BIBLIOGRAPHY DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. ...
BIBLIOGRAPHY
DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAY 2013. Organic Production Practices for
Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower Production. Benguet State
University, La Trinidad Benguet.
Adviser: Araceli G. Ladilad, PhD.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to determine appropriate and suitable organic production
practices for the production of quality chrysanthemum cutflower; establish a pre-
production/production and postharvest management systems in the organic production of
chrysanthemum cut flower; and determine the economics of using the different organic
production practices in chrysanthemum cut flower production, using three common
varieties grown for cut flower production under La Trinidad Benguet condition. The study
was conducted at the BSU Ornamental Horticulture Research Area, La Trinidad Benguet
from December 2012 to March 2013.
Results of the study showed that variety ‘Pink tube’ and variety ‘Handsome’ were
the best performing chrysanthemum varieties tested for organic chrysanthemum cutflower
production since both produced more number of leaves, the earliest to produce 0.5 cm
flower buds and earliest to reach harvesting stage. Variety ‘Handsome’ produced bigger
flowers and high cutflower yield that gave the highest return on cash expenses of 60.62
%, while ‘Novo’ gave the lowest cutflower quality and the lowest return on cash expenses
of 0.60 % among the three varieties grown.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
The use of sunflower-based production practice promoted the production of more
number of leaves per plant; earliest to attain 0.5 cm flower bud size, while mukusako-based
production practices promoted the production of bigger flowers.
Based on the findings variety ‘Handsome’ applied with mukusako-based
production practices is recommended for organic chrysanthemum cutflower production
since it produced thicker stems, bigger flowers and had high ROCE of 60.62%
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Vegetative Growth
Final Height at Flowering
Effect of variety. The final height of the three varieties of chrysanthemum used is shown
in Table 1. Significantly taller plants were measured from “Handsome” with a mean of
86.41 cm while “Pink tube” had a mean height of 70.94 cm which was the shortest among
the three varieties grown.
Sagalla (2000) pointed that each plant species had a unique genetic make-up. It determines
the yield potential, relative susceptibility to unfavorable environment, earliness and
regularity of bearing, length of productive life, and size and shape of plants at maturity.
She further stated that the internal factor sets the boundaries in which improvement of yield
or quality can be altered by manipulation of environmental factors.
Table 1. Final height at flowering
TREATMENT HEIGHT AT
FLOWERING
(cm)
Variety
Pink Tube 70.94c
Novo 76.36b
Handsome 86.41a
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 79.03
Mukusako-based 76.15
Sunflower-based 79.20
Nature’s Crop 77.23
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Effect of production practice. Results showed that there were no significant differences on
the final height at flowering as influenced by the different production practice. But
numerically, farmer’s practice has the tallest final height at flowering.
Interaction effects. There were no significant interaction effects observed between the
different chrysanthemum varieties and the different production practices on the final height
of chrysanthemum at flowering.
Leaf Number at Flowering (50% anthesis)
Effect of variety. The influence of the three varieties on the number of leaves per plant at
harvest is shown in Table 2. Highly significant differences were obtained among the
varieties evaluated. “Handsome” and “Pink Tube” significantly produced more leaves with
a comparable means of 36.73 and 35.34 leaves per plant; respectively while “Novo” had
significantly lower number of leaves with a mean of only 28.47 leaves per plant.
Mc Vikar (1970) reported that fertilizer applied as foliar spray to the leaves was needed
quickly to overcome some particular mineral deficiency which if allowed going
uncorrected would seriously impair the yield of plants and number of leaves.
Effect of production practice. Significant differences were obtained on the number of
leaves per plant at flowering (50% anthesis) as shown in Table 2. Chrysanthemum plants
applied with sunflower-based production practices produced more leaves with a mean of
35.74 leaves per plant, while the least number of leaves were observed from plants applied
with mukusako-based production practice and with the use of use Nature’s Crop organic
production practice.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Table 2 Leaf number at flowering
TREATMENT NUMBER OF
LEAF AT FLOWERING
Variety
Pink Tube 35.34a
Novo 28.47b
Handsome 36.73a
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 33.63ab
Mukusako-based 32.17b
Sunflower-based 35.74a
Nature’s Crop 32.51b
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Interaction effect. There were significant interaction effects between the three varieties and
production practice on the number of leaves counted per plant at flowering. Among the
three varieties, however, “Handsome” and “Pink Tube” produced the highest number of
leaves/plant with means of 84.41 and 70. 94, while the lowest numbers of leaves were
counted from “Novo” treated with Nature’s Crop production practice with a mean of 32.51.
Stem Thickness at Harvest, ( 6 cm above the ground)
Effect of variety. Highly significant differences were observed on the measured stem
diameter of cutflowers from the different varieties evaluated (Table 3). “Handsome” had
wider stem diameter with a mean of 0.55 cm
This result can be explained by Janick (1972) who stated that climate, the summation of
the weather condition in an area, which involves moisture and light effects; are the factors
to be considered in the physical environment of the plant. These determines when, where
and what plants will grow.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
45
ring
ab
ab
a
a
e 40
bc
bcd
flow 35
cde
de
de
e
30
e
e
nt at
25
r pla
Pink tube
pe 20
s
Novo
ve
a 15
Handsome
of le 10
r
5
Numbe
0
Farmers' practice Mukusako-based Sunflower-based Nature's Crop
Production practice
Fig.1 Number of leaver per plant at flowering as affected by variety and different
production practices (Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5%
level by DMRT)
Table 3. Stem thickness at harvest, (6 cm above the ground)
TREATMENT STEM THICKNESS
AT HARVEST (cm)
Variety
Pink Tube 0.49b
Novo 0.46b
Handsome 0.55a
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 0.48
Mukusako-based 0.52
Sunflower-based 0.51
Nature’s Crop 0.50
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Effect of production practice. There were no significant effects observed in the different
production practices applied on chrysanthemum cutflower production. However,
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
numerical data showed that plants applied with mukusako-based production practice has
the biggest stem diameter compared to the other production practices applied.
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effects noted between the different
varieties of chrysanthemum and different production practice applied.
Reproductive Growth
Days from Transplanting to 0.5 cm Flower Bud Size
Effect of variety. Statistical analysis shows that there were highly significant differences
obtained on the effect of the different varieties on the number of days from transplanting
to 0.5 cm flower bud size stage (Table 4). Results show that “Novo” had the longest
duration to form flower buds with a mean of 61.79 days from transplanting of
Table 4. Days from transplanting to 0.5 cm flower bud size
TREATMENT DAYS FROM
TRANSPLANTING TO 0.5
CM
FLOWER BUD SIZE
Variety
Pink Tube 56.27c
Novo 61.79a
Handsome 60.12b
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 58.76c
Mukusako-based 59.46b
Sunflower-based 60.08a
Nature’s Crop 59.28bc
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
rooted cuttings while “Pink Tube” flowered after a mean of 56.27 days from transplanting
and had the fastest duration to form flower buds observed.
Effect of production practice. Results show that there were highly significant effects of the
different production practices on the flowering of chrysanthemum. Plants that were applied
with farmers’ practice were the earliest to attain 0.5 cm flower bud size from transplanting
with a mean of 58.76 days (Table 4). Application of sunflower-based
production practices significantly delayed flowering with flower buds at 0.5 cm after a
mean of 60.08 days from transplanting.
Interaction effect. Significant interaction effects were obtained between the three varieties
of chrysanthemum and different production practices on the duration of transplanting to
0.5 cm bud size. “Novo” applied with the farmer’s practice, mukusako practices; and the
Nature’s Crops practices were the latest to attain 0.5 cm flower bud size from transplanting
with a mean of 62.13, 62.11 and 61.60 days; respectively;
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
64
a
a
62
ab
a
ab
bc
0.5cm
60
d
cd
o
t
e
ng
i
z
e
58
ant
f
Pink tube
pl
bud si
er
fg
ans
r
56
t
ow
g
l
f
Novo
om
r
54
s f
ay
Handsome
D
52
50
Farmers' practiceMukusako-based Sunflower-based Nature's Crop
Production practice
Fig. 2 Days from transplanting to 0.5 cm flower bud size as affected by variety and
different production practices (Means with a common letter are not significantly different
at 5% level by DMRT)
while “Pink Tube” applied with farmer’s practice and Nature’s Crop products were the
earliest to form 0.5cm bud size with means of 54.82 and 55.78 days from transplanting.
Days from Flower Bud Formation to Harvesting Stage (3 first flower at 50% anthesis)
Effect of variety. Table 5 shows the number of days from 0.5 cm flower bud stage to
harvesting stage of the three varieties of chrysanthemum grown. “Novo” had delayed
flower development reaching harvestable stage with a mean of 19.96 days from 0.5 cm bud
size; which was significantly longer compared to the other varieties grown. “Pink Tube”
was the earliest to reach 50% anthesis with a mean of only 14.50 days.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Effect of production practice. Highly significant differences were likewise, obtained on the
effects of the different production practices used in the number of days from 0.5 cm bud
size to harvesting stage as shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Days from flower bud formation to harvesting stage (3 first flowers at 50%
anthesis)
TREATMENT DAYS FROM FLOWER
BUD FORMATION TO
HARVESTING STAGE
Variety
Pink Tube 14.50c
Novo 19.96a
Handsome 15.85b
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 17.16a
Mukusako-based 16.42b
Sunflower-based 16.80ab
Nature’s Crop 16.70b
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
25
a
c
bc
ab
to
20
e
iz
d
e
e
fg
f
ag
g
fg
fg
t 15
s
h
m bud s
ng
i
Pink tube
0.5 c
Novo
10
om
Handsome
fr
harvest
s
y
5
Da
0
Farmers' practice Mukusako-based Sunflower-based
Nature's Crop
Production practice
Fig. 3 Days from 0.5 cm bud size to harvesting stage as affected by variety and different
production practices (Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5%
level by DMRT)
Plants applied with mukusako-based production practices and Nature’s Crop practices
were observed to have the shortest period of flower development with means of 16.42 and
16.70 days from 0.5 cm bud formation to harvesting stage. The longest to reach harvesting
stage were the plants applied with the farmers’ practice with a mean of 17.16 days from
0.5 cm bud size to harvesting stage.
Interaction effect. There were highly significant interaction effects between the three
varieties and the different production practices on the number of days from 0.5 cm bud size
to harvesting stage. “Novo” applied with farmers’ practice and nature’s crop were the
latest to attain 0.5 cm bud size to harvesting stage with means of 20.33 and 20.28 days;
respectively from 0.5 cm flower bud size.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Cutflower Stem Length at Harvest
Effect of variety. Highly significant differences were obtained on the effect of different
varieties grown on the cutflower stem length at harvest as shown in Table 6. “Handsome”
produced the longest cutflower stems with a mean of 83.74 cm compared to the other
varieties grown which had stems ranging from 67.18 to 73.27 cm; at harvest.
Effect of production practice. There were no significant interaction effects noted between
the different production practices. However, results showed that plants applied with
farmers’ practice had the longest stems at harvest.
100
a
90
a
a
st
ve
b
b
80
b b
b b
b
t har 70
a
c
c
ht 60
ng
e 50
Pink tube
m l 40
Novo
r ste 30
Handsome
20
utflowe
C 10
0
Farmers' practice Mukusako-based Sunflower-based Nature's Crop
Production practice
Fig. 4 Cutflower stem length at harvest as affected by variety and different production
practices (Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% level by
DMRT)
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Table 6. Cutflower stem length at harvest
TREATMENT CUT FLOWER STEM CUTFLOWER
LENGTH AT HARVEST GRADE
Variety
Pink Tube 67.18c Class B
Novo 73.27b Class A (short)
Handsome 83.74a Class A (Medium)
Production Practice
Farmers’ practices 76.40 Class A (short)
Mukusako-based 73.10 Class A (short)
Sunflower-based 74.97 Class A (short)
Nature’s Crop 74.43 Class A (short)
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effects noted between the different
varieties of chrysanthemum and the different production practices on the stem length of
cutflowers at harvest.
Size of Flower
Effect of variety. Highly significant differences on the flower size were obtained from the
three varieties of chrysanthemum at harvesting stage (Table 7). “Handsome” produced the
biggest flowers with a mean of 2.67 cm across compared to the other varieties which had
flower sizes ranging from 2.60 and 2.58 cm.
The results show that flower diameter is affected by its flower type basing from each
description inherently passed through from generation to generation and according to
Marshall and Sagar (1976), the extent to which plant parts were supplied with assimilates
is directly related to their rate of growth or sugar storage capability. Larger blooms could
be attributed to a more times at which the assimilates are translocated to the developing
flower blooms.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Table 7. Flower diameter at 50% anthesis
TREATMENT FLOWER
DIAMETER
AT
50%ANTHESIS
(cm)
Variety
Pink Tube 2.30b
Novo 2.58b
Handsome 2.67a
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 2.67b
Mukusako-based 2.76a
Sunflower-based 2.57c
Nature’s Crop 2.47d
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Effect of production practice. Highly significant differences on the flower size as affected
by the different production practices were noted. Plants applied with mukusako-based
technology with a mean of 2.76 cm had the biggest blooms, while the smallest flower sizes
were obtained from plants applied Nature’s Crop practices.
Interaction effect. Highly significant differences were obtained on the effect of the three
chrysanthemum varieties and the different production practices. “Novo” applied with
mukusako-based technology had the biggest flower sizes at 50% anthesis with a mean of
2.98 cm accross.
Soil Analysis
Table 8 shows the results of the initial and final soil analysis obtained at transplanting of
seedlings and after the cutflowers were harvest. Soil pH was decreased using the farmers’
practice, mukusako-based and sunflower-based production practices, while the soil pH
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
increased with the used of Nature’s Crop production practices. Application of Nature’s
Crop and mukusako-based production practices had the highest
3.5
a
3
b
b
c
d
d
f
e
f
f
ef
f
2.5
nthesis
2
t 50% a
a
e
Pink tube
1.5
siz
Novo
r
1
Handsome
lowe
F 0.5
0
Farmers' practice Mukusko-based Sunflower-based Nature's Crop
Production practice
Fig. 5 Flower size at 50% anthesis as affected by variety and different production
practices (Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% level by
DMRT)
Table 8. Soil analysis at transplanting and after cutflowers were harvested
TREATMENT pH OM P2O5 K2O
(%) P, ppm K, ppm
Initial soil analysis 6.8 Low High Slightly sufficient
at transplanting
Soil analysis after cutflowers
were harvested
Farmers’ Practice 6.10 3.5 330 2,400
Mukusako-based 6.54 4.0 200 1,100
Sunflower-based 6.64 3.0 270 916
Nature’s Crop 6.88 4.5 200 960
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
percentage of organic matter of 4.5% and 4.0%; respectively; while the application of the
farmers’ practice had the highest P and K, ppm of 330 and 2,400.
Occurrence of Insect Pests and Disease
Insect pests and disease during the study were identified. The insect pest noted
during the study as the aphids and which was controlled by using strong water pressure
mixed with detergent powder; while the disease observed was white rust which was
controlled by watering the plants early in the morning. For farmer’s practice, the aphids
and white rust were controlled by spraying insecticides and fungicides.
Table 9. Occurrence of insect pests and disease
INSECT PEST
STAGE OF PLANT
DEGREE OF
GROWTH
INFESTATION
Aphids
Vegetative stage
No infestation
Reproductive stage
Slight infestation
Harvesting stage
Slight infestation
DISEASES
STAGE OF INFESTATION
DEGREE OF
INFESTATION
White rust
Vegetative stage
No infestation
Reproductive stage
Slight infestation
Harvesting stage
Moderate infestation
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Meteorological Data
The minimum and maximum air temperature during the study period ranged from
23.7 to 26.3 0C and 12.3 to 16.9 0C, respectively while relative humidity ranged from
80.11% to 83.25 % (Table 10). Sunshine duration in the month of January, March and April
was low ranging from 5.0766 to 6.2083 hours, while the rainfall ranges from 00001 to
0042.5 mm (Table 10).
Table 10. Meteorological data for the cropping period
TEMPERATURE (OC) RELATIVE RAINFALL
SUNSHINE
MONTHS MAXIMUM MINIMUM HUMIDITY (mm)
DURATION
(%) (hours)
December 24.2 14.5 80.61 00001 6.295
January 23.7 12.3 80.45 00005 6.0
February 24.3 13.7 80.11 00001 6.3283
March 25.5 16.9 83.16 00025 5.0766
April 26.3 16.32 83.25 0046.5 6.2083
Marketable Cutflowers per Plot(doz)
Effect of variety. Table 10 shows the cutflower yield from the three varieties of
chrysanthemum grown. Results show that “Handsome” and “Pink tube” had significantly
higher yield with means of 5.11 and 4.98 (doz/plot) while “Novo” had the lowest yield
with a mean of 4.84 (doz/plot).
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
These results can be explained Sagalla (2000) pointed that each plant species had a unique
genetic make-up. It determines the yield potential, relative susceptibility to unfavorable
environment, earliness and regularity of bearing, length of productive life, and size and
shape of plants at maturity. She further stated that the internal factor sets the boundaries in
which improvement of yield or quality can be altered by manipulation of environmental
factors.
Table 11. Marketable yield/plot (doz. /m2)
TREATMENT MARKETABLE
YIELD
(doz./m2)
Variety
Pink Tube 4.98ab
Novo 4.84b
Handsome 5.11a
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 5.14
Mukusako-based 4.87
Sunflower-based 4.95
Nature’s Crop 4.94
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Effect of production practice. There were no significant effects observed on the number of
marketable cutflower as affected by different production practices applied on
chrysanthemum as shown in Table 10. Results show that, plants applied with
farmers’ practice produced the highest marketable cutflowers yield of 5.14 dozens per
1x2.5 cm plot.
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effects observed between the
different varieties of chrysanthemum and the production practices applied.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Non-Marketable Cutflower per Plot(doz.)
Effect of variety. There were no significant effects of variety on the
non-marketable yield per 1x2.5 cm plot. However, “Novo” has the highest volume of non-
marketable cutflowers among the three varieties grown.
Table 12. Non-marketable yield/plot (doz. /m2)
TREATMENT NON-MARKETABLE
YIELD
(doz./m2)
Variety
Pink Tube 0.40
Novo 0.55
Handsome 0.31
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 0.24
Mukusako-based 0.55
Sunflower-based 0.43
Nature’s Crop 0.47
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Effect of production practices. There were no significant effects of the different production
practices on the non-marketable yield per 1x2.5 cm plot. However, plants that were applied
with mukusako have the highest non-marketable cutflower yield per plot with a mean of
0.55 dozen.
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effects between the different
chrysanthemum varieties and the different production practices on the number of non-
marketable cutflower harvested per 1x2.5 cm plot.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
a
b
c
Plate 1. Compost preparation with (a) the reasearcher and (b, and c) his siblings.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Plate 2. Overview of the experimental area at one month from transplanting of rooted
cuttings.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Plate 3. Overview of the chrysanthemum plants during flower bud formation stage.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Pink tube
Handsome
Novo
Plate 4. Overview of the various chrysanthemum varieties grown in the study at
flowering stage.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Plate 5. Harvesting and packaging of the chrysanthemum cutflowers.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Table 13 Cost and return analysis
TREATMENT MARKETABLE GROSS EXPENSES
NET
ROCE RANK
YIELD
SALES
(P)
PROFIT
(%)
(doz)
(P)
(P)
Farmer’s
Practice
Pink tube
15.26
534.1
457.08
77.02
16.85 3
Novo
15.25
533.75
457.08
76.67
16.77 4
Handsome
15.75
787.5
457.08
330.42
72.29 1
Mukusako-
based
Pink tube
15.26
534.1
445.42
58.68
13.17 5
Novo
13.66
478.1
445.42
2.68
0.60
12
Handsome
14.92
746
445.42
270.58
60.62 2
Sunflower-
based
Pink tube
14.75
354
345.42
8.50
Novo
2.46
10
14.58
349.92
345.42
4.5
Handsome
1.30
11
15.25
366
345.42
20.58
5.96
7
Nature’s Crop-
based
Pink tube
14.5
348
337.92
10.08
2.98
9
Novo
14.58
349.92
337.92
12
3.55
8
Handsome
15.34
368.16
337.92
30.24
8.94
6
Note: Selling price per dozen during harvest was P 50.00 for A (medium), P35.00 for A
(short), and P20.00 for Class B.
While P1-2.00 for chrysanthemum damaged by white rust.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Table 14. List of inputs in the study
INPUTS
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
TOTAL VALUE
A. Material Cost
4,4334
.60/cutting
2,600
I. Labor Cost
a. Land practice
24 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
240.00
b. Transplanting
24 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
240.00
cuttings and wire
net installation
c. Fertilizer
10 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
100.00
application
d. Irrigation
37 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
370.00
e. Disbudding
2 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
20.00
f. Weeding
3 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
30.00
g. Pinching
2 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
20.00
h. Harvesting
2 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
20.00
i. Packaging
2 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
20.00
TOTAL
3660.00
B. Fixed Cost
Grab hoe
1
250
25
Knapsack sprayer
1
1500
150.00
Wire net
2 rolls
95/roll
190.00
TOTAL
365.00
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Table 15. Additional expenses per treatment
INPUTS
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
TOTAL VALUE
Farmer’s Practice
I.Fertilizer
a.Complete
2.5 kg
30.00/kg
75.00
b.Urea
3.5 kg
24.00/kg
84.00
c.Chicken
5 kg
1.80/kg
9.00
manure
II. Pesticides
a.Karate
100ml
68.00
68.00
b.Kumulus
½ kg
150.00
150.00
TOTAL
365.00
Mukusako-based
Mukusako
5 li
60.00/li
300.00
Liquid
Rice hull
1 ½ sack
20/ sack
30.00
TOTAL
330.00
Sunflower-based
Rice hull
1 ½ sack
20/sack
30.00
TOTAL
30.00
Available
Organic Fertilizer
3 kg
2.5/kg
7.50
(Siglat)
TOTAL
7.50
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The study was conducted to determine appropriate and suitable organic products for the
production of quality chrysanthemum cutflower; establish a pre-production/production and
postharvest management systems in the organic production of chrysanthemum cut flower;
and determine the economics of using the different organic production practices in
chrysanthemum cut flower production, using three common varieties grown for cut flower
production under La Trinidad Benguet condition. The study was conducted at the BSU
Ornamental Horticulture Research Area, La Trinidad Benguet from December 2012 to
March 2013.
Among the varieties used ‘Pink tube’ and ‘Handsome’ produced more number of leaves,
earliest to attain 0.5 cm flower bud size, and the fastest flower development from flower
bud formation to harvesting stage. ‘Handsome’ produced bigger flowers and a high
cutflower yield but was slightly comparable to ‘Pink tube’.
On the effect of different production practices used, results showed that plants applied with
sunflower-based practices numerically promoted the production of taller plants; more
number of leaves produced but was slightly comparable to plant applied with the farmers’
practice. Plants applied with mukusako-based practice produced thicker stems and bigger
flowers at flowering. Application of sunflower-based practices reduces the number of days
from transplanting to 0.5 cm flower bud size; while flower development from 0.5 cm bud
size to harvesting stage was significantly reduced with the application of the farmer’s
practice.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Significant interaction effects were observed between the three varieties and the different
organic production practices on the number of leaves at flowering, number of days from
transplanting to 0.5 cm bud size, flower development from 0.5 cm flower bud size to
harvesting; and on flower sizes. ‘Handsome’ applied with sunflower-based and Nature’s
Crop-based practices produced the highest number of leaves per plant. ‘Novo’ applied with
farmer’s practice produced the biggest flowers; but it was the latest to attain 0.5cm flower
bud size and the latest to reach the harvestable stage (50% anthesis).
There were no significant interactions between the three mum varieties and the different
production practices on the final height at flowering, stem thickness, cutflower stem length
at harvest, marketable yield per plot, and the non-marketable yield per plot.
Conclusion
Based on the results presented and discussed, results showed that ‘Pink Tube’ and
‘Handsome’ were the best performing chrysanthemum varieties tested for organic
chrysanthemum cutflower production since both produced more number of leaves, the
earliest to produce 0.5 cm flower buds and had faster flower development to harvesting
stage. ‘Handsome’ produced bigger flowers and a high cutflower yield that gave the highest
return on cash expenses of 60.62 %, while ‘Novo’ gave the lowest cutflower quality and
the lowest return on cash expenses of 0.60 % among the three varieties grown.
The use of sunflower-based production practice promoted the production of more number
of leaves per plant; earliest to attain 0.5 cm bud size, while mukusako-based production
practices promoted the production of bigger flowers.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Recommendation
Based on the findings ‘Handsome’ applied with mukusako-based production practices is
recommended for organic chrysanthemum cutflower production since it produced thicker
stems, bigger flowers and had a high ROCE of 60.62%
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
LITERATURE CITIED
BAUTISTA, O.K., H.V VALMAYOR, P.C. TABORA JR., R.R ESPINO, J. B.
SANGALANG. 1983. Introduction to tropical Horticulture. UPLB, Los Banos, Laguna.
P.231.
FOX O. 1985. Growing Lilies. Great Britain: Croom Helm Pub. P.33.
FRENCH. G. and A.C. ALSBURG. 1989. Comparison of controlled fertilizer for the
production of Rhodendron “Anna Rave Whitney”. Hort. Sci. 15:19.
GARDNER, V. R. 1949. Basic Horticulture. New York: The Macmillan Book
Co.P.146.
GAUTAM, H. 2007. Dictionary of Agriculture. Rajat Publication New Delhi. P.202.
GENOVE,J.2006.Growth, Flowering and Yield of the Nile (Agapanthus albus) as
Affected by Different Organic Materials.BS. Thesis (Unpub.) Benguet State University,
La Trinidad, Benguet.P.4.
JANICK, J. 1972. Horticultural Science. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman Pub, and Co.
Pp.158, 164-165, 328-329.
LADILAD, A.C. 1996. A Manual of Chrysanthemum Production in the Highlands.
LARSON, R. A. 1980. Introduction to Floriculture. New York: Academic Press Inc.
P 9.
MARSHALL, C. and G. SAGA. 1976 Plant Structure, Function and Adaptation.
New York: MacMillan Press, Ltd. Pp. 261-262
MENDIOLA, N. B. 1976. Principles of Crop Production on Southeast Asia.
Caloocan City: United Circulation, Inc. P. 71.
MCVICKAR, M.H. 1970. Using Commercial Fertilizers. Illinois: The Interstate
Pub. and Printers Corp. P201.
PCARRD. 1995. The Ornamental Horticulture. Philippine Council for Agriculture,
Forestry and Natural Resource Research and Development, Laguna:Departmentof Science
and Technology, Los Banos. ISBN 971-20-031-4. P.1.
PEARS, P. 2005.The Complete Guide to Natural and Chemical-free Gardening.
Rondal’s Illustrated Encyclopedia of Organic Gardening.DK Publishing Inc. New
York.P.61.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
REHM, K. G. 1994. Fertilizer Management and Technology. Houston, Texas:
Academic Press,Inc. Pp.179-188.
SAGALLA, L. 2000. Analyses of different formulated compost and their effects in
the performance of chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemum morifolium). MS Thesis. La Trinidad
Benguet. P.13.
SCOTTS, C. 1996. Growing medium and Fertilizer regime influence growth and
essential oil content of rosemary .Hort. Sci. 26:91.
VELASCO, L.B. 2000. Response of Three Greenhouse Grown Spray Chrysanthemum
Varieties to Planting Spacing. Benguet State Univiersity, La Trinidad, Benguet.
WATTS, R.L. 1972. Vegetable Gardening. New York: Orange Jude Pub. P.156.
YOKOMORI, .M. 2011. Farmers in Benguet Practice Savers Technology. Rianella
Printing Press (Baguio City, Philippines).
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAY 2013. Organic Production Practices for
Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower Production. Benguet State
University, La Trinidad Benguet.
Adviser: Araceli G. Ladilad, PhD.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to determine appropriate and suitable organic production
practices for the production of quality chrysanthemum cutflower; establish a pre-
production/production and postharvest management systems in the organic production of
chrysanthemum cut flower; and determine the economics of using the different organic
production practices in chrysanthemum cut flower production, using three common
varieties grown for cut flower production under La Trinidad Benguet condition. The study
was conducted at the BSU Ornamental Horticulture Research Area, La Trinidad Benguet
from December 2012 to March 2013.
Results of the study showed that variety ‘Pink tube’ and variety ‘Handsome’ were
the best performing chrysanthemum varieties tested for organic chrysanthemum cutflower
production since both produced more number of leaves, the earliest to produce 0.5 cm
flower buds and earliest to reach harvesting stage. Variety ‘Handsome’ produced bigger
flowers and high cutflower yield that gave the highest return on cash expenses of 60.62
%, while ‘Novo’ gave the lowest cutflower quality and the lowest return on cash expenses
of 0.60 % among the three varieties grown.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
The use of sunflower-based production practice promoted the production of more
number of leaves per plant; earliest to attain 0.5 cm flower bud size, while mukusako-based
production practices promoted the production of bigger flowers.
Based on the findings variety ‘Handsome’ applied with mukusako-based
production practices is recommended for organic chrysanthemum cutflower production
since it produced thicker stems, bigger flowers and had high ROCE of 60.62%
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Vegetative Growth
Final Height at Flowering
Effect of variety. The final height of the three varieties of chrysanthemum used is shown
in Table 1. Significantly taller plants were measured from “Handsome” with a mean of
86.41 cm while “Pink tube” had a mean height of 70.94 cm which was the shortest among
the three varieties grown.
Sagalla (2000) pointed that each plant species had a unique genetic make-up. It determines
the yield potential, relative susceptibility to unfavorable environment, earliness and
regularity of bearing, length of productive life, and size and shape of plants at maturity.
She further stated that the internal factor sets the boundaries in which improvement of yield
or quality can be altered by manipulation of environmental factors.
Table 1. Final height at flowering
TREATMENT HEIGHT AT
FLOWERING
(cm)
Variety
Pink Tube 70.94c
Novo 76.36b
Handsome 86.41a
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 79.03
Mukusako-based 76.15
Sunflower-based 79.20
Nature’s Crop 77.23
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Effect of production practice. Results showed that there were no significant differences on
the final height at flowering as influenced by the different production practice. But
numerically, farmer’s practice has the tallest final height at flowering.
Interaction effects. There were no significant interaction effects observed between the
different chrysanthemum varieties and the different production practices on the final height
of chrysanthemum at flowering.
Leaf Number at Flowering (50% anthesis)
Effect of variety. The influence of the three varieties on the number of leaves per plant at
harvest is shown in Table 2. Highly significant differences were obtained among the
varieties evaluated. “Handsome” and “Pink Tube” significantly produced more leaves with
a comparable means of 36.73 and 35.34 leaves per plant; respectively while “Novo” had
significantly lower number of leaves with a mean of only 28.47 leaves per plant.
Mc Vikar (1970) reported that fertilizer applied as foliar spray to the leaves was needed
quickly to overcome some particular mineral deficiency which if allowed going
uncorrected would seriously impair the yield of plants and number of leaves.
Effect of production practice. Significant differences were obtained on the number of
leaves per plant at flowering (50% anthesis) as shown in Table 2. Chrysanthemum plants
applied with sunflower-based production practices produced more leaves with a mean of
35.74 leaves per plant, while the least number of leaves were observed from plants applied
with mukusako-based production practice and with the use of use Nature’s Crop organic
production practice.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Table 2 Leaf number at flowering
TREATMENT NUMBER OF
LEAF AT FLOWERING
Variety
Pink Tube 35.34a
Novo 28.47b
Handsome 36.73a
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 33.63ab
Mukusako-based 32.17b
Sunflower-based 35.74a
Nature’s Crop 32.51b
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Interaction effect. There were significant interaction effects between the three varieties and
production practice on the number of leaves counted per plant at flowering. Among the
three varieties, however, “Handsome” and “Pink Tube” produced the highest number of
leaves/plant with means of 84.41 and 70. 94, while the lowest numbers of leaves were
counted from “Novo” treated with Nature’s Crop production practice with a mean of 32.51.
Stem Thickness at Harvest, ( 6 cm above the ground)
Effect of variety. Highly significant differences were observed on the measured stem
diameter of cutflowers from the different varieties evaluated (Table 3). “Handsome” had
wider stem diameter with a mean of 0.55 cm
This result can be explained by Janick (1972) who stated that climate, the summation of
the weather condition in an area, which involves moisture and light effects; are the factors
to be considered in the physical environment of the plant. These determines when, where
and what plants will grow.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
45
ring
ab
ab
a
a
e 40
bc
bcd
flow 35
cde
de
de
e
30
e
e
nt at
25
r pla
Pink tube
pe 20
s
Novo
ve
a 15
Handsome
of le 10
r
5
Numbe
0
Farmers' practice Mukusako-based Sunflower-based Nature's Crop
Production practice
Fig.1 Number of leaver per plant at flowering as affected by variety and different
production practices (Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5%
level by DMRT)
Table 3. Stem thickness at harvest, (6 cm above the ground)
TREATMENT STEM THICKNESS
AT HARVEST (cm)
Variety
Pink Tube 0.49b
Novo 0.46b
Handsome 0.55a
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 0.48
Mukusako-based 0.52
Sunflower-based 0.51
Nature’s Crop 0.50
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Effect of production practice. There were no significant effects observed in the different
production practices applied on chrysanthemum cutflower production. However,
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
numerical data showed that plants applied with mukusako-based production practice has
the biggest stem diameter compared to the other production practices applied.
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effects noted between the different
varieties of chrysanthemum and different production practice applied.
Reproductive Growth
Days from Transplanting to 0.5 cm Flower Bud Size
Effect of variety. Statistical analysis shows that there were highly significant differences
obtained on the effect of the different varieties on the number of days from transplanting
to 0.5 cm flower bud size stage (Table 4). Results show that “Novo” had the longest
duration to form flower buds with a mean of 61.79 days from transplanting of
Table 4. Days from transplanting to 0.5 cm flower bud size
TREATMENT DAYS FROM
TRANSPLANTING TO 0.5
CM
FLOWER BUD SIZE
Variety
Pink Tube 56.27c
Novo 61.79a
Handsome 60.12b
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 58.76c
Mukusako-based 59.46b
Sunflower-based 60.08a
Nature’s Crop 59.28bc
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
rooted cuttings while “Pink Tube” flowered after a mean of 56.27 days from transplanting
and had the fastest duration to form flower buds observed.
Effect of production practice. Results show that there were highly significant effects of the
different production practices on the flowering of chrysanthemum. Plants that were applied
with farmers’ practice were the earliest to attain 0.5 cm flower bud size from transplanting
with a mean of 58.76 days (Table 4). Application of sunflower-based
production practices significantly delayed flowering with flower buds at 0.5 cm after a
mean of 60.08 days from transplanting.
Interaction effect. Significant interaction effects were obtained between the three varieties
of chrysanthemum and different production practices on the duration of transplanting to
0.5 cm bud size. “Novo” applied with the farmer’s practice, mukusako practices; and the
Nature’s Crops practices were the latest to attain 0.5 cm flower bud size from transplanting
with a mean of 62.13, 62.11 and 61.60 days; respectively;
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
64
a
a
62
ab
a
ab
bc
0.5cm
60
d
cd
o
t
e
ng
i
z
e
58
ant
f
Pink tube
pl
bud si
er
fg
ans
r
56
t
ow
g
l
f
Novo
om
r
54
s f
ay
Handsome
D
52
50
Farmers' practiceMukusako-based Sunflower-based Nature's Crop
Production practice
Fig. 2 Days from transplanting to 0.5 cm flower bud size as affected by variety and
different production practices (Means with a common letter are not significantly different
at 5% level by DMRT)
while “Pink Tube” applied with farmer’s practice and Nature’s Crop products were the
earliest to form 0.5cm bud size with means of 54.82 and 55.78 days from transplanting.
Days from Flower Bud Formation to Harvesting Stage (3 first flower at 50% anthesis)
Effect of variety. Table 5 shows the number of days from 0.5 cm flower bud stage to
harvesting stage of the three varieties of chrysanthemum grown. “Novo” had delayed
flower development reaching harvestable stage with a mean of 19.96 days from 0.5 cm bud
size; which was significantly longer compared to the other varieties grown. “Pink Tube”
was the earliest to reach 50% anthesis with a mean of only 14.50 days.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Effect of production practice. Highly significant differences were likewise, obtained on the
effects of the different production practices used in the number of days from 0.5 cm bud
size to harvesting stage as shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Days from flower bud formation to harvesting stage (3 first flowers at 50%
anthesis)
TREATMENT DAYS FROM FLOWER
BUD FORMATION TO
HARVESTING STAGE
Variety
Pink Tube 14.50c
Novo 19.96a
Handsome 15.85b
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 17.16a
Mukusako-based 16.42b
Sunflower-based 16.80ab
Nature’s Crop 16.70b
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
25
a
c
bc
ab
to
20
e
iz
d
e
e
fg
f
ag
g
fg
fg
t 15
s
h
m bud s
ng
i
Pink tube
0.5 c
Novo
10
om
Handsome
fr
harvest
s
y
5
Da
0
Farmers' practice Mukusako-based Sunflower-based
Nature's Crop
Production practice
Fig. 3 Days from 0.5 cm bud size to harvesting stage as affected by variety and different
production practices (Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5%
level by DMRT)
Plants applied with mukusako-based production practices and Nature’s Crop practices
were observed to have the shortest period of flower development with means of 16.42 and
16.70 days from 0.5 cm bud formation to harvesting stage. The longest to reach harvesting
stage were the plants applied with the farmers’ practice with a mean of 17.16 days from
0.5 cm bud size to harvesting stage.
Interaction effect. There were highly significant interaction effects between the three
varieties and the different production practices on the number of days from 0.5 cm bud size
to harvesting stage. “Novo” applied with farmers’ practice and nature’s crop were the
latest to attain 0.5 cm bud size to harvesting stage with means of 20.33 and 20.28 days;
respectively from 0.5 cm flower bud size.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Cutflower Stem Length at Harvest
Effect of variety. Highly significant differences were obtained on the effect of different
varieties grown on the cutflower stem length at harvest as shown in Table 6. “Handsome”
produced the longest cutflower stems with a mean of 83.74 cm compared to the other
varieties grown which had stems ranging from 67.18 to 73.27 cm; at harvest.
Effect of production practice. There were no significant interaction effects noted between
the different production practices. However, results showed that plants applied with
farmers’ practice had the longest stems at harvest.
100
a
90
a
a
st
ve
b
b
80
b b
b b
b
t har 70
a
c
c
ht 60
ng
e 50
Pink tube
m l 40
Novo
r ste 30
Handsome
20
utflowe
C 10
0
Farmers' practice Mukusako-based Sunflower-based Nature's Crop
Production practice
Fig. 4 Cutflower stem length at harvest as affected by variety and different production
practices (Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% level by
DMRT)
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Table 6. Cutflower stem length at harvest
TREATMENT CUT FLOWER STEM CUTFLOWER
LENGTH AT HARVEST GRADE
Variety
Pink Tube 67.18c Class B
Novo 73.27b Class A (short)
Handsome 83.74a Class A (Medium)
Production Practice
Farmers’ practices 76.40 Class A (short)
Mukusako-based 73.10 Class A (short)
Sunflower-based 74.97 Class A (short)
Nature’s Crop 74.43 Class A (short)
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effects noted between the different
varieties of chrysanthemum and the different production practices on the stem length of
cutflowers at harvest.
Size of Flower
Effect of variety. Highly significant differences on the flower size were obtained from the
three varieties of chrysanthemum at harvesting stage (Table 7). “Handsome” produced the
biggest flowers with a mean of 2.67 cm across compared to the other varieties which had
flower sizes ranging from 2.60 and 2.58 cm.
The results show that flower diameter is affected by its flower type basing from each
description inherently passed through from generation to generation and according to
Marshall and Sagar (1976), the extent to which plant parts were supplied with assimilates
is directly related to their rate of growth or sugar storage capability. Larger blooms could
be attributed to a more times at which the assimilates are translocated to the developing
flower blooms.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Table 7. Flower diameter at 50% anthesis
TREATMENT FLOWER
DIAMETER
AT
50%ANTHESIS
(cm)
Variety
Pink Tube 2.30b
Novo 2.58b
Handsome 2.67a
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 2.67b
Mukusako-based 2.76a
Sunflower-based 2.57c
Nature’s Crop 2.47d
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Effect of production practice. Highly significant differences on the flower size as affected
by the different production practices were noted. Plants applied with mukusako-based
technology with a mean of 2.76 cm had the biggest blooms, while the smallest flower sizes
were obtained from plants applied Nature’s Crop practices.
Interaction effect. Highly significant differences were obtained on the effect of the three
chrysanthemum varieties and the different production practices. “Novo” applied with
mukusako-based technology had the biggest flower sizes at 50% anthesis with a mean of
2.98 cm accross.
Soil Analysis
Table 8 shows the results of the initial and final soil analysis obtained at transplanting of
seedlings and after the cutflowers were harvest. Soil pH was decreased using the farmers’
practice, mukusako-based and sunflower-based production practices, while the soil pH
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
increased with the used of Nature’s Crop production practices. Application of Nature’s
Crop and mukusako-based production practices had the highest
3.5
a
3
b
b
c
d
d
f
e
f
f
ef
f
2.5
nthesis
2
t 50% a
a
e
Pink tube
1.5
siz
Novo
r
1
Handsome
lowe
F 0.5
0
Farmers' practice Mukusko-based Sunflower-based Nature's Crop
Production practice
Fig. 5 Flower size at 50% anthesis as affected by variety and different production
practices (Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% level by
DMRT)
Table 8. Soil analysis at transplanting and after cutflowers were harvested
TREATMENT pH OM P2O5 K2O
(%) P, ppm K, ppm
Initial soil analysis 6.8 Low High Slightly sufficient
at transplanting
Soil analysis after cutflowers
were harvested
Farmers’ Practice 6.10 3.5 330 2,400
Mukusako-based 6.54 4.0 200 1,100
Sunflower-based 6.64 3.0 270 916
Nature’s Crop 6.88 4.5 200 960
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
percentage of organic matter of 4.5% and 4.0%; respectively; while the application of the
farmers’ practice had the highest P and K, ppm of 330 and 2,400.
Occurrence of Insect Pests and Disease
Insect pests and disease during the study were identified. The insect pest noted
during the study as the aphids and which was controlled by using strong water pressure
mixed with detergent powder; while the disease observed was white rust which was
controlled by watering the plants early in the morning. For farmer’s practice, the aphids
and white rust were controlled by spraying insecticides and fungicides.
Table 9. Occurrence of insect pests and disease
INSECT PEST
STAGE OF PLANT
DEGREE OF
GROWTH
INFESTATION
Aphids
Vegetative stage
No infestation
Reproductive stage
Slight infestation
Harvesting stage
Slight infestation
DISEASES
STAGE OF INFESTATION
DEGREE OF
INFESTATION
White rust
Vegetative stage
No infestation
Reproductive stage
Slight infestation
Harvesting stage
Moderate infestation
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Meteorological Data
The minimum and maximum air temperature during the study period ranged from
23.7 to 26.3 0C and 12.3 to 16.9 0C, respectively while relative humidity ranged from
80.11% to 83.25 % (Table 10). Sunshine duration in the month of January, March and April
was low ranging from 5.0766 to 6.2083 hours, while the rainfall ranges from 00001 to
0042.5 mm (Table 10).
Table 10. Meteorological data for the cropping period
TEMPERATURE (OC) RELATIVE RAINFALL
SUNSHINE
MONTHS MAXIMUM MINIMUM HUMIDITY (mm)
DURATION
(%) (hours)
December 24.2 14.5 80.61 00001 6.295
January 23.7 12.3 80.45 00005 6.0
February 24.3 13.7 80.11 00001 6.3283
March 25.5 16.9 83.16 00025 5.0766
April 26.3 16.32 83.25 0046.5 6.2083
Marketable Cutflowers per Plot(doz)
Effect of variety. Table 10 shows the cutflower yield from the three varieties of
chrysanthemum grown. Results show that “Handsome” and “Pink tube” had significantly
higher yield with means of 5.11 and 4.98 (doz/plot) while “Novo” had the lowest yield
with a mean of 4.84 (doz/plot).
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
These results can be explained Sagalla (2000) pointed that each plant species had a unique
genetic make-up. It determines the yield potential, relative susceptibility to unfavorable
environment, earliness and regularity of bearing, length of productive life, and size and
shape of plants at maturity. She further stated that the internal factor sets the boundaries in
which improvement of yield or quality can be altered by manipulation of environmental
factors.
Table 11. Marketable yield/plot (doz. /m2)
TREATMENT MARKETABLE
YIELD
(doz./m2)
Variety
Pink Tube 4.98ab
Novo 4.84b
Handsome 5.11a
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 5.14
Mukusako-based 4.87
Sunflower-based 4.95
Nature’s Crop 4.94
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Effect of production practice. There were no significant effects observed on the number of
marketable cutflower as affected by different production practices applied on
chrysanthemum as shown in Table 10. Results show that, plants applied with
farmers’ practice produced the highest marketable cutflowers yield of 5.14 dozens per
1x2.5 cm plot.
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effects observed between the
different varieties of chrysanthemum and the production practices applied.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Non-Marketable Cutflower per Plot(doz.)
Effect of variety. There were no significant effects of variety on the
non-marketable yield per 1x2.5 cm plot. However, “Novo” has the highest volume of non-
marketable cutflowers among the three varieties grown.
Table 12. Non-marketable yield/plot (doz. /m2)
TREATMENT NON-MARKETABLE
YIELD
(doz./m2)
Variety
Pink Tube 0.40
Novo 0.55
Handsome 0.31
Production Practice
Farmers’ practice 0.24
Mukusako-based 0.55
Sunflower-based 0.43
Nature’s Crop 0.47
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Effect of production practices. There were no significant effects of the different production
practices on the non-marketable yield per 1x2.5 cm plot. However, plants that were applied
with mukusako have the highest non-marketable cutflower yield per plot with a mean of
0.55 dozen.
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effects between the different
chrysanthemum varieties and the different production practices on the number of non-
marketable cutflower harvested per 1x2.5 cm plot.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
a
b
c
Plate 1. Compost preparation with (a) the reasearcher and (b, and c) his siblings.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Plate 2. Overview of the experimental area at one month from transplanting of rooted
cuttings.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Plate 3. Overview of the chrysanthemum plants during flower bud formation stage.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Pink tube
Handsome
Novo
Plate 4. Overview of the various chrysanthemum varieties grown in the study at
flowering stage.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Plate 5. Harvesting and packaging of the chrysanthemum cutflowers.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Table 13 Cost and return analysis
TREATMENT MARKETABLE GROSS EXPENSES
NET
ROCE RANK
YIELD
SALES
(P)
PROFIT
(%)
(doz)
(P)
(P)
Farmer’s
Practice
Pink tube
15.26
534.1
457.08
77.02
16.85 3
Novo
15.25
533.75
457.08
76.67
16.77 4
Handsome
15.75
787.5
457.08
330.42
72.29 1
Mukusako-
based
Pink tube
15.26
534.1
445.42
58.68
13.17 5
Novo
13.66
478.1
445.42
2.68
0.60
12
Handsome
14.92
746
445.42
270.58
60.62 2
Sunflower-
based
Pink tube
14.75
354
345.42
8.50
Novo
2.46
10
14.58
349.92
345.42
4.5
Handsome
1.30
11
15.25
366
345.42
20.58
5.96
7
Nature’s Crop-
based
Pink tube
14.5
348
337.92
10.08
2.98
9
Novo
14.58
349.92
337.92
12
3.55
8
Handsome
15.34
368.16
337.92
30.24
8.94
6
Note: Selling price per dozen during harvest was P 50.00 for A (medium), P35.00 for A
(short), and P20.00 for Class B.
While P1-2.00 for chrysanthemum damaged by white rust.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Table 14. List of inputs in the study
INPUTS
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
TOTAL VALUE
A. Material Cost
4,4334
.60/cutting
2,600
I. Labor Cost
a. Land practice
24 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
240.00
b. Transplanting
24 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
240.00
cuttings and wire
net installation
c. Fertilizer
10 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
100.00
application
d. Irrigation
37 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
370.00
e. Disbudding
2 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
20.00
f. Weeding
3 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
30.00
g. Pinching
2 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
20.00
h. Harvesting
2 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
20.00
i. Packaging
2 hrs.
10.00/hrs.
20.00
TOTAL
3660.00
B. Fixed Cost
Grab hoe
1
250
25
Knapsack sprayer
1
1500
150.00
Wire net
2 rolls
95/roll
190.00
TOTAL
365.00
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Table 15. Additional expenses per treatment
INPUTS
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
TOTAL VALUE
Farmer’s Practice
I.Fertilizer
a.Complete
2.5 kg
30.00/kg
75.00
b.Urea
3.5 kg
24.00/kg
84.00
c.Chicken
5 kg
1.80/kg
9.00
manure
II. Pesticides
a.Karate
100ml
68.00
68.00
b.Kumulus
½ kg
150.00
150.00
TOTAL
365.00
Mukusako-based
Mukusako
5 li
60.00/li
300.00
Liquid
Rice hull
1 ½ sack
20/ sack
30.00
TOTAL
330.00
Sunflower-based
Rice hull
1 ½ sack
20/sack
30.00
TOTAL
30.00
Available
Organic Fertilizer
3 kg
2.5/kg
7.50
(Siglat)
TOTAL
7.50
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The study was conducted to determine appropriate and suitable organic products for the
production of quality chrysanthemum cutflower; establish a pre-production/production and
postharvest management systems in the organic production of chrysanthemum cut flower;
and determine the economics of using the different organic production practices in
chrysanthemum cut flower production, using three common varieties grown for cut flower
production under La Trinidad Benguet condition. The study was conducted at the BSU
Ornamental Horticulture Research Area, La Trinidad Benguet from December 2012 to
March 2013.
Among the varieties used ‘Pink tube’ and ‘Handsome’ produced more number of leaves,
earliest to attain 0.5 cm flower bud size, and the fastest flower development from flower
bud formation to harvesting stage. ‘Handsome’ produced bigger flowers and a high
cutflower yield but was slightly comparable to ‘Pink tube’.
On the effect of different production practices used, results showed that plants applied with
sunflower-based practices numerically promoted the production of taller plants; more
number of leaves produced but was slightly comparable to plant applied with the farmers’
practice. Plants applied with mukusako-based practice produced thicker stems and bigger
flowers at flowering. Application of sunflower-based practices reduces the number of days
from transplanting to 0.5 cm flower bud size; while flower development from 0.5 cm bud
size to harvesting stage was significantly reduced with the application of the farmer’s
practice.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Significant interaction effects were observed between the three varieties and the different
organic production practices on the number of leaves at flowering, number of days from
transplanting to 0.5 cm bud size, flower development from 0.5 cm flower bud size to
harvesting; and on flower sizes. ‘Handsome’ applied with sunflower-based and Nature’s
Crop-based practices produced the highest number of leaves per plant. ‘Novo’ applied with
farmer’s practice produced the biggest flowers; but it was the latest to attain 0.5cm flower
bud size and the latest to reach the harvestable stage (50% anthesis).
There were no significant interactions between the three mum varieties and the different
production practices on the final height at flowering, stem thickness, cutflower stem length
at harvest, marketable yield per plot, and the non-marketable yield per plot.
Conclusion
Based on the results presented and discussed, results showed that ‘Pink Tube’ and
‘Handsome’ were the best performing chrysanthemum varieties tested for organic
chrysanthemum cutflower production since both produced more number of leaves, the
earliest to produce 0.5 cm flower buds and had faster flower development to harvesting
stage. ‘Handsome’ produced bigger flowers and a high cutflower yield that gave the highest
return on cash expenses of 60.62 %, while ‘Novo’ gave the lowest cutflower quality and
the lowest return on cash expenses of 0.60 % among the three varieties grown.
The use of sunflower-based production practice promoted the production of more number
of leaves per plant; earliest to attain 0.5 cm bud size, while mukusako-based production
practices promoted the production of bigger flowers.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
Recommendation
Based on the findings ‘Handsome’ applied with mukusako-based production practices is
recommended for organic chrysanthemum cutflower production since it produced thicker
stems, bigger flowers and had a high ROCE of 60.62%
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
LITERATURE CITIED
BAUTISTA, O.K., H.V VALMAYOR, P.C. TABORA JR., R.R ESPINO, J. B.
SANGALANG. 1983. Introduction to tropical Horticulture. UPLB, Los Banos, Laguna.
P.231.
FOX O. 1985. Growing Lilies. Great Britain: Croom Helm Pub. P.33.
FRENCH. G. and A.C. ALSBURG. 1989. Comparison of controlled fertilizer for the
production of Rhodendron “Anna Rave Whitney”. Hort. Sci. 15:19.
GARDNER, V. R. 1949. Basic Horticulture. New York: The Macmillan Book
Co.P.146.
GAUTAM, H. 2007. Dictionary of Agriculture. Rajat Publication New Delhi. P.202.
GENOVE,J.2006.Growth, Flowering and Yield of the Nile (Agapanthus albus) as
Affected by Different Organic Materials.BS. Thesis (Unpub.) Benguet State University,
La Trinidad, Benguet.P.4.
JANICK, J. 1972. Horticultural Science. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman Pub, and Co.
Pp.158, 164-165, 328-329.
LADILAD, A.C. 1996. A Manual of Chrysanthemum Production in the Highlands.
LARSON, R. A. 1980. Introduction to Floriculture. New York: Academic Press Inc.
P 9.
MARSHALL, C. and G. SAGA. 1976 Plant Structure, Function and Adaptation.
New York: MacMillan Press, Ltd. Pp. 261-262
MENDIOLA, N. B. 1976. Principles of Crop Production on Southeast Asia.
Caloocan City: United Circulation, Inc. P. 71.
MCVICKAR, M.H. 1970. Using Commercial Fertilizers. Illinois: The Interstate
Pub. and Printers Corp. P201.
PCARRD. 1995. The Ornamental Horticulture. Philippine Council for Agriculture,
Forestry and Natural Resource Research and Development, Laguna:Departmentof Science
and Technology, Los Banos. ISBN 971-20-031-4. P.1.
PEARS, P. 2005.The Complete Guide to Natural and Chemical-free Gardening.
Rondal’s Illustrated Encyclopedia of Organic Gardening.DK Publishing Inc. New
York.P.61.
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013
REHM, K. G. 1994. Fertilizer Management and Technology. Houston, Texas:
Academic Press,Inc. Pp.179-188.
SAGALLA, L. 2000. Analyses of different formulated compost and their effects in
the performance of chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemum morifolium). MS Thesis. La Trinidad
Benguet. P.13.
SCOTTS, C. 1996. Growing medium and Fertilizer regime influence growth and
essential oil content of rosemary .Hort. Sci. 26:91.
VELASCO, L.B. 2000. Response of Three Greenhouse Grown Spray Chrysanthemum
Varieties to Planting Spacing. Benguet State Univiersity, La Trinidad, Benguet.
WATTS, R.L. 1972. Vegetable Gardening. New York: Orange Jude Pub. P.156.
YOKOMORI, .M. 2011. Farmers in Benguet Practice Savers Technology. Rianella
Printing Press (Baguio City, Philippines).
Organic Production Practices for Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemm morifolium) Cutflower
Production | DOGYANG, CLEJE AIL B. MAYS 2013