BIBLIOGRAPHY GOLINGAB, LANELYN B. MAY 2009. ...

BIBLIOGRAPHY
GOLINGAB, LANELYN B. MAY 2009. Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted
after Lettuce, Garden Pea, Broccoli and Carrot. Benguet State University, La Trinidad,
Benguet

Adviser: Silvestre L. Kudan, Ph.D.
ABSTRACT

The study was conducted at the Balili area, Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet from August 2008 to April 2009 to evaluate the growth and yield of
carrot planted after garden pea, romaine lettuce, broccoli and carrot; determine any
allelophatic effect between carrot, broccoli, lettuce or carrot followed by carrot and
determine the profitability of carrot planted after the other crops.

Planting carrot after romaine lettuce consistently surpassed the growth and yield
of carrot that followed after carrot, broccoli and garden pea. In profitability, carrot
planted after romaine lettuce obtained 169.70% return on investment or Php1.70 for
every peso invested in the production. On the other hand, carrot planted after carrot,
broccoli and garden pea had similar growth and yield performance which were greatly
reduced compared from those carrot planted after romaine lettuce. In profitability, carrot
after carrot obtained 43.44% return on investment or Php0.43 for every peso spent in the
production while carrot after broccoli or after garden pea had negative ROI of 15.56%
and 31.62%, respectively.

The plant survival showed significantly lower from the carrot planted after garden
pea which was confirmed in the controlled study where parts of the plants (garden pea,
carrot, romaine lettuce and broccoli) were soaked in water then used to water the planted
seeds in seedling trays. Phytotoxicity may have affected the growth and yield of carrot
planted after carrot, broccoli and garden pea.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Bibiography . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
iii

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
MATERIALS AND METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15

The First Crops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15

Leaf Length (cm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
Number of Leaves Produced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
Length of Roots (cm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
Weight of Big Roots (kg) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
Weight of Medium Roots (kg) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
18
Weight of Small Roots (kg) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
Weight of Lumpia (kg) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20
Total Yield (kg) . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20
Percentage Survival (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
Percentage Germination (%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Percentage of Cracked, Malformed and Forked Roots (%) . . . . . . . .
23
Return on Investment (%). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23
iii

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION . . . . . . . . . . . .
25

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
25

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26

Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
26
LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
27
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29

iv

INTRODUCTION

Succession cropping refers to the planting of two or more crops one after another
on the same piece of land. The main objective is to optimize the use of land for better
productivity.

Philippines is an agricultural country but at this time, land availability for
production is getting smaller. In order to increase profit from crop production, proper
cropping system, intensified use of land and efficient labor management become a matter
of necessity. Relatively, majority of the people in the Cordillera are engaged in vegetable
production but there is a limited area for expansion.

Recent studies showed that the profitability of crop production is determined by
cropping system employed by farmers. Although, these systems are influenced by
several factors such as environmental, biological, some old practices like relay cropping
or succession cropping are common to most farmers. However, such practices are
usually done regardless of the compatibilities of the crops being planted.

Moreover, several farmers listening to the radio program of the BSU Extension
Services were asking, why carrot has a poor yield when planted after garden pea. It is
then a worthwhile endeavor to verify the observation of farmers that planting carrot after
garden pea is not good is indeed true.

There had been few studies and limited information regarding the compatibility of
crops for succession cropping. Information gathered from this study will help the farmers
select crops that are compatible with carrot for increased productivity. This will not
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

2
benefit the farmers only but also the extension workers, researchers and the following
generations who will be involved in vegetable production.

The study was conducted for the following objectives:

1. to evaluate the growth and yield of carrot planted after lettuce, broccoli, garden
pea and carrot;

2. to determine any allelophatic effects between lettuce, broccoli, garden pea or
carrot followed by carrot; and

3. to determine the profitability of carrot planted after the other crops to be
studied.

This study was conducted at Balili area from August 2008 to April 2009.
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Description of the Crops

Carrot. Carrot is a biennial plant grown for its edible, fleshy root which is usually
orange in color, aromatic and sweet. Carrot (Daucus carota), a member of Umbelliferae
is believed to be found worldwide, either as a cultivated or a weedy, wild plant with long,
dry roots. Wild roots which grow to 5 feet high, can be seen along roadsides and other
waste areas where they produce flattish clusters (umbles) of small, white flowers. These
white flower clusters give the wild carrots common name of Queen Anne’s lace (Bayer et
al., 2002).
Garden pea. Martin and Leonard (1970) described garden peas to be sweeter and
more wrinkled than field peas. The pea is annual herbaceous plant with a whitish bloom
on the surface. The leaf consists of one to three pairs of leaflets and terminal brached
tendril. The pods are about 3 inches long and contain 4 to 9 seeds. Furthermore, most
garden peas have white flowers. The blossoms are in a group. Pods are inflated, 4 to 8
centimeter long and varying in shape (Knott and Deanon, 1967).
Additionally, Benton (1970) describe that the stem of the pea plant are hallow and
climbing. Leaves are pinnately compound ending in tendrils that enable the plant to
climb and with large leafy stipules at their bases. The flowers are butterfly like, white or
purple, about 1 inch across; each has nine united stamens and one free stamen.
Lettuce. Lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) is an annual crop of the family Compositae,
and is extensively cultivated for its crisp tender leaves used as salad. There are four
major botanical varieties of lettuce. The first major variety of lettuce is head or cabbage
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

4
lettuce (var. capitata) with a dense leafy head similar to that of cabbage. The two forms
of head lettuce are the butter head which has a soft waxy leaves, and the crisp head,
which has a crispier, more brittle leaves. The second major variety is leafy lettuce (var.
Crispa) which has looser, lesser compact leaf heads. The third major variety is the
Romain lettuce (var. Longifolia) which has long shoehorn shaped leaves. The fourth
major variety is the asparagus lettuce (var. Asparangira) which has a thick edible stems
but is rarely grown in the U.S (Collier, 1964).
Broccoli. Broccoli (Brassica oleraceae, Italica group), form of cabbage of the
mustard family (Brassicae). Broccoli is a fast-growing, upright, branched, annual plant,
600-900 mm (24-35 inches) tall that bears dense clusters of flower buds at the ends of the
central axis and the branches. The flavor of broccoli resembles that of cabbage but it is
somewhat milder. Fresh broccoli should be dark in color, with firm stalks and compact
bud clusters, as a vegetable it is served as raw or cooked (Goulka and Safra, 1997).

Soil and Climatic Requirements
Garden pea. Purseglove (1968) stated that peas require a cool, relatively humid
climate with temperature of 55-65oF. Garden pea seldom yield well in tropics below
4,000 ft or when grown in cool weather, as in India, where they are grown as a winter
crop. Hot dry weather interferes with pod setting. Peas require a reasonable level of soil
fertility and a pH of 5.5 to 6.5. Pea crops cannot tolerate very acid soils or water logging.
Similarly, Chapman and Carter (1976) reported that peas are best adapted to well
drained, clay loam soils. They tolerate soil pH range: the optimum pH is 6.5 but
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

5
moderate acidity (pH as low as 5.5) is tolerated. In some areas, limiting to raise the soil
pH to 6.0 maybe necessary for profitable yields.
Pea is cool season crops and thrives best when the weather is cool and when
ample moisture is available. The young plant will tolerate considerable cold and light
frosts. If the crop is planted late, maturity takes place when the temperature is too high
for optimum growth and yield (Ware, 1937).
Lettuce. Lettuce can be grown on many kinds of soils such as clay loams and
muck or peat. It reaches its highest development on sandy loams and silt loams, well
supplied with organic matter and on good-well-drained much or peat soil. However,
ample sunlight, uniformly cool nights and plenty of moisture are essential for well-
developed lettuce heads. High temperature leads to inferior quality and tend to encourage
the development of the flowering stems rather than the formation of leaf heads. Good
soil moisture is another essential factor (McCollum, 1924).
Carrot. Carrot grows on a deep, loose, loamy or clay loam soil. Experiments in
Virginia and New York indicated that soil pH of 6.5 gives maximum yield and extremely
low yield at 5.2 (Thompson and Kelly, 1959). Similarly, Knott and Deanon (1969) stated
that carrot grow best on soil pH ranging from 6.0 to 6.8 in a soil with deep, friable nature
free of debris and rocks.
On the other hand, Kinoshita (1972) also cited that carrot requires abundant and
well distributed moisture supply. Moroever, Work and Carew (1945) added that
inadequate irrigation leads to storage root misshaping, forking or branching with tough
texture. Knott and Deanon (1969) explained that on all types of soil, irrigation and
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

6
adequate rain is necessary to keep the plant grow rapidly and to promote uniform and
tender roots up to the harvest time.
Tindal (1983) mentioned that carrot is sensitive to temperature fluctuations.
Furthermore, he stated that carrot planted in soils having high temperature encourage the
production of short roots. In excess of 28 centigrade, seed germination was severely
affected and root produced were pale yellow and fibrous with reduced beta-carotene.
Broccoli. Broccoli grows best in cool weather and in fertile, well-drained, amply
watered soil. It can endure light frost. Plants are started under glass and transplanted
outdoors for summer harvest, or they are planted directly outdoors for autumn harvest
(Bayer et al., 2002).
Moreover, Ranson (1998) stated that broccoli grows best at temperature between
10oC and 25oC and commercial culture takes place primarily in coastal areas with
moderate climates.

Importance of the Crops
Garden pea. Purseglove (1968) mentioned that peas are important garden and
field crop throughout the temperate regions, where they are grown for fresh peas and
which are also canned for fresh peas and for dry peas. Further, Rachie (1979) reported
that legumes are crucial to the balance of nature for many are able to convert nitrogen gas
from the air into ammonia, soluble form of nitrogen which is readily utilized by plants.

Additionally, Bawang (2006) reported that garden pea is important crop in
Benguet and some area of Mt. Province. In fact, it is one of the top 10 important cash
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

7
crops of these growing area and is a high-value crop commanding a price per kilo of from
Php0.35-Php0.50 or higher during periods of scarcity.

Lettuce. Lettuce is widely cultivated crop and leading vegetable with high market
deman. It is considered as one of the most popular crop due to its nutritive value. It
contains 95% water and it is a good source of vitamins and minerals (Knott and Deanon,
1967).

Moreover, Bawang (2006) reported that lettuce is one of the major vegetable
crops grown in Benguet and in Mt. Province.

Carrot. McCollum and Ware (1975) reported that historically, the carrot was used
primarily for medicinal purposes and was not generally used as a food plant until the
beginning of the 20th century. Carrots are an excellent source of Vitamin A and a good
source of Vitamins B, C and G (B2).

Moreover, Bawang (2006) mentioned that carrot is the third important crops in
the Cordillera Vegetable Industry and some area in the country. It has the highest return
on investment (ROI) among the major vegetables in the industry. In addition, it is a
heavy toner crop that in terms of land area, it maybe the most beneficial as to the weight
of produce per unit area.

Broccoli. Divinagracia (2005) reported that cultivars of Brassica oleraceae such
as broccoli, cauliflower and cabbage are commercially important vegetable grown in the
high elevated areas of Mt. Province, Kanlaoan, Negros Occidental, Cebu and Mindanao.
They are also grown in Ilocos region (374 ha in Ilocos Sur, 18 ha in Ilocos Norte).
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

8

Moroever, Bawang (2006) stated that broccoli are high-value crops and are priced
quite high. During periods of scarcity, a kilo may cost from Php50.00 to as high as
Php120.00.

Succession Cropping

Earlier, Thatcher (1923) stated that in succession cropping, the first crops affect
the yield of the following crops either beneficial or deleterious. Moreover, Sabarth
(1970) stated that a plant may enhance the growth and yield of another by adding
nutrients to the soil.

Relatively, Delorit (1959) stated that a well-planned crop rotation conserves,
improves and increases the productivity of the soil rather than depleting the fertility over
a period of time.

Furthermore, Cevallos (1933) stated that planting of different crops in succession
cropping on a piece of land merely prevents the exhaustion of any particular plant food
from the soil. He also indicated that when successive crops of one kind are grown on the
same area, those lements which are msore consumed become exhausted; hence the land
becomes weak and sticky.

Bawang and Victor (1982) found that suitable succession crop after cabbage,
white potato and cucumber is carrot. While after bush bean and carrot is white potato
and cucumber maybe successioned after cucumber, cabbage, carrot and white potato. In
addition, garden pea maybe planted after white potato, garden pea and cabbage. They
also found that cropping patterns like carrot-carrot and carrot-Chinese cabbage causes
tremendous reduction in yield.
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

9

A reduction in both crop yield and quality often occurs when the same crop or its
related species are cultivated on the same soil successively. This phenomenon is called
soil sickness. It is a complicated natural phenomenon and the causes are not yet fully
known. Various factors such as the build up of pests in soil, disorder in physico-chemical
properties of soil, autotoxicity (special kind of allelopathy) and other unknown factors are
believed to be involved in soil sickness (Narwal, 1999).

Moroever, the author reported that pea is vulnerable to soil sickness and there was
50% decrease in the yield in the second cropping. Furthermore, the residual nutrient
solution after culture of pea not only inhibited the growth of pea, but also showed
significant phytotoxicity to such crops such as carrot, eggplant, bean and Chinese
cabbage.

Autotoxic Substances of Pea

Concerning the autotoxic substances, Hatsuda et al (1963) isolated vanillic acid
and p-coumaric acid from the water extract of pea root. The phytotoxicity of these
compound is well-known.

Similarly, Vaughan and Ord (1991) cultured pea seedlings under a xenic
condition and collected root exudates with a XAD-4 resin column. They identified
ferulic, vanillic, p-coumaric and p-hydroxy-benzoic acids from 1 fresh weight of roots
during a 14-41 culture period were reported to be 5 and .04 mg, respectively. They also
found out that greatest phytotoxicity of root exudates appeared just before the beginning
of flowering but only a limited amount of phenolic acids such as benzoic acid were
detected in the exudates. It was unlikely that phytotoxicity was mainly due to phenolic
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

10
acids. Phytotoxicity of phenolic acids to pea was greatly modified by the nutrient status
of growth medium. In Houghland nutrient solution containing only 10% of its normal
nitrate content, 1 um concentration of vanillic, p-hydroxy-benzoic and p-coumaric acids
all inhibited growth of roots and greatly modified their morphology. The effects of
phenolic acids on protein synthesis in excise root segment and vanillic, p-coumaric and p-
hydroxybenzoic acids at .5 mm considerably inhibited protein synthesis.

Takijma and Hayashi (1959) fractioned the residual solution after hydroponic
culture of pea into several fractions and found that phytotoxicity in root exudates was
mainly due to acidic and neutral substances accumulated in the nutrient solution.

Additionally, Hirayoshi et al (1962) found that the phytotoxicity in root exudates
was mainly due to acidic substances and at least two phenolic acids were present in the
exudates but he failed to identify them.
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

11

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Materials

The materials used were carrot seeds (Kuroda Max), lettuce seeds, broccoli seeds,
garden pea seeds, watering cans and organic fertilizers such as compost, measuring tools,
peg, garden equipment and record book.

Methods

Experimental design and treatments. The experimental layout followed the
Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with 3 replications. The treatments were
as follows:

Code

T1 = Romain lettuce-carrot

T2 = Garden pea-carrot

T3 = Broccoli-carrot

T4 = Carrot-carrot

Land preparation. Twelve plots measuring 1m x m5 were prepared for the study.
The plots were applied with compost of grasses, cattle and horse manure and sunflower
as base dress. No synthetic dry fertilizer was used as the area is under conversion to
organic systems of production.

Seedling production. Two hundred Romaine lettuce seeds and broccoli seeds
were sown in a seedling trays filled with sterilized soil media. The seedlings were
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

12
transplanted 3 weeks from emergence. Except the lettuce and broccoli, garden pea seeds
and carrot seeds were planted directly to their assigned plots.
Crop maintenance. Irrigation, hilling-up in garden pea and carrot, trellising in
garden pea were done on the appropriate schedule and stages.

Data Gathered

The following data were gathered from the various crops:

1. Plant height (cm). The final height of peas was measured from ten sample
plants after the last pod harvest and also the lettuce, broccoli and carrot during harvest.
2. Weight of marketable yield (kg). This was the weight of the marketable yield
from the first to the last harvest from garden pea, marketable plants from Romaine lettuce
and broccoli and the marketable roots of carrot classified as big, medium and small.

3. Non-marketable yield (kg). This was the weight of harvest that was not sold in
the market due to damage and malformation.

Planting carrot. Immediately after harvesting the Romaine lettuce, broccoli,
garden pea and carrot, the plots were applied with compost and mixed with the soil as
fertilizer base dress.

Shallow furrows across the plots at 15 cm distance was made through the use of
stick and three seeds of carrot. “Kuroda Max” was dropped at 8 cm spacing then covered
with thin soil. In each plot, there were 29 furrows across the plots and seven rows of
plants along the plots which means 203 plants per plot.

Irrigation. After planting the seeds, the plots were irrigated and then regularly
done twice a week up to the termination of the study.
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

13

Thinning. Three weeks after the emergence, the plants were thinned leaving only
one plant each hill.

Hilling-up. One month after planting, the plant was hilled-up to cover the base of
the plant to avoid exposing the growing roots to sunlight, to cover growing weeds and to
fix the plot so that irrigation water will not flow to the canals.

The data gathered, tabulated and subjected to separation test using Duncan’s
Multiple Range Test (DMRT) were:

1. Leaf length (cm). Ten sample plants were uprooted at random and the leaves
were measured from the base of the petiole to the tip of the longest leaves.

2. Number of leaves produced. The leaves of ten sample plants were counted and
divided by ten to get the average leaves per plant.

3. Length of roots (cm). Ten sample roots from each plot was measured with
Tailor’s tape measure from the shoulder of the root to the tip then the average length per
root was computed.

4. Weight of big root (kg). This was the weight of big roots harvested per plot
following the farmer’s practice of classification. Roots measuring 15.0 to 20.0 cm long
or weighing 150 g and above was classified as big roots.

5. Weight of medium size roots (kg). Roots that are smaller than the big roots
were separated and weighed. Roots measuring 13.0 to 14.9 cm in length or weighing 80
to 149 g was classified as medium roots.

6. Weight of small roots (kg). This was the weight of roots which has smaller
than 13.0 cm in length or weighing 40 to 79 g.
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

14

7. Weight of “lumpia” (kg). This was the weight of roots per plot that were
cracked forked, malformed, very small and with rots.

8. Total yield (kg). This was the weight of all the roots harvested per plot,
marketable and non-marketable.

9. Return on investment (ROI). This was taken by using the formula:

Gross Sales – Total Expenses Per Plot

ROI (%) = x 100
Total Expenses Per Plot

10. Percentage germination. After harvesting the first crops, the plant parts were
chopped, soaked in water then used for watering the planted seeds of carrot in seedling
trays. This was taken using the formula:

Number of Seeds Germinated

% Germination = x 100

Number of Seeds Sown

11. Percentage survival. This was taken using the formula:

Number of Plants Harvested/Plot

% Survival = x 100

Number of Plants/Plot (203)

12. Percentage of cracked, forked, malformed roots. This was taken using the
formula:

Number of Cracked, Forked,
% of Cracked, Forked, Malformed Roots/Plot

Malformed Roots = x 100

Total Number of Roots/Plot
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

15
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The First Crops

Table 1 presents the plant heights, marketable and non-marketable yields obtained
from the different crops planted on the plots first before the carrot. The data specifically
from carrot provided the benchmark for the succession crop, which is carrot.

Leaf Length

Table 2 shows that there were no significant differences in the leaf length of
carrots planted immediately after the romaine lettuce, garden pea, broccoli and carrot.
This means that the leaf length of carrot was not affected by any of the first crop.

Table 1. Plant height, root length of carrot and the marketable and non-marketable yields
from the different crops

NON-

PLANT
ROOT
MARKETABLE MARKETABLE
CROP
HEIGHT
LENGTH
YIELD
YIELD
(cm)
(cm)
(kg)
(kg)
Broccoli
48.05
-
9.00
0.443
Romaine
25.06
-
4.07
0.564
Garden pea
195.64
-
2.78
0.105
Carrot
65.85
12.30
12.65
6.400
Note: The marketable yield of carrot consists of big roots (7.0 kg), medium-sized roots
(3.45 kg) and small-sized roots (2.20 kg).

Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

16
Table 2. Leaf length (cm) of carrot planted after the different crops
TREATMENT
MEAN

Romaine lettuce – carrot
52.42a
Garden pea – carrot
46.21a
Broccoli – carrot
42.14a
Carrot – carrot
43.01a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT

Number of Leaves Produced

As presented in Table 3, carrot planted after romaine lettuce produced
significantly more leaves than those carrot planted after garden pea, broccoli and carrot.

The significantly reduced number of leaves from carrot planted after garden pea,
broccoli and carrot may be an allelophatic interaction effect. Bawang and Victor (1982)
reported that planting carrot after carrot is not good. On the other hand, planting carrot
after garden pea was reported to be affected by garden pea (Narwal, 1999).

Table 3. Number of carrot produced as affected by the first crops
TREATMENT
MEAN

Romaine lettuce – carrot
12.77a
Garden pea – carrot
11.50b
Broccoli – carrot
10.50b
Carrot – carrot
11.13b
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

17
Length of Roots

As presented in Table 4, carrot planted after romaine lettuce produced
significantly longer roots than those carrot planted after garden pea, broccoli and carrot,
which have similar root lengths.

The root length of carrot planted during the benchmarking as shown in Table 1
was 12.30 cm which did not differ from the roots of carrot planted after the garden pea,
broccoli and carrot. It is however interesting to observe that the carrot when planted after
the romaine lettuce produced significantly longer roots. This may imply that the romaine
lettuce has no residues and root exudates that will inhibit the growth of roots in carrot,
instead enhanced root elongation.

Weight of Big Roots

Table 5 shows the weight of big roots obtained from the succession cropping.
Again, planting carrot after Romaine lettuce produced significantly heavier weight of big
roots while those that followed after carrot, garden pea and broccoli had similar weight of
big roots.

Table 4. Length of roots of carrot planted after the different crops (cm)
TREATMENT
MEAN

Romaine lettuce – carrot
15.08a
Garden pea – carrot
13.30b
Broccoli – carrot
12.41b
Carrot – carrot
12.54b
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

18
Table 5. Weight of big roots planted after the different crops (kg)
TREATMENT
MEAN

Romaine lettuce – carrot
8.383a
Garden pea – carrot
1.554b
Broccoli – carrot
0.323b
Carrot – carrot
2.417b
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT

In the first planting, the weight of big roots was 7.0 kg as presented in Table 1.
When carrot was planted after Romaine lettuce, the weight of big roots slightly increased
while those followed after carrot, garden pea and broccoli produced tremendously lower
big roots. It might be that the significantly more leaves of carrot after Romaine lettuce as
presented in Table 3 contributed to the significantly heavier big roots. Moreover, the
higher survival of plants following Romaine lettuce (Table 10) might have also
contributed to the heavier big roots. Meanwhile, the greatly reduced weight of big roots
after garden pea, carrot and broccoli might be an effect of allelopathy as reported by
Narwal (1999) and Bawang and Victor (1982).

Weight of Medium Roots

As presented in Table 6, carrot planted after romaine lettuce produced slightly
higher weight of medium roots than those carrots planted after garden pea, broccoli and
carrot. This result may suggest that medium-sized roots were not affected by romaine
lettuce, carrot, broccoli and garden pea.

Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

19
Table 6. Weight of medium roots of carrot planted after the different crops (kg)
TREATMENT
MEAN

Romaine lettuce – carrot
6.105a
Garden pea – carrot
1.613b
Broccoli – carrot
2.417ab
Carrot – carrot
3.150ab
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT

Weight of Small Roots

Table 7 shows the weight of small roots. Statistical analysis revealed slight
differences in the weight of small roots when planted after the different crops used in the
study. However, carrot planted after garden pea consistently produced the lowest in
medium and small roots, which was reported by Narwal (1999) to have allelopathic
interaction effect.

Table 7. Weight of small roots
TREATMENT
MEAN

Romaine lettuce – carrot
1.4693ab
Garden pea – carrot
0.4367b
Broccoli – carrot
2.0750a
Carrot – carrot
2.633a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

20
Weight of “Lumpia”

No significant differences were obtained from the weight of “lumpia” on roots
with some defects such as forking, cracking, rotting and very small (Table 8). This
means that all the treatments studied incurred defects in the roots.

Total Yield

Table 9 presents the total yield obtained from carrot planted after Romaine
lettuce, garden pea, broccoli and carrot. Statical analysis shows that carrot planted after
Romaine lettuce produced significantly higher yield over those planted after carrot,
broccoli and garden pea which showed similar total yield.

As shown in Table 1, the total yield of carrot during the first planting was 19.05
kg which was the same when planted after Romaine lettuce, which may imply that there
was no phytotoxicity between lettuce and carrot. The significantly reduced yield of
carrot when planted after garden pea, broccoli and carrot may indicate an allelopathic
interactions between the first and the succeeding crop which is carrot. As was reviewed
by Narwal (1999), the residual nutrient solution after culture of pea not only inhibited the

Table 8. Weight of “lumpia” roots of carrot planted after the different crops (kg)
TREATMENT
MEAN
Romaine lettuce – carrot
3.404a
Garden pea – carrot
2.658a
Broccoli – carrot
1.733a
Carrot – carrot
1.553a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

21
Table 9. Total yield of carrot planted after the different crops (kg)
TREATMENT
MEAN

Romaine lettuce – carrot
19.181a
Garden pea – carrot
6.362b
Broccoli – carrot
6.548b
Carrot – carrot
9.753b
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT

growth of pea, but also showed significant phytotoxicity to such crops as carrot, eggplant,
bean and Chinese cabbage.

Percentage Survival

Table 10 presents the percentage of survival of carrot planted after the different
crops. Carrot planted after Romaine lettuce obtained the highest percentage survival but
did not differ from those planted after carrot and broccoli, all of which significantly

Table 10. Percentage survival of carrot planted after the different crops
TREATMENT
MEAN

Romaine lettuce – carrot
76.52a
Garden pea – carrot
32.67b
Broccoli – carrot
58.14a
Carrot – carrot
67.16a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT

Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

22
surpassed the survival of carrot planted after garden pea. This observation agree to the
report of Narwal (1999) that the residual nutrient solution after culture of pea also
showed significant phytotoxicity to carrot.

Percentage Germination

Table 11 shows that there were significant differences among the percentage
germination in the controlled experiment where the plant parts were chopped, soaked in
water then used for watering the planted seeds in seedling trays.

Obviously, carrot seeds watered with the garden pea solution obtained the lowest
percentage of germination which was significantly lower compared to the lettuce and
broccoli with similar results which was also significantly lower than those seeds watered
with carrot tea solution and those just watered with tap water which have the highest
percentage of germination. This result shows reduction of germination from broccoli and
Romaine lettuce solution but the lowest was obtained when garden pea solution was used.

Table 11. Percentage germination from controlled experiment (%)
TREATMENT
MEAN

Romaine lettuce – carrot
73.33b
Garden pea – carrot
20.33c
Broccoli – carrot
78.67b
Carrot – carrot
93.67a
Control
94.00a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT

Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

23
Percentage of Cracked, Malformed and Forked Roots

The percentage of cracked, malformed and forked roots is shown in Table 12.
Statistical analysis revealed slight differences among the treatments. Carrot planted after
garden pea, produced the highest percentage of defects followed by carrot planted after
broccoli, carrot and Romaine lettuce had the lowest but did not differ significantly. The
lowest percentage of roots with defects from carrot planted after romaine lettuce might
have contributed to the consistently higher marketable roots.

Return on Investment

Table 13 shows the profitability of carrot planted after lettuce, garden pea,
broccoli and carrot. The main factor that affected the return on investment was the labor
cost. The study showed that planting carrot after romaine lettuce obtained 169.70%
return on investment or Php1.69 for every peso invested in the production. Planting
carrot after carrot obtained 43.44% ROI or Php0.43 for every peso spent in the

Table 12. Percentage of cracked, malformed and forked roots
TREATMENT
MEAN

Romaine lettuce – carrot
18.77b
Garden pea – carrot
50.29a
Broccoli – carrot
41.32ab
Carrot – carrot
30.48ab
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level by DMRT
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

24
Table 13. Return on investment in a 15 sq m plot

ROMAINE-
PEA-
BROCCOLI-
CARROT-
ITEM
CARROT CARROT
CARROT
CARROT

A. Marketable yield
47.872
11.111
14.445
24.600
(kg)
937.81
217.66
282.97
481.91
B. Sales (Php)

C. Expenses (Php)
21.66
21.66
21.66
21.66
1. Seeds
35.00
35.00
35.00
35.00
2. Compost
291.06
261.66
278.46
279.30
3. Labor
Total Expenses
347.72
318.32
335.12
335.96
Net Income
590.09
-100.66
-52.15
145.95
ROI (%)
169.70
-31.62
-15.56
43.44
Note: Selling price ranged from Php15.00 to Php30.00 per kilo or an average price of
Php19.59

production. Meanwhile, planting carrot after broccoli obtained a negative ROI of 15.56%
and planting carrot after garden pea obtained the highest loss of 31.62% or Php0.32 for
every peso invested in carrot planted after garden pea.
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

25

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary

The study was conducted at Balili area from August 2008 to April 2009 to
evaluate the growth and yield of carrot planted after garden pea, lettuce, broccoli and
carrot, to determine any allelophatic effect between carrot, broccoli and carrot followed
by carrot and to determine the profitability of carrot planted after the other crops studied.

Results show that planting carrot after romaine lettuce produced more leaves,
longer roots, heavier big roots, medium-sized roots and higher percentage of plant
survival resulting to the heaviest total yield. In most of the data gathered, planting carrot
after carrot, broccoli and garden pea showed similar results except the percentage of plant
survival wherein carrot planted after carrot closely followed the carrot planted after
romaine lettuce. This advantage gave the carrot planted after carrot slightly higher
weight of big, medium and small-sized roots. Apparently, carrot planted after garden pea
had the lowest percentage of plant survival supported by the controlled study on the
percentage of germination.

The economic analysis showed that carrot planted after romaine lettuce obtained
the highest net income with a return on investment of 169.70% or Php1.70 return for
every peso invested in the production. This was followed by planting carrot after carrot
with 43.44% ROI or Php0.43 return for every peso spent in the production. On the other
hand, planting carrot after broccoli and garden pea incurred a loss of Php0.16 and
Php0.32, respectively, for every peso invested in the production of carrot.

Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

26
Conclusion

Based on the results presented and discussed, planting carrot on plots previously
planted with romaine lettuce seem to enhance growth and yield far better than after carrot
while carrot planted after broccoli and garden pea had tremendously reduced growth and
yield which resulted to economic loss that might indicate allelophatic interaction.

Recommendation

It is therefore recommended, that carrot should be planted after romaine lettuce to
avoid phytotoxicity that will affect growth and yield of carrot. It is also recommended
that similar studies on other crops be done to find out compatible succession cropping.
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

27
LITERATURE CITED

BAWANG Sr., F. T. 2006. Production and Postharvest Technologies of Vegetables in
the Mid-elevation and High Altitude Tropics. Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet, Philippines. Pp. 82-84, 129, 135, 159.

BAWANG, F. T. and L. B. VICTOR. 1982. Pattern for Highland Vegetable Crops: A
Terminal Report. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.

BAYER, P., C. CLARK, K. FAIRCHILD, B. FEINBERG, S. C. MONJE, P. RAETHER,
V. F. TOWERS., and G. B. WAFF. 2002. The Encyclopedia Americana.
International Ed. Groiler International Inc. U.S.A. Vol. 5.

BENTON, W. 1970. Encyclopedia Britanica. Encyclopedia Britanica, Inc. Printed in
the U.S.A. 17:493.

CEVALLOS, F. O. 1933. Tropical Horticulture. Oriental Commercial Co., Inc. Phil..
P. 92.

CHAPMAN, R. S. and P. L. CARTER. 1976. Crop Production: Principles and Practices.
W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco. P. 374.

COLLIER, C. 1964. Colliers Encyclopedia, Inc. The Crowell-Colliers Publ., Co.
17:523.

DELORIT, R. D. 1959. Crop Production. Engelwood, New Jersey; Prentice Hall, Inc.
2nd Ed. P. 606.

DIVINAGRACIA, A. V. 2005. BAR Research and Development Digest, Cruciferous
Crops for the Lowlands. Bureau of Agricultural Research – Department of
Agriculture. 7:7.

GOULKA, J. E. and J. E. SAFRA. 1997. The New Encyclopedia Britanica. 15th
Edition. Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc. U.S.A. Vol. 2.

HATSUDA, Y.; T. HAMASAKI; S. NISHIMURA and M. RENBUTSU. 1963.
Biochemical studies on soil sickness 4- on the phytototic substances in pea roots
37:262-264.

HIRAYUSHI, I. K. NISHIKAWA and T. FUJII. 1962. Studies on homologus inhibitors
3-growth inhibitors extracted from culture solution of pea and upland and paddy
rice plants. Bulletin of Agriculture Faculty, Gifu University 16:99-103.

Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

28
KINOSHITA, K. 1972. Vegetable Production in the Subtropics and Tropics. Tokyo,
Japan: Overseas Technical Corporation Agency. P. 272.

KNOTT, J. E. and J. R. DEANON. 1967. Principles of Field Crop Production.
University of the Philippines, Los Baños, Laguna. P. 66.

KNOTT, J. E. and J. R. DEANON. 1969. Vegetable Production in Southeast Asia.
Lipca Press, Los Baños, Laguna: P. 307-315.

MARTIN, H. J. and W. J. LEONARD. 1970. Principles of Field Crop Production. New
York: MacMillan Company. P. 312.

NARWAL, S. S. 1999. Allelopathy Update. Basic and Applied Aspects. Science
Publishers, Inc. U.S.A. Vol. 2. P. 156.

MC COLLUM, P. J. 1924. The Encyclopedia Americana. Internal Edition. 14:258.
University of the Illinois. P. 250.

MC COLLUM and WARE. 1975. Vegetable Crops. The Interstate Printers and
Publishers, Inc. Danville, Illinois.

RACHIE, K. O. 1979. Tropical Legumes. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
P. 5.

RANSON, K. A. 1998. Groiler International Encyclopedia. Groiler, Inc. Danbury,
Connecticut. 1:500.

SABARTH E. 1970. Plant Symbiosis; Biodynamics. Winter. Pp. 13-30.

TAKIJIM, Y. and T. HAYASHI. 1959. Studies on soil sickness in crop. 3- fraction of
the phytotoxic substances in the residual nutrient solution. Agriculture and
Horticulture 34:1573-1574.

THATCHER, R. W. 1923. The effect of one crop on another. Journal of American
Science of Agronomy. 15(8):331-337.

THOMPSON, C. H. and KELLY. 1959. Vegetable Crop. New York and London:
McGrawhill Book Co., Inc. P. 329.

TINDAL, H. D. 1983. Vegetable in the Tropics. London, Mcmillan. Pp. 406-407.

PURSEGLOVE, J. W. 1968. Tropical Crops Dicotyledons. Singapore: Boon Hua
Printing Company. P. 312.

Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

29
VAUGHAN, D. and B. G. ORD. 1991. Extraction of potential allelochemicals and their
effects on root morphology and nutrient content. In: Plant Root Growth (Ed., D.
Atkinson). London: Blackwell Scientific Publications. Pp. 399-421.

WARE, W. G. 1937. Producing Vegetable Crops. 2nd ed. The Interstate Printers and
Publications, Inc. P. 379.

WORK, O. and J. CAREW. 1945. Vegetable Production and Marketing. New York.
John Wiley and Son, Inc. P. 210.

Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

30
APPENDICES

Appendix Table 1. Leaf length (cm)

REPLICATION

TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
Lettuce – carrot
50.71
49.62
56.94
157.27
52.42
Garden pea – carrot
48.44
50.01
40.17
138.62
46.21
Broccoli – carrot
43.69
44.61
38.11
126.41
42.14
Carrot – carrot
44.30
38.05
46.67
129.02
43.01

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN OF
F
TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE
0.05
0.01
Block
2
4.2704
2.1352

Treatment
3
195.5234
65.1744 2.66ns
4.76
9.78
Error
6
147.2240
24.5373
TOTAL
11
347.0178

ns - Not significant

Coefficient of variation = 10.78%
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

31
Appendix Table 2. Number of leaves produced

REPLICATION

TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
Lettuce – carrot
13.30
12.30
12.80
38.40
12.80
Garden pea – carrot
11.80
11.00
11.70
34.50
11.50
Broccoli – carrot
11.10
10.00
10.40
31.50
10.50
Carrot – carrot
10.90
10.00
12.50
33.40
11.13

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN OF
F
TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE
0.05
0.01
Block
2
2.5550
1.2775

Treatment
3
8.2091
2.7363 7.98**
4.76
9.78
Error
6
2.0583
0.3430

TOTAL
11
12.8225

** - Highly significant

Coefficient of variation = 5.10%
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

32
Appendix Table 3. Length of roots (cm)

REPLICATION

TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
Lettuce – carrot
15.77
14.65
14.82
45.24
15.08
Garden pea – carrot
13.54
13.22
13.14
39.90
13.30
Broccoli – carrot
12.73
12.92
11.59
37.24
12.41
Carrot – carrot
13.40
10.86
13.35
37.61
12.53

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN OF
F
TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE
0.05
0.01
Block
2
15.4639
0.9324

Treatment
3
13.5990
38.4589 6.47**
4.76
9.78
Error
6
4.2062
3.2320

TOTAL
11
19.6702

** - Highly significant

Coefficient of variation = 6.28%
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

33
Appendix Table 4. Weight of big roots (kg)

REPLICATION

TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
Lettuce – carrot
10.350
7.548
7.251
25.149
8.383
Garden pea – carrot
1.400
1.576
1.985
4.961
1.650
Broccoli – carrot
0.500
0.300
0.170
0.97
0.320
Carrot – carrot
6.550
0
0.700
7.25
2.420

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN OF
F
TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE
0.05
0.01
Block
2
12.7748
6.3874

Treatment
3
115.3767
38.4589 11.90**
4.76
9.78
Error
6
19.3921
3.2320
TOTAL
11
147.5437

** = Highly significant

Coefficient of variation = 56.73%
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

34
Appendix Table 5. Weight of medium roots (kg)

REPLICATION

TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
Lettuce – carrot
6.790
8.775
2.750
18.315
6.105
Garden pea – carrot
0.700
1.650
2.490
4.840
1.610
Broccoli – carrot
4.000
2.750
0.500
7.250
2.420
Carrot – carrot
5.525
1.250
2.675
9.450
3.150

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN OF
F
TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE
0.05
0.01
Block
2
9.7323
4.8661

Treatment
3
34.5415
11.5138 2.61ns
4.76
9.78
Error
6
26.4937
4.4156
TOTAL
11
70.7676

ns = Not significant

Coefficient of variation = 63.2696%
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

35
Appendix Table 6. Weight of small roots (kg)

REPLICATION

TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
Lettuce – carrot
1.250
1.658
1.500
4.408
1.470
Garden pea – carrot
0.120
0.590
0.600
1.310
0.440
Broccoli – carrot
2.950
2.775
0.500
6.225
2.075
Carrot – carrot
2.350
3.300
2.250
7.900
2.630

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN OF
F
TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE
0.05
0.01
Block
2
1.5088
0.7544

Treatment
3
7.9770
2.6523 5.08**
4.76
9.78
Error
6
3.1341
0.5223
TOTAL
11
12.6000

** = Highly significant

Coefficient of variation = 43.7077%

Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

36
Appendix Table 7. Weight of “lumpia” (kg)

REPLICATION

TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
Lettuce – carrot
1.760
1.950
6.502
10.212
3.404
Garden pea – carrot
1.175
2.900
3.900
7.975
2.660
Broccoli – carrot
2.55
1.850
0.900
5.200
1.730
Carrot – carrot
1.375
1.660
1.625
4.660
1.500

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN OF
F
TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE
0.05
0.01
Block
2
4.8174
2.4087

Treatment
3
6.6608
2.2202
0.89
4.76
9.78
Error
6
14.9974
2.4995
TOTAL
11
26.4757

ns = Not significant

Coefficient of variation = 67.64%
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

37
Appendix Table 8. Total yield

REPLICATION

TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
Lettuce – carrot
20.150
19.931
18.003
58.084
19.360
Garden pea – carrot
31.395
6.716
8.975
19.086
6.362
Broccoli – carrot
10.000
7.675
1.970
19.645
6.548
Carrot – carrot
15.800
6.210
7.250
29.260
9.750

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN OF
F
TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE
0.05
0.01
Block
2
22.8930
11.4465

Treatment
3
325.9673 108.6557 7.69**
4.76
9.78
Error
6
84.7624
14.1270
TOTAL
11
433.6228

** = Highly significant

Coefficient of variation = 35.93%
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

38
Appendix Table 9. Percentage survival

REPLICATION

TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
Lettuce – carrot
77.34
75.37
76.85
229.56
76.52
Garden pea – carrot
35.96
46.79
15.27
98.02
32.67
Broccoli – carrot
75.86
66.50
32.02
174.38
58.13
Carrot – carrot
76.85
68.97
55.67
201.49
67.15

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN OF
F
TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE
0.05
0.01
Block
2
48.5000
24.2500

Treatment
3
9192.3333 3060.1111 114.78**
4.76
9.78
Error
6
160.1666
26.6944
TOTAL
11
9401.0000

** = Highly significant

Coefficient of variation = 7.7694%
Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

39
Appendix Table 10. Percentage germination

REPLICATION

TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
Lettuce – carrot
71
84
65
220
73.33
Garden pea – carrot
21
19
21
61
20.33
Broccoli – carrot
81
78
77
236
78.67
Carrot – carrot
96
93
92
281
93.67
Control
88
96
98
282
94.00

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN OF
F
TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE
0.05
0.01
Block
2
1129.7180 564.8590

Treatment
3
3200.6142 1066.8714 9.40**
4.76
9.78
Error
6
680.6783 113.4463
TOTAL
11
5011.0106

** = Highly significant

Coefficient of variation = 18.17%

Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

40
Appendix Table 11. Percentage of cracked, forked, malformed roots

REPLICATION

TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
Lettuce – carrot
1.18
16.56
38.56
56.30
18.77
Garden pea – carrot
56.16
46.32
48.39
150.87
50.29
Broccoli – carrot
50.00
37.03
36.92
123.95
41.32
Carrot – carrot
12.82
45.00
33.63
91.45
30.48

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN OF
F
TABULAR F
VARIATION
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES VALUE
0.05
0.01
Block
2
180.4455
90.2227

Treatment
3
1672.2668 557.4222
2.73
4.76
9.78
Error
6
1225.0534 204.1755
TOTAL
11
3077.7658

ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 40.58%

Growth and Yield of Carrot Planted after Lettuce, Garden Pea,
Broccoli and Carrot / Lanelyn B. Golingab. 2009

Document Outline

Growth and Yield of Carrot Plantedafter Lettuce, Garden Pea, Broccoli and Carrot
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- ABSTRACT
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
  - Description of the Crops
  - Soil and Climatic Requirements
  - Importance of the Crops
  - Succession Cropping
  - Autotoxic Substances of Pea
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
  - The First Crops
  - Leaf Length
  - Number of Leaves Produced
  - Length of Roots
  - Weight of Big Roots
  - Weight of Medium Roots
  - Weight of Small Roots
  - Weight of �Lumpia�
  - Total Yield
  - Percentage Survival
  - Percentage Germination
  - Percentage of Cracked, Malformed and Forked Roots
  - Return on Investment
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
  - Summary
  - Conclusion
  - Recommendation
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES