments (Fig 1).
Number of Days to Pod Setting.
Effect of inoculation. All treatments were observed to take 47 DAP to pod
setting. Result of statistical analysis indicates that inoculation did not significantly affect
the number of days to pod setting in bush snapbeans.
Effect of variety. Similarly, the varieties had 47 DAP to pod setting.
Interaction
effect. No interaction effect was observed between inoculant and
variety.
Days from Planting to First Harvest
Effect of inoculation. All inoculation treatments were first harvested at 57 DAP.
Effect of variety. All varieties were also first harvested at 57 DAP.
Interaction effect. No interaction effect was observed between inoculant and
variety.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
15
6.2
6
5.8
cluster
V1
5.6
per
er
V2
5.4
flow
V3
5.2
V4
Number of
5
V5
4.8
4.6
4.4
I1
I2
I3
Fig 1. Interaction effect of inoculation and varieties of bush snapbeans
on number of flowers per cluster.
Legend: I – Inoculation
I1
-
No
inoculation
I2 - Inoculated with Vital N
I3 - Inoculated with Bio N
V – Variety
V1
–
Torrent
V2
–
BBL
274
V3 – HAB 63
V4-
-
HAB
323
V5 – Landmark
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
16
Days from Planting to Last Harvest
Effect of inoculation. All inoculation treatments were last harvested at 74 DAP.
Effect of variety. Similarly, all the five varieties were last harvested at 74 DAP.
Interaction
effect. No interaction effect on days from planting to last harvesting
was observed between inoculant and variety.
Number of Pods per Cluster.
Effect of inoculation. No significant differences were observed on the number of
pods per cluster.
Effect of variety. Torrent, BBL 274, HAB 63 and Landmark had significantly
greater number of pods per cluster than HAB 323 that produced the significantly fewer
number of pods per cluster (Table 2).
Interaction
effect. Statistically, no significant difference was observed between
the inoculant and variety on the number of pods per cluster (Table 2).
Number of Pods per Plant.
Effect of inoculation. No significant differences were observed on the number of
pods per plant.
Effect of variety. Highly significant differences were observed in the number of
pods per plant. Torrent had significantly the highest number of pods per plant than HAB
323, BBL 274 and HAB 63 (Table 2).
Interaction
effect. No significant interaction effect was observed between the
inoculant and the variety on the number of pods per plant.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
17
Table 2. Number of pods per cluster and per plant of five variety of bush snapbean as
affected by inoculation.
POD NUMBER______________
TREATMENTS
PER CLUSTER PER PLANT
Inoculation (I)
No inoculation
5
22
Vital N
5
21
Bio N
5
20
Varieties (V)
Torrent
5a
23a
BBL 274
5a 21bc
HAB 63
5a
21bc
HAB 323
4b
22b
Landmark
5a
20c
I x V
ns
ns
CV (a)%
10.99
7.19
CV (b)%
11.71
5.87
Means with common letter are not significance different at 95% level of
significance using DMRT.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
18
Length of Pods at Harvest.
Effect of inoculation. No significant differences were observed among the
inoculation treatments on the length of pods. It ranged only from 15.34 to 15.48 cm
(Table 3).
Effect of variety. Highly significant differences among the varieties tested were
observed on the length of pods (Table 3). Torrent registered the longest pods (16.76 cm),
followed by BBL 274 of 15.15 and was comparable to HAB 63 and HAB 323.
Landmark recorded the shortest (14.64 cm).
Interaction effect. No significant interaction was observed among the inoculants
and the variety on the length of pods.
Width of Pods at Harvest.
Effect of inoculation. Inoculation had no significant effect on the width of pods
of bush snapbeans (Table 3).
Effect of variety. Statistics showed no significant differences on the width of
pods among the varieties tested.
Interaction effect. No interaction effect between the inoculant and the variety was
observed.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
19
Table 3. Length and width of pods of five varieties of bush snapbeans as affected by
Inoculation.
POD___________
TREATMENTS
LENGTH WIDTH
Inoculation (I)
No inoculation
15.48
0.93
Vital N
15.34
0.89
Bio N
15.43
0.89
Varieties (V)
Torrent
16.76a 0.99
BBL
15.15a 0.85
HAB 63
15.33bc 0.89
HAB 323
15.21bc 0.86
Landmark
14.64c 0.94
I x V
Ns
ns
CV (a)%
4.14
8.37
CV (b)%
3.67
8.00
Weight of Marketable Pods
Effect of inoculation. Inoculation did not significantly affect the weight of
marketable pods (Table 4).
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
20
Effect of variety. No significant differences were observed among the five
varieties of bush snapbeans. Torrent was observed to have the highest weight (4.04 kg)
and was comparable to HAB 63, HAB 323 and Landmark.
Interaction
effect. No significant interaction was observed between the inoculant
and the variety.
Weight of Non-marketable Pods
Effect of inoculation. No significant differences were observed among the
inoculation treatments on the weight of non-marketable pods. Non marketable yield
ranged from 0.54 to 0.75 kg (Table 4)
Effect of variety. Among the varieties, Torrent and HAB 323 gave the least
weight of non-marketable pods ranging from 0.59 to 0.69 kg (Table 4).
Interaction
effect. No significant interaction effect was noted between the variety
and inoculation on the weight of non-marketable pods
Total Yield per Plot.
Effect of inoculation. There was no significant difference on the total yield per
plot (Table 5) ranging from 3.97 to 4.30 kg.
Effect of variety. There was no significant difference on the total yield per plot.
Torrent produced the highest yield of 4.65 and BBL 274 produced the lowest (Table5).
Interaction effect. No significant interaction effect was noted between the variety
and inoculant on the total yield per plot.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
21
Table 4. Weight of marketable pods per plot of five variety of bush snapbean as affected
By inoculation
POD WEIGHT/PLOT (kg/3m2)
TREATMENTS
MARKETABLE NON-MARKETABLE
Inoculation (I)
No inoculation
3.39
0.75
Vital N
3.44
0.54
Bio N
3.71
0.63
Varieties (V)
Torrent
4.04
0.59
BBL
3.14
0.69
HAB 63
3.42
0.69
HAB 323
3.58
0.59
Landmark
3.40
0.64
I x V
ns
ns
CV (a)%
25.91
74.93
CV (b)%
21.43
47.34
Computed Yield per Hectare.
Effect of inoculation. No significant differences were observed among the
inoculation treatments ranging from 13.21 to 14.52 t/ha (Table 5).
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
22
Effect of variety. Among the varieties, Torrent gave the highest yield per hectare
of 15.46 t/ha. It was followed by HAB 323. However, no significant differences were
noted among the five varieties evaluated (Table 5).
Interaction
effect. No significant interaction effect between inoculation and the
variety of bush snapbean was noted on computed yield per hectare (Table 5).
Nodules per Plant per Treatment.
Nodulation was assessed at 40 DAP. The number of nodules that were formed in
the roots of the two sample plants was counted separately per treatment.
Effect of inoculation. No significant differences among the three treatments were
noted on the number of nodules per plant (Table 6). Inoculation did not significantly
induce nodulation in bush snapbean. However, numerically, Vital N inoculated plants
registered the highest number of nodules per treatment.
Effect of variety. Result showed that there was no significant difference on the
nodule score among the varieties used. The number of nodules per plant among the
varieties, ranged from 32 to 44 (Table 6).
Interaction effect. No significant interaction effect was noted between the
inoculant and the variety on the number of nodules per plant.
The presence of nodules in uninoculated plots indicates the presence of native
strains, which might have been introduced by the cultivation of snapbeans in the area.
Continuous cultivation might have allowed population build up of the native strains.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
23
Table 5. Total yield per plot and computed yield per hectare.
TREATMENT
TOTAL YIELD
PER PLOT PER HECTRARE
(kg/3m2) (t/ha))
Inoculation (I)
No inoculation
4.16
13.81
Vital N
3.97
13.21
Bio N
4.30
14.52
Varieties (V)
Torrent
4.65
15.46
BBL
3.68
12.62
HAB 63
4.12
13.69
HAB 323
4.20
14.00
Landmark
4.05
13.48
I x V
ns
ns
CV (a)%
22.76
24.87
CV (b)%
21.77
21.31
Reaction to Bean Rust
Effect of Inoculation. Regardless of inoculation, all treatments and varieties tested
exhibited mild resistance to bean rust (Table 7).
Effect of variety. All the varieties tested exhibited mild resistance to bean rust.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
24
Interaction effect. No significant interaction between the inoculant and the
variety.
Table 6. Number of nodules per plant of five variety of bush snapbean as affected by
inoculation
TREATMENT NODULE
NUMBER
Inoculation (I)
No inoculation
34
Vital N
40
Bio N
32
Varieties (V)
Torrent
35
BBL
34
HAB 63
44
HAB 323
32
Landmark
33
I x V
ns
CV (a)%
27.42
CV (b)%
36.63
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
25
Reaction to Pod borer
Visual rating for the resistance to pod borer among the five varieties of bush snap
bean was done.
Effect of Inoculation. Mild resistance was visibly observed on the inoculated
plots, while in the control, it was observed to exhibit moderate resistance (Table 7).
Effect of variety. BBL 274, HAB 323 and Landmark were mildly resistant,
Torrent and HAB 63 were moderately resistant (Table 7).
