BIBLIOGRAPHY DUMAYAG, ROSELDA ...
BIBLIOGRAPHY
DUMAYAG, ROSELDA B. APRIL 2010. Growth and French Pod Yield of
Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically in La Trinidad Benguet. Benguet
State University, La Trinidad Benguet.
Adviser: Leoncia L. Tandang, Ph.D.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to evaluate the growth and French pod yield of eight
bush snap bean accessions grown organically; determine the acceptability and
profitability of eight bush snap bean accessions for French pod production in La Trinidad,
Benguet; and to determine the best accessions of eight bush snap beans applied with
organic fertilizers in terms of growth and French pod yield, acceptability and profitability
in La Trinidad, Benguet.
All the eight bush snap bean accessions emerged in seven days after sowing
except for Green Crop that emerged in eight DAS. HAB 323, Green Crop, HAB 19 and
Contender were the earliest to flower in 41 DAS. Torrent produced the tallest plants while
Landmark produced the shortest plants. At 30 DAP, Green Crop recorded the highest
canopy cover while BBL 274 had increased canopy cover at 45 and 60 DAP. All
accessions produced four to six flowers per cluster and three to five pods per cluster. BBL
274 had the highest total number of French pods per plant. BBL 274 had the longest pods,
HAB 323 had the widest pods and the pod diameter of eight bush snap bean accessions
ranged from 0.2-0.5 cm. HAB 63 produced the highest French pod yield per plot and total
yield per hectare, highest ROCE and highest acceptability rating by farmers and students
together with BBL 274 and HAB 323.All the eight bush snap bean accessions exhibited
resistance to bean rust and moderately tolerant to pod borer.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography………………………………………………………………….. i
Table of Contents…………………………………………………………….. i
Abstract……………………………………………………………………….. iii
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………… 1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Description of Bush Snap Bean Plant……………………………………. 2
Adaptation of Snap bean………………………………………………..... 3
Varietal Evaluation……………………………………………………….. 4
Effect of Organic fertilizer……………………………………………….. 5
MATERIALS AND METHODS……………………………………………… 7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Number of Days from Sowing to Emergence……………………………. 13
Number of Days from Sowing to Flowering…………………………....... 13
Number of Days from Sowing to First Harvesting……………………….. 14
Number of Days from Sowing to Last Harvesting……………………….. 14
Plant height…………………………………………….............................. 15
Canopy cover…………………………………………………………... 16
Number of Flowers Per Cluster, Pods Per Cluster
And Percent Pod Set Per Cluster………………………………………. 16
Number of Pod Clusters Per Plant……………………………………… 17
Total number of Pods per plant………………………………………… 17
iii
French Pod Length, Width and Diameter
of eight French Bush Snap Bean Accessions…………………………… 18
Reaction to bean rust and pod borer…………………………………..... 20
Number of Marketable French pods per 5m2…………………………… 20
Number of non-marketable French pods per 5m2………………………. 20
Weight of Marketable French pods per 5m2…………………………….. 21
Weight of non-marketable French pods per 5m2………………………... 21
Total Yield per 5m2 and per hectare……………………………………. 22
Return on cash expense…………………………………………………. 23
Acceptability……………………………………………………………. 24
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION……………… 27
Summary……………………………………………………………….. 27
Conclusion…………………………………………………………....... 28
Recommendation………………………………………………………. 28
LITERATURE CITED………………………………………………………. 29
APPENDICES……………………………………………………………….. 31
iv
1
INTRODUCTION
Snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris.L) is a food crop, popularly known as “Baguio
beans” or “lubias”. It is cultivated throughout the temperate, tropical and subtropical
areas of the world. It is the species cultivated for either dried beans or the immature green
pods. (Jose, 2004).
Snap bean is recognized as important source of proteins, vitamins, and minerals,
such as calcium & phosphorus. It is consumed mainly in the green pod stage or as fresh
pods as source of nutrients for human growth and development and as source of income
for the farmers (Seb-aten, 1997).
In Benguet where vegetable raising is one of the main sources of livelihood, snap
bean is among the popular crops being grown commercially. Farmers grow various crops
that are usually adapted to the environmental conditions in their respective locality.
Under Benguet condition, snap bean is one of the vegetable crops that perform well in
terms of growth and yield.
.
French beans are bush-type beans that produce very narrow, sometimes pencil-
thin pods. They are primarily grown for their immature green pods for export market to
European Union and elite local urban markets. The length of French beans is about four
inches and six to ten millimeter in diameter. The French beans is deep emerald in color
with tiny seeds (Decker, 2009).
In the Philippines, organic farming is being advocated. The use of resistant
varieties against diseases and insects would minimize the use of synthetic fungicides and
insecticides, is very important. Evaluation of introduced resistant and high yielding snap
bean varieties adapted to organic production is therefore necessary.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
2
Traditionally, in the Philippines, specifically in La Trinidad, bush snap beans are
grown for their tender and smooth green fresh snap bean pods. Ideally, the snap bean
growers prefer varieties with stringless pods i.e without suture, straight and slender with
0.80-1.00 cm diameter (Tandang, et.al., 2005). Presently, consumers are looking for
French type varieties with immature green pods since younger pods when consumed are
better are for human health.
The evaluation of growth and French pod yield of bush bean accessions in La
Trinidad Benguet is important to determine the best bush snap bean accession in terms of
French type pod yield and to encourage farmers to grow snap bean for French type pod
production as source of nutrients and higher income for they are more expensive than
ordinarily bush snap bean..
The objectives of the study were to:
1. evaluate the growth and French pod yield of eight bush snap bean accessions
grown organically in La Trinidad, Benguet;
2. determine the acceptability and profitability of eight accessions of bush snap
bean in La Trinidad, Benguet; and
3. determine the best accessions of bush snap bean applied with organic fertilizers
in terms of growth and French pod yield, acceptability and profitability in La Trinidad
Benguet.
The study was conducted at Benguet State University-Institute of Plant Breeding
Highland Crop Research Station (BSU-IPB HCRS), La Trinidad, Benguet from
December 2009 to March 2010.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Description of the Bush Snap Bean Plant
Bush snap beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) are tender warm season annuals that
originated in part of South and Central America. They are grown for their fleshy
immature pods that reach maturity from 50-70 days after planting. As a member of the
legumes family, snap bean roots contain nodules with rhizobium species that allow the
plant to fix atmospheric nitrogen (Delahaut, 2000).
In temperate countries, the green immature pods are cooked and eaten as
vegetable. Immature pods are marketed fresh, frozen or canned, wholecut, or French- cut.
In some parts of the tropics, leaves are used as potherb and to a lesser extent the green
shelled beans are eaten (Duke, 1998)
Adaptation of Snap bean
It is reported that beans grow best on soils that hold water well and have a good
aeration and water filtration. Soil should have a pH of 5.8-6.6. Temperature is important
for rapid growth, good pod set, and early maturity (Pacher, 2002)
Snap beans grow best in areas with temperature between 150C to 210C. Planting
snap beans should be scheduled during typhoon-free months as these cannot stand
adverse condition. In Benguet, typhoons usually occur between the months of June to
November. Hence, planting should be done from December to April to avoid the on
slought of adverse weather (PCARRD, 1989).
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
4
Varietal Evaluation
Varietal evaluation is a process in crop breeding which provides comparison of
promising lines with the local check in order to establish the superiority of the lines
developed by the breeder. It is only through varietal evaluation that a breeder sees or
shows the better performance of developed lines in terms of yield and quality, resistance
to diseases and pests, stress and other parameters ( Kimeu, 1994)
Regmi (1990) stated that varietal evaluation gathers data on plant characteristics,
yield performance and pod quality. Hence, we obtain high yielding and improve cultivars
that are known to plants important role in boosting production.
The result of the study of Pog-ok (2001) revealed that Pencil pod performed
significantly better than the other varieties with regard to the number of days to flowering
and first harvesting, pod length, pod diameter and resistance. B-21 and Hav 106 gave the
highest pod yield of about 12 tons/ha. Although statistically there were similarities with
the yield of Alno and other varieties studied
Lab-oyan (1987) as cited by Cadley (1999) revealed that a space of 30 cm
between rows produced the longest pods. The test varieties and spacing on the production
had no significant interaction effect. FLO had the highest seed yield among the varieties
tested.
Paredes (2003) found that the six varieties of bush snap bean he evaluated had
varying adaptability under La Trinidad conditions. Green Crop and Contender were the
most suited varieties due to the higher production of flower and high yield.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
5
Effect of Organic fertilizer
Organic fertilizers are 'naturally' occurring compounds manufactured through
natural processes. It contains essential nutrients to improve the health and productivity of
soil and encourage plant growth. Organic nutrients increase the abundance of soil
organisms by providing organic matter and micronutrients for organisms such as fungal
mycorrhiza, which aid plants in absorbing nutrients.
PCARRD (1982) stated that organic fertilizers supply some amount of the
nutrient requirements of the crop they promote favorable soil properties, such as
granulation and good tilt for efficient aeration, easy root penetration and improve water
holding capacity.
Amok (2003) found that snap bean plants applied with organic fertilizer
performed better than the plants without fertilizer in terms of 100 seed weight with
nodule count, fresh and dry weight of leaves and yield performance.
The application of organic fertilizer is an important practice in increasing the
productivity of the soil. The transformation and availability of phosphorus in the soil will
be more complex of organic fertilizer are used in strongly acidic soils (Chen, et al., 2001)
According to Colting (1994) application of organic fertilizers affects favorable
changes in the soil properties. In general, the pH and organic matter content of the soil
increased after harvesting of the plants. This indicates that organic farming allows the
production of crops while enhancing soil productivity.
Generally, fertilizers are applied at planting or before planting (basal application).
Organic fertilizers are should be applied much earlier so that they will be decomposed
further and the nutrients will be already available to the plants. Fertilizers are applied not
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
6
only at planting but also side dressed during the vegetative growth stage of bean plants
during dry season. The first half of a required fertilizer should be applied at planting, and
the second half of N should be side dressed three weeks after seeding (AVRDC, 1990)
Koshino (1990) found that nutrient elements from organic fertilizers are released
slowly which is particularly important in avoiding salt injury, ensuring a continuous
supply of nutrients during the growing season, and producing products of better quality.
The organic fertilizers supplies some amount of the nutrient requirements of the
crop and promotes favorable soil properties such as granulation, efficient aeration, easy
root penetration and improved water holding capacity of the soil (Marcelino, 1995)
Abadilla (1982) reported that crops fertilized with organic matter have greater
resistant to pest and diseases. He also explained that humic acids and growth substances
are absorbed into plant tissue through the roots and they favor the formation of proteins
by influencing the synthesis of enzymes, increasing the vigor and insect resistance of the
plant.
Parnes (1986) claimed that organic matter is the principal source of nitrogen,
phosphorus and sulfur become available as the organic matter continuous to decompose,
most of the calcium, magnesium and potassium in the decaying organic residue are
discarded by the soil organisms during the first stages of decomposition and these
nutrients are quickly available to plants organic matter through its effect on physical
condition of the soil increases the amount of water available for plant growth.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
7
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of 120m2 was thoroughly prepared into three blocks consisting 1x5m per
plot corresponding to the eight different accessions of bush snap bean. The experiment
was laid out following randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replication.
The seeds were sown in a double row plots at a distance of 25cm x 25cm between hills
and between rows.
Basal application of the organic fertilizer, i.e. “BSU growers’ compost” was done
at planting. It was thoroughly mixed with the soil at 5 kg per 5m2 plot. It was also side-
dressed during hilling up at three weeks after planting at 2 kg per 5m2 plot.
The following accessions of bush snap beans to be obtained from BSU-IPB
HCRS were used as treatments:
CODE
ACCESSIONS
ACC1
HAB 63
ACC2
BBL 274
ACC3
Torrent
ACC4
Landmark
ACC5
HAB 323
ACC6
Green crop
ACC7
HAB 19
ACC8 Contender
All cultural management practices necessary for French snap bean production
such irrigation, weeding was done to ensure the growth of the plants.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
8
Data gathered:
1. Maturity
a. Days from sowing to emergence. This was taken by counting the number of
days from planting up to the time when at least 50% of plants per plot emerged.
b. Days from sowing to flowering. This was recorded by counting the number of
days from planting up to the time when at least 50% of the plants set flowers.
c. Days from sowing to first harvesting of fresh pods. This was done by counting
the number of days from sowing to first harvesting of fresh pods per plot. Fresh pods are
ready for harvesting when they are generally about as thin as a pencil and when the pods
are immature green.
d. Days from sowing to the last harvesting of fresh pods. This was done by
counting the number of days from sowing to last harvesting of fresh pods per plot.
2. Canopy cover. This was gathered at 30, 45 and 60 DAP using a 120 cm x 60cm
wooden frame with the ten equal sized (12cmx6cm) grids in ten sample plants per plot.
3. Plant height
a. Initial height (cm). Ten sample plants was selected at random and measured
from the base of the plant to the tip of the youngest shoot at 30 DAP using meter stick.
b. Final height (cm).This was done by measuring the ground level to the tip of
plant using meter stick during the last harvesting.
4. Reproductive Characters
a. Number of flowers per cluster. This was taken by counting the number of
flowers per cluster per plant using ten samples per plot.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
9
b. Number of pod clusters per plant. This was done by counting the number of
pod clusters per plant from ten random sample plants per plot.
c. Percent pod set per cluster. This was taken by using the formula:
Percent pod setting (%) = Total no. of pods/cluster x 100
Total no. of flowers/cluster
d. Number of pods per cluster. This was taken by counting the number of pods per
cluster using ten sample clusters per plot.
e. Total number of pods per plant. This was done by counting the number of pods
per plant using ten samples per plot.
5. Fresh Pod Characters
a. Pod length (cm). This was taken by measuring the length in cm of sample pods
from the pedicel end to the blossom end using foot ruler.
b. Pod width (cm). This was taken using the foot ruler at the middle portion of
five sample pods per plot.
c. Pod texture. This was taken by touching the pod and the texture feels coarse or
smooth.
d. Pod straightness. This was recorded as either straight or curved.
e. Pod shape. This was recorded as flat or round.
f. Pod color. This was recorded as green, dark green and others when the pods
were fully developed.
g. Pod diameter (mm). The diameter of ten sample pods per plot was measured
using vernier caliper.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
10
6. Yield and Yield Component
a. Number and weight of marketable fresh pods per plot (kg/5m2). This was
measured by counting and weighing the marketable pods per plot. Pods are considered
marketable when they are straight, tender & free from insect & diseases damages.
b. Number and weight of non-marketable fresh pods (kg/5m2). Non-marketable
pods that are abnormal in shape and affected by pest and diseases were counted and
weighed per plot.
c. Total yield per plot (kg/5m2). The total weight of marketable and non-
marketable pods per plot was computed at the end of the harvesting duration.
d. Computed yield per hectare (t/ ha). This was computed using the formula:
Yield (t/ha) = Total yield/plot (kg/m2) x 2
*where 2 is a factor to be used to convert yield in kg/5m2 plot into yield per
hectare in ton/ha.
7. Reaction to bean rust and pod borer. This was determined at peak of harvesting
stage using the respective rating scales for bean rust infection and pod borer infestation
used at BSU-IPB HCRS by Tandang et al., in 2008 as follows:
a. Bean rust.
Scale Percent infection Remarks
1 Less than 20% infection per plot Highly resistant
2 20-40% infection /plot Moderately resistant
3 41-60% infection/plot Mildly resistant
4 61-80% infection/plot Susceptible
5 80-100% infection/plot Very susceptible
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
11
b. Pod borer.
Scale Percent infestation Remarks
1 No infestation Highly tolerant
2 1-25% of the plant/plot was infested Moderately tolerant
3 25-50% of the plant/plot was infested Mildly tolerant
4 51-75% of the plant/plot was infested Susceptible
5 76-100% of the plant/plot was infested Very susceptible
8. Return on cash expenses (ROCE) Production cost and gross and net income were
recorded and determined using the following formula:
ROCE =Gross sales-total expenses x 100
Total expenses
9. Visual evaluation. Ten farmers and students were invited in the field to serve as
panelist to evaluate the eight varieties of bush snap bean at peak of harvest stage. They
were also requested to make their own selection based on the following:
a. Plant appearance. This was evaluated by the farmers/students based on the
growth of eight French bush snap bean accessions using the questionnaire in Appendix
Table 1.
b. Pod characters. This was evaluated by the farmers/students based on pod shape,
pod texture, pod color, pod straightness and general acceptability of the ten French
bush snap bean accessions using the same questionnaire in Appendix Table 1.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
12
Analysis of Data
All quantitative data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) for
randomized compete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Significance of
difference among treatment means was tested using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test
(DMRT) at 5% level of significance.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
13
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Number of Days from Sowing to Emergence
The number of days from sowing to emergence was not significant among the
eight French bush snap bean accessions. Seven of the accessions evaluated emerged in
seven days, earlier than Green crop by one day (Table 1).
Table 1. Number of days from sowing to emergence, flowering, first harvesting and last
harvesting.
NUMBER OF DAYS FROM SOWING TO
ACCESSIONS
EMERGENCE FLOWERING FIRST
LAST
HARVESTING HARVESTING
HAB 63
7 42 b 58 ab 79 ab
BBL 274
7 44 a 59 a 80 a
Torrent
7 42 b 58 ab 77 b
Landmark
7 42 b 59 a 77 b
HAB 323
7 41 b 56 b 78 ab
Green Crop
8 41 b 56 b 77 b
HAB 19
7 41 b 57 ab 78 ab
Contender
7 41 b 56 b 77 b
CV (%)
7.77
1.62
1.93
1.42
* Means followed by a common letter are not significantly different at 5% level by
DMRT.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
14
Number of Days from Sowing
to Flowering
Highly significant differences in terms of days from sowing to flowering were
observed among the eight bush snap bean accessions (Table. 1). HAB 323, Green Crop,
HAB 19 and Contender were the earliest to flower at 41 days. The other accessions
flowered within 42- 44 days after sowing. The flowering difference could be attributed to
their different genetic make-up.
Number of Days from Sowing
to First and Last Harvesting
There were significant differences among treatments in terms of the number of
days from sowing to first harvesting and last harvesting. HAB 323, Green Crop, and
Contender were the earliest to harvest at 56 days after sowing (DAS). The other
accessions were harvested at 57 to 59 days.
Again, HAB 323, Green Crop, and Contender were the earliest accessions that
reached last harvesting. BBL 274 and Landmark were the latest to reach last harvesting
Differences on the days to flowering may be attributed to varietal characteristics of the
plant.
Plant Height
The plant height at 30 and 77 DAP did not significantly differ among the eight
French bush snap bean accessions evaluated. Plant height ranged from 10 cm to 14 cm at
30 DAP and 13 to 17 cm at 77 DAP.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
15
Table 2. Initial and final plant height of eight bush snap bean accessions
HEIGHT (cm)
ACCESSIONS
30 DAP
77 DAP
HAB 63
12 14
BBL 274
16
12
Torrent
17
14
Landmark
15
10
HAB 323
16
12
Green Crop
16
13
HAB 19
13
12
Contender
15
12
CV (%)
8.86
10.61
Canopy cover
Table 5 shows the canopy cover of the eight bush snap bean accessions which
were not significantly different at 30, 45 and 60 DAP. Numerically, at 30 DAP, Green
Crop had the widest canopy. HAB 63 and HAB 19 produced the narrowest canopy. All
accessions increased in canopy cover at 45 DAP BBL 274 produced the highest canopy
cover while HAB 63, Green Crop, HAB 19 and Contender had the lowest canopy cover.
At 60 DAP, BBL 274 had he highest canopy cover while Landmark produced the lowest
canopy cover.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
16
Table 3. Canopy cover at 30, 45 and 60 DAP of eight bush snap bean accessions
CANOPY COVER (cm2)
ACCESSIONS
30 DAP
45 DAP
60 DAP
HAB 63
648 1080 1656
BBL 274
720 1224 1500
Torrent
720 1152 1656
Landmark
720 1152 1368
HAB 323
720 1152 1656
Green Crop
292 1080 1584
HAB 19
648 1080 1656
Contender
720 1080 1656
CV (%)
7.62
8.27
11.01
Number of Flowers Per Cluster,
Pods Per Cluster and
Percent Pod Set Per Cluster
No significant differences were observed on the number of flowers per cluster.
The accessions evaluated produced four to six flowers per cluster (Table 4).
Significant differences were noted on the number of pods per cluster among eight
bush snap bean accessions evaluated (Table 4). Green Crop and Contender had three pods
per cluster while all other accessions produced four except for Torrent that had five pods
per cluster.
Pod setting of eight bush beans ranged from 59- 84 %.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
17
Table 4. Number of flowers per cluster, pods per cluster and percent pod setting per
cluster of eight bush snap bean accessions
NO. OF FLOWERS NO. OF PODS PER
% POD SETTING
ACCESSIONS
PER CLUSTER
CLUSTER
PER CLUSTER
HAB 63
6
4b
70
BBL 274
4 4b 84
Torrent
5 5a 76
Landmark
5 4b 68
HAB 323
5 4b 74
Green Crop
5 3c 59
HAB 19
6 4b 64
Contender
5 3c 67
CV
(%)
18.31 12.38 16.80
* Means followed by a common letter are not significantly different at 5% level by
DMRT.
Number of Pod Clusters Per Plant
HAB 323, Green Crop and Contender gave higher number of pod clusters per
plant while all other accessions produced the same number of pod clusters per plant (13)
(Table 5).
Total number of Pods per plant
There were no significant differences observed on the total number of pods per
plant among the eight bush beans studied (Table 5). Numerically, Contender had the
highest total number of pods per plant (57). BBL 274, Torrent, HAB 323 and Green Crop
had the lowest pods per plant (52).
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
18
Table 5. Number of pod clusters per plant and total number of pods per plant of eight
bush snap bean accessions
NUMBER OF POD
TOTAL NUMBER OF
ACCESSIONS
CLUSTERS PER PLANT
PODS PER PLANT
HAB 63
13
53
BBL 274
13 52
Torrent
13 52
Landmark
13 54
HAB 323
14 52
Green Crop
14 52
HAB 19
13 54
Contender
14 54
CV (%)
7.92
8.68
French Pod length, Width
and diameter of eight
French Bush Snap Bean Accessions
There were no significant differences in French pod length of the accessions
studied. BBL 274 gave the longest pods while HAB 63, Torrent and Landmark recorded
the shortest pods (Table 6).
Results showed no significant differences observed on the width of the pods
among the eight accessions used. All of them gave statistically similar width which
ranged from 0.3 to 0.5 cm (Table 6). HAB 323 gave the widest pods and Torrent
recorded the narrowest pods.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
19
The diameter of the eight bush snap bean accessions were also statistically
similar. Majority of the snap bean accessions evaluated had around 0.4 mm pod diameter.
Torrent had 2 mm while HAB 63 registered 5 mm (Table 6 and Figure 1).
Table 6. Fresh pod length, width and diameter of eight French bush snap bean accessions
POD LENGTH
POD WIDTH POD
DIAMETER
ACCESSIONS
(cm) (cm) (mm)
HAB 63
9
0.4
0.4
BBL 274
11
0.4
0.4
Torrent
9
0.4
0.2
Landmark
9
0.4
0.4
HAB 323
10
0.5
0.5
Green Crop
10
0.4
0.4
HAB 19
10
0.4
0.4
Contender
10
0.4
0.4
CV
(%)
12.00 9.97 18.84
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
20
Reaction to bean rust and pod borer
It was observed that the eight evaluated accessions were highly resistant to bean rust and
moderately tolerant to pod borer under organic production in La Trinidad, Benguet.
Figure 1. French pods of eight bush snap bean accessions
Number of Marketable French pods per 5m2
All the accessions tested had comparable number of marketable pods per plot.
HAB 63 produced the highest number of marketable pods while HAB 19 gave the lowest
number of marketable pods per plot (Table 7).
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
21
Number of non-marketable pods per 5m2
Table 7 shows the number of non-marketable pods per plot. HAB 63 obtained the
highest number of non-marketable French pods per plot followed by BBL 274. No
significant differences were obtained among the accessions grown.
Table 7. Number of marketable and non-marketable pods of eight bush snap bean
accessions
NUMBER OF PODS PER (5m2)
ACCESSIONS
MARKETABLE NON-MARKETABLE
HAB 63
185
59
BBL 274
176
38
Torrent
135
32
Landmark
153
31
HAB 323
175
33
Green Crop
134
31
HAB 19
129
37
Contender
162 33
CV (%)
18.97
28.48
Weight of Marketable French pods
The marketable French pod yield per plot of eight bush snap bean accessions were
statistically similar. It ranged from 1.7 to 2.9 kg/5m2 (Table 8).
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
22
Weight of non-marketable French pods
Highly significant differences in non-marketable French pod yield were observed
among the treatments. HAB 63 produced heavier non-marketable French pod yield/plot
than all other accessions (Table 8).
Table 8. Weight of marketable and non-marketable French pods per plot of eight French
bush snap bean accessions
ACCESSIONS
WEIGHT PER 5m2 (kg)
MARKETABLE NON-MARKETABLE
HAB 63
2.9
1.5a
BBL 274
2.73
0.64b
Torrent
2.86
0.60b
Landmark
2.33
0.73b
HAB 323
2.54
0.73b
Green Crop
1.87
0.73b
HAB 19
1.78
0.72b
Contender
2.5
1.06b
CV (%)
20.23
29.33
* Means followed by a common letter are not significantly different at 5% level by
DMRT.
Total Yield per 5m2 and per hectare
HAB 63 gave higher total French pod yield than the comparable French pod yield
of all other bush snap beans tested (Table 9). The total yield per plot and per hectare of
the eight French bush snap bean accessions could be attributed to high marketable and
non-marketable yield.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
23
Table 9. Total yield per 5m2 and per hectare of eight French bush snap bean accessions
ACCESSIONS TOTAL
YIELD
PER 5m2 (kg)
PER HECTARE (tons)
HAB 63
4.5a
9.12a
BBL 274
3.4b
6.74b
Torrent
3.5b
6.90b
Landmark
3.0b
6.11b
HAB 323
3.2b
6.57b
Green Crop
2.6b
5.20b
HAB 19
2.5b
5.00b
Contender
3.5b
7.12b
CV (%)
17.39
17.39
* Means followed by a common letter are not significantly different at 5% level by
DMRT.
Return on Cash Expense (ROCE)
HAB 63 had the highest return on cash expense (ROCE) followed by Contender,
Torrent and BBL 274 while HAB 19 had the lowest return on cash expense because of
their lower pod yield.
