BIBLIOGRAPHY
SUGOT, ALEPHA MARIE G. APRIL 2010. Agromorphological Diversity and
Cluster Analysis of Selected Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea. Benguet State University,
La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Leoncia L. Tandang, PhD.
ABSTRACT

The eleven accessions of garden pea were characterized to estimate variation
through diversity and cluster analysis. They differed in the agromorphological characters
observed in this study.

Diversity analysis revealed low variation among the eleven garden pea accessions
evaluated. The computed diversity indices for the quantitative characters ranged from
0.13 to 0.58 with a mean value of 0.41. The diversity indices for qualitative characters
ranged from 0.72 to 0.98 with a mean diversity of 0.89. Pooling diversity values for the
quantitative and qualitative characters gave an overall diversity index of 0.65 in the
collection.

Cluster analysis among the eleven accessions of garden pea based on their 32
qualitative characters formed four clusters. There was one single cluster with one single
accession, two clusters with three accessions each and one cluster with four accessions.

The existence of clusters with three or more accessions indicated the high
variation among the clusters studied and high similarities within a cluster.

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

Bibliography …………………………………………………………………… i
Abstract
…………………………………………………………………… i
Table of Contents
…………………………………………………………… ii

INTRODUCTION
…………………………………………………………… 1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE …………………………………………………… 4
MATERIALS AND METHODS
…………………………………………… 10
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
…………………………………………… 18
Number of Days from Emergence to
First and Last Harvesting
…………………………………………… 18

Number of Days from Pod Setting to
Pod Maturity, from Emergence
to First Flowering ………………………………………………………. 19

Node Number Bearing First Flower,
First and Last Pod
…………………………………………………… 21

Number of Flower per Plant,
Flower per Cluster, Flower per Plant ……………………...………….. 22

Number of Branches, Nodes
and Leaves per Plant …………………………………………………… 23

Number of Pods per Cluster and per Plant ……………………………… 24

Internode and Tendril Length ……………………………….............. 25
Plant Height at 35, 45 and 95
Days After Planting ………………………………………………… 26

Pod Width, Length and Number
of Seeds per Pod
…………………………………………………… 27

ii

---

Leaflet Length and Width
…………………………………………… 28
Reaction to Leaf miner
and Powdery Mildew
…………………………………………… 29

Fresh Pod Yield per Plot
…………………………………………… 29
Color of Leaf, Flower and
Pod Characteristics
……………………………………….................... 30

Diversity Indices for
Quantitative Characters …………………………........................................ 31

Diversity Indices for Qualitative
Characters
………………………....................................................... 32

Diversity Indices
…………………………………………………… 33
Cluster Analysis
…………………………………………………… 34

SUMMARY
…………………………………………………………… 37
CONCLUSION
………………………………………………………….. . 39
RECOMMENDATION
…………………………………………………… 40
LITERATURE CITED
……………………………………………. …….. 41
APPENDICES
…………………………………………………………… 43

iii

---

1

INTRODUCTION
.

Garden pea (Pisum sativum), an edible legume or pulse crop is one of the first
plant domesticated in the Middle East, from where it spread to the temperate old world.
Garden pea is produced in significant quantities in over 90 countries and is now the
fourth legume in terms of world production (IPGRI, 2009).
Fundamental changes in ecology, economics and agricultural production have
caused a decrease in global production and genetic erosion of plant gene pools in both
cultivated and natural wild ecosystems. A large number of old local cultivars and
landraces have been replaced by modern cultivars and hybrids that is more suitable for
new production technologies. Nevertheless, these old genotypes may possess valuable
irreplaceable characters. Having such genotypes ensures the sustainability of agriculture
and indeed life. The need for the protection of the genetic resources is one of the
priorities of a human society (Stickland, 1998).
Diversity collection is very important to buffer farmers against changing
circumstances. Diverse farming systems adapt and help poor farmers to survive change.
Since garden pea is one of the most important food legumes in terms of world
production, it needs to be characterized and evaluated in order to know the best varieties
that are suited in an area. Most of the accepted characteristics of garden pea are high
yield and resistance to pest and diseases. Consumer’s preferences must also be
considered because even if a variety is high yielding if the consumers or the farmer-
growers do not like its pod and other traits, it would affect its demand or marketability.
Crop improvement depends on the germplasm diversity existing in the crop of
interest. Pea and other cool season food legume crops are produced under the vagaries of
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

2

stresses, both biotic and abiotic. Evaluation of these crops would help on the
improvement of its performance. Evaluation refers to the periodic process of gathering
data and then analyzing or ordering it in such a way that the resulting information can be
used to determine whether these plants are effectively performing to the extent to which it
is achieving its stated objectives and anticipated results.
Characterization, on the other hand, involves a careful description of the special
characteristics that are inherited, easy to score and expressed consistently in all
environments. Characterization is a description of character or traits or essential features
of a variety. During the process of characterizing accessions, the expression of highly
heritable characters, varying from the morphological features and seed proteins to the
latest molecular markers, will be determined to check the true-to-type of homogeneous
samples. Such characters also enable an easy, guide discrimination between phenotypes,
and allow a simple grouping of the accession. Scoring this also allows the establishment
of systematic relationships between the accessions and even crops, including their
evolutionary relationships.
Cluster analysis is a collective term covering a wide variety of techniques for
delineating natural groups or clusters in data sets. The results of cluster analysis may
contribute to the definition of a formal classification scheme, such as taxonomy for
related insects or plants. It also suggests statistical models with which to describe
populations of it indicates rules for assigning new cases to classes for identification and
diagnostic purposes. By doing cluster analysis, a researcher will know if the selected
lines are closely related among them based on the similarities and differences in terms of
agro-morphological characters (IPGRI, 2009).
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

3

As climate change continues to change the geography of agriculture, we have to
mimic natural systems ourselves and use a diversity of approaches to ensure that farmers
and breeders have the ability to get hold of and make use of as much diversity as
possible. Diversity resides within the varieties grown by the poor rural farmers so farmers
who choose to grow traditional varieties are generally more than one variety, which is the
deliberate choice in favor of diversity (IPGRI, 2009). This study will characterize the
existing diversity present among the selected accessions of garden pea.
The objectives of the study were to:
1. morphologically characterize the eleven accessions of garden pea;
2. evaluate the agronomic characters of the garden pea accessions;
3. determine level of diversity of quantitative and qualitative characters; and
4. to determine their relationship through cluster analysis.
The study was conducted at Benguet State University-Institute of Plant Breeding-
Highland Crops Research Station (BSU-IPB-HCRS) from November 2009 to March
2010.
.












Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

4


REVIEW OF LITERATURE


Cultivation

Garden peas grow best on a well-drained, rich fertile soil with a pH of 6.0-7.0.
Seeds germinate in a wide range of soil temperature of 4˚-14˚C. Sow seeds at a minimum
depth of .75-1 cm apart in double rows spaced .75-3 cm apart, 12 cm between the next
double rows. Garden pea should not become too dry when they are in full bloom or when
the pods are swelling. Too much water before flowering reduces yield (Parker, 2000).
According to Poincelot in 2004, picking of garden pea should begin after four weeks after
full flowering. They are ready to be picked when their pods are well developed and fully
green but before the peas harden or lose their sugar content to starch.

Varietal Evaluation
Annogue (1997) evaluated eleven promising lines of garden pea lines under La
Trinidad Benguet condition. He reported that CGP 158 produced the highest yield per
plot per hectare. It was also earliest to mature and it produced the most number of pods
per hectare. CGP 158 was also resistant to leaf miner (Phytomasa articoonis) and
produced the good quality pods and seeds.
Bay-an (2000) evaluated the performance and acceptability of six promising
garden pea variety produced by the BSU-IPB-HRCS in Atok, Benguet. Results show that
all the six varieties were suited to the locality because of their good yield performance
ranging from 2.82-4.61 tons per hectare. They were also vigorous and mildly resistant to
leaf miner. Trinidad was the highest yielder but it was moderately liked because of its
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

5

bigger pods. Taichung, 89-001, and the Chinese garden peas were most preferred due to
their small pods.
Paganas (2005) characterized and evaluated five commercial grown garden pea
varieties in Benguet. Kalantao, Chinese white, CGP 39 and 89-001 were identified as
high yielding varieties. Kalantao, CGP 39 and 89-001 significantly produces the highest
number and weight of marketable pods per plot and thus recommended garden pea
growers in La Trinidad.
In 2006, Gawidan evaluated ten garden pea entries for fresh pod and seed yield
under La Trinidad condition. Significant differences were observed among the ten entries
of garden pea evaluated in terms of number of days t o first and last flowering, number of
nodes to first flower, number of pods per plant, pod width and fresh pod yield per plot.
N2634, 89-001 and CLG produced the highest fresh pod yield per plot per hectare. CGP
59 was observed to have moderate resistance to leaf miner and Ascochyta leaf spot.
Subelan (2006) also characterized the diversity and cluster analysis of different
accessions of garden pea under La Trinidad,Benguet. The 154 accessions differ in the
characters observed. Out of the 154 accessions observed, twenty were selected and
identified as promising materials for commercialization because of their prolificacy and
their pod quality. The computed diversity indexes for the quantitative characters ranged
from 0.63 (number of days from flowering to pod setting) to 0.99 (number of flower per
cluster) with a mean diversity index of 0.87. The diversity indexes for quantitative
characters ranged from 0.34-0.99 with a mean diversity index of 0.73. Pooling of
diversity indexes for all the characters observed gave an over all mean diversity index of
0.80, an indication of high variation with in the collection.
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

6

Cluster analysis for the twenty-eight characters formed a distinct cluster at the
dissimilarity coefficient of 14.73. There were eight single character clusters and six two
to six character clusters. This indicated that the clusters with single character were
distinct from each other and form clusters with two or more characters. Cluster analysis
for accessions resulted in the formation of a 3 tree with 41 clusters at a dissimilarity
coefficient of 0.50. There were 14 single accessions cluster, 10 2 cluster and 17 3 to 15
accession clusters. The existence of cluster with three or more accession indicated the
presence of high variation among the clusters of the accessions studied and high
similarities with in the cluster.
Recently, Del-amen (2009) evaluated the performance and farmer's acceptability
of six promising lines of garden pea. Results showed that all the six promising lines were
suitable in Madaymen because of their good growth and fresh pod yield ranging from
8.65-11.43 kg/10m2. They were all vigorous and highly resistant to leaf miners and
powdery mildew. CGP 34 and CGP 18A were the earliest to emerge and produce flowers
together with CGP 13. CGP 110 was the tallest while Kalantao was the shortest at 35
days after planting. All six lines showed high resistant to leaf miner and powdery mildew
except for the CGP 18A which had mild resistance to powdery mildew. CGP 110 and
Kalantao produced the highest marketable and total fresh pod yield per plot but Kalantao
was disliked by the farmers because of its big and curve pods.

Varietal Evaluation on other crops
Rebujio (2003) morphologically characterized through diversity analysis and
evaluated sweet potato genotypes at La Trinidad, Benguet. Results showed that the sweet
potato genotypes show significant differences for leaf area, canopy cover, number of
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

7

leaves, number of nodes, vine length, vine diameter, number and weight of marketable
and non-marketable storage root yield and storage root yield. Genotypes Tagalog, PSB
Sp 17 and Kawitan significantly produced the highest marketable yield. They were also
moderately resistant to leaf folder. High diversity indexes were noted for quantitative
characters. How ever, low diversity indexes were observed for qualitative characters. The
result indicates high variation among the sweet potato genotypes for quantitative
characters and low variation for qualitative characters. This indicates that selection
should be for quantitative characters of sweet potato.
Remoquillo (2003) evaluated the morphological diversity and yield performance
of different corn accessions collected from different sources. Seventeen corn accessions
significantly differ in the number of days from planting to emergence, number of days
from sowing to tasselling or silking, total number of leaves, length of leaves, plant height,
number of internodes, basal stem diameter, tassel peduncle length, tassel peduncle
diameter, ear diameter, length of the ear, ear height, number of kernel rows, number of
kernel in a row, 1000 kernel weight, weight of marketable ear, weight of non-marketable
ear per plot and the total yield. Tassel length and number of marketable and non-
marketable ears per plot were not significantly different among the accessions evaluated.
IP 13 hybrid all produced the highest marketable yield but it is comparable with
BS 9890 and GSI 40. The good performance maybe attributed to their resistance to corn
earworm, leaf blight and downy mildew hence, can be considered adapted to the locality.
Results of diversity analysis showed low variation with in the collection for the
qualitative characters. Medium variation was noted for the quantitative characters.
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

8

Pooling of diversity indexes gave an over all diversity index of 0.49, an indication of low
variability among the collections.
Among the seventeen corn accessions, IES glutinous number 2 and Los Banos
Lagkitan were the moderately liked, thus, recommended for green corn.
Ignacio (2005) morphologically characterize and evaluated through diversity
analysis of indigenous rice bean accessions from Benguet. Nine indigenous rice bean
accessions were from Benguet Province. Results shows for variability were observed for
number of days from emergence to flowering, seed filling, stem length, number of flower
per cluster, leaf area, pod length, plant height, leaf length and weight of 100 seeds. The
diameter of the stem, number of nodes to flowering, inflorescence length, number of
seeds per pod and pod width did not differ significantly. The accessions of
Ambongdolan, Tublay produced the widest, longest and heaviest seeds. It also showed
good growth performance such as initial and final plant height, leaf length and pod width
and length. Diversity analysis of qualitative characters show high variation for leaf shape,
pod curvature and seed color. High variation indicates selection for these characters.
Cluster analysis show grouping of the accessions into two major clusters and three sub-
clusters.
Tandang and Alfonso (2007) studied sweet potato varieties through
morphological diversity and cluster analysis in the Northern Philippine highland. They
morphologically characterize sixteen commercial varieties of sweet potato to access
genetic diversity. Estimation of variability for each character was done using
Standardized Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index. Qualitative and quantitative data were
also subjected to cluster analysis.
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

9

The qualitative characters observed in this study varied among the sixteen sweet
potato varieties characterized. They showed highly significant differences for all the
quantitative characters measured except for the number of non-marketable storage root
yield.
PSB Sp 22, NSIC Sp 31, UPL Sp 2, UPL Sp 1 and PSB Sp 14 were the varieties
that gave the significantly highest marketable storage root yield. UPL Sp 28, PSB Sp 18,
PSB Sp 23, NSIC Sp 29, PSB Sp 21 and NSIC Sp 30 were the varieties that gave the
significantly highest percentage dry matter content.
Databases of the fourteen qualitative and fifteen quantitative characters of the
sixteen sweetpotato varieties were established using Microsoft Excel Program.
High diversity indexes for the qualitative (0.70-0.99) and quantitative (.84-0.97)
were obtained with a mean diversity index of H' = 0.88 indicating the existence of high
diversity in the collection of sixteen sweetpotato varieties at Benguet State University.
Cluster analysis located seven distinct clusters formed among the sixteen varieties
of sweetpotato at 0.68 coefficient of dissimilarity for single variety clusters, one-two
variety cluster, and two-five variety clusters.














Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

10

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An area of 165 m2 was thoroughly cleaned and prepared. The area was divided
into three blocks, consisting of eleven plots each with a dimension of 1m x 5m. The
experimental treatments were laid out using Randomized Complete Block Design
(RCBD) with three replications. Two seeds per hill were sown at a depth of 2-3 cm with a
distance of 20 cm between hills and between rows. There were two rows per plot. Basal
application of chicken manure with a rate of 0.75 kg and 0.25 kg per plot and complete
fertilizer were properly mixed with the soil.
All the necessary cultural and management practices of farmers growing garden
pea was employed uniformly such as weeding, irrigation and putting of plastic twine for
the plants to cling.
The accessions obtained from BSU-IPB-HRCS served as treatments.

CODE ACCESSIONS

ACC 1 CGP 154

ACC 2 CGP 11

ACC 3 CGP 59
ACC 4 CGP 116
ACC 5 CGP110
ACC 6 CGP 13
ACC 7 CHINESE PEA
ACC 8 CGP 34
ACC 9 BETAG
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

11

ACC 10 CLG
ACC 11 TAICHUNG

Data Gathered

A. Quantitative Characters

1. Maturity

a. Number of days from sowing to emergence. This was obtained by
counting the number of days from sowing to emergence.

b. Number of days from emergence to flowering. This was recorded by
counting the number of days from emergence to the time when at least 50% of the plants
per plot had at least two fully opened flowers.

c. Number of days from emergence to last flowering. This was recorded
by counting the number of days from emergence to the last flowering when 50% of the
plant per plot had stopped flowering.

d. Number of days from emergence to pod setting. This was obtained by
counting the number of days from emergence until the plants produced pods.

e. Number of days from emergence to first and last harvesting. This was
recorded by counting the number of days from emergence to first and last harvesting.
f. Number of days from flowering to pod setting. This was obtained by
counting the number of days from flowering until the pods began to develop.
g. Number of days from pod setting to pod maturity. This was recorded
by counting the number of days from pod setting to pod maturity


Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

12

2. Leaf Characteristics

a. Leaflet length (cm). This was measured using a foot ruler from the
base of the petiole to the leaf tip of the ten sample leaves per treatment at 35 days after
planting.

b. Leaflet width (cm). Leaf width of the ten samples used in gathering leaf
length was gathered by measuring the broadest part of the leaf using a foot ruler at 35
days after planting.

c. Number of leaves per plant. This was recorded by counting the number
of leaves of ten sample plants per replication during harvesting.

d. Tendril length (cm). This was measured from the base to the tip of the
tendril using a ruler when the pods were fully matured.
3. Stem Characteristics


a. Plant height at 35 days after planting. This was measured from the base
of the plant at ground level to the tip of the youngest shoot using a meter stick from the
ten sample plants per replication at 35 days after planting.

b. Number of nodes per plant. This was counted from the base of the plant
to the tip of the main stem of the ten sample plants per treatment during the last harvest.

c. Node number bearing first flower cluster. This was recorded by
counting the node from the base of the plant to the node bearing the first flower cluster in
five sample plants per treatment.

d. Node number bearing first pod. This was recorded by counting the
nodes from the base of the plants to the node bearing first pod cluster in five sample
plants per treatment.
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

13


e. Node number bearing last pod. This was recorded by counting the node
from the base of the plants to the node bearing last pod cluster in five sample plants per
treatment.

f. Internode length (cm). This was measured by getting the mean length of
three internodes at the midpoint of the plant.

g. Number of branches. This was obtained by counting the number of
branches of the plants one week before harvesting.

h. Final plant height at maturity (cm). This was measured from the base of
the plant to the tip of the plant using a meter stick at maturity.
4. Flower Characteristics

a. Number of flowers per plant. This was recorded by counting the
flowers per plant in ten sample plants per treatment per replication at the peak of the
flowering.

b. Number of flowers per cluster. This was recorded by counting the
flowers per cluster per replication at the peak of flowering.

c. Number of flower cluster per plant. This was recorded by counting the
flower cluster per plant per treatment per replication around 50 days after planting.

d. Plant height at flowering (cm). This was recorded by measuring the
height of the plant from the base to the tip of the plant.
5. Pod Characteristics

a. Pod length (cm). This was obtained by measuring the length of ten pods
per treatment from the base to the tip of pod.
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

14


b. Pod width (cm). This was obtained by measuring the broadest part of
sample pods used in gathering pod length using foot rule.

c. Number of pods per cluster. This was obtained by getting the number of
pods per cluster from the ten sample plant per plot.

d. Number of pods per plant. This was obtained by counting the number of
pods per cluster per plant.

e. Percent pod set per plant. This was computed using the formula:
% pod set = total number of pods per plant X 100
total number of flower per plant


f. Pod straightness. This was recorded as irregular, curved or straight.
6. Seed Characteristics

a. Number of seeds per pod. This was obtained by counting the number of
seeds per pod from ten sample pods per treatment per replication.
7. Yield Characteristics

a. Weight of marketable fresh pods per plot (kg/5m2). This was recorded
by weighing the marketable pods per plot from first to last harvest. Marketable pods were
smooth, well-formed pods and free from damages.

b. Weight of non-marketable pods per plot (kg/5m2). This was obtained by
weighing non-marketable pods per plot per treatment. These are the pods that were over-
matured, malformed and damaged by insects and pest and diseases.

c. Total yield per plot (kg/5m2). This was recorded by getting the total
weight of marketable and non-marketable pods per plot per treatment throughout the
harvest period.

Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

15

B. Qualitative Characters

1. Leaf color. This was recorded as green, light green, dark green.
2. Flower color. This was recorded when 50% of the plants per plot have fully
opened flowers using color chart
3. Pod color. This was recorded as green, light green, yellow, dark green.
4. Pod shape. This was recorded as flat, round, curve or straight.
5. Stringiness. This was recorded during the harvest and recorded whether green
pod was stringy or stringless, stringy when the pods had suture or string when snapped
and stringless when there is no pod suture.
6. Waxiness of pod. This was recorded by observing the presence or absence of
wax in the pods.
7. Shininess of pod. This was recorded as shiny or dull.
8. Reaction to leaf miner infestation. This was gathered using the following scale
used by Tandang et.al, in 2008:

SCALE DESCRIPTION REMARKS

1 No damage highly resistant

2 1-25% infestations moderately resistant

3 26-50% infestations resistant

4 52-75% infestations moderately susceptible

5 76-100% infestations very susceptible


Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

16

9. Reaction to powdery mildew. This was observed following the scale used by
Tandang et.al, in 2008:
SCALE DESCRIPTION REMARKS

1 No damage highly resistant

2 1-25% of the total leaves per
plant per plot are infected moderately resistant

3 26-50% of the total leaves per
plant per plot are infected resistant

4 51-75% of the total leaves per
plant per plot are infected moderately susceptible

5 76-100% of the total leaves per
plant per plot are infected very susceptible


Data Analysis

All quantitative data were analyzed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the
Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. The significance of
differences among treatment means was tested using the Duncan’s Multiple Range Test
at 5% level of significance.

Quantification of Variation Using the Shannon- Weaver Diversity Index
Estimate of variability for each quantitative and qualitative character was computed
using the standardized Shannon- Weaver Design Index designated as H’ for qualitative
the following formula was used:
H’ = ∑ pi* log2/log2K

Where pi = relative frequency

K = number of descriptor states

Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

17

The same formula was applied for the quantitative character following the
construction of the frequency classes, with the class boundaries equal to some function of
mean and standard deviation as used by Subelan in 2006. For each character the over all
entry mean (X) and standard deviation (σ) was used to subdivide the accession values
(X1) into frequency classes. The lowest and highest values were considered to determine
the classes to construct. Thus the following formula was used to estimate variability in
quantitative characters.
H’ = ∑ pi* log2 Pi/log2N
Where pi = relative frequency
N = number of classes
The Shannon - Weaver Diversity Index has a value ranging from 0 to 1, where 0
indicates absence of diversity and 1 indicates the maximum diversity.

Cluster Analysis
Using standardized data, numerical values of likeness or similarity was computed
and distance matrix was constructed using the WARD’S method.
WARD’S method is an alternative approach for performing cluster analysis.
Basically, it looks at cluster analysis as an analysis of variance problem, instead of using
distance metrics or measures of association. This method involves an agglomerative
clustering algorithm. It is most appropriate variables. Ward’s method joins clusters to
maximize the likelihood at each level of the hierarchy under these assumptions:
multivariate normal mixtures, equal spherical covariance matrices and equal sampling
probabilities.

Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

18

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Number of days from emergence to
first and last harvesting, and pod setting

The eleven accessions of garden pea studied emerged within seven days after
sowing except for Taichung which emerged one day later. CGP 13 was the earliest
accession to produce flowers within 43 days after sowing (DAS) and Taichung was the

Table 1. Number of days from emergence to first and last harvesting, and pod setting of
the eleven accessions of garden pea


NUMBER OF DAYS FROM EMERGENCE TO

ACCESSION
FIRST
LAST
POD
FLOWERING
FLOWERING
SETTING

CGP 116
45b
92a
48b
CLG
46b
94b
47b
CGP 13
43a
94b
49b
CGP 59
45b
96c
46a
CGP 154
48c
94b
50b
CGP 34
49c
96b
53bc
CGP 110
46b
94b
49b
Chinese pea
49c
97b
46a
CGP 11
47c
94b
54c
Betag
45b
96b
49b
Taichung
54d
98d
58d
CV (%)
7.11
1.12
17.49
Means with common letters are not significantly different at 5% level of significance using DMRT.

Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

19

latest to flower at 45 days after emergence (DAE) (Table 1). The number of days from
emergence to last flowering of the eleven accessions of garden pea evaluated differed
significantly (Table 1). CGP 116 was the accession with the longest flowering period at
90 DAE, although Taichung flowered at 98 DAE. CGP 59 and Chinese pea accessions
produced pods at 46 DAE while Taichung produced pods at 58 DAE.

Number of days from flowering to pod setting to pod maturity,
from emergence to first flowering

CGP 13 was the earliest to set pod from six days after flowering together with
CGP 116 and Betag. Other accessions set pods two to six days later (Table 2). This result
corraborated with the findings of Gawidan (2006) that the garden pea varieties fully
develop its pods in six to seven days after flowering. Table 2 also shows the number of
days from emergence to first flowering of garden pea. CGP 13, CLG, CGP 110, Chinese
pea were the earliest accessions harvested at 60 DAE and Taichung was the latest that
was harvested at 66 DAE. There were no significant differences among all the eleven
accessions of garden pea on the number of days from emergence to last harvesting. CGP
59 and CGP 34 were the last harvested at 90 DAE while the other accessions were last
harvested three days later. Chinese pea matured within three days from pod setting,
which was one to four days earlier than the other accessions.







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

20

Table 2. Number of days from flowering to pod setting, from pod setting to pod maturity,

from emergence to first harvesting of eleven accessions of garden pea


NUMBER OF DAYS FROM
ACCESSION
FLOWERING TO
POD SETTING TO
EMERGENCE
POD SETTING
POD MATURITY
TO FIRST
HARVESTING
CGP 116
7a
4b
64c
CLG
8b
6bc
60a
CGP 13
6a
7c
60a
CGP 59
8b
7c
62b
CGP 154
8b
7c
61b
CGP 34
13c
6bc
64c
CGP 110
8b
7c
60a
Chinese Pea
10b
3a
60a
CGP 11
12c
6bc
64c
Betag
7a
6bc
60a
Taichung
13c
7c
66d
CV (%)
17.49
24.08
2.14
Means of the letters are not significantly different at 5% level of Significance using DMRT








Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

21

Node number bearing first flower,
first and last pod

Table 3 shows the node number bearing first flower cluster, first pod and last pod.
Results showed that the eleven accessions of garden pea produced their first flower
cluster and first pod on their 9th to 13th node. The last pod developed on the 19th to 23rd
node.

Table 3. Node number bearing first flower cluster, first and last pod of the eleven

accessions of garden pea

NODE NUMBER BEARING

FIRST


ACCESSION
FLOWER
FIRST POD
LAST POD
CLUSTER

CGP 116
12
12
21
CLG
12
12
22
CGP 13
10
10
21
CGP 59
13
13
20
CGP 154
12
12
21
CGP 34
12
12
23
CGP 110
12
12
19
Chinese Pea
9
9
23
CGP 11
11
11
23
Betag
10
10
20
Taichung
10
10
23
CV (%)
24.15
24.15
12.18



Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

22

Number of flower cluster per plant,
flowers per cluster, flower per plant

Among the eleven accessions of garden pea evaluated, CLG, CGP 13, CGP 34 and
Chinese pea were observed to have two flowers per cluster while the other accessions had
one flower per cluster (Table 4).

Table 4. Number of flower cluster per plant, flowers per cluster and flowers per plant

NUMBER OF FLOWERS

CLUSTER PER
PER CLUSTER
PER PLANT
ACCESSION
PLANT
CGP 116
3b
1a
3a
CLG
3b
2b
6c
CGP 13
2c
2b
4b
CGP 59
3c
1a
3a
CGP 154
2c
1a
2a
CGP 34
4a
2b
8d
CGP 110
2c
1a
2a
Chinese Pea
4a
2a
8d
CGP 11
2c
1a
2a
Betag
3b
1a
3a
Taichung
2c
1a
2a
CV (%)
12.20
17.75
12.20
Means the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance using DMRT.





Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

23

This result corroborated with the study of Gawidan (2006) that CGP 34, CGP 13
and CGP 18A had two flowers per cluster. But contradicted with the findings of Del-
amen (2009) stating that CGP 18A had only one flower per cluster.
Highly significant differences were noted on the number of flowers per cluster per
plant which ranged from two to four (Table 4). CGP 34 and Chinese pea had four flower
clusters per plant while the other accessions had two to three flower clusters per plant.
Chinese pea and CLG produced white flowers while the other accessions produced violet
flowers.

Number of branches, nodes and leaves per plant
Table 5 shows the number of branches of the accessions that ranged from three
to six. Chinese pea had six branches per plant while Taichung, Betag, CGP 34 produced
three branches. The number of branches varies among the accessions evaluated which
could be due to their genetic differences.
The other accessions produced four to five branches per plant. The eleven
accessions of garden pea had statistically similar number of nodes per plant ranging from
9-13 and the number of leaves per plant ranged from 145- 211.












Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

24

Table 5. Number of branches, nodes and leaves per plant of the eleven accessions of

garden pea



NUMBER OF

ACCESSION
BRANCHES NODE PER PLANT
LEAVES PER PLANT
PER PLANT
CGP 116
4b
22
207
CLG
5b
23
197
CGP 13
5b
22
145
CGP 59
4b
21
183
CGP 154
4b
21
173
CGP 34
3a
23
206
CGP 110
5b
20
174
Chinese Pea
6c
22
211
CGP 11
4a
23
201
Betag
3a
21
202
Taichung
3a
21
202
CV (%)
13.63
8.61
22.75

Means the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance using DMRT.

Number of pods per cluster and per plant
No significant differences were noted on the number of pods per cluster.
CGP 34, CGP 13, CLG and Chinese pea were double - podded (Table 6).
The number of pods per plant among the eleven accessions of garden pea
evaluated did not differ significantly. Numerically, CLG followed by Chinese pea
produced the highest number of pods per plant while CGP 59 produced the fewest pods
per plant.
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

25

Table 6.Number of pods per cluster and pods per plant of the eleven accessions of garden

pea


NUMBER OF PODS
ACCESSION
PER CLUSTER
PER PLANT
CGP 116
1a
17
CLG
2b
26
CGP 13
2b
15
CGP 59
1a
12
CGP 154
1a
14
CGP 34
2b
16
CGP 110
1a
14
Chinese Pea
2b
25
CGP 11
1a
20
Betag
1a
19
Taichung
1a
17
CV (%)
17.75
28.84
Means of the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance using DMRT

Internode and tendril length

No significant differences were noted on the internode and tendril length of the
accessions evaluated. Internode and tendril length ranged from 4.27 cm to 5.97 cm and
4.13 cm to 6.32 cm, respectively.



Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

26

Table 7. Internode and tendril length of the eleven accessions of garden pea



ACCESSION
INTERNODE LENGTH TENDRIL LENGTH
CGP 116
5.21
4.13
CLG
5.72
4.52
CGP 13
5.94
4.62
CGP 59
5.33
4.81
CGP 154
5.97
4.63
CGP 34
5.22
4.39
CGP 110
5.94
5.43
Chinese Pea
4.66
5.40
CGP 11
4.83
4.50
Betag
5.46
6.32
Taichung
4.27
5.71
CV (%)
12.49
1.54

Plant height at 35, 45 and 90 DAP
There are no significant differences observed on plant height at different period
among the eleven accessions of garden pea evaluated except at 35 DAP. Furthermore,
there was an increasing height measurement from 35, 45 and 90 days after planting as
shown on Table 8.




Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

27

Table 8. Plant height at 35, 45, 90 DAP of the eleven accessions of garden pea

PLANT HEIGHT
ACCESSION
35 DAP
45 DAP
90 DAP

CGP
116
34.33b 55.90 129.90
CLP

34.06b
59.06
132.53
CGP
13

40.06 c 67.36
129.96
CGP
59

40.10 c 62.30
140.96
CGP
154

40.20 c 59.93
128.96
CGP
34

35.50bc
60.50
136.66
CGP
110

35.2 bc
58.66
130.20
Chinese
Pea

31.83 b
51.93
143.80
CGP
11

34.83 b 56.36
129.16
Betag
32.60 b 57.56
130.23
Taichung


24.20 a 45.50 142.06
CV
(%)

16.01
13.69


6.18


Pod width, length and number of seeds per pod
No significant differences were noted on the length and width of pods of
garden pea accessions evaluated. Pod length and width ranged from 7.78 cm to 9.71 cm
and 1.45 cm to 1.85 cm, respectively (Table 9).
CGP 116 had nine seeds per pod and Chinese pea had six seeds per pod. The
other accessions had 7 to 8 seeds per pod. This could be due to varietal differences of the
accessions evaluated and may serve as criteria for selection. Pod width was considered
the most efficient character to use for indirect selection because it can be measured
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

28

Table 9. Pod length and width and number of seeds per pod of the eleven accessions of
garden pea



ACCESSION
POD LENGTH
POD WIDTH NUMBER OF
SEEDS PER POD
CGP 116
7.78
1.55
9c
CLG
8.19
1.45
7a
CGP 13
9.71
1.85
7a
CGP 59
8.39
1.57
7a
CGP 154
8.24
1.61
7a
CGP 34
8.37
1.63
8b
CGP 110
8.47
1.62
7a
Chinese Pea
7.83
1.46
6a
CGP 11
9.04
1.59
7a
Betag
9.20
1.73
7a
Taichung
8.27
1.60
8b
CV (%)
9.80
9.27 9.46


without regard to number of seeds per pod and is faster to measure than pod length
(Miles, 2010).

Leaflet length and width
No significant differences were noted on the leaflet length and width of the
accessions evaluated which ranged from 5.92 cm to 7.66 cm and 3.48 cm and 4.49 cm,
respectively (Table 10).

Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

29

Table 10. Leaflet length and width of the eleven accessions of garden pea


LEAFLET (cm)
ACCESSION
LENGTH
WIDTH



CGP 116
7.33
4.10

CLG
5.92
3.48

CGP 13
7.66
4.49

CGP 59
7.36
4.06

CGP 154
7.3 4.24

CGP 34
7.27
4.05

CGP 110
7.34
4.10

Chinese Pea
6.96
4.05

CGP 11
7.09
4.06
Betag
6.95
3.77

Taichung
6.3
3.94

CV (%)
10.42
11.59


Leaf miner and Powdery Mildew Incidence


All the eleven accessions of garden pea showed high resistance to leaf miner and
powdery mildew except for Betag which was moderately resistant to powdery mildew.

Fresh pod yield per plot
Table 11 shows that there were no significant differences in the fresh pod yield per
plot of the garden pea accessions evaluated. The marketable fresh pod yield per plot

Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

30

Table 11. Fresh pod yield of the eleven accessions of garden pea

FRESH POD YIELD (kg/5m2)
ACCESSION
MARKETABLE NON-
TOTAL
MARKETABLE




CGP 116
1.22
1.14
2.36
CLG
1.11
0.58
1.69
CGP 13
1.60
0.58
2.18
CGP 59
1.21
0.57
1.78
CGP 154
1.25
0.58
1.83
CGP 34
1.62
0.54
2.17
CGP 110
1.02
0.52
1.54
Chinese Pea
1.30
0.55
1.86
CGP 11
1.16
0.61
1.77
Betag
1.01
0.46
1.47
Taichung
0.79
0.45
1.25
CV (%)
26.57
20.14
22.23

ranged from 0.79 to 1.12 kg/5m2 while the non-marketable yield per plot ranged from
0.45- 1.14 kg/5m2. The total yield ranged from 1.25 to 2.36 kg/5m 2.

Leaf, Flower, and Pod Characteristics
Table 12 shows the qualitative characters of the garden pea evaluated. CLG,
Chinese pea and Taichung had light green leaf while the other accessions had green
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

31

leaves. All accessions were observed to have purple flowers except for CLG and Chinese
pea which had white flowers. CGP 116, CGP 34 and Chinese pea had dark colored pods
Pod shape were observed to be flat and curved. CGP 13, CGP 59, CGP 154, Betag, and
Taichung had curved pods and the other accessions had straight pods. All garden pea
accessions were observed to have stringy pods. CLG, CGP 13 and CGP 11 had waxy and
shiny pods and the other accessions had non- waxy and dull pods.

Diversity Indices (H’)
The indices for the quantitative characters ranged from 0.13 for weight of non
marketable fresh pods to 0.58 for number of days from pod setting to pod maturity.
(Table 13).

Table 14 presents the diversity indices for qualitative characters gathered from the
eleven accessions of garden pea. Diversity indices ranged from 0.72 to 0.98. Results
showed that there is high variation among the characters.

Pooling of diversity values for both the quantitative and qualitative characters
gave an overall diversity index of 0.65 in the collection. This indicates low variability
among the eleven accessions evaluated which are good characters of parents in making
crosses to develop better varieties and they can be used as indices of selection. Diversity
indices for qualitative characters were high so the garden pea accessions are good parents
in developing varieties that would improve qualities.



Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

32

Table 12. Color of leaves and flowers and pod characteristics of eleven accessions of garden pea
 
LEAF FLOWER
POD CHARACTERS
ACCESSIONS COLOR COLOR COLOR SHAPE STRAIGHTNES
STRINGINES WAXINESS SHININESS
CGP 116
Green
Purple
Dark
Flat Straight
Stringy
Non-waxy Dull
green
CLG
Light
White Green Flat Straight
Stringy
Waxy
Shiny
Green
CGP 13
Green
Purple
Green
Flat Curve
Stringy
Waxy
Shiny
CGP 59
Green
Purple
Green
Curve
Curve
Stringy
Non-Waxy
Dull
CGP 154
Green
Purple
Green
Curve
Curve
Stringy
Non-Waxy
Dull
CGP 34
Green
Purple
Dark
Flat Straight
Stringy
Non-Waxy
Dull
Green
CGP 110
Green
Purple
Dark
Flat Straight
Stringy
Non-Waxy
Dull
Green
Chinese Pea
Light
White
Dark
Flat Straight
Stringy
Non-Waxy
Dull
Green
Green
CGP 11
Green
Purple
Green
Flat
Straight
Stringy
Waxy
Shiny
Betag Green
Purple
Green
Curve
Curve Stringy
Non-waxy
Dull
Taichung Light
Purple Green Curve Curve
Stringy
Non-waxy Dull
Green
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

33


Table 13. Diversity indices (H’) for the quantitative characters of eleven accessions of
garden pea

CHARACTER







H’
Number of days from sowing to emergence


0.53
Number of days from emergence to first flowering

0.54
Number of days from emergence to last flowering 0.48
Number of days from emergence to pod setting 0.39
Number of days from emergence to pod setting 0.53
Number of days from emergence to first harvesting 0.39
Number of days from emergence to last harvesting 0.20
Number of days from pod setting to pod maturity 0.58
Number of nodes per plant 0.53
Node number bearing first flower cluster 0.36
Number of flower per plant 0.36
Number of flower cluster per plant
0.48
Node number bearing first pod 0.48
Number of leaves per plant 0.43
Node number bearing last pod 0.39
Number of branches 0.47
Number of flowers per cluster 0.42
Number of pods per cluster 0.43
Number of pods per plant 0.42
Number of seeds per pod 0.44
Leaflet length
0.43
Leaflet Width







0.49
Tendril Length
0.47
Plant Height at 35 DAP
0.47
Internode length
0.53
Final plant height at maturity
0.54
Pod length
0.38
Pod width
0.47
Plant height at flowering
0.52
Weight of marketable fresh pod per plot




0.56
Weight of non - marketable fresh pod per plot



0.13
Total yield per plot
0.54

Mean Diversity Index






0.41



Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

34


Table 14. Diversity indices for the qualitative characters of eleven accessions of garden

pea
CHARACTER








H’
Leaf
color

0.72
Flower
color

0.83
Pod
color

0.90
Pod
shape

0.95
Waxiness
of
pod

0.97
Shininess
of
pod

0.98
Mean Diversity Index






0.89

Cluster Analysis

The cluster analysis conducted on the 32 qualitative characters of the eleven
garden pea accessions formed four distinct clusters (Figures 1 and 2). CGP 11, CGP 34,
CGP 116 and CLG were the first cluster formed, which were early maturing accessions
with many nodes and branches. They also had wide pods with many seeds. Chinese,
Betag, Taichung comprises the second cluster which bore flower and first pod at lower
nodes, had numerous flowers per plant, flowers per cluster and flower clusters per plant.
They had long internodes and tendrils, shortest at flowering but tallest at maturity with
least non – marketable fresh pod yield and long harvesting period. CGP 13 is the only
accession in the third cluster which was high yielding accessions which emerged early to
flowering, flowering to pod setting, and to first and last harvesting. It had wide leaves,
tall at 35 DAP and had numerous long pods per cluster. CGP 59, CGP 110, CGP 154
comprised the fourth cluster that had early emergence to pod setting. The accessions
studied showed high variation among the clusters.
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

35



2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
Can1
species
BETAG
CGP11
CGP110
CGP116
CGP13
CGP154
CGP34
CGP59
CHINPEA
CLG
TAICH



Figure 1. Cluster analysis of eleven accessions of garden pea using WARD’s method





Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

36

Dendrogram for Cluster Analysis of Garden Pea
100
L2 dissimilarity measure
50
0 1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
4
4
4



CGP 11 CGP 34 CGP 116 CLG Chinese Betag Taichung CGP 13 CGP 59 CGP 110
CGP 154
pea
Figure 2. Dendogram produced from cluster analysis of eleven accessions of
garden pea











Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

37

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Summary

The eleven accessions of garden pea were characterized to estimate variation
among them through diversity and cluster analysis.

The eleven accessions of garden pea evaluated emerged in 7 to 8 days after
sowing, flowered from 43 to 54 days after emergence, took 46 to 58 days from sowing to
pod setting and 3 to 7 days from pod setting to pod maturity.
The garden pea accession observed to produce first flower was CGP 13 while
Taichung was the latest at 54 days after emergence.CGP 34, Betag, CGP 13, CLG and
Chinese pea had two flowers per cluster while the other cluster had only one flower. The
accessions were observed to produce 3 to 6 branches. The number of nodes per plant
recorded ranged from 20 to 23 and the number of leaves per plant was from 145 to 211.
The leaflet length varied from 5.92 cm to 7.66 cm. Pod width ranged from 1.45 cm to
1.85 cm. Internode and tendril length measured from 4.27 cm to 5.97 cm and 4.13 cm to
6.32 cm, respectively. Plant height did not differ significantly although there is an
increase in measurement from 35, 45 and 90 days after planting.
The marketable and non-marketable fresh pod yield per plot of the eleven
accession of garden pea ranged from 0.79 kg to 1.62 kg and non-marketable fresh pod
yield ranged from 0.45 kg to 1.14 kg respectively. The total yield of garden pea ranged
from 1.25 kg (Taichung) to 2.18 (CGP 13).

The eleven accessions of garden pea varied in qualitative characters. They had
light green and green leaves. All of them had purple flowers except for CLG and Chinese
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

38

pea which had white flowers. They had green to dark green stringy pods that were either
flat, curve or straight which were either waxy or non-waxy and shiny or dull.
CGP 11, CGP 34, CGP 116 and CLG were the first cluster formed, which were
early maturing accessions with many nodes and branches. They also had wide numerous
pod seeds. Chinese, Betag, Taichung comprises the second cluster which bore flower and
first pod at lower nodes, had numerous flowers per plant, flowers per cluster and flower
clusters per plant. They had long internodes and tendrils, shortest at flowering but tallest
at maturity with least non – marketable fresh pod yield and long harvesting period. CGP
13 is the only accession in the third cluster which was high yielding accessions which
emerged early to flowering, flowering to pod setting, and to first and last harvesting. It
had wide leaves, tall at 35 DAP and had numerous long pods per cluster. CGP 59, CGP
110, CGP 154 comprised the fourth cluster that had early emergence to pod setting. The
accessions studied showed high variation among the clusters.
 
The diversity analysis revealed low variations within the collection of accession
of garden pea evaluated. The diversity indices (H’) for the quantitative characters ranged
from 0.13 to 0.58. The diversity indices for qualitative characters of the eleven accessions
ranged from 0.72 to 0.98. Pooling of diversity values for both the quantitative and
qualitative characters gave an overall diversity index of 0.65 in the collection. This
indicates low variability among the eleven accessions evaluated which are good
characters of parents in making crosses to develop better varieties and they can be used as
indices of selection. Diversity indices for qualitative characters were high so the garden
pea accessions are good parents in developing varieties that would improve qualities.

Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

39

Conclusion

The eleven accessions significantly differed in the agromorphological characters
observed in this study.
CGP 13, Chinese pea, and CGP 34 were among the accessions that produced
flowers and pods earlier. CGP 116, on the other hand, produced the highest number of
seeds per pod and total fresh pod yield. `
The diversity indices for the quantitative characters ranged from 0.13 to 58. The
characters that had high diversity index were number of days from sowing to emergence
(0.53), number of days from emergence to first flowering (0.54), number of days from
emergence to pod setting (0.53), number of days from pod setting to pod maturity (0.58),
number of nodes per plant (0.53), internode length (0.53), plant height at flowering
(0.52), plant height at maturity (0.54), weight of marketable fresh pods per plot (0.52),
and total yield per plot. Diversity indices for qualitative characters ranged from 0.72 to
0.98 with a mean of 0.89. This indicates low variation among the quantitative characters
measured.
Cluster analysis revealed four clusters among the eleven accessions of garden
pea. The first cluster included CGP 11, CGP 34, CGP 116 and CLG which were found to
be early maturing accessions with many nodes and branches, had wide numerous pod
seeds. Chinese pea, Betag, Taichung formed the second cluster that bore first flower and
pod at lower nodes, had numerous flowers, long internodes and tendrils, shortest at
flowering but tallest at maturity with least non – marketable yield and long harvesting
period. CGP 13 was the only accession on the third distinct cluster which was high
yielding, emerged early to flowering, first and last harvesting and pod setting. It had big
Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

40

leaves and tall at 35 DAP and has numerous and long pods per cluster; CGP 59, CGP
110, CGP 154 comprised the fourth cluster that had early emergence to pod setting. The
accessions studied showed low variation among the clusters.

Recommendation
The high variation found in the agromorphological characters observed in this
study among the accessions in the collection could be used to start a breeding program.
These characters may also be subjected for further evaluation and selection to release
new and improved varieties of garden pea.















Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

41

LITERATURE CITED

ANNOGUE, W.D. 1997. Evaluation and correlation analysis of 11 promising lines of
garden pea. BS thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P.2.

BAY-AN, N. B. 2000. Performance and acceptability of promising lines of garden pea in
Atok, Benguet. BS thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P.7.

DEL-AMEN, MAYLER.2009. Growth, Yield and Farmer’s Acceptability of promising
lines of garden pea. BS thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Pp.7-9.

GAWIDAN, L. P. 2006. Fresh pod yield of garden pea entries in La Trinidad, Benguet.
BS thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp.4,7.

IGNACIO, J. C. 2005. Morphological Characterization, Evaluation and Diversity
analysis of Indigenous rice bean accessions from Benguet. BS thesis. Benguet
State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P.31.

INTERNATIONAL PLANT GENETICS RESOURCES INSTITUTE. 2009.
International Plant Genetics Resources Institute. Viadei Tre Denari,Macanese
(Rome), Italy. Accessed at htt://www.bioversityinternational.org.

MILES.C.A.2010.Edamame Harvesting and Marketing Potentials. Accessed at
http://agsyst.wsu.edu/edhrv.html

PAGANAS, A.M. 2005. Characterization and Evaluation of commercially grown garden
pea varieties in Benguet. BS thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad,
Benguet. Pp.2-12.

PARKER, R. 2000. Introduction to Plant Science. Delmar publishers. Pp. 460-466.

REBUJIO, M.L. 2003. Morphological Character and Diversity analysis and Evaluation
of sweet potato varieties. BS thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad,
Benguet. P.2

REMOQUILLO, J.2003.Morphological Diversity And Yield prerformance of different
corn accessions collected from different sources. BS thesis. Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 2.

TANDANG,L.L., and ALFONSO, J. I. 2007. Benguet State University Research Journal.
Morphological Diversity and Cluster analysis in sweet potato varieties in the
Northern Philippine Highland. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.

Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

42

TANDANG, L.L.,KIMEU.A.m.,AMLOS,B.A.,BAGTILA,J.G.,KEBASEN,B.B. and
G.R. MAGHIRANG.2008. Benguet State University In-house Review (May 22-
24, 2006). Report formats for completed projects. Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet. P. 2
STICKLAND, S. 1998. Heritage Vegetables. The Gardener’s Guide to cultivating
Diversity. Plant Genetics Resources Newsletter. P. 30.

SUBELAN, R.G. 2006. Characterization,Diversity and Cluster analysis of different
accessions of garden pea unde La Trinidad, Benguet. BS thesis. Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 2.




































Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

43

APPENDICES


Appendix Table 1. Number of days from sowing to emergence

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
8
7
7
22
7.33a
CLG 7
8
6
21
7.00a
CGP 13
7
8
7
22
7.33a
CGP 59
7
7
7
21
7.00a
CGP 154
7
7
7
21
7.00a
CGP 34
6
6
8
20
6.67a
CGP 110
7
8
7
22
7.03a
Chinese Pea
7
7
7
21
7.00a
CGP 11
7
7
8
22
7.33a
Betag 6
6
8
20
6.67a
Taichung 8 8
8 24
8.00a
TOTAL 77
79
80



ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES
SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 4.240 0.420


Block
2
0.420
0.212
0.44
2.35 3.37
Error 20
9.580
0.479

TOTAL 32
14.240


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
9.68%


Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

44

Appendix Table 2. Number of days from emergence to flowering.

TREATMENT BLOCK

I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
42
42
50
134
44.67c
CLG 45
48
45 138
46.00c
CGP 13
43
43
43
129
43.00d
CGP 59
45
45
45
135
45.00c
CGP 154
48
48
48
144
48.00b
CGP 34
45
54
48
147
49.00b
CGP 110
47
46
46
139
46.33c
Chinese Pea
45
45
57
147
49.00b
CGP 11
46
48
46
147
46.67c
Betag 40
50
45 140
45.00c
Taichung 48 57
57
135
54.00a
TOTAL 494
526
530 162




ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10
2.66.670
26.297


Block 2
70.790
35.394
3.17
2.35
3.37
Error 20
223.210
11.161

TOTAL 32
560.970


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
7.11%





Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

45

Appendix Table 3. Number of days from emergence to last flowering.

TREATMENT BLOCK

I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
92
92
92
276
92d
CLG 94
94
96 284
94c
CGP 13
94
96
94
284
94c
CGP 59
96
96
96
288
96b
CGP 154
94
96
94
284
94c
CGP 34
96
96
96
288
96b
CGP 110
94
94
96
284
94c
Chinese Pea
96
98
96
290
96b
CGP 11
94
94
94
284
94c
Betag 96
98
94 288
96b
Taichung 96 100
98
294 98d
TOTAL 1,042
1,054
1,046




ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 74.180
7.418


Block 2
6.790
3.394
3.01
2.35
3.37
Error 20
22.550
1.127

TOTAL 32
103.520


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
1.






Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

46

Appendix Table 4. Number of days from emergence to pod setting.

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
50
42
52
144
48b
CLG 49
48
45 142
47b
CGP 13
49
49
49
147
49b
CGP 59
48
45
47
140
46a
CGP 154
47
48
57
152
50b
CGP 34
58
54
47
159
53bc
CGP 110
56
46
46
148
49b
Chinese Pea
47
45
47
139
46a
CGP 11
58
48
58
164
54c
Betag 47
50
52 149
49b
Taichung 62 57
57
176 58d
TOTAL 569
526





ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10
427.640
42.764


Block 2
70.970
35.485
2.48
2.35
3.37
Error 20
268.360
14.318

TOTAL 32
784.970


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
7.52%







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

47

Appendix Table 5. Number of days from flowering to pod setting.

TREATMENT BLOCK

I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
8
7
9
23
7a
CLG 7
7
9
23
8b
CGP 13
6
6
6
18
6a
CGP 59
8
8
9
25
8b
CGP 154
8
8
9
25
8b
CGP 34
13
12
13
38
13c
CGP 110
9
7
7
23
8b
Chinese Pea
7
7
15
29
10b
CGP 11
10
15
12
37
12c
Betag 7
7
7
21
7c
Taichung 14 13 13 40 13a
TOTAL 107
108
116




ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10
356.970
35.697


Block 2
4.420
2.212
0.72
2.35
3.37
Error 20
61.580
3.079

TOTAL 32
422.970


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=17.49









Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

48

Appendix Table 6. Number of days from emergence to first harvesting
.
TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
64
64
64
192
64c
CLG 60
60
60
180
60a
CGP 13
60
60
60
180
60a
CGP 59
62
66
60
184
62b
CGP 154
61
60
64
186
61b
CGP 34
64
64
66
194
64c
CGP 110
60
60
60
180
60a
Chinese Pea
60
60
60
180
60a
CGP 11
64
64
64
192
64c
Betag 60
60
60
180
60a
Taichung 66 66 66 196 66d
TOTAL 678
648
684





ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10
154.670
15.467


Block 2
2.180
1.091
0.62
2.35
3.37
Error 20
35.150
1.758

TOTAL 32
192.000


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
2.14






Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

49

Appendix Table 7. Number of days from emergence to last harvesting.

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP
116 93 93 93 279 93
CLG
93 93 93 279 93
CGP
13 93 93 93 279 93
CGP
59 90 90 90 270 90
CGP
154 93 93 93 279 93
CGP
34 90 90 90 270 90
CGP
110 93 93 93 279 93
Chinese
Pea
93 93 93 279 93
CGP
11 93 93 93 279 93
Betag
93 93 93 279 93
Taichung 93 93 93 279 93
TOTAL
1017 1017 1017





ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 44.180
4.418


Block 2
0.000
0.000
0.00
2.35
3.37
Error 20
0.000
0.000

TOTAL 32
44.180


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
0.00







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

50

Appendix Table 8. Number of days from pod setting to pod maturity

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
4
4
3
11
4
CLG 6
6
6
18
6
CGP 13
7
9
6
22
7
CGP 59
6
9
7
22
7
CGP 154
7
6
8
21
7
CGP 34
6
5
7
18
6
CGP 110
8
7
5
20
7
Chinese Pea
3
2
4
9
3
CGP 11
6
8
4
18
6
Betag 6
6
6
18
6
Taichung 4 9 9 22 7
TOTAL 63
71
65


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 63.636
6.364


Block 2
3.152
1.576
3.02*
2.35

3.37
Error 20
42.182
2.109

TOTAL 32
108.970


*=
significant
CV
(%)
=
24.08%









Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

51

Appendix Table 9. Number of nodes per plant.

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
24
24
20
68
23
CLG 23
23
22
69
23
CGP 13
24
22
19
66
22
CGP 59
23
20
19
64
21
CGP 154
23
21
21
65
21
CGP 34
24
22
24
71
23
CGP 110
21
21
19
62
20
Chinese Pea
23
20
22
67
22
CGP 11
22
21
27
69
23
Betag 22
20
20
63
21
Taichung 25 20 19 64 21
TOTAL 256
236
237


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 24.780
2.418


Block 2
23.060
11.531
3.18
2.35
3.37
Error 20
72.480
3.624

TOTAL 32
120.330


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
8.61







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

52

Appendix Table 10. Node number bearing first flower cluster

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
10
16
10
36
12
CLG 13
11
13
37
12
CGP 13
11
9
9
29
10
CGP 59
11
11
16
38
13
CGP 154
11
11
14
36
12
CGP 34
14
13
10
37
12
CGP 110
18
8
9
35
12
Chinese Pea
7
8
11
26
9
CGP 11
11
11
12
34
11
Betag 9
8
13
30
10
Taichung 10 9 10 29 10
TOTAL 124
113
125



ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 50.180
5.018


Block 2
6.540
3.269
0.44
2.35
3.37
Error 20
148.500
7.425

TOTAL 32
205.220


ns – not significant





CV (%) = 24.15%







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

53

Appendix Table 11. Node number bearing first pod

TREATMENT BLOCK

I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
10
16
10
36
12
CLG 13
11
13
37
12
CGP 13
11
9
9
29
10
CGP 59
11
11
16
38
13
CGP 154
11
11
14
36
12
CGP 34
14
13
10
37
12
CGP 110
18
8
9
35
12
Chinese Pea
7
8
11
26
9
CGP 11
11
11
12
34
11
Betag 9
8
13
30
10
Taichung 10 9 10 29 10
TOTAL 124
113
125



ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 50.180
5.018


Block 2
6.540
3.269
0.44
2.35
3.37
Error 20
148.500
7.425

TOTAL 32
205.220


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
24.15%







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

54

Appendix Table 12. Node number bearing last pod

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
23
22
18
64
21
CLG 22
22
21
67
22
CGP 13
23
21
18
63
21
CGP 59
23
18
18
61
20
CGP 154
23
19
19
62
20
CGP 34
23
21
24
69
23
CGP 110
19
20
17
57
19
Chinese Pea
22
25
21
70
23
CGP 11
21
19
27
69
23
Betag 22
19
18
60
20
Taichung 26 27 16 70 23
TOTAL 253
239
222



ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 67.22
6.722


Block
2
42.64
21.318
3.06
2.35 3.37
Error 20
439.42
6.971

TOTAL 32
249.28


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
12.18%







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

55

Appendix Table 13. Number of leaves per plant
TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
144
280
194
620
207
CLG 150
227
211
590
197
CGP 13
129
175
130
435
145
CGP 59
118
186
245
550
183
CGP 154
193
178
147
518
172
CGP 34
194
186
236
617
206
CGP 110
157
178
187
523
174
Chinese Pea
168
159
303
631
211
CGP 11
159
170
272
601
201
Betag 162
174
268
604
202
Taichung 212 151 241 605 202
TOTAL 1792
2067
2438



ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10
11879.060
1187.906


Block
2
19108.550
9554.273
5.07
2.35 3.37
Error 20
37682.820
1884.141

TOTAL 32
68670.420


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=22.74%









Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

56

Appendix Table 14. Number of branches

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
2
1
2
5
2
CLG 3
2
1
6
3
CGP 13
2
2
2
6
3
CGP 59
1
1
2
4
1
CGP 154
1
2
2
5
2
CGP 34
1
1
1
3
1
CGP 110
2
1
3
6
3
Chinese Pea
3
4
3
10
3
CGP 11
2
1
1
4
1
Betag 1
1
1
3
1
Taichung 1 1 1 3 1
TOTAL 19
17
19


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10
14.000 1.400


Block
2
0.242
0.121
3.95**
2.35 3.37
Error 20
7.091
0.355

TOTAL 32
21.333


**=highly
significant
CV
(%)
=
13.63








Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

57

Appendix Table 15. Number of flower per cluster
TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
1
1
1
3
1
CLG 2
2
2
6
2
CGP 13
2
2
2
6
2
CGP 59
1
1
1
3
1
CGP 154
1
1
1
3
1
CGP 34
2
2
2
6
2
CGP 110
1
1
1
3
1
Chinese Pea
2
2
2
6
2
CGP 11
1
1
1
3
1
Betag 1
1
1
3
1
Taichung 1 1 1 3 1
TOTAL 15
15
15


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 6.85
0.685


Block 2
0.00
0.000
0.00
2.35
3.37
Error 20
1.33
0.067

TOTAL 32
8.18


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
17.75%








Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

58

Appendix Table 16. Number of flower cluster per plant
TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
3
3
2
8
3
CLG 2
3
2
7
3
CGP 13
2
2
2
6
2
CGP 59
2
2
3
7
3
CGP 154
2
2
2
6
2
CGP 34
3
3
4
10
4
CGP 110
2
2
2
6
2
Chinese Pea
3
4
3
10
4
CGP 11
2
2
2
6
2
Betag 2
2
3
7
3
Taichung 2 2 2 6 2
TOTAL 25
26
27



ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 5.66
0.566


Block 2
0.08
0.40
0.36
2.35
3.37
Error 20
2.21
0.110

TOTAL 32
7.94


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=12.20








Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

59


Appendix Table 17. Number of flower per plant

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
3
3
3
9
3
CLG 6
6
6
18
6
CGP 13
4
4
4
12
4
CGP 59
3
3
3
9
3
CGP 154
2
2
2
6
2
CGP 34
8
8
8
24
8
CGP 110
2
2
2
6
2
Chinese Pea
8
8
8
24
8
CGP 11
2
2
2
6
2
Betag 3
3
3
9
3
Taichung 2 2 2 6 2
TOTAL 41
41
41


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 22.62
2.262


Block 2
0.32
0.158
0.36
2.35
3.37
Error 20
8.82
0.441

TOTAL 32
31.76


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
12.20%







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

60

Appendix Table 18. Number of pods per cluster

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
1
1
1
3
1
CLG 2
2
2
6
2
CGP 13
2
2
2
6
2
CGP 59
1
1
1
3
1
CGP 154
1
1
1
3
1
CGP 34
2
2
2
6
2
CGP 110
1
1
1
3
1
Chinese Pea
2
2
2
6
2
CGP 11
1
1
1
3
1
Betag 1
1
1
3
1
Taichung 1 1 1 3 1
TOTAL 15
15
15


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 6.85
0.685


Block 2
0.00
0.000
0.00
2.35
3.37
Error 20
1.33
0.067

TOTAL 32
8.18


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
17.75%








Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

61

Appendix Table 19. Number of pods per plant

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
10
29
11
50
17
CLG 22
29
24
76
26
CGP 13
17
16
11
44
15
CGP 59
12
11
12
36
12
CGP 154
16
14
12
42
14
CGP 34
20
12
15
47
16
CGP 110
15
14
12
42
14
Chinese Pea
24
23
28
76
25
CGP 11
20
18
23
53
20
Betag 23
12
21
56
19
Taichung 26 16 10 52 17
TOTAL 207
196
180


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 591.74
59.174


Block 2
33.46
16.728
0.64
2.35
3.37
Error 20
524.25
26.212

TOTAL 32
1149.44


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
28.84%








Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

62

Appendix Table 20. Number of seeds per plant
TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
8
8
8
24
9
CLG 7
7
7
21
7
CGP 13
7
7
7
21
7
CGP 59
7
8
5
20
7
CGP 154
7
7
7
21
7
CGP 34
8
8
8
24
8
CGP 110
7
7
6
20
7
Chinese Pea
5
6
7
18
6
CGP 11
7
7
7
21
7
Betag 7
5
7
19
7
Taichung 8 8 8 24 8
TOTAL 78
78
77


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 13.08
1.308


Block 2
0.20
0.099
0.20
2.35
3.37
Error 20
9.87
0.493

TOTAL 32
23.15


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
9.46%








Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

63

Appendix Table 21. Leaflet length(cm)

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
6.54
7.76
7.72
22.01
7.33
CLG 4.71
5.79
7.27
17.77
5.92
CGP 13
6.75
7.91
8.34
23.00
7.66
CGP 59
7.04
7.50
6.41
20.95
6.98
CGP 154
6.23
7.55
8.32
22.01
7.36
CGP 34
7.94
7.60
6.27
21.81
7.27
CGP 110
7.53
7.00
7.49
22.02
7.34
Chinese Pea
6.67
6.22
7.99
20.88
6.96
CGP 11
6.93
7.23
7.12
21.88
7.09
Betag 7.09
6.86
6.91
20.86
6.95
Taichung 6.45
5.59
6.91
18.95
6.31
TOTAL 73.87
77.01
80.75


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 7.55
0.755


Block 2
2.16
1.079
2.01
2.35
3.37
Error 20
10.71
0.535

TOTAL 32
20.14


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
10.42%








Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

64

Appendix Table 22. Leaflet width (cm)

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
3.48
4.23
4.60
12.31
4.10
CLG 2.70
3.31
4.44
10.45
3.48
CGP 13
3.96
4.65
4.86
13.47
4.49
CGP 59
4.11
4.54
3.55
12.2
4.06
CGP 154
3.79
4.35
4.59
12.73
4.24
CGP 34
4.34
4.27
3.55
12.16
4.05
CGP 110
4.37
3.92
4.02
12.31
4.10
Chinese Pea
3.96
3.88
4.32
12.16
4.05
CGP 11
3.96
4.11
4.11
12.17
4.05
Betag 4.29
3.17
3.87
11.33
3.77
Taichung 3.72
4.16
3.96
11.84
3.94
TOTAL 42.68
44.59
45.96




ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 1.92
0.192


Block 2
0.47
0.234
1.07
2.35
3.37
Error 20
4.37
0.219

TOTAL 32
6.76


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=11.59%







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

65

Appendix Table 23. Tendril length(cm)

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
4
5
4
13
4.13
CLG 5
5
4
14
5.52
CGP 13
5
5
4
14
5.62
CGP 59
5
5
5
15
5.81
CGP 154
5
5
4
14
5.63
CGP 34
4
4
5
13
4.49
CGP 110
5
6
5
16
5.53
Chinese Pea
5
6
4
16
5.40
CGP 11
5
5
5
14
4.50
Betag 5
7
7
20
6.32
Taichung 8 6 4 18
5.71
TOTAL 56
64
51



ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10
2.242 1.121


Block
2
15.879
1.588
3.25*
2.35 3.37
Error 20
9.758
0.488

TOTAL 32
27.879


*–
significant
CV
(%)
=13.80%









Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

66

Appendix Table 24. Internode length(cm)

TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
5.16
5.66
4.83
15.65
5.21
CLG 5.50
5.66
6.0
17.16
5.72
CGP 13
6.33
6.83
4.66
17.82
5.94
CGP 59
5.33
5.83
4.83
15.99
5.33
CGP 154
6.33
6.10
5.50
17.93
5.97
CGP 34
5.83
5.50
4.33
15.66
5.22
CGP 110
7.33
6.33
4.16
17.82
5.94
Chinese Pea
5.33
4.33
4.33
13.99
4.66
CGP 11
6.16
4.50
3.83
14.49
4.83
Betag 6.83
5.06
4.50
16.39
5.46
Taichung 4.66
3.83
4.33
12.82
4.27
TOTAL 64.79
59.63
51.30



ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 9.50
0.950


Block
2
8.42
4.212
9.52**
2.35 3.37
Error 20
8.85
0.443

TOTAL 32
26.78


**
–
highly
significant CV (%)
=12.49%






Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

67


Appendix Table 25. Pod length (cm)
TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
7.55
7.29
8.51
23.35
7.78
CLG 7.87
9.21
7.49
24.57
8.19
CGP 13
7.76
11.36
10.02
24.46
8.15
CGP 59
7.64
9.30
8.24
25.18
8.39
CGP 154
7.37
8.85
8.52
24.74
8.24
CGP 34
8.43
8.33
8.37
25.13
8.37
CGP 110
7.61
8.84
9.04
25.49
8.49
Chinese Pea
6.58
7.58
9.34
23.50
7.83
CGP 11
9.12
8.54
9.47
27.13
9.04
Betag 8.44
10.21
8.95
27.60
9.20
Taichung 8.87
8.00
7.96
24.83
8.27
TOTAL 87.24
97.51
95.91




ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 10.36
1.036


Block 2
5.55
2.776
4.00
2.35
3.37
Error 20
13.89
0.694

TOTAL 32
29.80


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
9.80%






Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

68


Appendix Table 26. Pod width (cm)
TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
1.49
1.49
1.67
4.65
1.55
CLG 1.47
1.52
1.36
4.35
1.45
CGP 13
1.61
2.08
1.87
5.56
1.85
CGP 59
1.53
1.70
1.49
4.72
1.57
CGP 154
1.56
1.72
1.57
4.85
1.51
CGP 34
1.63
1.50
1.78
4.91
1.63
CGP 110
1.49
1.68
1.70
4.87
1.62
Chinese Pea
1.33
1.24
1.83
4.40
1.46
CGP 11
1.52
1.58
1.69
4.79
1.59
Betag 1.74
1.80
1.65
5.19
1.73
Taichung 1.69
1.64
1.49 4.82 1.60
TOTAL 17.06
17.95
18.10



ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 0.38
0.038


Block 2
0.06
0.029
1.29
2.35
3.37
Error 20
0.45
0.022

TOTAL
32
0.88



ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
9.27%







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

69


Appendix Table 27. Plant height at 35 days after planting
TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
29.7
35.7
37.6
103
34.33
CLG 30.7
33.7
37.8
102.2
34.06
CGP 13
34.7
42.5
43.2
120.4
40.13
CGP 59
41.8
39.3
39.2
120.3
40.10
CGP 154
40.2
40.6
39.8
120.6
40.20
CGP 34
45.2
40.6
20.7
106.5
35.50
CGP 110
42.5
29.6
33.6
105.7
35.32
Chinese Pea
29.0
32.4
34.1
95.5
31.83
CGP 11
35.7
35.8
33.0
104.5
34.83
Betag 34.7
30.2
32.9
97.8
32.60
Taichung 27.7
19.6
25.3 72.6
24.20
TOTAL 386.7
302.86
377.10



ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10
1207.49
120.749


Block 2
213.07
106.536
1.57
2.35
3.37
Error 20
1359.90
67.995

TOTAL 32
2780.46


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
6.18







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

70


Appendix Table 28. Plant height at flowering
TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
43.9
60.0
63.7
167.7
55.90
CLG 60.8
59.7
56.7
177.2
59.06
CGP 13
73.2
60.0
68.9
202.1
67.36
CGP 59
71.4
55.4
60.1
186.9
62.30
CGP 154
56.7
57.8
65.3
179.8
59.93
CGP 34
72.2
65.3
44.0
181.5
60.50
CGP 110
64.1
53.4
58.5
176.0
58.66
Chinese Pea
43.6
49.0
63.2
155.8
51.93
CGP 11
52.9
59.2
57.0
162.8
56.36
Betag 59.2
58.1
55.4
172.7
57.56
Taichung 48.4
38.5
49.6
136.5
45.50
TOTAL 646.4
616.4
642.5



ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 952.05
95.205


Block 2
48.38
24.188
0.39
2.35
3.37
Error 20
1250.33
62.517

TOTAL 32
2250.76


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
13.69%







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

71


TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP
116 122.1 116.5 136.1 374.7 124.9
CLG
128.0 137.5 132.1 397.6 132.53
CGP
13
132.5 122.7 134.7 389.9 129.96
CGP
59
146.2 131.5 145.2 422.9 140.96
CGP
154 137.4 120.2 126.6 384.2 128.06
CGP
34
140.2 140.3 129.5 410.0 136.67
CGP
110 122.5 127.5 140.6 390.6 130.20
Chinese
Pea 151.9 145.5 134.0 431.4 143.80
CGP
11
139.5 131.1 116.9 387.5 129.16
Betag
138.3 133.3 119.1 390.7 130.23
Taichung 149.3 139.4 137.5 426.2 142.06
TOTAL
1507.9 1445.4 1452.3


Appendix Table 29. Plant height at maturity


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10
1207.49
120.749


Block 2
213.07
106.536
1.57
2.35
3.37
Error 20
1359.90
67.995

TOTAL 32
2780.46


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
6.18%








Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

72


Appendix Table 30. Weight of marketable fresh pod per plot (kg/5m2)
TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
0.76
1.36
1.54
3.66
1.22
CLG
1.04
1.02
1.26
3.32
1.11
CGP 13
1.42
1.67
1.72
4.81
1.60
CGP 59
1.58
0.68
1.39
3.65
1.21
CGP 154
1.04
1.06
1.65
3.75
1.25
CGP 34
2
1.48
1.39
4.87
1.62
CGP 110
1.37
0.85
0.84
3.06
1.02
Chinese Pea
1.81
1.28
0.82
3.91
1.30
CGP 11
1.21
1.06
1.23
3.50
1.16
Betag 1.47
0.65
0.92
3.04
1.01
Taichung 1.09
0.62
0.67
2.38 0.79
TOTAL 14.795
11.73
13.43




ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 1.79
0.105


Block 2
0.43
0.221
1.91
2.35
3.37
Error 20
2.07
0.115

TOTAL 32
4.29


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=
26.57%







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

73


Appendix Table 31. Weight of non-marketable fresh pod per plot (kg/5m2)
TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
2.27
0.35
0.82
3.44
1.146
CLG 0.42
0.53
0.81
1.76
0.585
CGP 13
0.55
0.35
0.85
1.75
0.583
CGP 59
0.52
0.38
0.81
1.71
0.570
CGP 154
0.61
0.44
0.71
1.76
0.586
CGP 34
0.52
0.31
0.81
1.64
0.546
CGP 110
0.54
0.49
0.55
1.58
0.526
Chinese Pea
0.80
0.61
0.26
1.67
0.556
CGP 11
0.44
0.61
0.78
1.83
0.610
Betag 0.58
0.31
0.49
1.38
0.460
Taichung 0.33
0.45
0.59
1.37
0.456
TOTAL 7.575
4.83




ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 1.05
0.105


Block 2
0.44
0.221
1.91
2.35
3.37
Error 20
2.31
0.115

TOTAL 32
3.80


ns
–
not
significant
CV
(%)
=20.14%







Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

74


Appendix Table 32.Total yield per plot (kg/5m2)
TREATMENT BLOCK


I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
CGP 116
3.03
1.71
2.36
7.10
2.36
CLG 1.46
1.55
2.07
5.08
1.69
CGP 13
1.97
2.02
2.57
6.56
2.186
CGP 59
2.10
1.06
2.20
5.36
1.786
CGP 154
1.65
1.50
2.36
5.51
1.836
CGP 34
2.52
1.79
2.20
6.51
2.170
CGP 110
1.91
1.34
1.39
4.64
1.546
Chinese Pea
2.61
1.89
1.08
5.58
1.860
CGP 11
1.65
1.67
2.01
5.33
1.776
Betag 2.05
0.96
1.41
4.42
1.473
Taichung 1.45
1.07
1.26 3.75
1.250
TOTAL 22.37
16.56
20.91


ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Treatment 10 3.29
0.329


Block 2
1.66
0.830
5.11*
2.35
3.37
Error 20
3.25
0.163

TOTAL 32
8.20


*
–significant
CV
(%)
=22.23%



Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected
Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea/ Alepha Marie G. Sugot. 2010

---

Document Outline

• Agromorphological Diversity and Cluster Analysis of Selected Eleven Accessions of Garden Pea
  • BIBLIOGRAPHY
  • ABSTRACT
  • TABLE OF CONTENTS
  • INTRODUCTION
  • REVIEW OF LITERATURE
  • MATERIALS AND METHODS
  • RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
  • SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
  • LITERATURE CITED
  • APPENDICES

---