Interaction effect. No interaction effect was observed between the variety and the
inoculant.
Table 7. Reaction of five bush snap bean varieties to bean rust and pod borer treated with
different inoculants.
TREATMENT
REACTION TO BEAN
REACTION TO POD
RUST
BORER
Inoculated (I)
No
inoculation
Mild
Resistance Moderate
resistance
Vital
N
Mild
Resistance Mild
Resistance
Bio
N
Mild
Resistance Mild
Resistance
Varieties (V)
Torrent Mild
Resistance Moderate
resistance
BBL
274
Mild
Resistance Mild
Resistance
HAB
63 Mild
Resistance Moderate
resistance
HAB
323
Mild
Resistance Mild
Resistance
Landmark
Mild
Resistance Mild
Resistan
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
26
Return on cash expense (ROCE)
Effect of inoculation. Among the inoculation treatments, Bio N had the highest
economic return (15.38%).
Effect of variety. Torrent showed the highest return on cash expense (25.87%)
followed by HAB 323 (Table 8).
Interaction
effect. Based on treatment combination, Torrent inoculated with Vital
N registered the highest return on cash expense (Table 8).
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
27
Table 8. Return on cash expenses of producing marketable fresh pods of five bush
snapbeans varieties as affected inoculation.
TREATMENT YIELD (kg) GROSS SALES TOTAL
NET
ROCE
(PhP)
EXPENSES
INCOME
(%)
(PhP)
Inoculation (I)
No Inoculation
16.98
237.70
219.50
18.20
8.30
Vital N
17.22
241.10
227.50
13.60
6.00
Bio N
18.22
262.50
227.50
35.00
15.38
Varieties
Torrent 12.13 169.80 134.90 34.90 25.87
BBL
274
9.42 131.90 134.90 -3.00 -2.22
HAB 63
10.27
143.80
134.90
8.90
6.60
HAB 323
10.74
150.35
134.90
15.45
11.45
Landmark 10.21 143.00
134.90
8.10
6.00
Selling price: PhP 14
Total; expenses include labor, fertilizers, seeds and inoculants
TREATMENT YIELD
(kg)
GROSS TOTAL
NET
ROCE
SALES
EXPENSES INCOME
(%)
(PhP)
(PhP)
Control
Torrent
3.78
52.90
43.90
9.00
20.50
BBL 274
3.02
42.25
43.90
-1.65
-3.75
HAB
63
3.36 47.00 43.90 3.10 7.06
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
28
HAB 323
3.48
48.70
43.90
4.80
10.09
Landmark
3.34
46.75
43.90
2.85
6.49
Vital N
Torrent
4.43 62.00 45.50 16.50 36.26
BBL 274
2.92
40.85
45.50
-4.65
-10.22
HAB 63
3.10
43.40
45.50
-2.10
-4.61
HAB 323
3.75
52.50
45.50
7.00
15.38
Landmark
3.02
42.25
45.50
-3.00
-6.59
Bio N
Torrent
3.92 54.85 45.50 9.35 20.55
BBL 274
3.48
48.70
45.50
3.20
7.03
HAB 63
3.81
53.30
45.50
7.70
17.14
HAB 323
3.51
49.15
45.50
3.65
8.03
Landmark
3.85
53.90
45.50
8.40
18.46
Table 9. Return on cash expenses of producing marketable fresh pods of five bush
snapbean as affected inoculation.
Selling price: Php 14
Total expenses include labor, fertilizers, seeds, and inoculants
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
29
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
This study aimed to determine the response of five bush snapbean varieties to
different inoculants, to determine which among the inoculants used will give favorable
results in bush snapbean production and to determine the interaction effect between
inoculation and the variety on the agronomic characters of bush snapbeans, and to
evaluate the economic importance of inoculation in bush snapbean production. This was
conducted from December 2005 to February 2006 at Benguet State University-Institute
for Plant Breeding Highland Crop Research Station.
Inoculation had no significant effect in all the agronomic characters measured in
this study in bush snapbean production. Highly significant differences among the five
varieties of bush snapbean evaluated were observed on the number of flowers per cluster,
number of pods per plant, pod length and pod width. The number of pods per cluster
among the five varieties of bush snapbeans differed significantly. Torrent was
significantly the highest ranking variety based on the aforementioned agronomic
characters. No significant interaction between inoculation and the variety was noted in all
the characters considered except for the number of flowers per cluster. BBL 274 got the
significantly highest number of flowers per cluster when inoculated with Vital N. Based
on the ROCE, higher profit could be realized by using Bio N as inoculant. Growing
Torrent inoculated with Vital N was the best among the treatment combinations in terms
of yield and ROCE.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
30
Conclusion
The agronomic characters of bush snapbean were not significantly affected by
inoculation. Inoculation of Bio N gave higher return on cash expense (15.38%) than Vital
N and the control.
The five varieties of bush snapbeans significantly differed only in number of
flowers per cluster, number of pods per cluster, number of pods per plant, pod length and
pod width. Among the varieties studied based on agronomic characters measured, Torrent
was the significantly highest and also exhibited the highest ROCE (25.87%).
Among the treatment combinations tested, Torrent inoculated with Bio N, Vital N
and uninoculated recorded the highest ROCE. More than 20% ROCE could be realized
by growing Torrent without inoculation and with Bio N inoculation. However, growing
Vital N inoculated Torrent resulted in higher ROCE of more than 36%.
.
Recommendation
Based on return on cash expense (ROCE), Bio N can be recommended because it
gave the highest economic return among the inoculants used. Among the varieties tested,
Torrent can be recommended as commercial variety because it registered the highest
profit and performed well in La Trinidad, Benguet. The treatment combination of Vital N
and Torrent is highly recommended for pod production to get higher ROCE.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
31
LITERATURE CITED
AGAYAO, M. 2002. Seeds production of bush beans in a farmer’s field as affected by
different organic fertilizers. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp.10-11.
AMOK, M. 2003. Nodulation and seed yield of new varieties of snapbean as influenced
by organic fertilizer. BS Thesis.BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp.15, 17, 27-28.
ATOS, C. 1997. Growth and yield performance of five bean cultivars. BS Thesis.BSU,
La Trinidad, Benguet. P.5.
BUTLER, E .J. 1955. Plant Pathology. The Lowa State College Press, Inc. Pp.16-17.
EVANS, J. 1991. Wheat response after temperate crop legumes in South Eastern
Australia. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research. Pp. 43, 155-156.
FAIZAH, A. W., B.I. RERKASEM and D. F. HERRIDGE. 1989. Methods for evaluating
nitrogen fixation by nodulated legumes in the field. Peoples, M.B. ACIAR.
Pp. 2-7.
FIARAWAN, K. 2001. Nodulation of rice bean (Vigna umbellata) under La Trinidad
condition. BS Thesis.BSU, La Trinidad,. Benguet. P21.
ISWARAN, V. 1973. Inoculate grain legumes with Rhizobium for higher yields. Sci.,
14 (1): 13 -14.
JENSEN, E.S. 1989. The roll of pea cultivation in the nitrogen economy of soils and
succeeding crops. In Legumes in Farming Systems. Pp. 3-15.
KROOTAH, P. 1971. Effect on pH on the growth of rhizobia and N fixation in some
Rhizobium – legume association. MS Thesis. University of the Philippines. Los
Baños, Laguna. P. 93
KUMAR, S. 1976. Response of different genotypes of soybean to inoculation with
various composite cultures of Rhizobium japonicum. Panthagar J. Res. 1(1): 30-
32.
MANGUIAT, T.J., D.M., MENDOSA, and S.M. TILO 1985. Influence of Legume
Rhizobia Symbiosis on the Nitrogen Economy of a Legume based on a cropping
system. Phils. J. 68 (7) 36-38.
MANUEL, R. S. 1997. Response of bush snapbean cv. Bush Blue Lake 274 to the
frequency of nitrogen fertlizer application during vegetative growth. BS Thesis.
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. Department of Crop Science.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
32
MERESTELA, T. M. 1989. Symbiotic nitrogen fixation in some cultivated legumes in
the Philippine. PhD. Dissertation. University of Tokyo, Japan. P. 119.
MERESTELA, T., Y. MARUYAMA, E. DAYAP, R. RAMOS and D. PADUA 1993.
Host cultivar and rhizobial strain interaction effects on N2 – fixation in pole
beans. (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Benguet State University. Grad. School Res. J. Pp.
25-33.
NAHAUL, C. H. 1980. Effect of inoculation and different rates of lime on the growth
and yield of Baguio Bean. BS Thesis. MSAC, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 53.
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE. 1979. Tropical Legume Resources for the
Future. Washington, D. C. US Government Printing Office. Pp. 5-6.
NAVARRO, L. D. 1984. Response of inoculation and tillage practices. MS Thesis.
Mountain State Agricultural College, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 81.
PCARRD, 1975. The Philippine Recommends for Vegetables Los Baños, Laguna.
University of the Philippines, College of Agriculture p. 13.
PIHA, M. I. and D. N. MUNNS. 1987. Nitrogen fixation potentials of beans compared
with other grain legumes under controlled conditions. Plant and soil. Pp. 98, 168-
182.
POG-OK, J. F. 2001. On farm evaluation of potential varieties of pole snapbean at Pico,
La Trinidad, Benguet.BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 1.
PUYONGAN, A. 1997. Evaluation of different rhizobial strains for biological nitrogen
fixation ability in two varieties of snapbeans. (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) , BS Thesis.
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
SALI, H. 1981. The effect of level of CaCO3, inoculation beans, lime and phosphorous
on the growth and nodulation of ipil-ipil cultivars in three soils. Abstract
Bibliography of Forage, Pasture and Grassland Researches. P. 26.
TANDANG, L. L. 1990. Promising varieties if snapbean in the highlands. A paper
presented during the highlights at Regional Science Development Center. BSU,
La Trinidad, Benguet.
TILO, S. N. 1977. Effects of inoculation, lime and phosphorous on the growth of ipl-ipil
cultivars in three soils. Abstract Bibliography of Forage, Pasture and Grassland
Researches. P. 26.
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
33
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Number of flowers per cluster
TREATMENT
BLOCK
I II III
TOTAL
MEAN
No
inoculation
Torrent
6
5
6
17.00
5.67
BBL 274
5
5
6
16.00
5.67
HAB 63
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
HAB 323
6
5
6
17.00
5.67
Landmark
5
5
6
16.00
5.33
Vital
N
Torrent
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
BBL 274
6
6
6
18.00
6.00
HAB 63
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
HAB 323
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
Landmark
5
6
5
16.00
5.33
Bio
N
Torrent
6
5
5
16.00
5.33
BBL 274
6
5
6
17.00
5.67
HAB 63
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
HAB 323
6
5
6
17.00
5.67
Landmark
6
5
6
17.00
5.67
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
34
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
TOTAL MEAN
Control 5.67 5.33 5.00 5.67 5.33 27 5.4
Vital
N
5.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 5.33 26.33 5.27
Bio
N
5.33 5.67 5.00 5.67 5.67 27.34 5.47
TOTAL
16 17 15
16.34
16.33
MEAN
5.33 5.67 5.00 5.45 5.44
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 1.377
0.688
Factor A
2
0.311
0.155
0.30ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
2.088
0.522
Factor B
4
2.133
0.533
5.05** 2.78
4.22
AB 8
21.33
0.266
2.53* 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
2.533
0.105
TOTAL 44
10.577
**-highly significant
*-significant
ns-non-significant
Coefficient of variation (a) = 13.44%
Coefficient of variation (b) = 6.03%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
35
Appendix Table 1. Number of pods per cluster
TREATMENT
BLOCK
I II III
TOTAL
MEAN
No
inoculation
Torrent
6
6
5
17.00
5.67
BBL 274
4
5
5
14.00
4.67
HAB 63
5
5
6
16.00
5.33
HAB 323
4
4
5
13.00
4.33
Landmark
5
5
4
14.00
4.67
Vital
N
Torrent
6
5
5
16.00
5.33
BBL 274
5
4
4
13.00
4.33
HAB 63
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
HAB 323
4
5
5
14.00
4.67
Landmark
5
4
5
14.00
4.67
Bio
N
Torrent
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
BBL 274
4
6
6
15.00
5.00
HAB 63
5
5
5
16.00
5.33
HAB 323
4
4
5
13.00
4.33
Landmark
5
5
5
15.00
5.00
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
36
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
TOTAL MEAN
Control 5.67 4.67 5.33 4.33 4.67 24.67 4.93
Vital
N
5.33 4.33 5.00 4.67 4.67 24.00 4.80
Bio
N
5.00 5.00 5.33 4.33 5.00 24.66 4.93
TOTAL 16
14
15.66
13.33
14.34
MEAN
5.33 4.67 5.22 4.44 4.78
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 0.311
0.155
Factor A
2
0.177
0.088
0.31ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
1.155
0.288
Factor B
4
5.111
1.277
3.90* 2.78
4.22
AB 8
1.822
0.277
0.69ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
7.866
0.327
TOTAL 44
16.444
*-significant
ns-non-significant
Coefficient of variation (a) = 10.99%
Coefficient of variation (b) = 11.71%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
37
Appendix Table 3. Number of pods per plant
TREATMENT
BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
28
24
22
74.00
24.67
BBL 274
20
21
20
61.00
20.33
HAB 63
24
20
21
65.00
21.67
HAB 323
25
21
22
68.00
22.67
Landmark
20
22
20
62.00
20.67
Vital
N
Torrent
26
22
23
71.00
23.67
BBL 274
22
20
22
64.00
21.33
HAB 63
24
21
21
66.00
22.00
HAB 323
24
20
20
64.00
21.33
Landmark
20
20
21
61.00
20.33
Bio
N
Torrent
20
20
21
61.00
20.33
BBL 274
21
21
20
62.00
20.67
HAB 63
20
19
20
59.00
19.67
HAB 323
22
20
21
63.00
21.00
Landmark
20
20
20
30.00
20.00
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
38
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS VARIETIES TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control 24.67 20.33 21.67 22.67 20.67 110.01 22.00
Vital
N
23.67 21.33 22.00 21.33 20.33 108.66 21.73
Bio
N
20.33 20.67 19.67 21.00 20.00 101.67 20.33
TOTAL
68.67 62.33 63.34 65.00 61.00
MEAN
22.89 20.78 21.11 21.67 20.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 1.377
0.688
Factor A
2
0.311
0.155
5.10ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
2.088
0.522
Factor B
4
2.133
0.533
5.56** 2.36
4.22
AB 8
21.33
0.266
1.85ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
2.533
0.105
TOTAL 44
10.577
**-highly significant
ns-non-significant
Coefficient of variation (a) = 7.19%
Coefficient of variation (b) = 5.87%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
39
Appendix Table 2. Length of pods at harvest (cm)
TREATMENT
BLOCK
I II III
TOTAL
MEAN
No
inoculation
Torrent
17.07
16.45
16.78
50.30
16.77
BBL 274
15.18
15.39
15.14
45.71
15.24
HAB 63
15.74
15.75
15.19
46.68
15.56
HAB 323
15.18
14.62
15.20
45.00
15.00
Landmark
15.05
15.20
14.26
44.51
14.84
Vital
N
Torrent
17.47
16.60
16.39
50.46
16.82
BBL 274
15.04
13.89
15.60
44.53
14.84
HAB 63
15.78
14.98
14.09
44.80
14.93
HAB 323
15.48
14.60
16.42
46.50
15.50
Landmark
15.34
14.53
14.01
43.88
14.63
Bio
N
Torrent
16.63
16.11
17.35
50.09
16.70
BBL 274
15.45
15.69
15.00
46.14
15.38
HAB 63
15.45
15.45
15.61
46.51
15.50
HAB 323
15.65
14.64
15.10
45.39
15.13
Landmark
13.49
14.91
15.00
43.40
14.47
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
40
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control 16.77 15.24 15.56 15.00 14.84 77.41 15.48
Vital
N
16.82 14.84 14.93 15.50 14.63 76.72 15.34
Bio
N
16.70 15.38 15.50 15.13 14.47 77.18 15.44
TOTAL
50.29 45.46 45.99 45.63 43.94
MEAN
16.76 15.15 15.33 15.21 14.65
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 2.844
1.422
Factor A
2
0.311
0.155
0.81ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
0.355
0.088
Factor B
4
0.755
0.188
17.68** 2.78
4.22
AB 8
1.244
0.155
0.65ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
4.800
0.200
TOTAL 44
10.311
**-highly significant
ns-non- significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) = 4.14%
Coefficient of Variation (b) = 3.67%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
41
Table 6. Width of pods at harvest (cm)
TREATMENT
BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
1
1
1
3.0
1.00
BBL 274
0.9
0.95
0.9
2.75
0.92
HAB 63
0.9
0.95
0.85
2.70
0.90
HAB 323
0.9
0.85
0.9
2.65
0.88
Landmark
1
1
0.9
2.9
0.97
Vital
N
Torrent
1.1
1
0.95
3.05
1.02
BBL 274
0.8
0.79
0.85
2.44
0.81
HAB 63
0.95
0.8
0.79
2.54
0.85
HAB 323
0.87
0.78
0.9
2.55
0.85
Landmark
1
0.96
0.9
2.86
0.95
Bio
N
Torrent
1
0.94
1
2.94
0.98
BBL 274
1
0.85
0.6
2.45
0.82
HAB 63
1.1
0.8
0.89
2.79
0.93
HAB 323
0.9
0.79
0.85
2.54
0.85
Landmark
0.88
0.95
0.9
2.73
0.91
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
42
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS VARIETIES TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control 1.00 0.92 0.90 0.88 0.97 4.67 0.93
Vital
N
1.02 0.81 0.85 0.85 0.95 4.48 0.90
Bio
N
0.98 0.82 0.93 0.85 0.91 4.49 0.90
TOTAL
1.96 2.55 2.68 2.66 2.83 1.96
MEAN
0.65 0.85 0.89 0.89 0.94 0.65
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 0.047
0.023
Factor A
2
0.014
0.007
1.17ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
0.023
0.006
Factor B
4
0.140
0.035
6.57** 2.78
4.22
AB 8
0.027
0.003
0.64ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
0.128
0.005
TOTAL 44 44
0.379
**-highly significant
ns- non-significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) = 8.37%
Coefficient of Variation (b) = 8.00%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
43
Table 7. Weight of marketable pods (kg)
TREATMENT
BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
5.49
2.04
3.81
11.34
3.78
BBL 274
2.78
2.48
3.79
9.05
3.02
HAB 63
4.06
3.30
2.72
10.08
3.36
HAB 323
4.00
2.55
3.90
10.45
3.48
Landmark
3.00
3.42
3.61
10.03
3.34
Vital
N
Torrent
5.02
4.00
4.28
13.30
4.43
BBL 274
2.75
3.02
2.98
8.75
2.92
HAB 63
3.98
3.28
2.04
9.30
3.10
HAB 323
4.02
4.20
3.04
11.26
3.75
Landmark
3.52
3.02
2.52
9.06
3.02
Bio
N
Torrent
3.33
4.01
4.52
11.76
3.92
BBL 274
2.38
3.56
4.50
10.44
3.48
HAB 63
4.51
3.60
3.27
11.44
3.81
HAB 323
4.02
2.76
3.75
10.53
3.51
Landmark
4.27
4.25
3.03
11.55
3.85
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
44
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control
3.78 3.02 3.36 3.48 3.34 16.98 3.40
Vital
N
4.43 2.92 3.10 3.75 3.02 17.22 3.44
Bio
N
3.92 3.48 3.81 3.51 3.85 18.75 3.71
TOTAL
12.13 9.42 10.27 10.74 10.21
MEAN
4.04 3.14 3.42 3.58 3.40
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2
2.029
1.015
Factor A
2
0.882
0.441
0.53ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
3.326
0.832
Factor B
4
4.027
1.007
1.77ns 2.36
4.22
AB 8 2.335
0.292
0.51ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
13.660
0.569
TOTAL 44
44
26.260
ns- non-significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) =25.91%
Coefficient of Variation (b) =21.43%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
45
Appendix Table 4. Weight of non-marketable pods (kg)
TREATMENT BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
1.5
0.75
0.75
3
1
BBL 274
0.6
1.6
0.8
3
1
HAB 63
0.5
0.5
0.75
1.75
0.58
HAB 323
0.8
0.75
0.5
2.05
0.68
Landmark
0.3
0.5
0.7
105
0.5
Vital
N
Torrent
0.5
0.5
0.25
1.25
0.42
BBL 274
0.3
0.25
0.75
1.3
0.43
HAB 63
0.75
0.25
0.77
1.52
0.51
HAB 323
0.5
0.8
1.00
2.3
0.77
Landmark
0.5
0.8
1.00
2.3
0.77
Bio
N
Torrent
0.3
0.5
0.25
1.05
0.35
BBL 274
0.2
0.75
1.00
1.95
0.96
HAB 63
0.25
1.7
0.78
2.73
0.91
HAB 323
0.5
0.75
0.5
1.75
0.58
Landmark
0.25
1.00
0.75
2.00
0.67
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
46
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control 1.0 1.0 0.58 0.68 0.5 3.76 0.75
Vital
N
0.42 0.43 0.59 0.51 0.77 2.72 0.54
Bio
N
0.35 0.65 0.91 0.58 0.67 3.16 0.63
TOTAL
1.77 2.08 2.08 1.77 1.94
MEAN
0.59 0.69 0.69 0.59 0.63
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
0.05 0.01
VARIATION FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.367
0.183
Factor A
2
0.335
0.168
0.72ns
6.94 18.00
Error (a)
4
0.929
0.232
Factor B
4
0.098
0.024
0.27ns
2.78 4022
AB 8
1.287
0.161
1.74ns 2036
3.36
Error (b)
24
2.221
0.092
TOTAL 44
5.238
ns- non-significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) = 74.93%
Coefficient of Variation (b) = 47.34%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
47
Appendix Table 5. Total Yield per plot (kg/3m 2)
TREATMENT
BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
7.09
2.79
4.56
14.44
4.81
BBL 274
3.28
4.08
4.59
11.95
3.98
HAB 63
4.56
3.8
3.47
11.91
3.97
HAB 323
4.8
3.3
4.4
15.50
4.17
Landmark
3.3
3.92
4.31
11.53
3.84
Vital
N
Torrent
5.52
4.5
4.53
14.55
4.85
BBL 274
2.78
3.27
3.73
9.78
3.26
HAB 63
4.73
3.53
2.81
12.78
4.26
HAB 323
4.52
4.45
3.81
12.78
4.26
Landmark
4.02
3.82
3.52
11.36
3.79
Bio
N
Torrent
3.53
4.51
4.77
12.86
4.29
BBL 274
2.58
4.31
5.5
11.39
3.80
HAB 63
4.76
5.3
4.05
14.11
4.70
HAB 323
4.52
3.51
4.53
12.56
4.19
Landmark
4.52
5.25
3.78
13.55
4.52
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
48
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control 4.81 3.98 3.97 4.17 3.84 20.77 4.15
Vital
N
4.85 3.2 3.69 4.36 3.79 19.85 3.97
Bio
N
4.29 3.80 4.70 4.19 4.52 21.5 4.3
TOTAL
13.95 11.04 12.36 12.62 12.15
MEAN
4.65 3.68 4.12 4.21 4.05
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 0.887
0.443
Factor A
2
0.815
0.407
0.46ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
3.552
0.888
Factor B
4
4.361
1.090
1.34ns 2.78
4.22
AB 8
3.274
0.409
0.50ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
19.501
0.813
TOTAL 44
32.389
ns- non-significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) = 22.76%
Coefficient of Variation (b) = 21.77%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
49
Table 8. Computed yield per hectare (t/ha)
TREATMENT
BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
23.61
9.29
15.8
48.08
16.03
BBL 274
10.92
13.59
15.28
39.79
13.26
HAB 63
15.18
12.65
11.56
39.39
13.13
HAB 323
15.98
10.99
14.65
41.62
13.87
Landmark
10.99
13.05
14.35
38.39
12.80
Vital
N
Torrent
18.38
14.99
15.08
48.45
16.15
BBL 274
9.26
70.89
12.42
32.57
10.86
HAB 63
15.75
11.75
9.36
36.86
12.29
HAB 323
15.05
14.82
12.69
42.58
14.19
Landmark
13.39
12.72
11.72
37.83
12.61
Bio
N
Torrent
11.75
15.02
15.88
42.65
14.22
BBL 274
8.59
14.35
18.32
41.26
13.75
HAB 63
15.85
17.65
13.49
46.99
15.66
HAB 323
15.05
11.63
15.08
41.82
13.94
Landmark
15.05
17.48
12.59
45.12
15.04
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
50
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control
16.03 13.26 13.13 13.87 12.80 69.09 13.82
Vital
N
16.15 10.86 12.29 14.19 12.61 66.1 13.22
Bio
N
14.22 13.75 15.66 13.94 15.04 72.61 14.52
TOTAL
46.4 37.87 41.08 42.00 40.45
MEAN
15.47 12.62 13.69 14.00 13.48
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 6.414
3.207
Factor A
2
12.793
6.397
0.54ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
47.448
11.862
Factor B
4
38.616
9.654
1.11ns 2.78
4.22
AB 8
38.324
4.791
0.55ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
209.130
8.714
TOTAL 44
352.727
ns- non-significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) = 24.87%
Coefficient of Variation (b) = 21.31%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
51
Appendix Table 10. Number of nodules per plant
TREATMENT
BLOCK
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
No
inoculation
Torrent
35
24
42
101.00
33.67
BBL 274
39
17
24
80.00
26.67
HAB 63
66
35
40
141.00
47.00
HAB 323
35
32
21
38.00
29.33
Landmark
26
13
68
107.00
35.67
Vital
N
Torrent
44
33
30
107.00
35.67
BBL 274
57
25
60
142.00
47.33
HAB 63
50
52
53
155.00
51.67
HAB 323
35
67
38
110.00
36.67
Landmark
32
29
30
91.00
30.33
Bio
N
Torrent
22
34
51
107.00
35.67
BBL 274
36
18
32
86.00
28.67
HAB 63
45
39
19
103.00
34.33
HAB 323
38
35
17
90.00
30.00
Landmark
21
35
44
100.00
33.33
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
52
I x V TWO-WAY TABLE
INOCULANTS
VARIETIES
TOTAL MEAN
TOR BBL 63 323 LND
Control
33.67 26.67 47.00 29.33 35.67 172.34 34.47
Vital
N
35.67 47.33 51.67 36.67 30.33 201.67 40.33
Bio
N
35.67 28.64 34.33 30.00 33.33 162 32.4
TOTAL
105.01 102.67 133
96
99.33
MEAN
35.00 34.22 44.33 32
33.11
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
_____________
VARIATION FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication 2 613.200
306.600
Factor A
2
508.133
254.066
2.65ns 6.94
18.00
Error (a)
4
383.866
95.966
Factor B
4
878.355
219.588
1.28ns 2.78
4.22
AB 8
903.644
112.955
0.66ns 2.36
3.36
Error (b)
24
4111.600
171.316
TOTAL 44
7398.800
ns-non-significant
Coefficient of Variation (a) = 27.42%
Coefficient of Variation (b) = 36.63%
Agronomic Characters of Five Bush Snapbeans Varieties
Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N / Melba T. Tipayno. 2006
Document Outline
- Agronomic Characters of Five Bush
Snapbeans Varieties Inoculated with Bio N and Vital N.
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- ABSTRACT
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES