BIBLIOGRAPHY
BULANGEN, DIEGO JR S. MAY 2010. Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to
Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under La Trinidad, Benguet Condition. Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Fernando R. Gonzales, PhD.
ABSTRACT

The study was conducted at BSU Experimental Station, Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet from November 2009 to March 2010 to determine the growth and yield of
chickpea as affected by different sources of organic fertilizers, to identify the chickpea
accessions that would respond favorably to the application of different organic fertilizers and to
determine the economics using the different organic fertilizer treatments in chickpea production.

There were significant differences observed on the average number of pods per plant,
average number of filled and unfilled pods, total yield per plot and computed yield per hectare,
total yield per sample and weight of 100 seeds as affected by the different sources of organic
matter of plants applied with ½ kg/m² (5T/ha). BSU compost attained the highest number of
pods, number of filled pods and total yield per sample while plants applied with sagana 100
attained the highest number of unfilled pods, total yield per plot, computed yield per hectare and
weight of 100 seeds.

Plants applied with unprocessed chicken manure on the other hand, had the lowest
number of pods per plant, average number of filled and unfilled pods while those applied with

---

processed chicken manure had the lowest total yield per plot, total yield per hectare and weight
of 100 seeds. Unprocessed chicken manure application attained the lowest yield per sample.
In terms of the different varieties used in the study, ICCV 93952 (Desi type) were the
earliest to reach 50% flowering, tallest plants at flowering, had the highest number of pods per
plant, had the highest average number of filled and unfilled pods, had the highest total yield per
plot, highest yield per sample, and highest computed yield per hectare while ICCV 06102 (Desi
type) were the latest to be harvested. ICCV 2 (Kabuli type) produced the highest number of main
stems at flowering and ICCV 95334 (Kabuli type) had the highest weight of 100 seeds.

On the other hand ICCV 2 (Kabuli type) was the earliest to reach 50% flowering and
days from planting to harvesting. ICCV 07307 (Kabuli type) were the shortest plants at
flowering, ICCV 06102 (Kabuli type) had the lowest number of main stems at flowering and
ICCV 95334 (Kabuli type) attained the lowest yield per plot, yield per sample and computed
yield per hectare.


ICCV 93952 applied with processed chicken manure were the tallest at flowering;
When applied with BSU compost produced the most number of pods per plant and it produced
the most number of filled pods, when applied with sagana 100, it produced the highest yield per
plot and computed yield per hectare and it had the highest return on investment with 69.96%
when applied with unprocessed chicken manure.

Based on the findings and conclusion of the study, it is therefore recommended that
ICCV 93952 (Desi type), ICCV 06102 (Desi type), and ICCV 2 (Kabuli type) can be
productively grown and have a highest return on investment with the application of .5kg/sq.m
(5tons/ha) of unprocessed chicken dung under La Trinidad, Benguet condition.

ii

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
iii

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
MATERIALS AND METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
Days from Planting to 50% Flowering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19

Average Plant Height at Flowering (cm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21

Number of Days from Planting to Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23

Number of Main Stems at Flowering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
24

Average Number of Pods per Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26

Average Number of Filled Pods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
28

Average Number of Unfilled Pods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
30

Yield Per Plot (g) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
32

Computed Yield Per Hectare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
34

Yield per Sample Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
36

Weight of 100 Seeds (g) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
38
Cost and Return Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
40


iii

---

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION . . . . . . . . . . . .
44

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
44

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
47
Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
47
LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
48
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
49

iv

---

1

INTRODUCTION


Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is an ancient crop that has been grown in India, the
Middle East and parts of Africa for many years. Chickpeas are an important food plant in
India, Africa and Central and South America. They are the main ingredient of humus, a
sauce originating in the Middle East. In southern Europe, chickpeas are a common
ingredient in soups, salads and stews. A kind of meal or flour is also made from
chickpeas.

Chickpea is commonly known as Bengal gram (Indian), Chickpea (English),
Garbanzo (Latin America), Hommes, Hamaz (Arab world), Nohud, Lablabi (Turkey),
and Shimbra (Ethiopia). Chick pea is an important food item for from the Mediterranean
countries to India; they are full of protein and starch. Mature Chickpeas can be cooked
and eaten cold in salads, cooked in stews, ground into a flour called gram flour (also
known as besan and used primarily in Indian cuisine), ground and shaped in balls and
fried as falafel, fermented to make an alcoholic drink similar to sake, stirred inato a batter
and baked to make farinata, cooked and ground into a paste called humus or roasted,
spiced and eaten as a snack (such as leblebi). Chickpeas and Bengal grams are used to
make curries and are of the most popular vegetarian foods in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh
and the UK.

In the Indian sub continent chickpeas are called kadake kaalu in kanada, shanaga
in telugu, chana in hindi and other Indic Languages, Chhola in Bengale and konda
kadalai in tamil, where they are a major source of protein in mostly vegetarian culture.
Organic farming generally falls within the accepted definition of sustainable agriculture.
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

2

However, it is important to distinguish between the two, since organic products can be
(unsustainably) produced on large industrial farms, and farms that are not certified
organic can produce food using methods that will sustain the farm's productivity for
generations. Some organic dairy farms, for example, raise cows in large confinement
facilities but are able to meet the bare minimum requirements for organic certification,
while a non-organic certified small farm could use organic guidelines and be self-
sufficient by recycling the entire farm's waste to meet its fertility needs.
Although the Density of nutrients in Organic material is comparatively modest,
they have many advantages; the majority of Nitrogen supplying organic fertilizers
contains insoluble Nitrogen and act as a slow-release fertilizer. Additionally data analysis
for soil Physical Properties , Soil Chemistry and Soil Biology showed that nearly all
chemical (PH, P, K, Mg, C and N) and biological parameters (respiration, DNA, urease,
earthworms) assessed were improved by Organic Fertilization.
Organic agriculture is becoming more popular because consumers are demanding
healthful and environmentally-friendly food. This shift in consumer behavior is good
news, but unfortunately, increased demand for organic foods has attracted large
agribusiness corporations that intend to profit from the trend. Organic farming is an
agricultural system that seeks to provide you, the consumer, with fresh, tasty and
authentic food while respecting natural life-cycle systems.
Renewed concern about the environment has stipulated interest in the use of
Organic Fertilizers. Organic Farming is a farming system which promotes, among other
practices the use of organic fertilizer. Soil organic matter contributes greatly to soil
quality and plant health. Managing soil organic matter entails consideration of a range of
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

3

factors that influence carbon cycling and ultimately the long term health of the soil. As
ecological, organic and sustainable farmers of the future, growing our understanding of
organic matter is indeed at the foundation of soil ecology and management. Organic
matter provides the soil with the right components to build soil structure, tilth and
friability of the soil, something that inorganic fertilizers really cannot do. Organic matter
also provides those other lesser-used nutrients called micro nutrients, think one-a-day
vitamins for plants." Organic matter also will help sandy soils hold more water and
nutrients and will aid the ability of a heavy clay soil to drain excessive soil moisture by
adding porosity. To be effective in supplying all the nutrients a plant will need,
applications of organic matter need to be done annually.

Garbanzo beans (chickpeas) provide an excellent source of molybdenum. They
are a very good source of folic acid, fiber, and manganese. They are also good source of
protein, as well as minerals such as iron, copper, zinc, and magnesium. As a good source
of fiber, garbanzo beans can help lower cholesterol and improve blood sugar levels. This
makes them a great food especially for diabetics and insulin-resistant individuals. When
served with high quality grains, garbanzo beans are an extremely-low-fat, complete
protein food. One hundred grams of mature boiled chickpeas contains 164 calories. 2.6
grams of fat (of which only 0.27 grams is saturated), 7.6 grams of dietary fiber and 8.9
grams of protein. Chickpea also provide dietary calcium (49-53mg/100g), with same
sources citing the garbanzo’s calcium content as about th same as yugort and close to
milk. According to the International Crops Research Institute, for the semi-arid tropics,
chickpea seeds contain an average: 23% Protein, a64% total Carbohydrates (47% starch,
6% soluble sugar), 5% fat, 6% Crude Fiber and 3% Ash. There is also a high reported
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

4

mineral content: Phosphorous (340mg/100g), Calcium (190mg/100g), Magnesium
(140mg/100g), iron (7mg/100g) and Zinc (3mg/100g). Recent studies by government
agencies have also shown that they can assist in lowering of cholesterol in the
bloodstream.
The study was conducted to determine the growth and yield performance of
chickpea as affected by different organic fertilizers, to identify the chickpea accessions
that would respond favorably to the application of different organic fertilizers and to
determine the economics using the different organic fertilizer treatments in chickpea
production.

The study was conducted at BSU Experimental Station, Benguet State University,
La Trinidad, Benguet from November 2009 to March 2010.




















Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

5

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Botany of Chickpea
Chickpea (species Cicer arietinum), annual plant of the pea family (Fabaceae),
widely grown for its nutritious seeds. The bushy, 60-centimetre (2-foot) plants bear
pinnate leaves and small white or reddish flowers. The yellow-brown peas are borne one
or two to a pod. Chick-peas are an important food plant in India, Africa, and Central and
South America. Hummus, or hummous. Chickpea plant is multiple branched. Some
chickpea varieties have compounded leaves and some have simple leaves, which are
pubescent (hairy) in appearance. Chickpea leaves exude malic and oxalic acids. Flowers
which are self pollinated are borne in groups of two or three are ½ to 1 in. long and come
in purple, white, pink and blue color depending upon variety. Each flower produces a
short pubescent pod which is ¾ to 2 in. long and which appears to be flatted. One or two
seeds that has a size of ½ to 1in diameter are present in each pod. The seeds come with
either rough or smooth surfaces and can be crème, yellow, brown, black or green in color.
There is a definite groove visible between the cotyledons about two-thirds of the way
around the seed, with a beak-like structure presents.
An article from Wikipedia (2008) the free encyclopedia states that there are two
main kinds of chickpea: Desi, which has small, darker seeds and a rough coat, cultivated
mostly in the Indian subcontinent, Ethiopia, Mexico, and Iran. Kabuli, which has lighter
coloured, larger seeds and a smoother coat, mainly grown in Southern Europe, Northern
Africa, Afghanistan, and Chile, also introduced during the 18th century to the Indian
subcontinent. The Desi (meaning country or local in Hindi) is also known as Bengal
gram or kala chana. Kabuli (meaning from Kabul in Hindi, since they were thought to
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

6

have come from Afghanistan when first seen in India) is the kind widely grown
throughout the Mediterranean. Desi is likely the earliest form since it closely resembles
seeds found both on archaeological sites and the wild plant ancestor of domesticated
chickpeas (Cicer reticulatum) which only grows in southeast Turkey, where it is believed
to have originated. Desi chickpeas have markedly higher fiber content than Kabulis and
hence a very low glycemic index which may make them suitable for people with blood
sugar problems. The desi type is used to make Chana Dal, which is a split chickpea with
the skin removed.

Environmental Requirement

Chickpea is a cool season annual crop performing optimally in 70 to 80 F daytime
temperatures and 64 to 70 F night temperature. They produce good yields in drier
conditions because of the deep tap root. Heavier rainfall season (over 30 in. annually)
show reduced yield due to disease outbreaks and stem lodging problems from the
excessive vegetative growth. Areas with lighter, well distributed rainfall patterns have
produced the highest yield and quality chickpea seed. Chickpea does best on fertile
sandy, loam soils with good internal drainage. Good drainage is necessary because even
short period of flooded or water logged fields reduce growth and increase susceptibility
to root and stem rots

Cultural Practice

Optimum yield potential and success in chickpea production is obtained by giving
complete attention to field selection, seeding, inoculation, disease control, weed
management, insects, harvesting and crop rotation. According to Oplinger et al. (1990) a
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

7

firm, smooth seedbed with most of the previous crop residue incorporated is best. This
will allow proper depth of planting as well as good seed-soil contact, which is essential
for rapid germination and emergence. If moisture is short keep deep preplan" tillage to a
minimum to prevent excessive drying in the top 2 to 3 in. of soil. Chickpea is typically
seeded in narrow row spacing of 6 to 12 inches. Target stand densities range from 3
plants per square foot for large kabuli types to 4 plants per square foot for desi and small
kabuli types. This will typically require planting 4 seeds/sq.ft. for large kabuli and 5
seeds/sq.ft for desi chickpea. Depending on seed size this often translates into seeding
rates of 80-100 lb/a for desi types and 125-150 lb/a for large kabuli types. Seeding depth
recommendations are 1 inch below moist soil for small-seeded types and 2 inches below
moist soil for large-seeded types. Chickpea can be seeded to a depth of 4 inches to utilize
available soil moisture for germination.

Chickpea is a poor competitor with weeds at all stages of growth. Slow growth
during the seedling stages, in addition to a relatively sparse optimum plant population of
three to four plants per square foot, causes an open crop canopy which requires season-
long weed management. Crop rotation and field selection are cultural methods that
should be used as part of an integrated weed management system. Cultural weed control
begins with avoidance. Avoid fields where perennial and annual broadleaf weeds are a
major problem, and be sure to control these weeds in the preceding crop. Kochia, Russian
thistle, wild mustard and wild buckwheat are the most problematic in chickpea, and can
cause major problems for direct-harvesting.




Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

8

Harvesting

Chickpea can be harvested direct or swathed prior to combining depending upon
uniformity of maturity and weed problems. About 1 week of good drying weather is
required in the swath. Chickpea is sold as a high quality human food product. While seed
size is a major factor in economic returns for the kabuli type, seed color is the single most
important factor in determining if your crop is marketable. If the seed coats are dark or
discolored the crop will not be accepted by the food processors. Harvesting decisions
such as timing and harvesting methods are the major factors in harvesting seeds with the
light yellowish-cream color demanded by the processor. Chickpea normally has a low
shattering potential, although pod drop has occurred in some instances when harvesting
was delayed, and pod shattering has occurred in unusually hot late August and early
September temperatures. The lowest pod height is typically four inches above the ground,
making direct harvesting possible but requiring an experienced combine operator. In
some regions it is advantageous to swath and combine, due to fact that delayed harvests
can result in darkening of the seed coat.

Drying and Storage

Moisture content should be around 10 to 12% to prevent insect and or disease
outbreaks in storage. Because of their relatively large seed size, chickpea can be dried
slightly with ambient temperature air flow through thin layers in a regular storage bin.
Storage system should be carefully fumigated before storing chickpea and all storage
areas should be monitored regularly to identify potential problems early.



Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

9

Fertilizer

Fertilizers are chemical compounds applied to promote plant and fruit growth.
Fertilizers are usually applied either through the soil for uptake by plant roots or, by foliar
feeding for uptake through leaves. Fertilizers contain nutrients (nourishing substances)
that are essential for plant growth. Some fertilizers are made from organic waste such as
manure or sewage. Others are manufactured from certain minerals or from synthetic
compounds produced in factories (Magciano, 2009). Fertilizers can be placed into the
categories of organic fertilizers (composed of decayed plant/animal matter), or inorganic
fertilizers (composed of simple chemicals and minerals). Organic fertilizers are 'naturally'
occurring compounds, such as peat, manufactured through natural processes (such as
composting), or naturally occurring mineral deposits; inorganic fertilizers are
manufactured through chemical processes (such as the Haber process), also using
naturally occurring deposits, while chemically altering them (e.g. concentrated triple
superphosphate). Properly applied, organic fertilizers can improve the health and
productivity of soil and plants, as they provide different essential nutrients to encourage
plant growth. Organic nutrients increase the abundance of soil organisms by providing
organic matter and micronutrients for organisms such as fungal mycorrhiza, which aid
plants in absorbing nutrients. Chemical fertilizers may have long-term adverse impact on
the organisms living in soil and a detrimental long term effect on soil productivity of the
soil.

Organic and Inorganic or chemical fertilizers are the two types of Fertilizers.
Organic fertilizer are derived from organic wastes such as plant residues and animal
wastes while Inorganic fertilizers consist of chemically prepared substance containing
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

10

varying amount of Nitrogen, Phosphorous Acid and Potash. Organic materials must not
and decay before they become beneficial to plants while inorganic fertilizers are available
for the plants as it is dissolve. According to Bautista et al. (1983), organic fertilizers
release great quantities of nutrient elements that can easily absorbed by the root stand and
its result can be seen within few days. Gardeners need to understand that it will take
several growing seasons of applying composts and organic matter before the beds
become nutritionally self sufficient and that making applications annually is the best way
to maintain those nutrient levels in the soil, Hentschel (2009) said.

Organic Fertilizer

Organic fertilizers are made from materials derived from living things. Animal
manures, compost, bone meal and blood meal are organic fertilizers. Organic fertilizers
can be more expensive and less accessible than inorganic fertilizers. Blood meal, bone
meal, and fresh and dried manures were at one time inexpensive by-products of slaughter
houses and farms. Organic fertilizers are not immediately available to plants. Before the
plants can use them, they must be broken down by soil micro-organisms into simpler,
inorganic molecules and ions. In contrast, the nutrients in chemical fertilizers are already
in inorganic form and so can be immediately used by the plants. Balco (1986) stated that
Organic fertilizers have an advantage over chemical because they are renewable, and soil
fertility gradually declines as a result of their continued application. It is important to
understand that there is no fundamental difference in nutritional quality between organic
and inorganic fertilizers. It makes no difference to the beet root if the atoms of potassium
it absorbs are from an organic fertilizer such as wood ash or an inorganic one such as
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

11

muriate of potash. Unlike chemical fertilizers, organic material does more than provide
organic nutrients. It also improves the soil structure, or tilt, and increases its ability to
hold both water and nutrients. Knott (1976) mentioned that the application of organic
fertilizer in soil prior to planting or sowing time results high yield. With organic
fertilizers a buildup of toxicity in the soil is unlikely, as long as the amount of organic
material incorporated into the soil is fully decomposed.
On the other side of the coin, there are some disadvantages to the use of organic
fertilizers. As noted above, they are not immediately available to the plants. The manure
which is applied to a vegetable garden in the spring may not be broken down into organic
form by soil bacteria (and therefore available to plants) until mid-summer. If organic
nutrients have been added to soils continually on an on-going basis, this may not be a
problem. However, if you are just beginning to rely solely on organic material as a
nutrient source, your garden may experience an initial nutrient deficiency until the system
is in place. The amount of nutrients and the exact type of elements available from a given
amount of manure, compost or other inorganic fertilizer can only be guessed at. It is
dependent on such factors as: the age of the manure or compost; its origin (chicken, cow,
horse, sawdust, garden residue, grass clippings); and weather conditions such as
temperature and rainfall. It is therefore a less exact way of providing for a plant's
nutritional needs (Williams, 2009).




Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

12

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Materials

The materials used in the study were seeds of Chickpea, organic fertilizers, meter
stick, ruler, weighing scale, watering can, garden tools, record book and other materials
needed for the experiment.

Methods

The Experiment was laid out in a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD)
in factorial arrangement with the cultivar as Factor A and the different organic fertilizers
as Factor B. There were three replications per treatment combination; with three samples
per treatment in a 1m x 3m plot. The seeds were planted with a planting distance of 30
cm between rows and 20cm between hills. The amount of Organic matter applied was
based in 5 tons/ha (P.D. Sangatanan). The treatments were represented as follows:

Factor A (Type of cultivar)

“DESI Type”





“KABULI Type”

ICCV 93952





ICCV 2

ICCV 93954





ICCV 95334

ICCV 06102





ICCV 07307
Factor B (Organic fertilizers)



Nutrient Composition
S1 – Chicken Manure (Unprocessed)

N – 6.6% P205 – 2.7% K20 – 1.5%
S2 – BSU Compost


N – 2.0% P205 – 2.7% K20 – 2.4%
S3 – Processed Chicken Manure

N – 4.0% P205 – 4.0% K20 – 4.0%
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

13

S4 – Sagana 100 (Commercial OF)
N – 7.0% P205 – 7.0% K20 – 7.0%
Data Gathered

The data gathered were as follows:
A. Vegetative Growth
1. Days from planting to 50% flowering. The data was gathered from the date of
sowing the seeds up to 50% flower opening.
2. Average plant height at flowering (cm). It was taken at the first stage of
flowering.
3. Days from planting to first harvests. It was determined by counting the
number of days from sowing to first harvest.
4. Number of lateral stems at flowering. It was taken at flowering stage and
determined by using the formula:
Average Number of Lateral Stems = Number of Lateral Stems of Sample Plants




Number Sample Plant

B. Yield

1. Average number of pods per plant. It was computed by using the formula:
Average Number of Pods = Total Number of Pods Produced Per Sample


Number of Sample Plant

2. Average number of filled pods. It was the total number of filled pods taken
from sample plants per plot divided by the number of sample plant.
3. Average number of unfilled pods. It was the total number of unfilled pods
taken from sample plants per plot divided by the number of sample plant.
4. Total yield per plot (3m²). It was the total yield gathered per plot by adding
the yield of sample plants and non sample plants.
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

14

5. Computed yield/ha. It was the total yield computed from the experiments per
plot (1x3m) x 3,333.33.
6. Total yield per sample. It was the total yield taken from sample plants on a
3m2 plot divided by the number of sample plant.
C. Seed Quality

1. Weight of 100 seeds (gram). It was determined by weighing 100 seeds at
14% moisture content.
D. Documentation. It was taken through pictures during land preparation, flowering
stage and harvesting (Figures 1 to 6).











Figure 1. Overview of the experimental area during land preparation



Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

15











Figure 2. Overview of the newly planted experimental area












Figure 3. Overview of the experiment during flowering stage

Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

16













Figure 4. Overview of the experiment during pod setting stage













Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

17

Figure 5. Harvesting time











Figure 6. Overview of the harvested sample plants at first harvest
E. Meteorological data (Taken at BSU PAG-ASA)
a) Temperature

b) Relative Humidity

c) Rainfall


Meteorological data

Figure 7 shows the temperature, relative humidity and rainfall during the conduct
of the study under La Trinidad, Benguet condition from November 2009 to March 2010.
The temperature ranged from 21.05°C on the month of December to 22.95°C on the month
of February. The month of November recorded a temperature of 22.2°C, month of
February with 22.6°C and in the month of March with a temperature of 22.9°C.
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

18

The relative humidity recorded during the conduct of the study ranged from
82.75% on December to 88% on the month of January. The month of November had a
relative humidity of 84%, month of February with 84.5% and month of March with a
relative humidity of 86.75%.

There was no recorded rainfall during the duration of the study.













Figure 7. Recorded temperature, relative humidity and rainfall during the duration of the
study








Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

19

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Days from Planting to 50% Flowering

Effect of variety. There were significant differences noted in the number of days
from planting to 50% flowering of chickpea as affected by the different varieties of
chickpea. ICCV 2 (Kabuli type) was the earliest to reach 50% flowering after 47.31 days
from planting while ICCV 93952 (Desi type) was the latest after 72.31 days from
planting.
Findings showed that kabuli type chickpeas produce flowers earlier than the desi
type.
Effect of organic fertilizers. There were no significant differences noted on the
days from planting to 50% flowering of chickpea as affected by different organic
fertilizers applied. The number of days from planting to 50% flowering ranged from
58.19 to 59.52 days. Result showed that the different organic fertilizers did not affect the
number of days from planting to flowering of chickpea.
As stated by Summerfield and Roberts (1988), flowering time of chickpea is
variable depending on the effect of the season, sowing date, latitude and altitude.
Interaction effect. Analysis revealed significant differences between the
interaction of different organic fertilizers and varieties used on the days from planting to
50% flowering of chickpea. Results revealed that ICCV 2 (Kabuli type) applied with
sagana 100 had produced flowers the earliest; while ICCV 93952 (Desi type) applied
with unprocessed chicken manure was the latest to produce flower (Figure 8).


Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

20

Table 1. Days from planting to 50% flowering



TREATMENT





MEAN (Days)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variety

ICCV 93952






72.31a

ICCV 93954






67.30c

ICCV 06102






70.53b

ICCV 2







47.31d

ICCV 95334






48.08d

ICCV 07307






47.56d

Organic Fertilizers
Unprocessed chicken manure




59.52a

BSU compost






58.83a

Processed chicken manure




58.85a

Sagana 100






58.19a
________________________________________________________________________
CV (%)







3.43
Means with common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT.


















Figure 8. Days from planting to 50% flowering

Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

21

Average Plant Height at Flowering (cm)
Effect of variety. Table 2 shows that there were significant differences noted in
the average plant height at flowering of chickpea as affected by the different varieties of
chickpea used. Results show that ICCV 93952 (Desi type) had the tallest plants at
flowering with 53.05 cm; while ICCV 07307 (Kabuli type) had the shortest plants at
flowering with 33.10 cm. Findings showed that desi type produces taller plant at
flowering than kabuli type chickpea.
Effect of organic fertilizers. There were no significant differences noted on the
average plant height at flowering of chickpea as affected by different organic fertilizers
applied. The average plant height ranged from 43.99 to 46.64 cm. Result showed that the
different organic fertilizers did not affect the average plant height at flowering of
chickpea.
Interaction effect. Analysis revealed significant differences on the average plant
height at flowering of chickpea as affected by the interaction between the different
organic fertilizers applied and different varieties used. Results revealed that ICCV 93952
(Desi type) applied with processed chicken manure produced the tallest plant while ICCV
07307 (Kabuli type) applied with unprocessed chicken manure produced the shortest
plants at flowering (Figure 9).





Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

22

Table 2. Average plant height at flowering (cm)


TREATMENT





MEAN (cm)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variety

ICCV 93952






53.05a

ICCV 93954






48.12bc

ICCV 06102






49.08b

ICCV 2







40.10d

ICCV 95334






45.76c

ICCV 07307






33.10e
Organic Fertilizers

Unprocessed chicken manure




43.99a

BSU compost






45.91a

Processed chicken manure




46.64a

Sagana 100






44.93a
________________________________________________________________________
CV (%)







7.70
Means with common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT.




















Figure 9. Average plant height at flowering (cm)

Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

23

Number of Days from Planting to Harvesting

Effect of variety. There were significant differences noted on the days from
planting to harvesting of chickpea as affected by the different varieties of chickpea used.
Results show that ICCV 2 (Kabuli type) was the earliest to be harvested after 124 days
from sowing the seeds; while ICCV 06102 (Desi type) was the latest to be harvested after
141 days from planting. Findings showed that kabuli type was harvested earlier than desi
type chickpeas.
Effect of organic fertilizers. As shown in Table 3, there were no significant
differences noted on the number of days from planting to harvesting of chickpea as
affected by different organic fertilizers applied. Results showed that the different organic
fertilizers applied have the same results of 132.8 days from planting to harvesting. It
showed that the different organic fertilizers did not affect the duration from planting to
harvesting of chickpea. According to McKay et al. (2001), chickpea matures later than
dry pea or lentil and prefers a longer, warmer growing season.
Interaction effect. Analysis revealed that there were no significant differences on
the number of days from planting to first harvest of chickpea as affected by the
interaction between the different organic fertilizers applied and different varieties used.






Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

24

Table 3. Number of days from planting to first harvest



TREATMENT





MEAN (Days)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variety

ICCV 93952






140.0b

ICCV 93954






140.0b

ICCV 06102






141.0a

ICCV 2







124.0a

ICCV 95334






126.0c

ICCV 07307






126.0c

Organic Fertilizers

Unprocessed chicken manure




132.8a

BSU compost






132.8a

Processed chicken manure




132.8a

Sagana 100






132.8a
________________________________________________________________________
CV (%)







0
Means with common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT.


Number of Main Stems at Flowering


Effect of variety. There were significant differences noted in the number of main
stems at flowering of chickpea as affected by the different varieties of chickpea used.
Result showed that ICCV 2 (Kabuli type) had produced the most number of main stems
at flowering with 4.31 lateral stems while ICCV 06102 (Desi type) produced the lowest
number of main stems at flowering with 3.50 stems.
Effect of organic fertilizers. There were no significant differences noted on the
number of main stems at flowering of chickpea as affected by different organic fertilizers
applied. The number of main stems at flowering ranged from 3.67 to 4.07 main stems.
Result showed that different organic fertilizers applied did not affect the production of
the number of main stems of chickpea at flowering.
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

25

Interaction effect. Analysis revealed that there were no significant differences in
the number of main stems at flowering of chickpea as affected by the interaction between
the different organic fertilizers applied and different varieties used.

Table 4. Number of main stems at flowering



TREATMENT






MEAN
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variety

ICCV 93952






3.75b

ICCV 93954






3.72b

ICCV 06102






3.50b

ICCV 2







4.31a

ICCV 95334






4.28a

ICCV 07307






3.58b
Organic Fertilizers

Unprocessed chicken manure




3.98a

BSU compost






3.67a

Processed chicken manure




3.70a

Sagana 100






4.07a
________________________________________________________________________
CV (%)







16.06
Means with common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT.



Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

26

Average Number of Pods per Plant
Effect of variety. There were significant differences noted in the average number
of pods per plant of chickpea as affected by the different varieties of chickpea used.
Results show that ICCV 93952 (Desi type) had the highest number of pods produced per
plant with an average of 293.44 pods; while ICCV 95334 (Kabuli type) produced the
least number of pods per plant with an average of 68.17 pods.
Findings showed that desi type produces higher number of pods per plant than
desi type chickpea.
Effect of organic fertilizers. There were significant differences noted on the
average number of pods per plant of chickpea as affected by different organic fertilizers
applied. The application BSU compost had resulted on the most number of pods per plant
with an average of 230.57 pods; while the application of unprocessed chicken manure
resulted on the production of lowest number of pods per plant with an average of 199.24
pods.
Interaction effect. Analysis revealed significant differences in the average number
of pods per plant of chickpea as affected by the interaction between the different organic
fertilizers applied and different varieties used. Results showed that ICCV 93952 (Desi
type) applied with BSU compost produced the highest number of pods per plant; while
ICCV 95334 (Kabuli type) applied with unprocessed chicken manure produced the
lowest number of pods produced per plant (Figure 10).



Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

27

Table 5. Average number of pods per plant



TREATMENT






MEAN
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variety

ICCV 93952






293.44a

ICCV 93954






267.28a

ICCV 06102






273.14a

ICCV 2







226.50b

ICCV 95334






68.17d

ICCV 07307






164.25c

Organic Fertilizers

Unprocessed chicken manure




199.24b

BSU compost






230.57a

Processed chicken manure




209.61ab

Sagana 100






222.43ab
________________________________________________________________________
CV (%)







19.89
Means with common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT.




















Figure 10. Average number of pods per plant

Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

28

Average Number of Filled Pods
Effect of variety. There were significant differences noted in the average number
of filled pods of chickpea as affected by the different varieties of chickpea used. Results
show that ICCV 93952 (Desi type) produced the highest number of filled pods with a
mean of 256.39 pods; while ICCV 95334 (Kabuli type) produced the lowest with a mean
of 58.70 filled pods.
Effect of organic fertilizers. Likewise, there were significant differences noted on
the average number of filled pods of chickpea as affected by different organic fertilizers
applied. The application of BSU compost produced the highest number of filled pods
with an average of 210.20 pods; while the application of unprocessed chicken manure
produced the lowest number of filled pods with an average of 173.33 pods.
Interaction effect. Analysis revealed significant differences in the average number
of filled pods of chickpea as affected by the interaction between the different organic
fertilizers applied and different varieties used. Results showed that ICCV 93952 (Desi
type) applied with BSU compost produced the highest number of filled pods while ICCV
95334 (kabuli type) applied with unprocessed chicken manure produced the lowest
number of filled pods (Figure 11).









Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

29

Table 6. Average number of filled pods



TREATMENT






MEAN
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variety

ICCV 93952






256.39a

ICCV 93954






243.70a

ICCV 06102






249.31a

ICCV 2







205.89b

ICCV 95334






58.70d

ICCV 07307






136.36c
Organic Fertilizers

Unprocessed chicken manure




173.33b

BSU compost






210.20a

Processed chicken manure




187.70ab

Sagana 100






195.65ab
________________________________________________________________________
CV (%)







22.39
Means with common letter are not significantly at 5% by DMRT.



















Figure 11. Average number of filled pods


Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

30

Average Number of Unfilled Pods
Effect of variety. There were significant differences noted in the average number
of unfilled pods of chickpea as affected by the different varieties of chickpea used.
Results show that ICCV 93952 (Desi type) produced the highest number of unfilled pods
with a mean of 37.06 pods; while ICCV 95334 (Kabuli type) produced the lowest number
of unfilled pods with an average of 10.36 pods.
Effect of organic fertilizers. There were significant differences noted on the
average number of unfilled pods of chickpea as affected by different organic fertilizers
applied. Results showed that the application of sagana 100 produced the highest number
of unfilled pods with a mean of 26.78 pods; while the application of unprocessed chicken
manure produced the lowest with a mean of 17.57 unfilled pods.
Interaction effect. Analysis revealed significant differences in the average
number of unfilled pods of chickpea as affected by the interaction between the different
organic fertilizers applied and different varieties used. Results showed that ICCV 93952
(Desi type) applied with sagana 100 produced the highest number of unfilled pods while
ICCV 95334 (Kabuli type) applied with unprocessed chicken manure produced the
lowest number of unfilled pods (Figure 12).












Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

31

Table 7. Average number of unfilled pods



TREATMENT






MEAN
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variety

ICCV 93952






37.06a

ICCV 93954






23.58b

ICCV 06102






19.67c

ICCV 2







18.41cd

ICCV 95334






10.36e

ICCV 07307






15.41d

Organic Fertilizers

Unprocessed chicken manure




17.57b

BSU compost






18.18b

Processed chicken manure




20.46b

Sagana 100






26.78a
________________________________________________________________________
CV (%)







22.12
Means with common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT.



















Figure 12. Average number of unfilled pods


Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

32

Yield per Plot (g)
Effect of variety. There were significant differences noted in the yield per plot of
chickpea as affected by the different varieties of chickpea used. Results show that ICCV
93952 (Desi type) produced the highest yield per plot with 619.33g; while ICCV
95334(Kabuli type) produced the lowest with 205.61g per plot. McKay et al. (2001)
stated that optimum yield potential and success in chickpea production is obtained by
giving complete attention to field selection, seeding, inoculation, disease control, weed
management, insects, harvesting and crop rotation.
Effect of organic fertilizers. There were significant differences noted in the yield
per plot of chickpea as affected by different organic fertilizers applied. Results showed
that the application of sagana 100 produced the highest yield per plot with 530.92g while
the application of processed chicken manure produced the lowest yield per plot with
447.42g.
Interaction effect. Analysis revealed significant differences in the yield per plot
of chickpea as affected by the interaction between the different organic fertilizers applied
and different varieties used. Results showed that ICCV 93952 (Desi type) applied with
sagana 100 produced the highest yield per plot while ICCV 95334 (Kabuli type) applied
with processed chicken manure produced the lowest total yield per plot (Figure 13).










Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

33

Table 8. Yield per plot (g)



TREATMENT





MEAN (g)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variety

ICCV 93952






619.33a

ICCV 93954






498.37c

ICCV 06102






562.99b

ICCV 2







561.25b

ICCV 95334






205.61e

ICCV 07307






436.51d
Organic Fertilizers

Unprocessed chicken manure




487.62b

BSU compost






456.74c

Processed chicken manure




447.42c

Sagana 100






530.92a
________________________________________________________________________
CV (%)







8.27
Means with common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT.












Figure 13. Yield per plot (g)




Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

34

Computed Yield per Hectare

Effect of variety. There were significant differences noted in the
Computed yield per hectare of chickpea as affected by the different varieties of chickpea
used. Results show that ICCV 93952 (Desi type) produced the highest computed yield
per hectare with a total of 2064.44kgs/ha while ICCV 95334 (Kabuli type) which had a
computed yield of 685.33kgs/ha, had the lowest yield.
Effect of organic fertilizers. There were significant differences noted in the
computed yield per hectare of chickpea as affected by different organic fertilizers
applied. Results showed that the application of sagana 100 produced the highest
Computed yield per hectare with a total of 1769.72kgs/ha while the application of
processed chicken manure produced the lowest computed yield with a total of
447.42kgs/ha.
Interaction effect. Analysis revealed significant differences in the Computed
yield per hectare of chickpea as affected by the interaction between the different organic
fertilizers applied and different varieties used. Results showed that ICCV 93952 (Desi
type) applied with sagana produced the highest computed yield while ICCV 95334
(Kabuli type) applied with processed chicken manure produced the lowest computed
yield per hectare (Figure 14).










Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

35

Table 9. Computed yield per hectare (kg)


TREATMENT





MEAN (kg)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variety

ICCV 93952






2064.44a

ICCV 93954






1661.22c

ICCV 06102






1876.64b

ICCV 2







1870.83b

ICCV 95334






685.33e

ICCV 07307






1455.03d

Sources of organic matter

Unprocessed chicken manure




1625.39b

BSU compost






1522.48c

Processed chicken manure




1491.41c

Sagana 100






1769.72a
_______________________________________________________________________
CV (%)






8.27
Means with common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT.











Figure 14. Computed yield per hectare (kg)


Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

36

Yield per Sample Plant (g)
Effect of variety. There were significant differences noted in the yield per sample
plant of chickpea as affected by the different varieties of chickpea used. Result showed
that ICCV 93952 (Desi type) produced the highest yield per sample with a total of 66.47g
while ICCV 95334 (Kabuli type) produced the lowest yield with a mean of 24.08g per
sample.
Effect of organic fertilizers. There were significant differences noted in the yield
per sample plant of chickpea as affected by different organic fertilizers applied. Results
showed that the application of BSU compost produced the highest yield per sample with
57.01g; while the application of processed chicken manure produced the lowest yield of
51.40g per sample.
Interaction effect. Analysis revealed significant differences in the total yield per
sample of chickpea as affected by the interaction between the different organic fertilizers
applied and different varieties used. Results showed that ICCV 93952 (Desi type) applied
with BSU compost produced the highest yield per sample plant; while ICCV 95334
(Kabuli type) applied with processed chicken manure produced the lowest yield per
sample plant (Figure 15).






Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

37

Table 10. Yield per sample (g)



TREATMENT





MEAN (g)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variety

ICCV 93952






66.47a

ICCV 93954






60.61b

ICCV 06102






61.97b

ICCV 2







52.16c

ICCV 95334






24.08d

ICCV 07307






59.33b
Organic Fertilizers

Unprocessed chicken manure




52.19b

BSU compost






57.01a

Processed chicken manure




51.40b

Sagana 100






55.81a
________________________________________________________________________
CV (%)







8.74
Means with common letter are not significantly at 5% by DMRT.



















Figure 15. Yield per sample (g)



Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

38

Weight of 100 Seeds (g)
Effect of variety. There were significant differences noted in the weight of 100
seeds of chickpea as affected by the different varieties of chickpea used. Result showed
that ICCV 95334 (Kabuli type) produced the heaviest weight of 100 seeds with 43.68g
while ICCV 2 (Desi type) had the lightest weight of 100 seeds with 24.22 grams. Kabuli
type chickpea had generally bigger sized seeds that lead to heavier 100 seed weight.
Effect of organic fertilizers. There were significant differences noted in the weight
of 100 seeds of chickpea as affected by different organic fertilizers applied. Results
showed that the application of Sagana 100 produced the heaviest weight of 100 seeds
with 30.17 grams; while those applied with processed chicken manure produced the
lightest weight of 100 seeds with 28.68 grams.
Interaction effect. Analysis revealed significant differences in the weight of 100
seeds of chickpea as affected by the interaction between the different organic fertilizers
applied and different varieties used. Results showed that ICCV 95334 (Kabuli type)
applied with sagana produced the heaviest weight while ICCV 2 (Desi type) applied with
processed chicken manure produced the lightest (Figure 16).








Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

39

Table 11. Weight of 100 seeds (g)



TREATMENT






MEAN (g)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Variety

ICCV 93952






26.13c

ICCV 93954






24.23d

ICCV 06102






24.26d

ICCV 2







24.22d

ICCV 95334






43.68a

ICCV 07307






34.50b

Organic Fertilizers

Unprocessed chicken manure




29.68ab
BSU compost






29.48ab
Processed chicken manure




28.68b

Sagana 100






30.17a
________________________________________________________________________
CV (%)







5.77
Means with common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT.











Figure 16. Weight of 100 seeds (g)


Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

40

Cost and Return Analysis

Based on the cost and return analysis of the study, results show that the return on
investment of the different varieties of chickpea applied with the different organic
fertilizers revealed varying results. ICCV 93952 of the Desi type applied with
unprocessed chicken manure have the highest return on investment with 69.96%; while
ICCV 95334 a Kabuli type applied with unprocessed chicken manure produced the
lowest return on investment with -102.29%. It was observed on Table 12 that the variety
ICCV 93952 had high yield potential even when applied with different organic fertilizers
as compared to the other varieties used. In addition, the application of unprocessed
chicken manure compared to other organic fertilizers used, had the highest return on
investment regardless of variety used. However, for ICCV 95334 the variety’s low
yielding potential affected the computed yield per hectare as shown in table 12.











Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

41

Table 12. Cost and return analysis for a hectare basis

COST OF
PESTICIDE LABOR YIELD
GROSS
NET
ROI
FERTILIZER
(Php)
(Php)
(Kg)
SALES
PROFIT
(%)
(Php)
(Php)
(Php)








ICCV 93952








Unprocessed







chicken
9,999.99
49,999.95
41,666.63 2115.89 338,542.4 236,857.83 69.96
manure








BSU compost
99,999.9
49,999.95
41,666.63 2217.89 354,862.4 163,195.92 49.99








Processed







chicken
20,999.98
49,999.95
41,666.63 1841.78 294,684.8 182,018.24 61.77
manure








Sagana 100
39,499.96
49,999.95
41,666.63 2082.22 333,155.2 201,988.66 60.63












ICCV 93954








Unprocessed







chicken
9,999.99
49,999.95
41,666.63 1810.11 289,617.6 187951.03 64.90
manure








BSU compost
99,999.9
49,999.95
41,666.63 1825.55 292,088.0 100,421.52 34.38








Processed







chicken
20,999.98
49,999.95
41,666.63 1725.89 276,142.4 163,475.84 59.20
manure








Sagana 100
39,499.96
49,999.95
41,666.63 1283.33 205,332.8 74,166.26
36.12












ICCV 06102








Unprocessed







chicken
9,999.99
49,999.95
41,666.63 1926.22 308,195.2 206,528.63 67.02
manure








BSU compost
99,999.9
49,999.95
41,666.63 1668.55 266,968.0 75,301.52
28.21








Processed







chicken
20,999.98
49,999.95
41,666.63 1809.11 289,457.6 176,791.04 61.08
manure








Sagana 100
39,499.96
49,999.95
41,666.63 2102.66 336,425.6 205,259.06 61.01


Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

42

Table 12 continued…

COST OF
PESTICIDE LABOR YIELD
GROSS
NET
ROI
FERTILIZER
(Php)
(Php)
(Kg)
SALES
PROFIT
(%)
(Php)
(Php)
(Php)








ICCV 2











Unprocessed







chicken
9,999.99
49,999.95
41,666.63
1921
307,360.0 205,693.43 66.92
manure








BSU compost
99,999.9
49,999.95
41,666.63 1442.89 230,862.4 39,195.92
16.98








Processed







chicken
20,999.98
49,999.95
41,666.63 1903.11 304,497.6 191,831.04
63
manure








Sagana 100
39,499.96
49,999.95
41,666.63 2216.33 354,612.8 223,446.26 63.01









ICCV 95334








Unprocessed







chicken
9,999.99
49,999.95
41,666.63 314.11
50,257.6 -51,408.97 -102.29
manure








BSU compost
99,999.9
49,999.95
41,666.63 700.78 112,124.8 -79,541.68 -70.94








Processed







chicken
20,999.98
49,999.95
41,666.63 880.89 140,942.4 28,275.84
20.06
manure








Sagana 100
39,499.96
49,999.95
41,666.63 845.67 135,307.2
4,140.66
3.06












ICCV 07307








Unprocessed







chicken
9,999.99
49,999.95
41,666.63 1665.11 266,417.6 164,757.03 61.84
manure








BSU compost
99,999.9
49,999.95
41,666.63 1279.22 204,675.2 13,008.72
6.36








Processed







chicken
20,999.98
49,999.95
41,666.63 787.67 126,027.2 13,360.64
10.60
manure








Sagana 100
39,499.96
49,999.95
41,666.63 2088.11 334,097.6 202,931.06 60.74


Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

43

Table 13. Cost of Production for a 1x3m area and per hectare basis
INPUT
QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL/3m² TOTAL/ha
1. Fertilizer





a.Unprocessed





chicken manure
1.5
Kg
2.00
3.00
9,999.99

b.BSU compost
1.5
Kg
20.00
30.00
99,999.90

c. Processed





chicken manure
1.5
Kg
4.20
6.30
20,999.98

d. Sagana 100
1.5
Kg
7.90
11.85
39,499.96

2. Pesticide






a. Insecticide
1.0
Tbsp
10.00
10.00
33,333.30
b. Fungicide
1.0
Tbsp
5.00
5.00
16,666.65

3.Labor (Land





preparation,




planting, hilling-
30 (min)
Min/plot 200/day(8hrs)
12.50
41,666.63
up, weeding,
harvesting,
dressing)
TOTAL (Php)



78.65
262,166.41

a. Unprocessed chicken manure = Php100.00/Sack
b. BSU compost = Php 20.00/Kg
c. Processed chicken dung = Php 210.00/Sack
d. Sagana 100 = Php 395.00/Sack
Retail price for chickpea seeds = Php 160.00/Kg




Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

44

SUMMARY CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION


Summary

The study was conducted to determine the growth and yield performance of
chickpea as affected by different sources of organic fertilizers and to identify the
chickpea variety that would respond favorably to the application of different organic
fertilizers. Based on the proceeding results, there were no significant differences
observed on the days from planting to 50% flowering, average plant height at flowering,
days from planting to first harvest and in the number of lateral stems at flowering as
affected by the different sources of organic fertilizers used. However, significant
differences were observed on the following.
In the average number of pods per plant, BSU compost produced the highest
number of pods produced while chicken manure had the lowest.
The average number of filled and unfilled pods significantly differs among the
different organic fertilizers. Application of BSU compost produced the highest number of
filled pods; while sagana 100 had the highest number of unfilled pods; unprocessed
chicken manure applied produced the lowest number of both filled and unfilled pods.
The application of BSU compost produced the highest yield per sample while
processed chicken manure applied produced the lowest. In the total yield per plot and
computed yield per hectare, the application of sagana 100 produced the highest yield
while processed chicken manure produced the lowest yield.
Chickpea applied with sagana 100 produced the heaviest weight of 100 seeds at
14% moisture content while the application of unprocessed chicken manure had the
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

45

lightest weight.
Results showed that ICCV 93952 (Desi type) was the latest to produce flower
while ICCV 2 (kabuli type) produced the earliest flowers. Findings showed that kabuli
type produces flower earlier than the desi type chickpea.
ICCV 94952(Desi type) produced the tallest plants at flowering; while ICCV
07307 (kabuli type) produced the shortest plants. Findings showed that Desi type
produces taller plants at flowering compared to the kabuli type.

In the number of days from planting to harvesting, results show that ICCV 2
(kabuli type) was the earliest to be harvested while ICCV 06102 (Desi type) was the
latest. Findings showed that kabuli type matures and harvested earlier than desi type.
As to the number of main stems at flowering, results show that ICCV 2 (kabuli
type) produced the most number of main stems while ICCV 06102 (desi type) produced
the least number of main stems.
ICCV 93952 (desi type) produced the highest number of pods per plant while
ICCV 95334 (kabuli type) had the least number of pods. Findings showed that desi type
produces more pods per plant than kabuli type.
In the average number of filled and unfilled pods, results showed that ICCV
93052 (desi type) produced the highest number of both filled and unfilled pods while
ICCV 95334 (kabuli type) had produced the least nember of filled and unfilled pods.
ICCV 93952 (desi type) significantly produced the highest yield per sample while
ICCV 95334 (kabuli) produced the lowest yield per sample, total yield per plot and
computed yield per hectare.

In the weight of 100 seeds, results showed that ICCV 95334 (kabuli) had the
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

46

heaviest weight of collected 100 seeds while ICCV 2 (kabuli) had the lightest weight.

As for the interaction, no significant differences were noted in the interaction of
the sources of different organic matter and different varieties on the days from planting to
first harvest and number of lateral stems at flowering of chickpea.

ICCV 93952 applied with unprocessed chicken manure were the latest to attain
50% flowering while ICCV 2 applied with sagana 100 were the earliest to bear flower.

In the average plant height at flowering, ICCV 93952 applied with processed
chicken manure were the tallest at flowering while ICCV 07307 applied with
unprocessed chicken manure produced the shortest plants at flowering.
ICCV 93952 applied with BSU compost produced the most number of pods per
plant while ICCV 95334 applied with unprocessed chicken manure produced the least
number of pods.

As for the average number of filled and unfilled pods, ICCV 93952 applied with
BSU compost produced the most number of filled pods However, ICCV 93952 applied
with sagana produced the most number of unfilled pods. On the Other hand, ICCV 95334
applied with unprocessed chicken manure produced the least number of both filled and
unfilled pods.

The results show that for the total yield and computed yield per hectare, ICCV
93952 applied with sagana 100 produced the highest yield per plot and computed yield
per hectare while ICCV 95334 applied with processed chicken manure produced the
lowest yield.

In relation to the weight of 100 seeds, ICCV 95334 applied with sagana 100
produced the heaviest weight of 100 seeds while ICCV 2 applied with processed chicken
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

47

manure had the lightest weight of 100 seeds.

The cost and return analysis show that ICCV 93952 of the Desi type applied with
unprocessed chicken manure have the highest return on investment with 69.96% while
ICCV 95334 applied with unprocessed chicken manure produced the lowest return on
investment with a total of -102.29%.

Conclusion

Based on the results discussed, the best three varieties tested under La Trinidad,
Benguet condition were ICCV 93952 (Desi type) followed by ICCV 06102 (Desi type)
and lastly ICCV 2 (Kabuli type) since they had good growth and flowering and produced
the highest return on investment among all the other varieties grown. The best organic
fertilizer chosen for the selected varieties is the application of unprocessed chicken
manure since it contributed to low cost of production yet gained a high return on
investment.

Recommendation

Based on the findings and conclusion of the study, it is therefore recommended
that ICCV 93952 (Desi type), ICCV 06102 (Desi type), and ICCV 2 (Kabuli type) can be
productively grown and have a highest return on investment with the application of
.5kg/sq.m (5tons/ha) of unprocessed chicken manure under La Trinidad, Benguet
condition.






Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

48

LITERATURE CITED


BALCO, G. R. 1986. Non-metallic materials; fertilizer research. Philippine Council for
Agriculture and Resource Research Development. National Council for
Agriculture and Resource Development National Science and Technology
Authority Los Baños, Laguna. P. 76

BAUTISTA, O. K, H. V. VALMAYOR, P. C. TABORA, JR, R. C. ESPINO and J. S.
SAINGALANG. 1983. Introduction to Tropical Horticulture. UPLB, College Los
Baños, Laguna. P. 231

HENTSCHEL, R. 2009. Organic Matter and Soil Fertility Play Important Roles in
Gardens, Extension interactive learning environment. Retrieved February 27,
2009. from
http://www.extension.org/pages/Organic_Matter_and_Soil
_Fertility_Play_Important_Roles_in_Gardens

KNOTT, J. E. 1976. Handbook for Vegetable Growers London. John Wiley and Sons,
Inc. P. 28


MAGCIANO, D.B. 2009. Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) varieties to organic
fertilizer application. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 6.

MCKAY, K. P. MILLER, B. JENKS, J. RIESSELMAN, K. NEILL, D. BUSCHENA and
A. BUSSAN. 2001. Growing Chickpea in the Northern Great Plains. North
Dakota Extension Service. North Dakota State University Fargo, North Dakota
58105.
Retrieved November 29,
2002
from
http://www.pulseusa.com/pdf/chikpea.pdf

OPLINGER, E.S. L.L. HARDMAN, E.A. OELKE, A.R. KAMINSKI, E.E. SCHULTE,
and J.D. DOLL. 1990. Alternative Field Crops Manual. MINESOTA OR
WISCONSIN Extension Services. Retrieved November 17, 1997 from
http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/afcm/chickpea.html

SUMMERFIELD, R. J. and ROBERTS, E. H. 1988. Photothermal regulation of lowering
in pea, lentil, faba bean and chickpea. Dordecht, The Netherlands. Klower
Academic Publishers. Pp. 911-922.

WIKIPEDIA, 2008. Chickpea. last modified on 19 August 2009 at 15:41.Wikimedia
Foundation Inc.
Retrieved August 19, 2009 from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chickpea

WILLIAMS, S. 2009. Common Sense Gardening Part 3: Organic And Inorganic
Fertilizers. University of Saskatchewan Extension Division. Retrieved September
30, 2009 from http://gardenline.usask.ca/misc/common3.html

Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

49

APPENDICES

Appendix Table 1. Number of days from planting to 50% flowering

TREATMENT
REPLICATION
TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
V1 S1
71.33
76.67
69.67
217.67
72.56
S2
72.00
74.33
70.67
217.00
72.33
S3
74.33
75.33
72.00
221.66
73.89
S4
70.33
67.33
73.67
211.33
70.44
V2 S1
70.33
70.67
69.33
210.33
70.11
S2
64.00
69.33
66.33
199.66
66.55
S3
64.33
64.00
69.00
197.33
65.78
S4
67.33
69.67
63.33
200.33
66.78
V3 S1
73.67
71.67
67.67
213.01
71.00
S2
71.33
73.33
70.33
214.99
71.66
S3
73.67
69.67
66.33
209.67
69.89
S4
73.33
67.67
67.67
208.67
69.56
V4 S1
47.00
47.00
48.00
142.00
47.33
S2
47.00
48.00
48.33
143.33
47.78
S3
47.33
47.00
47.00
141.33
47.11
S4
47.00
47.00
47.00
141.00
47.00
V5 S1
48.33
48.00
49.67
146.00
48.67
S2
47.00
47.00
47.67
141.67
47.22
S3
47.00
49.33
48.00
144.33
48.11
S4
47.00
49.33
48.67
145.00
48.33
V6 S1
47.33
47.00
48.00
142.33
47.44
S2
47.67
47.00
47.67
142.34
47.45
S3
48.00
47.67
49.33
145.00
48.33
S4
47.00
47.00
47.00
141.00
47.00


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05
0.01
FREEDOM
Block
2
7.36
3.68
0.91

Variety
5
9187.92
1837.58
452.26*
<.0001
Organic





fertilizers
3
16.02
5.34
1.31
.028
A X B
15
51.12
3.41
0.84*
0.63
Error
46
186.91
4.06


TOTAL
71
9449.32



* - Significant




Coefficient of variation = 3.43%
Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

50

Appendix Table 2. Average plant height at flowering (cm)

TREATMENT
REPLICATION
TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
V1 S1
48.03
51.87
49.00
148.90
49.63
S2
53.7
53.43
50.57
157.70
52.57
S3
58.13
55.17
54.53
167.83
55.94
S4
53.67
51.87
56.57
162.11
54.04
V2 S1
46.07
46.07
49.63
141.77
47.26
S2
44.20
51.57
51.87
147.64
49.21
S3
42.77
49.07
54.90
146.74
48.91
S4
45.53
54.53
41.20
104.26
34.75
V3 S1
51.37
48.47
44.37
144.21
48.07
S2
49.57
53.13
51.83
154.53
51.51

S3
46.43
50.20
47.63
144.26
48.09
S4
50.43
49.50
46.03
145.96
48.65
V4 S1
36.23
47.13
40.50
118.03
39.34
S2
36.53
40.10
42.80
119.43
39.81
S3
38.43
42.27
40.13
120.83
40.28
S4
37.13
44.63
41.20
122.96
40.99
V5 S1
45.63
42.30
45.00
132.93
44.31
S2
50.80
45.37
48.83
145.00
48.33
S3
41.20
46.17
46.60
133.97
44.66
S4
42.47
44.07
50.70
137.24
45.75
V6 S1
30.10
34.03
41.93
106.06
35.35
S2
31.50
28.10
42.50
102.10
34.03
S3
27.90
29.57
32.43
89.90
29.97
S4
31.90
32.10
35.13
99.13
33.04


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05
0.01
FREEDOM
Block
2
95.25
47.62
3.99

Variety
5
3085.94
617.19
51.65*
<.0001
Organic
3
34.31
11.44
0.96
0.42
fertilizers
A X B
15
146.20
9.75
0.82*
0.66
Error
46
549.71
11.95


TOTAL
71
3911.41



* - Significant




Coefficient of variation = 7.70%


Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

51

Appendix Table 3. Number of days from planting to first harvest

TREATMENT
REPLICATION
TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
V1 S1
140
140
140
420
140
S2
140
140
140
420
140
S3
140
140
140
420
140
S4
140
140
140
420
140
V2 S1
140
140
140
420
140
S2
140
140
140
420
140
S3
140
140
140
420
140
S4
140
140
140
420
140
V3 S1
141
141
141
423
141
S2
141
141
141
423
141
S3
141
141
141
423
141
S4
141
141
141
423
141
V4 S1
124
124
124
372
124
S2
124
124
124
372
124
S3
124
124
124
372
124
S4
124
124
124
372
124
V5 S1
126
126
126
378
126
S2
126
126
126
378
126
S3
126
126
126
378
126
S4
126
126
126
378
126
V6 S1
126
126
126
378
126
S2
126
126
126
378
126
S3
126
126
126
378
126
S4
126
126
126
378
126


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05
0.01
FREEDOM
Block
2
0.00
0.00
0.00

Variety
5
4090.00
818.00
-*
<.0001
Organic
3
0.00
0.00
.
.
fertilizers
A X B
15
0.00
0.00
.
.
Error
46
0.00
0.00


TOTAL
71
4090.00



* - Significant




Coefficient of variation = 0%



Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

52

Appendix Table 4. Number of main stems at flowering

TREATMENT
REPLICATION
TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
V1 S1
4.67
3.67
3.33
11.67
3.89
S2
3.67
3.33
3.67
10.67
3.56
S3
3.67
3.33
3.33
10.33
3.44
S4
5.00
4.33
3.00
12.33
4.11
V2 S1
2.67
2.67
4.00
9.34
3.11
S2
3.00
4.00
4.67
11.67
3.89
S3
4.00
3.67
4.00
11.67
3.89
S4
433
3.67
4.00
12.00
4.00
V3 S1
567
3.33
3.33
12.33
4.11
S2
3.00
3.67
2.33
9.00
3.00
S3
2.67
3.67
3.33
9.67
3.22
S4
3.33
3.67
4.00
11.00
3.67
V4 S1
4.00
4.33
4.00
12.33
4.11
S2
4.67
3.00
3.33
11.00
3.67
S3
4.67
5.00
4.00
13.67
4.56
S4
4.67
467
5.33
14.67
4.89
V5 S1
4.00
4.67
5.00
13.67
4.56
S2
4.33
4.00
5.33
13.66
4.55
S3
3.67
4.00
4.33
12.00
4.00
S4
3.67
3.67
4.67
12.01
4.00
V6 S1
4.00
3.67
4.67
12.34
4.11
S2
3.67
3.00
3.33
10.00
3.33
S3
2.33
3.33
3.67
9.33
3.11
S4
4.00
3.33
4.00
11.33
3.78


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05
0.01
FREEDOM
Block
2
0.55
0.28
0.72

Variety
5
7.33
1.47
3.82*
0.0056
Organic
3
2.21
0.74
1.92
0.1397
fertilizers
A X B
15
7.61
0.51
1.32
0.23
Error
46
17.64
0.38


TOTAL
71
35.34



* - Significant




Coefficient of variation = 16.06%


Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

53

Appendix Table 5. Average number of pods per plant

TREATMENT
REPLICATION
TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
V1 S1
203.33
298.33
222.33
723.99
241.33
S2
393.00
349.33
313.67
1056.00
352.00
S3
300.33
246.33
303.33
849.99
283.33
S4
309.00
288.00
294.33
891.33
297.11
V2 S1
344.33
202.00
286.00
832.33
277.44
S2
265.67
373.67
390.00
1029.34
343.11
S3
286.67
259.00
264.33
810.00
270.00
S4
127.67
183.33
224.67
535.67
178.56
V3 S1
294.33
189.33
266.00
704.66
234.89
S2
122.00
262.33
294.33
678.66
226.22
S3
295.67
261.33
287.67
844.67
281.56
S4
317.67
324.33
312.67
954.67
318.22
V4 S1
203.67
228.00
185.67
61734
205.78
S2
243.67
19033
277.33
711.33
237.11
S3
257.00
245.33
148.33
650.66
216.89
S4
235.33
246.67
256.67
738.67
246.22
V5 S1
36.00
33.33
34.00
103.33
34.44
S2
70.00
89.67
84.33
254.67
84.89
S3
53.00
58.33
56.00
167.33
55.78
S4
101.33
102.00
100.00
303.33
101.11
V6 S1
125.33
252.33
182.00
559.66
186.55
S2
75.67
181.00
124.33
381.00
127.00
S3
131.33
152.67
166.33
450.33
150.11
S4
174.33
132.33
273.33
579.99
193.33


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05
0.01
FREEDOM
Block
2
2316.62 1158.31
0.63

Variety
5
438399.46 87679.89
47.75*
<.0001
Organic
3
10337.00 3445.67
1.88*
0.15
fertilizers
A X B
15
79831.77 5322.12
2.90*
0.0028
Error
46
84470.96 1836.33


TOTAL
71
615355.80



* - Significant




Coefficient of variation = 19.89%



Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

54

Appendix Table 6. Average number of filled pods

TREATMENT
REPLICATION
TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
V1 S1
181.00
274.33
207.67
663.00
221.00
S2
366.00
312.00
284.67
962.67
320.89
S3
289.67
24433
215.33
74933
249.78
S4
274.67
215.67
211.33
701.67
233.89
V2 S1
208.33
287.67
263.67
759.67
253.22
S2
246.00
336.33
368.67
951.00
317.00
S3
265.67
136.33
228.00
730.00
243.33
S4
113.00
167.00
203.67
483.67
161.22
V3 S1
269.67
171.67
250.67
692.01
230.67
S2
114.00
242.00
273.67
629.67
209.89
S3
231.00
268.67
273.67
773.34
257.78
S4
307.00
200.67
389.00
896.67
298.89
V4 S1
17633
216.33
158.00
550.66
183.55
S2
226.33
173.33
268.00
667.66
222.55
S3
239.00
206.67
136.00
581.67
193.89
S4
219.00
217.33
234.33
67066
223.55
V5 S1
30.33
30.33
31.67
92.33
30.78
S2
76.00
64.33
75.67
216.00
72.00
S3
47.67
47.67
49.00
14434
48.11
S4
76.67
77.67
97.33
251.67
83.89
V6 S1
109.67
133.00
119.67
362.34
120.78
S2
129.67
110.00
117.00
356.67
118.89
S3
130.33
130.33
139.33
399.99
133.33
S4
153.67
125.00
23867
517.34
172.45


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05
0.01
FREEDOM
Block
2
3404.49 1702.25
0.92

Variety
5
373928.83 74785.77
40.57*
<.0001
Organic
3
12802.83 4267.61
2.32*
0.09
fertilizers
A X B
15
69563.00 4637.53
2.52*
0.0084
Error
46
84796.18 1843.40


TOTAL
71
544495.34



* - Significant




Coefficient of variation = 22.39%


Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

55

Appendix Table 7. Average number of unfilled pods

TREATMENT
REPLICATION
TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
V1 S1
22.33
24.00
14.67
61.00
20.33
S2
27.00
37.33
29.00
93.33
31.11
S3
39.67
23.00
38.00
100.67
33.56
S4
64.33
62.33
63.00
189.66
63.22
V2 S1
26.00
24.33
22.33
72.66
24.22
S2
29.67
27.33
21.33
78.33
26.11
S3
21.00
22.67
36.33
80.00
26.67
S4
14.67
16.33
21.00
52.00
17.33
V3 S1
24.67
1767
15.33
57.67
19.22
S2
18.00
15.33
15.67
49.00
16.33
S3
24.67
22.67
24.00
71.34
23.78
S4
10.67
23.67
23.67
58.01
19.34
V4 S1
27.33
11.67
27.67
66.67
22.22
S2
15.33
17.00
11.33
43.66
14.55
S3
18.00
12.33
12.33
42.66
14.22
S4
20.33
25.30
22.33
67.99
22.66
V5 S1
4.67
3.00
3.33
11.00
3.67
S2
12.67
15.33
10.67
38.67
12.89
S3
7.33
8.67
7.00
23.00
7.67
S4
14.67
19.33
17.67
51.67
17.22
V6 S1
15.67
19.33
12.33
47.33
15.78
S2
6.00
11.00
7.33
24.33
8.11
S3
17.00
14.33
19.00
50.33
16.78
S4
20.67
17.33
24.67
62.67
20.89


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05
0.01
FREEDOM
Block
2
2.72
1.36
0.06

Variety
5
5003.96
1000.79
47.53*
<.0001
Organic
3
955.27
318.42
15.12*
<.0001
fertilizers
A X B
15
3099.37
206.62
9.81*
<.0001
Error
46
968.64
21.06


TOTAL
71
10029.95



* - Significant




Coefficient of variation = 22.12%



Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

56

Appendix Table 8. Total yield per plot (g)

TREATMENT
REPLICATION
TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
V1 S1
631.80
652.70
619.80
1904.30
634.77
S2
609.00
663.00
724.10
1997.00
665.67
S3
556.50
545.80
555.30
1657.60
552.53
S4
577.40
641.80
654.80
1874.00
624.67
V2 S1
588.00
519.60
52150
1629.10
543.03
S2
490.30
584.90
567.80
1643.00
547.67
S3
430.50
559.00
560.80
1553.30
517.77
S4
392.00
373.60
389.40
1155.00
385.00
V3 S1
579.10
529.00
625.50
1733.60
577.87
S2
466.90
475.70
559.10
1501.70
500.57
S3
582.60
509.90
535.70
1628.20
542.73
S4
640.90
590.50
661.00
1829.40
630.80
V4 S1
600.70
502.00
626.20
1728.90
576.30
S2
424.10
403.80
470.70
1298.60
432.87
S3
553.50
613.80
545.50
1702.80
567.60
S4
668.70
633.60
692.40
1994.70
664.90
V5 S1
96.70
99.10
869.00
282.70
94.23
S2
212.80
215.80
202.10
630.70
210.23
S3
257.60
215.40
319.80
729.80
264.27
S4
259.70
254.60
246.80
761.10
253.70
V6 S1
454.50
576.20
467.90
1498.60
499.53
S2
403.10
341.20
407.00
1151.30
388.77
S3
243.10
217.70
248.10
708.90
236.30
S4
608.10
583.90
687.30
1879.30
626.43


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05
0.01
FREEDOM
Block
2
12238.01 6119.00
3.87

Variety
5
1325038.30 265007.66
167.69*
<.0001
Organic
3
76516.34 25505.45
16.14*
<.0001
fertilizers
A X B
15
410270.85 27351.39
17.31*
<.0001
Error
46
72694.05 1580.31


TOTAL
71
1896757.55



* - Significant




Coefficient of variation = 8.27%



Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

57

Appendix Table 9. Computed yield per hectare (kg)

TREATMENT
REPLICATION
TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
V1 S1
2106.00
2175.66
2066.00
6347.66
2115.89
S2
2030.00
2210.00
2413.66
6653.66
2217.89
S3
1855.00
1819.33
1851.00
5525.33
1841.78
S4
1924.66
2139.33
2182.66
6246.65
2082.22
V2 S1
1960.00
1732.00
1738.33
5430.33
1810.11
S2
1634.33
1949.66
1892.66
5476.65
1825.55
S3
1435.00
1863.33
1879.33
5177.66
1725.89
S4
1306.67
1245.33
1298.00
3850.00
1283.33
V3 S1
1930.33
1763.33
2085.00
5778.66
1926.22
S2
1556.33
1585.67
1863.66
5005.66
1668.55
S3
1942.00
1699.66
1785.66
5427.32
1809.11
S4
2136.33
1968.33
2203.33
6307.99
2102.66
V4 S1
2002.33
1673.33
2087.33
5762.99
1921.00
S2
1413.67
1346.00
1569.00
4328.67
1442.89
S3
1845.00
2046.00
1818.33
5709.33
1903.11
S4
2229.00
2112.00
2308.00
6649.00
2216.33
V5 S1
322.33
330.33
289.67
942.33
314.11
S2
704.33
719.33
673.67
2102.33
700.78
S3
858.67
718.00
1066.00
2642.67
880.89
S4
865.67
848.67
822.67
2537.01
845.67
V6 S1
1515.00
1920.66
1559.67
4995.33
1665.11
S2
1343.67
1137.33
1356.67
3837.67
1279.22
S3
810.33
725.66
827.00
2363.00
878.67
S4
2027.00
1946.33
2291.00
6264.33
2088.11


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05
0.01
FREEDOM
Block
2
136000.27 68000.14
3.87

Variety
5
14723185.17
2944637.03
167.71*
<.0001
Organic
3
850169.66 283389.89
16.14*
<.0001
fertilizers
A X B
15
4558821.54 303921.44
17.31*
<.0001
Error
46
807672.81 17558.10


TOTAL
71
21075849.46



* - Significant




Coefficient of variation = 8.27%



Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

58

Appendix Table 10. Yield per sample (g)

TREATMENT
REPLICATION
TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
V1 S1
50.20
63.63
67.77
181.60
60.53
S2
85.37
81.23
82.03
248.63
82.88
S3
65.53
61.60
62.60
191.73
63.91
S4
63.67
52.13
59.90
175.70
58.57
V2 S1
68.07
53.37
57.53
178.97
59.66
S2
70.50
79.37
70.23
220.10
73.37
S3
71.76
65.50
68.17
205.34
68.45
S4
33.23
49.27
40.33
122.83
40.94
V3 S1
58.80
52.23
54.97
166.00
55.33
S2
47.23
52.5
46.30
146.03
48.68
S3
65.37
63.33
62.67
191.37
63.79
S4
74.90
85.70
79.63
240.23
80.08
V4 S1
49.83
44.83
48.73
143.39
47.80
S2
56.27
51.57
63.80
171.64
57.21
S3
50.83
48.73
40.57
140.13
46.71
S4
52.83
58.83
60.13
171.79
57.26
V5 S1
15.83
10.37
10.70
36.90
12.30
S2
32.93
29.63
29.23
91.79
30.60
S3
17.93
19.67
17.97
55.57
18.52
S4
28.93
36.77
38.97
104.67
34.89
V6 S1
77.70
75.93
79.00
232.63
77.54
S2
49.07
44.17
55.70
148.94
49.65
S3
43.57
47.63
49.77
140.97
46.99
S4
62.27
62.77
64.37
189.41
63.14


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05
0.01
FREEDOM
Block
2
8.71
4.36
0.19

Variety
5
14277.34
2855.47
127.78*
<.0001
Organic
3
402.34
134.11
6.00*
0.0015
fertilizers
A X B
15
7265.39
484.36
21.68*
<.0001
Error
46
1027.92
22.35


TOTAL
71
22981.70



* - Significant




Coefficient of variation = 8.74%



Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

59

Appendix Table 11. Weight of 100 seeds (g)

TREATMENT
REPLICATION
TOTAL
MEAN
I
II
III
V1 S1
26.70
32.20
30.80
89.70
29.90
S2
25.90
24.70
28.20
78.80
26.27
S3
24.60
25.70
25.00
75.30
25.10
S4
22.50
22.70
24.50
69.70
23.23
V2 S1
23.90
22.70
21.10
67.70
22.57
S2
23.50
23.20
24.30
71.00
23.67
S3
24.20
25.10
25.00
74.30
24.77
S4
24.70
25.90
27.20
77.80
25.93
V3 S1
23.60
26.50
24.70
74.80
24.93
S2
23.60
24.10
23.30
71.00
23.67
S3
22.20
22.00
25.00
69.20
23.07
S4
24.10
27.00
25.00
76.10
25.37
V4 S1
23.40
24.40
20.10
67.90
22.63
S2
24.20
23.90
24.80
72.90
24.30
S3
22.80
22.00
22.60
67.40
22.47
S4
27.90
26.00
28.50
82.40
27.47
V5 S1
43.00
40.10
40.40
123.50
41.17
S2
44.50
41.20
44.60
130.30
43.43
S3
43.50
41.90
44.20
129.60
43.20
S4
48.10
45.20
47.40
140.70
46.90
V6 S1
36.10
37.00
37.50
110.60
36.87
S2
37.20
34.00
35.40
106.60
35.53
S3
35.70
28.00
36.80
100.50
33.50
S4
33.50
29.30
33.50
96.30
32.10


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05
0.01
FREEDOM
Block
2
13.24
6.62
2.28

Variety
5
3845.37
769.07
265.10*
<.0001
Organic
3
20.58
6.86
2.36*
0.83
fertilizers
A X B
15
219.28
14.62
5.04*
<.0001
Error
46
133.45
2.90


TOTAL
71
4231.93



* - Significant




Coefficient of variation = 5.77%


Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to Different Sources of Organic Fertilizers under
La Trinidad, Benguet Condition /Diego S. Bulangen Jr. 2010

---

Document Outline

• Response of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) toDifferent Sources of Organic Fertilizers under La Trinidad, Benguet Condition.
  • BIBLIOGRAPHY
  • ABSTRACT
  • TABLE OF CONTENTS
  • INTRODUCTION
  • REVIEW OF LITERATURE
  • MATERIALS AND METHODS
  • RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
    • Days from Planting to 50% Flowering
    • Average Plant Height at Flowering (cm)
    • Number of Days from Planting to Harvesting
    • Number of Main Stems at Flowering
    • Average Number of Pods per Plant
    • Average Number of Filled Pods
    • Average Number of Unfilled Pods
    • Yield per Plot (g)
    • Computed Yield per Hectare
    • Yield per Sample Plant (g)
    • Weight of 100 Seeds (g)
    • Cost and Return Analysis
  • SUMMARY CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
    • Summary
    • Conclusion
    • Recommendation
  • LITERATURE CITED
  • APPENDICES

---