This indicates that high ROCE could be realized from growing bush snap bean
organically for French pod production.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
24
Table 10. Return on cash expense of growing eight French bush snap bean accessions
ACCESSIONS YIELD
GROSS
TOTAL
NET
ROCE
(kg)
SALES
EXPENSES INCOME
(%)
HAB 63
4.56 136.8 32.61 104.19
319.50
BBL 274
3.37 101.1 32.61 68.49 210.03
Torrent
3.45 103.5 32.61 70.89 217.39
Landmark
3.06 91.80 32.61 59.19 107.57
HAB 323
3.28 98.40 32.61 65.79 201.75
Green Crop
2.60 78.00 32.61 45.39 138.85
HAB 19
2.50 75.00 32.61 42.39 129.99
Contender
3.56 106.8 32.61 74.19 227.51
Fresh pods were sold at PhP 30 per kg.
Acceptability
Ten farmers and students were invited to evaluate the harvested pods of the eight
French bush snap bean accessions. The farmers consisted of five females and one male
with ages ranging from 35-50 years old while four of the students had ages ranging from
19- 21 years old. The result of the visual evaluation based on plant appearance, pod
characters, and general acceptability of the eight French bush snap bean accessions are
shown in Table 11.
Based on appearance, HAB 63 Landmark and HAB 323 were liked moderately.
BBL 274, Torrent and Contender were liked slightly. HAB 19 was disliked slightly and
Green Crop was disliked moderately.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
25
In terms of French pod characters, BBL 274 and HAB 323 were liked very much
and the other accessions were liked moderately except for HAB 19 which was likes
slightly. Only Green Crop was disliked very much because of its flat, big and coarse
pods.
HAB 63, BBL 274 and HAB 323 were liked very much by farmers and students
in La Trinidad. HAB 63 was robust and produced many pods. BBL 274 produced
straight, smooth, green French pods while Torrent, Landmark and Contender were liked
moderately because of their desirable characters. Green Crop and HAB 19 were liked
slightly
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
26
Table 11.Visual evaluation by farmers and students of eight French bush snap bean accessions
POD CHARACTERS
GENERAL
REASONS FOR
ACCESSIONS APPEARANCE
SHAPE SIZE
TEXTURE
ACCEPTABILITY
COLOR
ACCEPTABILITY
HAB 63
Like
Like
Like
Like
Like
Like very much
Very robust,
moderately
moderately moderately moderately moderately
produced more
pods
BBL 274
Like slightly
Like very
Like very
Like very
Like
Like very much
Produced straight,
much
much
much
moderately
smooth and green
pods
Torrent Like
Like
Like
Like
Like very
Like moderately
Exhibited good
moderately
moderately moderately moderately
much
plant height
Landmark Like Like
Like
Like
Like
Like moderately
It had long narrow,
moderately
moderately moderately moderately moderately
straight pods
HAB 323
Like
Like very
Like
Like
Like
Like very much
Early maturing,
moderately
much
moderately moderately moderately
had good pod set
Green Crop
Dislike very
Dislike
Dislike
Dislike
Like
Like slightly
Flat,big,coarse
much
very much
very much
very much
moderately
pods
HAB 19
Dislike slightly
Like
Like
Like
Like
Like slightly
Had long pods
slightly
slightly
slightly
moderately
Contender Like
slightly Like Like
Like
Like very
Like moderately
Produced good
moderately moderately moderately
much
growth
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
27
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
The study aimed to evaluate the growth and French pod yield of eight bush snap
bean accessions grown organically in La Trinidad, Benguet; to determine their
acceptability and profitability; and to determine the best accessions in terms of growth and
French pod yield, acceptability and profitability in La Trinidad, Benguet.
All the accessions emerged in seven days except for Green Crop which emerged
one day later. HAB 323, Green Crop, HAB 19 and Contender were the earliest to flower at
41 DAS. The earliest accessions to harvest for French pod production accessions were
harvested two to three days later.
All the accessions had comparable initial and final plant height, and canopy cover
at 30, 45 and 60 DAP. The eight bush snap bean accessions produced four to six flowers
per cluster and three to five pods per cluster.
BBL 274 had the highest percentage pod setting while HAB 323, Green Crop and
Contender had the highest number of pod clusters per plant. Contender produced the
highest total number of French pods per plot. All the accessions had comparable pod
length, width and diameter.
The eight accessions had statistically similar number and weight of marketable
French pods per plot. The accessions produced higher total French pod yield per plot and
per hectare. All the accessions evaluated had high resistance to bean rust and were
moderately tolerant to pod borer under organic production.
The highest ROCE was obtained from producing HAB 63, BBL 274 and HAB
323. The accessions were liked very much based on plant morphology, pod characters and
general acceptability.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
28
Conclusion
The eight bush snap bean accessions were comparable in days from sowing to
emergence, to plant height, canopy cover, flowers per cluster, percentage pod setting, pod
clusters per plant, number and weight of marketable French pods, total number of pods per
plot, pod length, width and diameter.
The accessions differed in number of days from sowing to flowering, to first and
last harvesting, pods per cluster, number and weight of marketable French pods per plot
and total French pod yield.
HAB 63 was the highest French pod yielder and the most profitable to grow
organically although all other accessions had comparable French pod yield and ROCE.
HAB 63, BBL 274 and HAB 323 were acceptable to farmers and students because
of their good growth and pod characteristics.
Recommendation
Based on the results of this study, HAB 63,BBL 274 and HAB 323 could be
planted in La Trinidad Benguet for French pod production because of their good growth,
high yielding ability, profitability and acceptability during the dry season.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
29
LITERATURE CITED
ABADILLA, D. C. 1982. Organic Farming. Quezon City: AFA Publishing inc. Pp.81-
181.
AMOK, M. 2003. Nodulation and Seed yield of new varieties of snap bean as influenced
by organic fertilizer.BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. P. 15.
AVRDC. 1990. Vegetable production Training Manual. Asian Vegetable Development
Center.Shanhua, Tainan, Taiwan. P. 447.
CADLEY, D. T. 1999. Dry bean yield of five bush snap bean varieties under La Trinidad
Benguet Condition. BS Thesis. BSU La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 5.
CHEN, J. H, WU, J .T and HUNG, W. T .2001. Effect of compost on the availability of
nitrogen and phosphorus in strongly acidic soil. Department of Agricultural
chemistry, Taiwan Agriculture Institute, Wu Feng. Taiwan. Pp. 1-2
COLTING, R. D. 1994. Yield Response of snap bean and cabbage on pure organic
fertilization. The Philippine Journal of Crop Science
DECKER , H. M. 2009. Promoting farm/non-farm linkages: a case study of French bean
processing in Kenya - Lydia Neema Kimenye. Accessed on December 15, 2009
at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4383e/y4383e0f.htm
DELAHAUT, K. A. 2000. Processing Snap bean Production. The Board of Regents of
the University of Wiscousin System. Accessed on November 26, 2009 at http://
www.ipcm.wisc.edu/piap/snapbeans/default.htm.
DUKE, J. A. 1998 .Handbook of Energy Crops. Accessed December 15, 2009 at http://
www.purdue.edu/new crop/duke energy/duke index.html.
JOSE, M. 2004. Varietal Characterization, Evaluation and Correlation Study in Bush
Snap Bean. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. P. 1.
KIMEU, A .M. 1994. Yield Response of Two Bush and Pole snap bean Varieties to
Three Mulching Materials.MS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 1-2.
KOSHINO, S. O. 1990. The use of organic and chemical in Japan. Food and Fertilizer
technology Center. Extension Bulletin. Pp. 13-14.
LAB-OYAN, R. T. Yield evaluation of AVRDC Chinese cabbage varieties under
highland condition. P. 15.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
30
MARCELINO,C. B. 1995. Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers on the growth and
yield of NCT-8 Japonica rice variety. P. 2.
PACHER, S. 2002. Kitchen Garden about snap beans. Accessed on December 15, 2009
at http://www.motherearth news.com
PAREDES, O. P. 2003. Evaluation of bush snap beans in Longlong, La Trinidad,
Benguet. P. 18.
PARNES, R. 1986. Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers. Woods and Agricultural Institute.
P. 99.
PCARRD. 1989. Snap bean Techno guide for the Highlands. First edition. BSU, La
Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 1-5.
POG.OK, S. K. 2001.Varietal evaluation of promising lines and path coefficient analysis
in pole snapbeans. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. P. 1.
REGMI, J. F. 1990. On farm evaluation of potential varieties of pole snap beans at Pico
La Trinidad Benguet.MS Thesis. BSU La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 39-40.
SEB-ATEN, D. N. 1997. Efficacy evaluation of 14-10-12 and 18-1628 green bee foliar
fertilizer on the growth and yield of Snap beans. BS Thesis. BSU La Trinidad
Benguet. Pp. 1-3.
TANDANG, L. L. KIMEU, A. M. AMLOS, B. A., BAGTILA, J. G., KEBASEN, B. B.
and G. R. MAGHIRANG. 2008. Development and Evaluation of Snap bean
(Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars for the Philippine Highlands. A paper presented
during the 2009 Agency In-house Review at Benguet State University, La
Trinidad Benguet.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
31
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1.Visual evaluation.
Structured questionnaire used in evaluating ten bush snap bean accessions for
French type pod under La Trinidad Benguet.
Name:
Sex:
Age:
Status:
Pod characters
Accessions Appearance
General
Reasons for
Shape texture Color
straightness acceptability
acceptabilit
y
HAB 63
BBL 274
Torrent
Landmark
HAB 323
Green Crop
HAB 19
Contender
Legend Reaction Scale
1-Like extremely
2-Like very much
3-Like moderately
4-Like slightly
5-Neither like nor not dislike
6-Dislike slightly
7-Dislike moderately
8-Dislike very much
9-Dislike extremely
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
32
Appendix Table 2. Number of days from sowing to emergence of eight bush snap bean
accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
7
7
8
22
7
BBL 274
7
7
7
21
7
Torrent
8
7
7
22
7
Landmark
7
7
7
21
7
HAB 323
7
8
8
23
7
Green Crop
8
8
8
24
8
HAB 19
7
7
7
21
7
Contender
7
7
9
23
7
TOTAL 58
58
61 177 7
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.750
0.375
Treatment 7
2.958
0.423
1.51ns 2.77
4.28
Error 14
3.917
0.280
TOTAL
23
7.625
ns= Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%)= 7.17
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
33
Appendix Table 3. Number of days to flowering of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
HAB 63
44
41
41
126
42
BBL 274
44
44
44
132
44
Torrent
42
42
41
125
41
Landmark
44
42
42
128
42
HAB 323
41
41
41
123
41
Green Crop
41
41
41
123
41
HAB 19
41 41 41 123 41
Contender 42
41
41
124
41
TOTAL
339
333
332
1004
840
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
f
f
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
3.583
1.792
Treatment
7
23.333
3.333
7.27**
2.77 4.28
Error 14
6.417
0.458
TOTAL 23
33.333
**= Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =1.62
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
34
Appendix Table 4. Number of days to first harvest of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
59
56
59
174
58
BBL 274
59 59 59 177 59
Torrent
59 59 56 174 58
Landmark
59 59 59 177 59
HAB 323
56 56 56 168 56
Green Crop
56 56 56 168 56
HAB 19
56 59 56 171 57
Contender
56 56 56 168 56
TOTAL
460
460
457
1377
459
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.750
0.375
Treatment
7
35.625
5.089
4.13*
2.77 4.28
Error 14
17.250
1.232
TOTAL
23
53.625
*= significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =1.93
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
35
Appendix Table 5. Days from sowing to last harvesting of eight bush snap bean
accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
80
77
80
237
79
BBL 274
80 80 80 240 80
Torrent
80 80 77 237 79
Landmark
80 80 80 240 80
HAB 323
77 77 77 231 77
Green Crop
77 77 77 231 77
HAB 19
77 80 77 234 78
Contender
77 77 77 231 77
TOTAL
628
628
625
1881
627
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.750
0.375
Treatment
7
35.625
5.089
4.13*
2.77 4.28
Error 14
17.250
1.232
TOTAL
23
53.625
*= significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =1.42
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
36
Appendix Table 6. Initial plant height at 30 DAP of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
12.82
12.62
13.21
38.65
12.88
BBL 274
13.74 12.46 11.11 37.31 12.43
Torrent
14.00 14.31 15.84 44.15 14.71
Landmark
11.85 10.63 10.51 32.99 10.99
HAB 323
13.96 12.04 12.53 38.99 12.96
Green Crop
11.59 15.03 13.00 39.89 13.29
HAB 19
13.23 12.13 12.04 37.57 12.52
Contender
11.92 12.18 13.82 37.92 12.64
TOTAL
103.11
102.2
102.06
307.37
102.42
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.081
0.041
Treatment 7
22.319
3.188
2.48ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
18.016
1.287
TOTAL
23
40.416
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation(%)=1.42
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
37
Appendix Table 7. Final plant height of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
15.62
13.89
15.38
44.89
14.96
BBL 274
15.72 16.73 16.49 48.94 16.31
Torrent
19.03 17.49 15.17 51.69 17.23
Landmark
16.88 12.17 16.13 45.18 15.06
HAB 323
17.42 15.42 15.36 48.02 16.07
Green Crop
14.3 18.62 16.26 49.18 16.39
HAB 19
16.33 11.84 13.06 41.77 13.92
Contender
16.05 15.69 15.53 47.27 15.76
TOTAL
131.35
121.85
123.92
377.12
125.7
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
6.239
3.120
Treatment 7
22.329
3.190
1.14ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
38.921
2.780
TOTAL
23
67.489
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation(%)=10.61
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
38
Appendix Table 8. Canopy cover at 30 DAP of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
11.1
8.9
9.6
29.6
9.87
BBL 274
10.0 9.2 12.5 31.7 10.56
Torrent
10.9 9.8 9.4 30.1 10.03
Landmark
10.7 9.4 11.5 31.6 10.53
HAB 323
11.1 9.9 10.3 31.3 10.43
Green Crop
11.4 10.7 11.2 33.3 11.10
HAB 19
10.8 9.7 9.4 29.9 9.97
Contender
11.0 10.1 11.5 32.6 10.87
TOTAL
87.0
77.7
85.4
25.1
83.37
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
6.181
0.630
Treatment 7
4.073
0.582
0.92ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
8.826
0.630
TOTAL
23
19.080
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%)=7.62
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
39
Appendix Table 8. Canopy cover at 45 DAP of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
16.0
15.5
15.6
47.1
15.7
BBL 274
19.6 16.0 16.9 52.5 17.05
Torrent
17.3 16.3 17.1 50.7 16.09
Landmark
17.0 14.3 17.5 48.8 16.27
HAB 323
19.8 15.4 14.8 5.00 16.67
Green Crop
16.4 14.5 15.6 46.5 15.05
HAB 19
17.9 15.2 13.2 46.3 15.43
Contender
15.1 16.0 16.4 47.5 15.83
TOTAL
139.1 123.2 127.1 344.4 129.8
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
17.167
8.584
Treatment 7
11.578
1.654
0.92ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
25.219
1.801
TOTAL
23
53.965
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%)=8.27
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
40
Appendix Table 9. Canopy cover at 60 DAP of eight bush bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
HAB 63
23.6
23.3
22.3
69.2
23.07
BBL 274
27.8 24.4 24.8 77.0 25.65
Torrent
24.2 25.3 22.3 71.8 23.93
Landmark
24.1 23.6 11.6 59.3 19.77
HAB 323
26.0 23.4 21.0 70.4 23.47
Green Crop
22.2 22.1 23.4 67.7 22.57
HAB 19
24.1 22.6 20.6 67.3 22.43
Contender
23.2 24.5 22.2 69.9 23.3
TOTAL
195.2 165.8 168.2 552.6 184.19
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
39.000
19.500
Treatment 7
56.833
8.119
1.25ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
90.987
6.499
TOTAL
23
186.820
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =11.01
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
41
Appendix Table 10. Number of flowers per cluster of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
Mean
I II III
HAB 63
8
5
5
18
6.00
BBL 274
4 5 5 14
4.67
Torrent
5 7 5 17
5.67
Landmark
6 5 6 17
5.67
HAB 323
5 5 6 16
5.33
Green Crop
6 5 6 17
5.67
HAB 19
7 7 5 19
6.33
Contender
6 5 4 15
5.00
TOTAL
45
44
42
133
44.34
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
1.583
0.792
Treatment 7
5.958
0.851
0.83ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
14.417
1.030
TOTAL
23
21.958
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =18.31
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
42
Appendix Table 11. Number of pods per cluster of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
Mean
I II III
HAB 63
4
4
4
12
4b
BBL 274
4 4 4 12 4b
Torrent
4 6 4 14 5a
Landmark
3 4 4 11 4b
HAB 323
3 4 4 11 4b
Green Crop
3 4 3 10 3c
HAB 19
4 4 4 12 4b
Contender
3 3 3 9 3c
TOTAL
28 33 30 91 31
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
1.583
0.792
Treatment
7
5.292
0.756
3.43*
2.77 4.28
Error 14
3.083
0.220
TOTAL
23
9.958
*= significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =12.38
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
43
Appendix Table 12. Percent pod set per cluster of eight bush bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
Mean
I II III
HAB 63
48.19
80.77
81.48
210.44
70.15
BBL 274
92.31 81.48 79.63 253.42 84.47
Torrent
77.55 55.38 95.65 228.58 76.19
Landmark
55.74 74.07 76.36 206.17 68.72
HAB 323
65.38 88.89 69.09 223.36 74.45
Green crop
53.33 67.31 58.62 179.26 59.75
HAB 19
53.62 61.19 78.00 192.81 64.27
Contender
59.65 69.39 74.42 203.46 67.82
TOTAL
505.77 578.48 613.25 1697.5 565.82
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
752.697
376.348
Treatment 7
1224.584
174.941
1.24ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
1976.371
141.169
TOTAL 23
3953.651
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =16.80
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
44
Appendix Table 13. Number of pod clusters per plot of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
12
14
14
40
13
BBL 274
13
13
13
39
13
Torrent
11
14
15
40
13
Landmark
13
15
13
41
13
HAB 323
15
14
14
43
14
Green Crop
14
15
13
42
14
HAB 19
14
13
13
40
13
Contender
15
14
14
43
14
TOTAL 107
112
109 328 107
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
1.583
0.792
Treatment 7
5.333
0.762
0.65ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
16.417
1.173
TOTAL 23
23.333
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =7.92
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
45
Appendix Table 14. Total number. of pods per plant of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
Mean
I II III
HAB 63
47
57
56
160
53
BBL 274
50
54
53
157
52
Torrent
44
54
60
158
52
Landmark
51
59
52
162
54
HAB 323
46
56
56
158
52
Green Crop
43
61
52
156
52
HAB 19
58
52
52
162
54
Contender
58
57
56
171
54
TOTAL
397
450
437
1284
423
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
190.750
95.375
Treatment 7
53.333
7.619
0.35ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
301.917
21.565
TOTAL
23
546.000
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =8.68
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
46
Appendix Table 15. Pod length of eight bush snap bean accessions (cm)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
9.27
10.01
10.01
27.92
9.09
BBL 274
9.59
14.89
9.81
34.29
11.43
Torrent
9.54
9.87
8.81
28.22
9.4
Landmark
9.24
9.63
10.38
29.25
9.75
HAB 323
10.71
10.7
10.87
32.38
10.76
Green Crop
10.02
11.09
9.65
30.76
10.25
HAB 19
9.87
9.99
10.44
30.3
10.1
Contender
10.6
9.8
9.68
30.08
10.02
TOTAL
78.84
428.5
79.65
243.2
80.8
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
5.479
2.740
Treatment 7
11.530
1.647
1.12ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
20.585
1.470
TOTAL
23
37.594
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =12.00
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
47
Appendix Table 16.Pod width of eight bush snap bean accessions (cm)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
0.39
0.51
0.41
1.31
0.44
BBL 274
0.45
0.04
0.49
1.34
0.45
Torrent
0.04
0.04
0.39
1.19
0.04
Landmark
0.49
0.39
0.55
1.43
0.48
HAB 323
0.49
0.52
0.55
1.56
0.52
Green Crop
0.44
0.48
0.43
1.35
0.45
HAB 19
0.43
0.49
0.52
1.44
0.48
Contender
0.41
0.41
0.46
1.28
0.43
TOTAL
3.5
3.6
3.8
10.9
3.65
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.006
0.003
Treatment 7
0.030
0.004
2.08ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
0.029
0.002
TOTAL 23
0.064
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =12.00
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
48
Appendix Table 17. Pod diameter of eight bush snap bean accessions (mm)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
HAB 63
0.48
0.48
0.03
1.26
0.42
BBL 274
0.42
0.41
0.41
1.24
0.41
Torrent
0.26
0.03
0.28
0.84
0.28
Landmark
0.45
0.28
0.47
1.20
0.40
HAB 323
0.47
0.54
0.54
1.55
0.52
Green Crop
0.29
0.49
0.47
1.25
0.42
HAB 19
0.48
0.42
0.51
1.41
0.47
Contender
0.37
0.34
0.05
1.21
0.40
TOTAL 3.22 3.26
3.8
8.88
3.32
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.005
0.002
Treatment 7 0.096
0.014
2.24ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
0.086
0.006
TOTAL 23
0.186
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =18.84
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
49
Appendix Table 18. Number of marketable pods per plot of eight bush snap bean
accessions (5m2)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
169
207
180
556
185
BBL 274
190
182
157
529
176
Torrent
156
110
141
407
135
Landmark
142
184
134
460
153
HAB 323
226
162
140
526
175
Green Crop
172
117
114
403
134
HAB 19
105
150
132
387
129
Contender
151
137
198
486
162
TOTAL 1311
1249
1196
3756
1249
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
830.083
415.042
Treatment 7
9903.833
1414.833
1.61ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
12321.917
880.137
TOTAL 23
23055.833
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =18.97
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
50
Appendix Table 19. Number of non-marketable pods per plot of eight bush snap bean
accessions (5m2)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
HAB 63
59
49
71
179
59
BBL 274
30
35
49
114
38
Torrent 46
22
28
96
32
Landmark 32 32 31 95 31
HAB 323
54
23
23
100
33
Green Crop
37
33
24
94
31
HAB 19
40
23
49
112
37
Contender
25
33
42
100
33
TOTAL
323
250
317
890
294
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
410.583
205.292
Treatment 7
1881.833
268.833
2.41ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
1561.417
111.530
TOTAL
23
3583.833
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation(%)=18.97
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
51
Appendix Table 20. Weight of marketable pods per plot of eight French bush snap bean
accessions (kg /5m2)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
2.67
3.26
2.77
8.07
2.9
BBL 274
2.71
2.08
2.68
8.19
2.73
Torrent
2.59
2.56
3.42
8.57
2.86
Landmark
2.71
2.67
1.61
6.99
2.33
HAB 323
3.03
2.64
1.96
7.63
2.54
Green Crop
1.93
1.95
1.73
5.61
1.87
HAB 19
1.28
1.96
2.11
5.35
1.78
Contender
2.42
1.85
3.22
7.49
2.5
Total
19.34
19.69
19.5
58.53
19.51
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE f
f
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.008
0.004
Treatment 7
3.754 0.536
2.20ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
3.409
0.243
TOTAL
23
7.171
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation(%)=20.23
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
52
Appendix Table 21. Weight of non-marketable pods per plot of eight French bush snap
bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
1.49
1.68
1.33
4.5
1.5a
BBL 274
0.58
0.61
0.73
1.92
0.64b
Torrent
0.78
0.5
0.51
1.79
0.60b
Landmark
0.75
0.74
0.69
2.18
0.73b
HAB 323
0.94
0.07
0.56
2.2
0.73b
Green Crop
0.09
0.07
0.59
2.19
0.73b
HAB 19
1.00
0.48
0.68
2.16
0.72b
Contender
0.51
1.26
1.42
3.19
1.06b
Total
6.95
6.67
6.51
20.13
6.71
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.012
0.006
Treatment
7
1.906
0.272
4.50**
2.77 4.28
Error 14
0.847
0.061
TOTAL
23
2.766
**= Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =29.33
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
53
Appendix Table 22. Total yield per plot of eight French bush snap bean (kg/5m2)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
4.16
4.94
4.59
13.69
4.5a
BBL 274
3.29
3.41
3.41
10.11
3.4b
Torrent
3.37
3.06
3.93
10.36
3.5b
Landmark
3.46
3.41
2.03
9.17
3.0b
HAB 323
3.97
3.34
2.55
9.86
3.2b
Green Crop
2.83
2.65
2.32
7.08
2.6b
HAB 19
2.28
2.44
2.79
7.51
2.5b
Contender
2.93
3.11
4.64
10.68
3.5b
Total
26.29
26.36
26.53
79.18
26.2
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.004
0.002
Treatment
7
8.268
1.233
3.74*
2.77 4.28
Error 14
4.608
0.329
TOTAL
23
13.240
*= significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =17.39
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
54
Appendix Table 23. Computed yield per hectare of eight French bush snap bean
accessions (t /ha)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
8.32
9.88
9.18
27.38
9.12b
BBL 274
6.58
6.82
6.82
20.22
6.74b
Torrent
6.74
6.12
7.86
20.72
6.90b
Landmark
6.92
6.82
4.06
18.34
6.11b
HAB 323
7.94
6.68
5.01
19.72
6.57b
Green Crop
5.66
5.03
4.64
15.06
5.20b
HAB 19
4.56
4.88
5.58
15.02
5.00b
Contender
5.86
6.22
9.28
21.36
7.12b
Total 52.58
52.72
53.06
158.36
52.76
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.015
0.015
Treatment
7
34.513
4.930
3.74*
2.77 4.28
Error 14
18.433
1.317
TOTAL
23
52.961
*= significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =17.39
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
55
Appendix Table 24. Reaction to bean rust of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
1
1
1
3
1
BBL 274
1
1
1
3
1
Torrent
1
1
1
3
1
Landmark
1
1
1
3
1
HAB 323
1
1
1
3
1
Green Crop
2
1
1
4
1.33
HAB 19
1
2
1
4
1.33
Contender
1
1
2
4
1.33
Total
9
9
9
27
8.99
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.000
0.000
Treatment 7 0.625
0.089
0.62ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
2.000
0.143
TOTAL
23
2.625
ns= non-significant Coefficient of Variation(%)=10.76
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
56
Appendix Table 25. Reaction to pod borer of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
HAB 63
2
2
3
9
3
BBL 274
2
2
2
6
2
Torrent
2
2
3
7
2.33
Landmark
3
2
2
7
2.33
HAB 323
2
2
3
7
2.33
Green Crop
2 2 2 6 2.00
HAB 19
2 2 2 6 2.00
Contender
2 2 2 7 2.33
Total
18 18 19 55 18.32
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.750
0.375
Treatment
7 6.292
0.899
1.47ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
8.583
0.613
TOTAL
23 15.625
ns= non-significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =10.93
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
DUMAYAG, ROSELDA B. APRIL 2010. Growth and French Pod Yield of
Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically in La Trinidad Benguet. Benguet
State University, La Trinidad Benguet.
Adviser: Leoncia L. Tandang, Ph.D.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to evaluate the growth and French pod yield of eight
bush snap bean accessions grown organically; determine the acceptability and
profitability of eight bush snap bean accessions for French pod production in La Trinidad,
Benguet; and to determine the best accessions of eight bush snap beans applied with
organic fertilizers in terms of growth and French pod yield, acceptability and profitability
in La Trinidad, Benguet.
All the eight bush snap bean accessions emerged in seven days after sowing
except for Green Crop that emerged in eight DAS. HAB 323, Green Crop, HAB 19 and
Contender were the earliest to flower in 41 DAS. Torrent produced the tallest plants while
Landmark produced the shortest plants. At 30 DAP, Green Crop recorded the highest
canopy cover while BBL 274 had increased canopy cover at 45 and 60 DAP. All
accessions produced four to six flowers per cluster and three to five pods per cluster. BBL
274 had the highest total number of French pods per plant. BBL 274 had the longest pods,
HAB 323 had the widest pods and the pod diameter of eight bush snap bean accessions
ranged from 0.2-0.5 cm. HAB 63 produced the highest French pod yield per plot and total
yield per hectare, highest ROCE and highest acceptability rating by farmers and students
together with BBL 274 and HAB 323.All the eight bush snap bean accessions exhibited
resistance to bean rust and moderately tolerant to pod borer.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography………………………………………………………………….. i
Table of Contents…………………………………………………………….. i
Abstract……………………………………………………………………….. iii
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………… 1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Description of Bush Snap Bean Plant……………………………………. 2
Adaptation of Snap bean………………………………………………..... 3
Varietal Evaluation……………………………………………………….. 4
Effect of Organic fertilizer……………………………………………….. 5
MATERIALS AND METHODS……………………………………………… 7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Number of Days from Sowing to Emergence……………………………. 13
Number of Days from Sowing to Flowering…………………………....... 13
Number of Days from Sowing to First Harvesting……………………….. 14
Number of Days from Sowing to Last Harvesting……………………….. 14
Plant height…………………………………………….............................. 15
Canopy cover…………………………………………………………... 16
Number of Flowers Per Cluster, Pods Per Cluster
And Percent Pod Set Per Cluster………………………………………. 16
Number of Pod Clusters Per Plant……………………………………… 17
Total number of Pods per plant………………………………………… 17
iii
French Pod Length, Width and Diameter
of eight French Bush Snap Bean Accessions…………………………… 18
Reaction to bean rust and pod borer…………………………………..... 20
Number of Marketable French pods per 5m2…………………………… 20
Number of non-marketable French pods per 5m2………………………. 20
Weight of Marketable French pods per 5m2…………………………….. 21
Weight of non-marketable French pods per 5m2………………………... 21
Total Yield per 5m2 and per hectare……………………………………. 22
Return on cash expense…………………………………………………. 23
Acceptability……………………………………………………………. 24
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION……………… 27
Summary……………………………………………………………….. 27
Conclusion…………………………………………………………....... 28
Recommendation………………………………………………………. 28
LITERATURE CITED………………………………………………………. 29
APPENDICES……………………………………………………………….. 31
iv
1
INTRODUCTION
Snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris.L) is a food crop, popularly known as “Baguio
beans” or “lubias”. It is cultivated throughout the temperate, tropical and subtropical
areas of the world. It is the species cultivated for either dried beans or the immature green
pods. (Jose, 2004).
Snap bean is recognized as important source of proteins, vitamins, and minerals,
such as calcium & phosphorus. It is consumed mainly in the green pod stage or as fresh
pods as source of nutrients for human growth and development and as source of income
for the farmers (Seb-aten, 1997).
In Benguet where vegetable raising is one of the main sources of livelihood, snap
bean is among the popular crops being grown commercially. Farmers grow various crops
that are usually adapted to the environmental conditions in their respective locality.
Under Benguet condition, snap bean is one of the vegetable crops that perform well in
terms of growth and yield.
.
French beans are bush-type beans that produce very narrow, sometimes pencil-
thin pods. They are primarily grown for their immature green pods for export market to
European Union and elite local urban markets. The length of French beans is about four
inches and six to ten millimeter in diameter. The French beans is deep emerald in color
with tiny seeds (Decker, 2009).
In the Philippines, organic farming is being advocated. The use of resistant
varieties against diseases and insects would minimize the use of synthetic fungicides and
insecticides, is very important. Evaluation of introduced resistant and high yielding snap
bean varieties adapted to organic production is therefore necessary.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
2
Traditionally, in the Philippines, specifically in La Trinidad, bush snap beans are
grown for their tender and smooth green fresh snap bean pods. Ideally, the snap bean
growers prefer varieties with stringless pods i.e without suture, straight and slender with
0.80-1.00 cm diameter (Tandang, et.al., 2005). Presently, consumers are looking for
French type varieties with immature green pods since younger pods when consumed are
better are for human health.
The evaluation of growth and French pod yield of bush bean accessions in La
Trinidad Benguet is important to determine the best bush snap bean accession in terms of
French type pod yield and to encourage farmers to grow snap bean for French type pod
production as source of nutrients and higher income for they are more expensive than
ordinarily bush snap bean..
The objectives of the study were to:
1. evaluate the growth and French pod yield of eight bush snap bean accessions
grown organically in La Trinidad, Benguet;
2. determine the acceptability and profitability of eight accessions of bush snap
bean in La Trinidad, Benguet; and
3. determine the best accessions of bush snap bean applied with organic fertilizers
in terms of growth and French pod yield, acceptability and profitability in La Trinidad
Benguet.
The study was conducted at Benguet State University-Institute of Plant Breeding
Highland Crop Research Station (BSU-IPB HCRS), La Trinidad, Benguet from
December 2009 to March 2010.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Description of the Bush Snap Bean Plant
Bush snap beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) are tender warm season annuals that
originated in part of South and Central America. They are grown for their fleshy
immature pods that reach maturity from 50-70 days after planting. As a member of the
legumes family, snap bean roots contain nodules with rhizobium species that allow the
plant to fix atmospheric nitrogen (Delahaut, 2000).
In temperate countries, the green immature pods are cooked and eaten as
vegetable. Immature pods are marketed fresh, frozen or canned, wholecut, or French- cut.
In some parts of the tropics, leaves are used as potherb and to a lesser extent the green
shelled beans are eaten (Duke, 1998)
Adaptation of Snap bean
It is reported that beans grow best on soils that hold water well and have a good
aeration and water filtration. Soil should have a pH of 5.8-6.6. Temperature is important
for rapid growth, good pod set, and early maturity (Pacher, 2002)
Snap beans grow best in areas with temperature between 150C to 210C. Planting
snap beans should be scheduled during typhoon-free months as these cannot stand
adverse condition. In Benguet, typhoons usually occur between the months of June to
November. Hence, planting should be done from December to April to avoid the on
slought of adverse weather (PCARRD, 1989).
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
4
Varietal Evaluation
Varietal evaluation is a process in crop breeding which provides comparison of
promising lines with the local check in order to establish the superiority of the lines
developed by the breeder. It is only through varietal evaluation that a breeder sees or
shows the better performance of developed lines in terms of yield and quality, resistance
to diseases and pests, stress and other parameters ( Kimeu, 1994)
Regmi (1990) stated that varietal evaluation gathers data on plant characteristics,
yield performance and pod quality. Hence, we obtain high yielding and improve cultivars
that are known to plants important role in boosting production.
The result of the study of Pog-ok (2001) revealed that Pencil pod performed
significantly better than the other varieties with regard to the number of days to flowering
and first harvesting, pod length, pod diameter and resistance. B-21 and Hav 106 gave the
highest pod yield of about 12 tons/ha. Although statistically there were similarities with
the yield of Alno and other varieties studied
Lab-oyan (1987) as cited by Cadley (1999) revealed that a space of 30 cm
between rows produced the longest pods. The test varieties and spacing on the production
had no significant interaction effect. FLO had the highest seed yield among the varieties
tested.
Paredes (2003) found that the six varieties of bush snap bean he evaluated had
varying adaptability under La Trinidad conditions. Green Crop and Contender were the
most suited varieties due to the higher production of flower and high yield.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
5
Effect of Organic fertilizer
Organic fertilizers are 'naturally' occurring compounds manufactured through
natural processes. It contains essential nutrients to improve the health and productivity of
soil and encourage plant growth. Organic nutrients increase the abundance of soil
organisms by providing organic matter and micronutrients for organisms such as fungal
mycorrhiza, which aid plants in absorbing nutrients.
PCARRD (1982) stated that organic fertilizers supply some amount of the
nutrient requirements of the crop they promote favorable soil properties, such as
granulation and good tilt for efficient aeration, easy root penetration and improve water
holding capacity.
Amok (2003) found that snap bean plants applied with organic fertilizer
performed better than the plants without fertilizer in terms of 100 seed weight with
nodule count, fresh and dry weight of leaves and yield performance.
The application of organic fertilizer is an important practice in increasing the
productivity of the soil. The transformation and availability of phosphorus in the soil will
be more complex of organic fertilizer are used in strongly acidic soils (Chen, et al., 2001)
According to Colting (1994) application of organic fertilizers affects favorable
changes in the soil properties. In general, the pH and organic matter content of the soil
increased after harvesting of the plants. This indicates that organic farming allows the
production of crops while enhancing soil productivity.
Generally, fertilizers are applied at planting or before planting (basal application).
Organic fertilizers are should be applied much earlier so that they will be decomposed
further and the nutrients will be already available to the plants. Fertilizers are applied not
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
6
only at planting but also side dressed during the vegetative growth stage of bean plants
during dry season. The first half of a required fertilizer should be applied at planting, and
the second half of N should be side dressed three weeks after seeding (AVRDC, 1990)
Koshino (1990) found that nutrient elements from organic fertilizers are released
slowly which is particularly important in avoiding salt injury, ensuring a continuous
supply of nutrients during the growing season, and producing products of better quality.
The organic fertilizers supplies some amount of the nutrient requirements of the
crop and promotes favorable soil properties such as granulation, efficient aeration, easy
root penetration and improved water holding capacity of the soil (Marcelino, 1995)
Abadilla (1982) reported that crops fertilized with organic matter have greater
resistant to pest and diseases. He also explained that humic acids and growth substances
are absorbed into plant tissue through the roots and they favor the formation of proteins
by influencing the synthesis of enzymes, increasing the vigor and insect resistance of the
plant.
Parnes (1986) claimed that organic matter is the principal source of nitrogen,
phosphorus and sulfur become available as the organic matter continuous to decompose,
most of the calcium, magnesium and potassium in the decaying organic residue are
discarded by the soil organisms during the first stages of decomposition and these
nutrients are quickly available to plants organic matter through its effect on physical
condition of the soil increases the amount of water available for plant growth.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
7
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of 120m2 was thoroughly prepared into three blocks consisting 1x5m per
plot corresponding to the eight different accessions of bush snap bean. The experiment
was laid out following randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replication.
The seeds were sown in a double row plots at a distance of 25cm x 25cm between hills
and between rows.
Basal application of the organic fertilizer, i.e. “BSU growers’ compost” was done
at planting. It was thoroughly mixed with the soil at 5 kg per 5m2 plot. It was also side-
dressed during hilling up at three weeks after planting at 2 kg per 5m2 plot.
The following accessions of bush snap beans to be obtained from BSU-IPB
HCRS were used as treatments:
CODE
ACCESSIONS
ACC1
HAB 63
ACC2
BBL 274
ACC3
Torrent
ACC4
Landmark
ACC5
HAB 323
ACC6
Green crop
ACC7
HAB 19
ACC8 Contender
All cultural management practices necessary for French snap bean production
such irrigation, weeding was done to ensure the growth of the plants.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
8
Data gathered:
1. Maturity
a. Days from sowing to emergence. This was taken by counting the number of
days from planting up to the time when at least 50% of plants per plot emerged.
b. Days from sowing to flowering. This was recorded by counting the number of
days from planting up to the time when at least 50% of the plants set flowers.
c. Days from sowing to first harvesting of fresh pods. This was done by counting
the number of days from sowing to first harvesting of fresh pods per plot. Fresh pods are
ready for harvesting when they are generally about as thin as a pencil and when the pods
are immature green.
d. Days from sowing to the last harvesting of fresh pods. This was done by
counting the number of days from sowing to last harvesting of fresh pods per plot.
2. Canopy cover. This was gathered at 30, 45 and 60 DAP using a 120 cm x 60cm
wooden frame with the ten equal sized (12cmx6cm) grids in ten sample plants per plot.
3. Plant height
a. Initial height (cm). Ten sample plants was selected at random and measured
from the base of the plant to the tip of the youngest shoot at 30 DAP using meter stick.
b. Final height (cm).This was done by measuring the ground level to the tip of
plant using meter stick during the last harvesting.
4. Reproductive Characters
a. Number of flowers per cluster. This was taken by counting the number of
flowers per cluster per plant using ten samples per plot.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
9
b. Number of pod clusters per plant. This was done by counting the number of
pod clusters per plant from ten random sample plants per plot.
c. Percent pod set per cluster. This was taken by using the formula:
Percent pod setting (%) = Total no. of pods/cluster x 100
Total no. of flowers/cluster
d. Number of pods per cluster. This was taken by counting the number of pods per
cluster using ten sample clusters per plot.
e. Total number of pods per plant. This was done by counting the number of pods
per plant using ten samples per plot.
5. Fresh Pod Characters
a. Pod length (cm). This was taken by measuring the length in cm of sample pods
from the pedicel end to the blossom end using foot ruler.
b. Pod width (cm). This was taken using the foot ruler at the middle portion of
five sample pods per plot.
c. Pod texture. This was taken by touching the pod and the texture feels coarse or
smooth.
d. Pod straightness. This was recorded as either straight or curved.
e. Pod shape. This was recorded as flat or round.
f. Pod color. This was recorded as green, dark green and others when the pods
were fully developed.
g. Pod diameter (mm). The diameter of ten sample pods per plot was measured
using vernier caliper.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
10
6. Yield and Yield Component
a. Number and weight of marketable fresh pods per plot (kg/5m2). This was
measured by counting and weighing the marketable pods per plot. Pods are considered
marketable when they are straight, tender & free from insect & diseases damages.
b. Number and weight of non-marketable fresh pods (kg/5m2). Non-marketable
pods that are abnormal in shape and affected by pest and diseases were counted and
weighed per plot.
c. Total yield per plot (kg/5m2). The total weight of marketable and non-
marketable pods per plot was computed at the end of the harvesting duration.
d. Computed yield per hectare (t/ ha). This was computed using the formula:
Yield (t/ha) = Total yield/plot (kg/m2) x 2
*where 2 is a factor to be used to convert yield in kg/5m2 plot into yield per
hectare in ton/ha.
7. Reaction to bean rust and pod borer. This was determined at peak of harvesting
stage using the respective rating scales for bean rust infection and pod borer infestation
used at BSU-IPB HCRS by Tandang et al., in 2008 as follows:
a. Bean rust.
Scale Percent infection Remarks
1 Less than 20% infection per plot Highly resistant
2 20-40% infection /plot Moderately resistant
3 41-60% infection/plot Mildly resistant
4 61-80% infection/plot Susceptible
5 80-100% infection/plot Very susceptible
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
11
b. Pod borer.
Scale Percent infestation Remarks
1 No infestation Highly tolerant
2 1-25% of the plant/plot was infested Moderately tolerant
3 25-50% of the plant/plot was infested Mildly tolerant
4 51-75% of the plant/plot was infested Susceptible
5 76-100% of the plant/plot was infested Very susceptible
8. Return on cash expenses (ROCE) Production cost and gross and net income were
recorded and determined using the following formula:
ROCE =Gross sales-total expenses x 100
Total expenses
9. Visual evaluation. Ten farmers and students were invited in the field to serve as
panelist to evaluate the eight varieties of bush snap bean at peak of harvest stage. They
were also requested to make their own selection based on the following:
a. Plant appearance. This was evaluated by the farmers/students based on the
growth of eight French bush snap bean accessions using the questionnaire in Appendix
Table 1.
b. Pod characters. This was evaluated by the farmers/students based on pod shape,
pod texture, pod color, pod straightness and general acceptability of the ten French
bush snap bean accessions using the same questionnaire in Appendix Table 1.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
12
Analysis of Data
All quantitative data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) for
randomized compete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Significance of
difference among treatment means was tested using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test
(DMRT) at 5% level of significance.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
13
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Number of Days from Sowing to Emergence
The number of days from sowing to emergence was not significant among the
eight French bush snap bean accessions. Seven of the accessions evaluated emerged in
seven days, earlier than Green crop by one day (Table 1).
Table 1. Number of days from sowing to emergence, flowering, first harvesting and last
harvesting.
NUMBER OF DAYS FROM SOWING TO
ACCESSIONS
EMERGENCE FLOWERING FIRST
LAST
HARVESTING HARVESTING
HAB 63
7 42 b 58 ab 79 ab
BBL 274
7 44 a 59 a 80 a
Torrent
7 42 b 58 ab 77 b
Landmark
7 42 b 59 a 77 b
HAB 323
7 41 b 56 b 78 ab
Green Crop
8 41 b 56 b 77 b
HAB 19
7 41 b 57 ab 78 ab
Contender
7 41 b 56 b 77 b
CV (%)
7.77
1.62
1.93
1.42
* Means followed by a common letter are not significantly different at 5% level by
DMRT.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
14
Number of Days from Sowing
to Flowering
Highly significant differences in terms of days from sowing to flowering were
observed among the eight bush snap bean accessions (Table. 1). HAB 323, Green Crop,
HAB 19 and Contender were the earliest to flower at 41 days. The other accessions
flowered within 42- 44 days after sowing. The flowering difference could be attributed to
their different genetic make-up.
Number of Days from Sowing
to First and Last Harvesting
There were significant differences among treatments in terms of the number of
days from sowing to first harvesting and last harvesting. HAB 323, Green Crop, and
Contender were the earliest to harvest at 56 days after sowing (DAS). The other
accessions were harvested at 57 to 59 days.
Again, HAB 323, Green Crop, and Contender were the earliest accessions that
reached last harvesting. BBL 274 and Landmark were the latest to reach last harvesting
Differences on the days to flowering may be attributed to varietal characteristics of the
plant.
Plant Height
The plant height at 30 and 77 DAP did not significantly differ among the eight
French bush snap bean accessions evaluated. Plant height ranged from 10 cm to 14 cm at
30 DAP and 13 to 17 cm at 77 DAP.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
15
Table 2. Initial and final plant height of eight bush snap bean accessions
HEIGHT (cm)
ACCESSIONS
30 DAP
77 DAP
HAB 63
12 14
BBL 274
16
12
Torrent
17
14
Landmark
15
10
HAB 323
16
12
Green Crop
16
13
HAB 19
13
12
Contender
15
12
CV (%)
8.86
10.61
Canopy cover
Table 5 shows the canopy cover of the eight bush snap bean accessions which
were not significantly different at 30, 45 and 60 DAP. Numerically, at 30 DAP, Green
Crop had the widest canopy. HAB 63 and HAB 19 produced the narrowest canopy. All
accessions increased in canopy cover at 45 DAP BBL 274 produced the highest canopy
cover while HAB 63, Green Crop, HAB 19 and Contender had the lowest canopy cover.
At 60 DAP, BBL 274 had he highest canopy cover while Landmark produced the lowest
canopy cover.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
16
Table 3. Canopy cover at 30, 45 and 60 DAP of eight bush snap bean accessions
CANOPY COVER (cm2)
ACCESSIONS
30 DAP
45 DAP
60 DAP
HAB 63
648 1080 1656
BBL 274
720 1224 1500
Torrent
720 1152 1656
Landmark
720 1152 1368
HAB 323
720 1152 1656
Green Crop
292 1080 1584
HAB 19
648 1080 1656
Contender
720 1080 1656
CV (%)
7.62
8.27
11.01
Number of Flowers Per Cluster,
Pods Per Cluster and
Percent Pod Set Per Cluster
No significant differences were observed on the number of flowers per cluster.
The accessions evaluated produced four to six flowers per cluster (Table 4).
Significant differences were noted on the number of pods per cluster among eight
bush snap bean accessions evaluated (Table 4). Green Crop and Contender had three pods
per cluster while all other accessions produced four except for Torrent that had five pods
per cluster.
Pod setting of eight bush beans ranged from 59- 84 %.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
17
Table 4. Number of flowers per cluster, pods per cluster and percent pod setting per
cluster of eight bush snap bean accessions
NO. OF FLOWERS NO. OF PODS PER
% POD SETTING
ACCESSIONS
PER CLUSTER
CLUSTER
PER CLUSTER
HAB 63
6
4b
70
BBL 274
4 4b 84
Torrent
5 5a 76
Landmark
5 4b 68
HAB 323
5 4b 74
Green Crop
5 3c 59
HAB 19
6 4b 64
Contender
5 3c 67
CV
(%)
18.31 12.38 16.80
* Means followed by a common letter are not significantly different at 5% level by
DMRT.
Number of Pod Clusters Per Plant
HAB 323, Green Crop and Contender gave higher number of pod clusters per
plant while all other accessions produced the same number of pod clusters per plant (13)
(Table 5).
Total number of Pods per plant
There were no significant differences observed on the total number of pods per
plant among the eight bush beans studied (Table 5). Numerically, Contender had the
highest total number of pods per plant (57). BBL 274, Torrent, HAB 323 and Green Crop
had the lowest pods per plant (52).
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
18
Table 5. Number of pod clusters per plant and total number of pods per plant of eight
bush snap bean accessions
NUMBER OF POD
TOTAL NUMBER OF
ACCESSIONS
CLUSTERS PER PLANT
PODS PER PLANT
HAB 63
13
53
BBL 274
13 52
Torrent
13 52
Landmark
13 54
HAB 323
14 52
Green Crop
14 52
HAB 19
13 54
Contender
14 54
CV (%)
7.92
8.68
French Pod length, Width
and diameter of eight
French Bush Snap Bean Accessions
There were no significant differences in French pod length of the accessions
studied. BBL 274 gave the longest pods while HAB 63, Torrent and Landmark recorded
the shortest pods (Table 6).
Results showed no significant differences observed on the width of the pods
among the eight accessions used. All of them gave statistically similar width which
ranged from 0.3 to 0.5 cm (Table 6). HAB 323 gave the widest pods and Torrent
recorded the narrowest pods.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
19
The diameter of the eight bush snap bean accessions were also statistically
similar. Majority of the snap bean accessions evaluated had around 0.4 mm pod diameter.
Torrent had 2 mm while HAB 63 registered 5 mm (Table 6 and Figure 1).
Table 6. Fresh pod length, width and diameter of eight French bush snap bean accessions
POD LENGTH
POD WIDTH POD
DIAMETER
ACCESSIONS
(cm) (cm) (mm)
HAB 63
9
0.4
0.4
BBL 274
11
0.4
0.4
Torrent
9
0.4
0.2
Landmark
9
0.4
0.4
HAB 323
10
0.5
0.5
Green Crop
10
0.4
0.4
HAB 19
10
0.4
0.4
Contender
10
0.4
0.4
CV
(%)
12.00 9.97 18.84
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
20
Reaction to bean rust and pod borer
It was observed that the eight evaluated accessions were highly resistant to bean rust and
moderately tolerant to pod borer under organic production in La Trinidad, Benguet.
Figure 1. French pods of eight bush snap bean accessions
Number of Marketable French pods per 5m2
All the accessions tested had comparable number of marketable pods per plot.
HAB 63 produced the highest number of marketable pods while HAB 19 gave the lowest
number of marketable pods per plot (Table 7).
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
21
Number of non-marketable pods per 5m2
Table 7 shows the number of non-marketable pods per plot. HAB 63 obtained the
highest number of non-marketable French pods per plot followed by BBL 274. No
significant differences were obtained among the accessions grown.
Table 7. Number of marketable and non-marketable pods of eight bush snap bean
accessions
NUMBER OF PODS PER (5m2)
ACCESSIONS
MARKETABLE NON-MARKETABLE
HAB 63
185
59
BBL 274
176
38
Torrent
135
32
Landmark
153
31
HAB 323
175
33
Green Crop
134
31
HAB 19
129
37
Contender
162 33
CV (%)
18.97
28.48
Weight of Marketable French pods
The marketable French pod yield per plot of eight bush snap bean accessions were
statistically similar. It ranged from 1.7 to 2.9 kg/5m2 (Table 8).
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
22
Weight of non-marketable French pods
Highly significant differences in non-marketable French pod yield were observed
among the treatments. HAB 63 produced heavier non-marketable French pod yield/plot
than all other accessions (Table 8).
Table 8. Weight of marketable and non-marketable French pods per plot of eight French
bush snap bean accessions
ACCESSIONS
WEIGHT PER 5m2 (kg)
MARKETABLE NON-MARKETABLE
HAB 63
2.9
1.5a
BBL 274
2.73
0.64b
Torrent
2.86
0.60b
Landmark
2.33
0.73b
HAB 323
2.54
0.73b
Green Crop
1.87
0.73b
HAB 19
1.78
0.72b
Contender
2.5
1.06b
CV (%)
20.23
29.33
* Means followed by a common letter are not significantly different at 5% level by
DMRT.
Total Yield per 5m2 and per hectare
HAB 63 gave higher total French pod yield than the comparable French pod yield
of all other bush snap beans tested (Table 9). The total yield per plot and per hectare of
the eight French bush snap bean accessions could be attributed to high marketable and
non-marketable yield.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
23
Table 9. Total yield per 5m2 and per hectare of eight French bush snap bean accessions
ACCESSIONS TOTAL
YIELD
PER 5m2 (kg)
PER HECTARE (tons)
HAB 63
4.5a
9.12a
BBL 274
3.4b
6.74b
Torrent
3.5b
6.90b
Landmark
3.0b
6.11b
HAB 323
3.2b
6.57b
Green Crop
2.6b
5.20b
HAB 19
2.5b
5.00b
Contender
3.5b
7.12b
CV (%)
17.39
17.39
* Means followed by a common letter are not significantly different at 5% level by
DMRT.
Return on Cash Expense (ROCE)
HAB 63 had the highest return on cash expense (ROCE) followed by Contender,
Torrent and BBL 274 while HAB 19 had the lowest return on cash expense because of
their lower pod yield.
This indicates that high ROCE could be realized from growing bush snap bean
organically for French pod production.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
24
Table 10. Return on cash expense of growing eight French bush snap bean accessions
ACCESSIONS YIELD
GROSS
TOTAL
NET
ROCE
(kg)
SALES
EXPENSES INCOME
(%)
HAB 63
4.56 136.8 32.61 104.19
319.50
BBL 274
3.37 101.1 32.61 68.49 210.03
Torrent
3.45 103.5 32.61 70.89 217.39
Landmark
3.06 91.80 32.61 59.19 107.57
HAB 323
3.28 98.40 32.61 65.79 201.75
Green Crop
2.60 78.00 32.61 45.39 138.85
HAB 19
2.50 75.00 32.61 42.39 129.99
Contender
3.56 106.8 32.61 74.19 227.51
Fresh pods were sold at PhP 30 per kg.
Acceptability
Ten farmers and students were invited to evaluate the harvested pods of the eight
French bush snap bean accessions. The farmers consisted of five females and one male
with ages ranging from 35-50 years old while four of the students had ages ranging from
19- 21 years old. The result of the visual evaluation based on plant appearance, pod
characters, and general acceptability of the eight French bush snap bean accessions are
shown in Table 11.
Based on appearance, HAB 63 Landmark and HAB 323 were liked moderately.
BBL 274, Torrent and Contender were liked slightly. HAB 19 was disliked slightly and
Green Crop was disliked moderately.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
25
In terms of French pod characters, BBL 274 and HAB 323 were liked very much
and the other accessions were liked moderately except for HAB 19 which was likes
slightly. Only Green Crop was disliked very much because of its flat, big and coarse
pods.
HAB 63, BBL 274 and HAB 323 were liked very much by farmers and students
in La Trinidad. HAB 63 was robust and produced many pods. BBL 274 produced
straight, smooth, green French pods while Torrent, Landmark and Contender were liked
moderately because of their desirable characters. Green Crop and HAB 19 were liked
slightly
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
26
Table 11.Visual evaluation by farmers and students of eight French bush snap bean accessions
POD CHARACTERS
GENERAL
REASONS FOR
ACCESSIONS APPEARANCE
SHAPE SIZE
TEXTURE
ACCEPTABILITY
COLOR
ACCEPTABILITY
HAB 63
Like
Like
Like
Like
Like
Like very much
Very robust,
moderately
moderately moderately moderately moderately
produced more
pods
BBL 274
Like slightly
Like very
Like very
Like very
Like
Like very much
Produced straight,
much
much
much
moderately
smooth and green
pods
Torrent Like
Like
Like
Like
Like very
Like moderately
Exhibited good
moderately
moderately moderately moderately
much
plant height
Landmark Like Like
Like
Like
Like
Like moderately
It had long narrow,
moderately
moderately moderately moderately moderately
straight pods
HAB 323
Like
Like very
Like
Like
Like
Like very much
Early maturing,
moderately
much
moderately moderately moderately
had good pod set
Green Crop
Dislike very
Dislike
Dislike
Dislike
Like
Like slightly
Flat,big,coarse
much
very much
very much
very much
moderately
pods
HAB 19
Dislike slightly
Like
Like
Like
Like
Like slightly
Had long pods
slightly
slightly
slightly
moderately
Contender Like
slightly Like Like
Like
Like very
Like moderately
Produced good
moderately moderately moderately
much
growth
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
27
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
The study aimed to evaluate the growth and French pod yield of eight bush snap
bean accessions grown organically in La Trinidad, Benguet; to determine their
acceptability and profitability; and to determine the best accessions in terms of growth and
French pod yield, acceptability and profitability in La Trinidad, Benguet.
All the accessions emerged in seven days except for Green Crop which emerged
one day later. HAB 323, Green Crop, HAB 19 and Contender were the earliest to flower at
41 DAS. The earliest accessions to harvest for French pod production accessions were
harvested two to three days later.
All the accessions had comparable initial and final plant height, and canopy cover
at 30, 45 and 60 DAP. The eight bush snap bean accessions produced four to six flowers
per cluster and three to five pods per cluster.
BBL 274 had the highest percentage pod setting while HAB 323, Green Crop and
Contender had the highest number of pod clusters per plant. Contender produced the
highest total number of French pods per plot. All the accessions had comparable pod
length, width and diameter.
The eight accessions had statistically similar number and weight of marketable
French pods per plot. The accessions produced higher total French pod yield per plot and
per hectare. All the accessions evaluated had high resistance to bean rust and were
moderately tolerant to pod borer under organic production.
The highest ROCE was obtained from producing HAB 63, BBL 274 and HAB
323. The accessions were liked very much based on plant morphology, pod characters and
general acceptability.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
28
Conclusion
The eight bush snap bean accessions were comparable in days from sowing to
emergence, to plant height, canopy cover, flowers per cluster, percentage pod setting, pod
clusters per plant, number and weight of marketable French pods, total number of pods per
plot, pod length, width and diameter.
The accessions differed in number of days from sowing to flowering, to first and
last harvesting, pods per cluster, number and weight of marketable French pods per plot
and total French pod yield.
HAB 63 was the highest French pod yielder and the most profitable to grow
organically although all other accessions had comparable French pod yield and ROCE.
HAB 63, BBL 274 and HAB 323 were acceptable to farmers and students because
of their good growth and pod characteristics.
Recommendation
Based on the results of this study, HAB 63,BBL 274 and HAB 323 could be
planted in La Trinidad Benguet for French pod production because of their good growth,
high yielding ability, profitability and acceptability during the dry season.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
29
LITERATURE CITED
ABADILLA, D. C. 1982. Organic Farming. Quezon City: AFA Publishing inc. Pp.81-
181.
AMOK, M. 2003. Nodulation and Seed yield of new varieties of snap bean as influenced
by organic fertilizer.BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. P. 15.
AVRDC. 1990. Vegetable production Training Manual. Asian Vegetable Development
Center.Shanhua, Tainan, Taiwan. P. 447.
CADLEY, D. T. 1999. Dry bean yield of five bush snap bean varieties under La Trinidad
Benguet Condition. BS Thesis. BSU La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 5.
CHEN, J. H, WU, J .T and HUNG, W. T .2001. Effect of compost on the availability of
nitrogen and phosphorus in strongly acidic soil. Department of Agricultural
chemistry, Taiwan Agriculture Institute, Wu Feng. Taiwan. Pp. 1-2
COLTING, R. D. 1994. Yield Response of snap bean and cabbage on pure organic
fertilization. The Philippine Journal of Crop Science
DECKER , H. M. 2009. Promoting farm/non-farm linkages: a case study of French bean
processing in Kenya - Lydia Neema Kimenye. Accessed on December 15, 2009
at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4383e/y4383e0f.htm
DELAHAUT, K. A. 2000. Processing Snap bean Production. The Board of Regents of
the University of Wiscousin System. Accessed on November 26, 2009 at http://
www.ipcm.wisc.edu/piap/snapbeans/default.htm.
DUKE, J. A. 1998 .Handbook of Energy Crops. Accessed December 15, 2009 at http://
www.purdue.edu/new crop/duke energy/duke index.html.
JOSE, M. 2004. Varietal Characterization, Evaluation and Correlation Study in Bush
Snap Bean. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. P. 1.
KIMEU, A .M. 1994. Yield Response of Two Bush and Pole snap bean Varieties to
Three Mulching Materials.MS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 1-2.
KOSHINO, S. O. 1990. The use of organic and chemical in Japan. Food and Fertilizer
technology Center. Extension Bulletin. Pp. 13-14.
LAB-OYAN, R. T. Yield evaluation of AVRDC Chinese cabbage varieties under
highland condition. P. 15.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
30
MARCELINO,C. B. 1995. Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers on the growth and
yield of NCT-8 Japonica rice variety. P. 2.
PACHER, S. 2002. Kitchen Garden about snap beans. Accessed on December 15, 2009
at http://www.motherearth news.com
PAREDES, O. P. 2003. Evaluation of bush snap beans in Longlong, La Trinidad,
Benguet. P. 18.
PARNES, R. 1986. Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers. Woods and Agricultural Institute.
P. 99.
PCARRD. 1989. Snap bean Techno guide for the Highlands. First edition. BSU, La
Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 1-5.
POG.OK, S. K. 2001.Varietal evaluation of promising lines and path coefficient analysis
in pole snapbeans. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. P. 1.
REGMI, J. F. 1990. On farm evaluation of potential varieties of pole snap beans at Pico
La Trinidad Benguet.MS Thesis. BSU La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 39-40.
SEB-ATEN, D. N. 1997. Efficacy evaluation of 14-10-12 and 18-1628 green bee foliar
fertilizer on the growth and yield of Snap beans. BS Thesis. BSU La Trinidad
Benguet. Pp. 1-3.
TANDANG, L. L. KIMEU, A. M. AMLOS, B. A., BAGTILA, J. G., KEBASEN, B. B.
and G. R. MAGHIRANG. 2008. Development and Evaluation of Snap bean
(Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars for the Philippine Highlands. A paper presented
during the 2009 Agency In-house Review at Benguet State University, La
Trinidad Benguet.
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
31
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1.Visual evaluation.
Structured questionnaire used in evaluating ten bush snap bean accessions for
French type pod under La Trinidad Benguet.
Name:
Sex:
Age:
Status:
Pod characters
Accessions Appearance
General
Reasons for
Shape texture Color
straightness acceptability
acceptabilit
y
HAB 63
BBL 274
Torrent
Landmark
HAB 323
Green Crop
HAB 19
Contender
Legend Reaction Scale
1-Like extremely
2-Like very much
3-Like moderately
4-Like slightly
5-Neither like nor not dislike
6-Dislike slightly
7-Dislike moderately
8-Dislike very much
9-Dislike extremely
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
32
Appendix Table 2. Number of days from sowing to emergence of eight bush snap bean
accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
7
7
8
22
7
BBL 274
7
7
7
21
7
Torrent
8
7
7
22
7
Landmark
7
7
7
21
7
HAB 323
7
8
8
23
7
Green Crop
8
8
8
24
8
HAB 19
7
7
7
21
7
Contender
7
7
9
23
7
TOTAL 58
58
61 177 7
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.750
0.375
Treatment 7
2.958
0.423
1.51ns 2.77
4.28
Error 14
3.917
0.280
TOTAL
23
7.625
ns= Not significant Coefficient of Variation (%)= 7.17
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
33
Appendix Table 3. Number of days to flowering of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
HAB 63
44
41
41
126
42
BBL 274
44
44
44
132
44
Torrent
42
42
41
125
41
Landmark
44
42
42
128
42
HAB 323
41
41
41
123
41
Green Crop
41
41
41
123
41
HAB 19
41 41 41 123 41
Contender 42
41
41
124
41
TOTAL
339
333
332
1004
840
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
f
f
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
3.583
1.792
Treatment
7
23.333
3.333
7.27**
2.77 4.28
Error 14
6.417
0.458
TOTAL 23
33.333
**= Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =1.62
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
34
Appendix Table 4. Number of days to first harvest of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
59
56
59
174
58
BBL 274
59 59 59 177 59
Torrent
59 59 56 174 58
Landmark
59 59 59 177 59
HAB 323
56 56 56 168 56
Green Crop
56 56 56 168 56
HAB 19
56 59 56 171 57
Contender
56 56 56 168 56
TOTAL
460
460
457
1377
459
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.750
0.375
Treatment
7
35.625
5.089
4.13*
2.77 4.28
Error 14
17.250
1.232
TOTAL
23
53.625
*= significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =1.93
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
35
Appendix Table 5. Days from sowing to last harvesting of eight bush snap bean
accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
80
77
80
237
79
BBL 274
80 80 80 240 80
Torrent
80 80 77 237 79
Landmark
80 80 80 240 80
HAB 323
77 77 77 231 77
Green Crop
77 77 77 231 77
HAB 19
77 80 77 234 78
Contender
77 77 77 231 77
TOTAL
628
628
625
1881
627
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.750
0.375
Treatment
7
35.625
5.089
4.13*
2.77 4.28
Error 14
17.250
1.232
TOTAL
23
53.625
*= significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =1.42
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
36
Appendix Table 6. Initial plant height at 30 DAP of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
12.82
12.62
13.21
38.65
12.88
BBL 274
13.74 12.46 11.11 37.31 12.43
Torrent
14.00 14.31 15.84 44.15 14.71
Landmark
11.85 10.63 10.51 32.99 10.99
HAB 323
13.96 12.04 12.53 38.99 12.96
Green Crop
11.59 15.03 13.00 39.89 13.29
HAB 19
13.23 12.13 12.04 37.57 12.52
Contender
11.92 12.18 13.82 37.92 12.64
TOTAL
103.11
102.2
102.06
307.37
102.42
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.081
0.041
Treatment 7
22.319
3.188
2.48ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
18.016
1.287
TOTAL
23
40.416
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation(%)=1.42
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
37
Appendix Table 7. Final plant height of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
15.62
13.89
15.38
44.89
14.96
BBL 274
15.72 16.73 16.49 48.94 16.31
Torrent
19.03 17.49 15.17 51.69 17.23
Landmark
16.88 12.17 16.13 45.18 15.06
HAB 323
17.42 15.42 15.36 48.02 16.07
Green Crop
14.3 18.62 16.26 49.18 16.39
HAB 19
16.33 11.84 13.06 41.77 13.92
Contender
16.05 15.69 15.53 47.27 15.76
TOTAL
131.35
121.85
123.92
377.12
125.7
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
6.239
3.120
Treatment 7
22.329
3.190
1.14ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
38.921
2.780
TOTAL
23
67.489
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation(%)=10.61
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
38
Appendix Table 8. Canopy cover at 30 DAP of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
11.1
8.9
9.6
29.6
9.87
BBL 274
10.0 9.2 12.5 31.7 10.56
Torrent
10.9 9.8 9.4 30.1 10.03
Landmark
10.7 9.4 11.5 31.6 10.53
HAB 323
11.1 9.9 10.3 31.3 10.43
Green Crop
11.4 10.7 11.2 33.3 11.10
HAB 19
10.8 9.7 9.4 29.9 9.97
Contender
11.0 10.1 11.5 32.6 10.87
TOTAL
87.0
77.7
85.4
25.1
83.37
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
6.181
0.630
Treatment 7
4.073
0.582
0.92ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
8.826
0.630
TOTAL
23
19.080
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%)=7.62
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
39
Appendix Table 8. Canopy cover at 45 DAP of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
16.0
15.5
15.6
47.1
15.7
BBL 274
19.6 16.0 16.9 52.5 17.05
Torrent
17.3 16.3 17.1 50.7 16.09
Landmark
17.0 14.3 17.5 48.8 16.27
HAB 323
19.8 15.4 14.8 5.00 16.67
Green Crop
16.4 14.5 15.6 46.5 15.05
HAB 19
17.9 15.2 13.2 46.3 15.43
Contender
15.1 16.0 16.4 47.5 15.83
TOTAL
139.1 123.2 127.1 344.4 129.8
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
17.167
8.584
Treatment 7
11.578
1.654
0.92ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
25.219
1.801
TOTAL
23
53.965
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%)=8.27
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
40
Appendix Table 9. Canopy cover at 60 DAP of eight bush bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
HAB 63
23.6
23.3
22.3
69.2
23.07
BBL 274
27.8 24.4 24.8 77.0 25.65
Torrent
24.2 25.3 22.3 71.8 23.93
Landmark
24.1 23.6 11.6 59.3 19.77
HAB 323
26.0 23.4 21.0 70.4 23.47
Green Crop
22.2 22.1 23.4 67.7 22.57
HAB 19
24.1 22.6 20.6 67.3 22.43
Contender
23.2 24.5 22.2 69.9 23.3
TOTAL
195.2 165.8 168.2 552.6 184.19
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
39.000
19.500
Treatment 7
56.833
8.119
1.25ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
90.987
6.499
TOTAL
23
186.820
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =11.01
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
41
Appendix Table 10. Number of flowers per cluster of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
Mean
I II III
HAB 63
8
5
5
18
6.00
BBL 274
4 5 5 14
4.67
Torrent
5 7 5 17
5.67
Landmark
6 5 6 17
5.67
HAB 323
5 5 6 16
5.33
Green Crop
6 5 6 17
5.67
HAB 19
7 7 5 19
6.33
Contender
6 5 4 15
5.00
TOTAL
45
44
42
133
44.34
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
1.583
0.792
Treatment 7
5.958
0.851
0.83ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
14.417
1.030
TOTAL
23
21.958
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =18.31
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
42
Appendix Table 11. Number of pods per cluster of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
Mean
I II III
HAB 63
4
4
4
12
4b
BBL 274
4 4 4 12 4b
Torrent
4 6 4 14 5a
Landmark
3 4 4 11 4b
HAB 323
3 4 4 11 4b
Green Crop
3 4 3 10 3c
HAB 19
4 4 4 12 4b
Contender
3 3 3 9 3c
TOTAL
28 33 30 91 31
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
1.583
0.792
Treatment
7
5.292
0.756
3.43*
2.77 4.28
Error 14
3.083
0.220
TOTAL
23
9.958
*= significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =12.38
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
43
Appendix Table 12. Percent pod set per cluster of eight bush bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
Mean
I II III
HAB 63
48.19
80.77
81.48
210.44
70.15
BBL 274
92.31 81.48 79.63 253.42 84.47
Torrent
77.55 55.38 95.65 228.58 76.19
Landmark
55.74 74.07 76.36 206.17 68.72
HAB 323
65.38 88.89 69.09 223.36 74.45
Green crop
53.33 67.31 58.62 179.26 59.75
HAB 19
53.62 61.19 78.00 192.81 64.27
Contender
59.65 69.39 74.42 203.46 67.82
TOTAL
505.77 578.48 613.25 1697.5 565.82
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
752.697
376.348
Treatment 7
1224.584
174.941
1.24ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
1976.371
141.169
TOTAL 23
3953.651
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =16.80
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
44
Appendix Table 13. Number of pod clusters per plot of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
12
14
14
40
13
BBL 274
13
13
13
39
13
Torrent
11
14
15
40
13
Landmark
13
15
13
41
13
HAB 323
15
14
14
43
14
Green Crop
14
15
13
42
14
HAB 19
14
13
13
40
13
Contender
15
14
14
43
14
TOTAL 107
112
109 328 107
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
1.583
0.792
Treatment 7
5.333
0.762
0.65ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
16.417
1.173
TOTAL 23
23.333
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =7.92
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
45
Appendix Table 14. Total number. of pods per plant of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
Mean
I II III
HAB 63
47
57
56
160
53
BBL 274
50
54
53
157
52
Torrent
44
54
60
158
52
Landmark
51
59
52
162
54
HAB 323
46
56
56
158
52
Green Crop
43
61
52
156
52
HAB 19
58
52
52
162
54
Contender
58
57
56
171
54
TOTAL
397
450
437
1284
423
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
190.750
95.375
Treatment 7
53.333
7.619
0.35ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
301.917
21.565
TOTAL
23
546.000
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =8.68
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
46
Appendix Table 15. Pod length of eight bush snap bean accessions (cm)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
9.27
10.01
10.01
27.92
9.09
BBL 274
9.59
14.89
9.81
34.29
11.43
Torrent
9.54
9.87
8.81
28.22
9.4
Landmark
9.24
9.63
10.38
29.25
9.75
HAB 323
10.71
10.7
10.87
32.38
10.76
Green Crop
10.02
11.09
9.65
30.76
10.25
HAB 19
9.87
9.99
10.44
30.3
10.1
Contender
10.6
9.8
9.68
30.08
10.02
TOTAL
78.84
428.5
79.65
243.2
80.8
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
5.479
2.740
Treatment 7
11.530
1.647
1.12ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
20.585
1.470
TOTAL
23
37.594
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =12.00
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
47
Appendix Table 16.Pod width of eight bush snap bean accessions (cm)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
0.39
0.51
0.41
1.31
0.44
BBL 274
0.45
0.04
0.49
1.34
0.45
Torrent
0.04
0.04
0.39
1.19
0.04
Landmark
0.49
0.39
0.55
1.43
0.48
HAB 323
0.49
0.52
0.55
1.56
0.52
Green Crop
0.44
0.48
0.43
1.35
0.45
HAB 19
0.43
0.49
0.52
1.44
0.48
Contender
0.41
0.41
0.46
1.28
0.43
TOTAL
3.5
3.6
3.8
10.9
3.65
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.006
0.003
Treatment 7
0.030
0.004
2.08ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
0.029
0.002
TOTAL 23
0.064
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =12.00
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
48
Appendix Table 17. Pod diameter of eight bush snap bean accessions (mm)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
HAB 63
0.48
0.48
0.03
1.26
0.42
BBL 274
0.42
0.41
0.41
1.24
0.41
Torrent
0.26
0.03
0.28
0.84
0.28
Landmark
0.45
0.28
0.47
1.20
0.40
HAB 323
0.47
0.54
0.54
1.55
0.52
Green Crop
0.29
0.49
0.47
1.25
0.42
HAB 19
0.48
0.42
0.51
1.41
0.47
Contender
0.37
0.34
0.05
1.21
0.40
TOTAL 3.22 3.26
3.8
8.88
3.32
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.005
0.002
Treatment 7 0.096
0.014
2.24ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
0.086
0.006
TOTAL 23
0.186
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =18.84
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
49
Appendix Table 18. Number of marketable pods per plot of eight bush snap bean
accessions (5m2)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
169
207
180
556
185
BBL 274
190
182
157
529
176
Torrent
156
110
141
407
135
Landmark
142
184
134
460
153
HAB 323
226
162
140
526
175
Green Crop
172
117
114
403
134
HAB 19
105
150
132
387
129
Contender
151
137
198
486
162
TOTAL 1311
1249
1196
3756
1249
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
830.083
415.042
Treatment 7
9903.833
1414.833
1.61ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
12321.917
880.137
TOTAL 23
23055.833
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =18.97
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
50
Appendix Table 19. Number of non-marketable pods per plot of eight bush snap bean
accessions (5m2)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
HAB 63
59
49
71
179
59
BBL 274
30
35
49
114
38
Torrent 46
22
28
96
32
Landmark 32 32 31 95 31
HAB 323
54
23
23
100
33
Green Crop
37
33
24
94
31
HAB 19
40
23
49
112
37
Contender
25
33
42
100
33
TOTAL
323
250
317
890
294
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
410.583
205.292
Treatment 7
1881.833
268.833
2.41ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
1561.417
111.530
TOTAL
23
3583.833
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation(%)=18.97
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
51
Appendix Table 20. Weight of marketable pods per plot of eight French bush snap bean
accessions (kg /5m2)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
2.67
3.26
2.77
8.07
2.9
BBL 274
2.71
2.08
2.68
8.19
2.73
Torrent
2.59
2.56
3.42
8.57
2.86
Landmark
2.71
2.67
1.61
6.99
2.33
HAB 323
3.03
2.64
1.96
7.63
2.54
Green Crop
1.93
1.95
1.73
5.61
1.87
HAB 19
1.28
1.96
2.11
5.35
1.78
Contender
2.42
1.85
3.22
7.49
2.5
Total
19.34
19.69
19.5
58.53
19.51
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE f
f
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.008
0.004
Treatment 7
3.754 0.536
2.20ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
3.409
0.243
TOTAL
23
7.171
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variation(%)=20.23
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
52
Appendix Table 21. Weight of non-marketable pods per plot of eight French bush snap
bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
1.49
1.68
1.33
4.5
1.5a
BBL 274
0.58
0.61
0.73
1.92
0.64b
Torrent
0.78
0.5
0.51
1.79
0.60b
Landmark
0.75
0.74
0.69
2.18
0.73b
HAB 323
0.94
0.07
0.56
2.2
0.73b
Green Crop
0.09
0.07
0.59
2.19
0.73b
HAB 19
1.00
0.48
0.68
2.16
0.72b
Contender
0.51
1.26
1.42
3.19
1.06b
Total
6.95
6.67
6.51
20.13
6.71
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.012
0.006
Treatment
7
1.906
0.272
4.50**
2.77 4.28
Error 14
0.847
0.061
TOTAL
23
2.766
**= Highly significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =29.33
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
53
Appendix Table 22. Total yield per plot of eight French bush snap bean (kg/5m2)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
4.16
4.94
4.59
13.69
4.5a
BBL 274
3.29
3.41
3.41
10.11
3.4b
Torrent
3.37
3.06
3.93
10.36
3.5b
Landmark
3.46
3.41
2.03
9.17
3.0b
HAB 323
3.97
3.34
2.55
9.86
3.2b
Green Crop
2.83
2.65
2.32
7.08
2.6b
HAB 19
2.28
2.44
2.79
7.51
2.5b
Contender
2.93
3.11
4.64
10.68
3.5b
Total
26.29
26.36
26.53
79.18
26.2
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.004
0.002
Treatment
7
8.268
1.233
3.74*
2.77 4.28
Error 14
4.608
0.329
TOTAL
23
13.240
*= significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =17.39
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
54
Appendix Table 23. Computed yield per hectare of eight French bush snap bean
accessions (t /ha)
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
8.32
9.88
9.18
27.38
9.12b
BBL 274
6.58
6.82
6.82
20.22
6.74b
Torrent
6.74
6.12
7.86
20.72
6.90b
Landmark
6.92
6.82
4.06
18.34
6.11b
HAB 323
7.94
6.68
5.01
19.72
6.57b
Green Crop
5.66
5.03
4.64
15.06
5.20b
HAB 19
4.56
4.88
5.58
15.02
5.00b
Contender
5.86
6.22
9.28
21.36
7.12b
Total 52.58
52.72
53.06
158.36
52.76
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.015
0.015
Treatment
7
34.513
4.930
3.74*
2.77 4.28
Error 14
18.433
1.317
TOTAL
23
52.961
*= significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =17.39
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
55
Appendix Table 24. Reaction to bean rust of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
HAB 63
1
1
1
3
1
BBL 274
1
1
1
3
1
Torrent
1
1
1
3
1
Landmark
1
1
1
3
1
HAB 323
1
1
1
3
1
Green Crop
2
1
1
4
1.33
HAB 19
1
2
1
4
1.33
Contender
1
1
2
4
1.33
Total
9
9
9
27
8.99
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.000
0.000
Treatment 7 0.625
0.089
0.62ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
2.000
0.143
TOTAL
23
2.625
ns= non-significant Coefficient of Variation(%)=10.76
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
56
Appendix Table 25. Reaction to pod borer of eight bush snap bean accessions
REPLICATION
ACCESSIONS
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
HAB 63
2
2
3
9
3
BBL 274
2
2
2
6
2
Torrent
2
2
3
7
2.33
Landmark
3
2
2
7
2.33
HAB 323
2
2
3
7
2.33
Green Crop
2 2 2 6 2.00
HAB 19
2 2 2 6 2.00
Contender
2 2 2 7 2.33
Total
18 18 19 55 18.32
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED TABULATED
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARE
F
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Replication
2
0.750
0.375
Treatment
7 6.292
0.899
1.47ns
2.77 4.28
Error 14
8.583
0.613
TOTAL
23 15.625
ns= non-significant Coefficient of Variation (%) =10.93
Growth and French Pod Yield of Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically
in La Trinidad Benguet / Roselda B. Dumayag. 2010
Document Outline
- Growth and French Pod Yield of
Eight Bush Snap Bean Accessions Grown Organically in La Trinidad Benguet
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- ABSTRACT
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES