BIBLIOGRAPHY SARMOYAN, JENIFER QUEEN B. ...
BIBLIOGRAPHY
SARMOYAN, JENIFER QUEEN B. APRIL 2008. Production of Pole Snap
Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition.
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Dr. Danilo P. Padua, PhD.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to determine the variety best suited in Taloy Norte,
Tuba, Benguet condition; determine the effect of three organic-based soil amendments on
the growth and yield of pole snap bean; identify the interaction of pole snap bean
varieties applied with organic-based soil amendments; and determine the economic
benefits of pole snap bean varieties applied with organic-based soil amendments.
Study shows that Maroon (Beta) is the best variety suited in Taloy Norte, Tuba,
Benguet condition. Maroon (Beta) bean was the most responsive to Carbonized rice hull
as soil amendment in terms of yield, but in growth Maroon (Beta) was more responsive to
garden compost. The interaction of Maroon (Beta) and Coco coir dust were significantly
on number of marketable pods per plot, and the number of pods per plot observed on
Maroon (Beta) in combination with garden compost.
With the good performance of Maroon (Beta), it is highly recommended for fresh
pod and seed production under Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition for higher return on
cash expense. Likewise, Coco coir dust as soil amendment is also recommended for
higher marketable seed and fresh pod yield. Stonehill with Carbonized rice hull as soil
amendment could be an alternative choice.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Table of Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ii
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
Environmental Requirements of Snap bean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
Varietal Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
Effect of Organic Amendments to Soil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
Effect of Coco Coir Dust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
Effect of Carbonized Rice Hull . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
MATERIALS AND METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Percent Germination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Percent Survival . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14
Number of Days to Flowering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14
Days of Maturity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
Plant Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
Number of Pods Per Plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
Number of Marketable Fresh Pods Per Plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
18
Number of Non-marketable Pods Per Plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
Weight of Marketable Fresh
Pods Per Plot (kg) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20
ii
Weight of Non-Marketable
Pods Per Plot (kg) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
Total Fresh Pod Yield
Per Hectare (t/ha) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
Total Yield Per Plot (g) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Total Seed Yield
Per Hectare (t/ha) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Reaction to Pod Borer
and Bean Rust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23
Return on Cash Expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
24
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
27
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
27
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
28
Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
28
LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
31
iii
INTRODUCTION
Snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris), also known as common bean is grown for its
seeds or tender and green pods. It is an annual crop that can be grown profitably in high
elevated areas in the tropics. In lower elevation, yield was significantly lower (George,
1985).
Buyers tend to buy legumes as substitutes for meat products when the prices of
the meat products are too expensive. Legumes are recognized as important source of
protein, vitamins, and minerals such as calcium and phosphorus which maybe consumed
as dry seeds or as green fresh pods for human nutrition (Work and Crew, 1995).
Costumers are turning to organic food because they believe it to be tastier, as well
as healthier, both for themselves and the environment. Despite the higher cost for
organic products, costumers are willing to pay for their preferences.
Organic farming is environmentally friendly. Organic inputs keep dangerous
chemicals out of the environment and maintain the natural balance of ecosystems.
Furthermore, organic farming employs many positive environmental practices such as
recycling and composting and helps maintain soil health through natural methods
(Anonymous, 1999).
Organic farms use natural methods of protection from pest such as those derived
from plants. Natural pesticides are a last resort, while growing healthier, disease resistant
plants, using cover crops and crop rotation, and encouraging beneficial insects and birds
are the primary methods of pest control. The most common organic pesticides used by
most organic farmers include, Bt pytethrum and retonone. On the other hand,
conventional farming uses large quantities of pesticides through techniques such as crop
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
2
dusting. People who work with pesticides have an increase risk of developing
Parkinson’s disease. If the herbicide parquet and fungicide maneb mix together may
cause brain damage in mice. But some organic pesticides, such as retonone, have high
toxicity that affects the fishes and aquatic creatures, including mammals and humans
(Guthman, 2004).
Legumes are highly recommended for crop rotation and green manuring due to
their capability to fix atmosphere nitrogen to plants in usable form with the aid of some
species of bacteria. The system of nitrogen fixation can offer economically acceptable
and environment friendly way of applying fertilizer by reducing chemical inputs
(Brickbauer and Mortenson, 1978).
Snap bean production is one of the main sources of income of the farmers in
highlands. The production of snap bean should therefore be given due attention. One of
the ways to increase production is through the use of the varieties that are high in yielding
and resistant to pest and diseases that are best adapted in the locality. Some farmers do
not consider much the importance of the variety and quality of seeds they use for the
production. In this case, there is need to evaluate different varieties in the different
growing areas to identify the varieties that are high yielding and suited in growing areas.
Although they claim that organic food is expensive than conventional food and
thus too highly priced to be affordable to persons on a lower income. Organic products
typically cost 10 % to 40 % more than similar conventionally produced products.
Processed organic foods vary greatly in price when compared to their conventional
counterparts. But despite the highly priced of organic products costumers are willing to
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
3
pay for their preferences. Organic food is tastier, as well as healthier, both for their
health and environment (Kuepper, 2003).
Organic products have higher cost because it reflects many of the cost as
conventional foods in terms of growing, harvesting, transporting and storage. It must
meet stricter regulations, governing all these steps so that the process is often more labor
and management intensive, and farming tends to be a smaller scale. There is mounting
evidence that is all the indirect cost of conventional food production were factored into
the price of food, organic foods would cost the same, or more likely is cheaper
(Anonymous, 1999).
The objectives of the study were to:
1. determine the variety best suited in Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition;
2. determine the effect of three organic-based soil amendments on the growth
and yield of pole snap bean;
3. identify the interaction of pole snap bean varieties applied with organic-based
soil amendments; and
4. determine the economic benefits of pole snap bean varieties applied with
organic-based soil amendments.
The study was conducted at Taloy Norte, Tuba, and Benguet from December
2007 to March 2008.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
4
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Environmental Requirements of Snap bean
Snap beans grow best in areas with temperature between 15 to 21ºC like in
Benguet. Bush varieties can tolerate low temperature better than the climbing varieties
and can tolerate warm temperature up to 25ºC.
Snap beans grow well in loose textured soil with good drainage. They can
tolerate soil pH of 5.5 to 6.5 but perform best between pH ranges of 5.8 to 6.0. Soils that
crust or cake easily resulted in poor crop stand. Well-drained bottomland in the mountain
has been most satisfactory. Plowing under green manure crops will increase the organic
matter of the soil as well as improve the yield and quality of the beans.
Varietal Evaluation
Varietal evaluation is done to find out those varieties of crops that are adapted to
the grower’s need, is very important. But after testing most attention should be paid to
test strains and stocks of varieties selected because great differences exist between strains
of many crops and is the only by trial that superior varieties are found (Thompson and
Kelly, 1957).
Varietal evaluation is done to gather data on plant character, yield and pod quality
(Regmi, 1990) as well as to observe characters such as earliness, vigor, maturity and
keeping quality because different varieties have a wide range of difference (Work and
Crew, 1995). It is done therefore to ascertain adaptability of varieties in a certain
locality.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
5
Evaluation of different snap bean varieties have been continuously conducted in
various parts of Benguet. Working on six varieties, Mulchino (2007) concluded that Blue
lake and Taichung are the varieties suited for Gusaran, Kabayan, Benguet due to their
high return on cash expenses. Cayso (2005) evaluated ten varieties of pole snap bean
collected from different places according to plant growth, flowering habit, maturity, and
highest number of pods per plot, and resistant to pest and disease. She found out that
Blue lake, Maccarao, and B-12 have good performance in terms of yield reaction to pest
and diseases and adaptability under Basil, Tublay, Benguet condition.
Effect of Organic Amendments to Soil
The best way to improve soil fertility is to increase its organic matter content.
Organic matter is a source of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sulfur nutrients which soil
organisms require and retain. These nutrients slowly become available as the organic
matter continues to decompose. Organic materials can therefore supply the nutritional
requirements of the crops. Most of the magnesium, calcium, and potassium in the
decaying organic residues are discarded by the soil organisms during the first stage of
decomposition and these nutrients are quickly available to plants. Supply of organic
matter without excess of nitrogen will decrease the incidence of potato scab by
encouraging other soil microorganisms that will compete with the scab producing
organisms.
Organic fertilizers improve the soil physical properties, whether they are applied
to heavy soil or sandy soil. The loosen up clay soils and improve the water retention of
sandy soils. The fibrous portion of organic matter which is high carbon content promotes
soil aggregation to improve the permeability and aeration of clay soil, while its ability to
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
6
absorb moisture helps in the granulation of sandy soils and improve their water holding
capacity. It is also mentioned that in the use of organic matter for the biological control
of the soil borne diseases of nematodes, some types of organic matter reduces the
population of pathogens soil microorganism such as fusarium and others could
potentially used as a safe and low cost disease control (Sung Ching, 1992)
Some result on fertilizer application shows that the physical and chemical
properties of the soil were highly affected by organic fertilizer. The soil bulk density was
lowered especially on plots applied with wild sunflower. The values in all the treatments
were higher than the ideal bulk density value of 1.33 g/cc. Soil water holding capacity
were also increased by organic fertilizers used, hog, manure application had the highest
increased in water holding capacity. Wild sunflower application significantly increased
the soil pH (Lazo, 2006). Application of organic fertilizer such as compost, wild flower,
and chicken dung increases the seed yield and improve the quality of the pole snap bean
(Simsim, 2007). Plants Applied with compost produced the highest yield in potato under
La Trinidad condition. Entry 676089 was the best performing potato entry in terms of
resistance to pest and diseases (Palaroan, 2006).
Effect of Coco Coir Dust
Coco coir dust is a mixture of short and powder fibers. It has a pH of 5.5-5.6 and
usually contains higher level of potassium, sodium and chlorine than peat. Coco coir dust
can be used as a substitute for peat when reducing container grown viburnum and lilac
and presumably other woody plants. It is composed of millions of capillary micro-
sponges that absorb and hold water up to eight times its own weight. The natural pH is
between 5.5 to 6.5 and it has a very high ability to exchange cations. It has a very high
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
7
water holding capacity and good air porosity and does not compact like sawdust
(Bosleng, 2004).
Vavrina (1992) as cited by Daguyan stated that coco coir dust is biodegradable
and has superior structural ability, water absorption ability and drainage, and cation
exchange capacity compared to either sphagnum peat or sedge peat. Small amount of
nitrogen draw down occurred with coco coir dust, but typical production fertilization
practices would likely compensate for the amount of nitrogen loss. It has high level of
potassium that proves more benefits than a detriment to plant growth. The higher the pH
of coco coir, dust may allow less time to add the coco coir dust based medium.
Effect of Carbonized Rice Hull
Gaw (2003) as cited by Cezar claimed that rice hull which is made from the husk
of palay, carefully carbonized and completely sterilized contains high amounts of carbon
essential for proper development of seedlings when added to the mix, it makes the
medium loose for better root penetration. It also makes the medium hold fertilizer longer.
Carbonized rice hull can also serve as a moisture retention helper or as a weed
growth inhibitor in the soil. When rice hull is burned, the remaining ash serves as mix
for fertilizers finely ground rice hull are also used as a components in commercial mixed
fertilizers. The rice hull prevents caking of other fertilizers components (Cezar, 2005).
Carbonated rice hull is an excellent soil conditioner. Continuous applications of
carbonized rice hull replenish the nutrient lost from the soil as a result of continuous use
of inorganic fertilizer. It has high air permeability since it is porous and bulky, and has
the ability to replenish air in the soil. It is also favorable habitat for beneficial
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
8
microorganisms in the soil because it is sterilized from disease organisms (Daguyam,
2006).
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
9
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of 270 square meters was prepared and divided into 27 plots. Each block
was composed of 3 plots measuring 1 m x 10 m. The experiment was laid out in 3 x 3
factorial in randomized complete design (RCBD) with three replications.
Snap beans seeds were planted, 2 to 3 seeds per hill at distances of 20 cm between
hills and 50 cm between rows. The organic- based soil amendments were applied at the
rate of 20 kg/10 meter square during the land preparation. Cultural management
practices such as irrigation, weeding and hilling up were uniformly employed to all the
treatments.
Half of the plots was used for fresh pod production and the other half for seed
yield.
The treatments were the following:
Factor
A
–
Variety
(V)
V1
–
Alno
V2
–
Maroon
(Beta)
V3
–
Stonehill
Factor B – Organic-based soil amendments
S1
–
Garden
compost
S2 – Coco coir dust
S3 – Carbonated rice hull
Data Gathered
A. Vegetative characters
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
10
1. Percent germination. This was taken 10 days after planting. It was
determined using the formula:
Total number of plants germinated
% Germination =
x 100
Total number of plants planted
2. Plant survival (cm). This was taken 2 weeks after germination. It was
determined using the formula:
Total number of plants survived
Percent survival =
x 100
Total number of germinated seeds
3. Number of days from planting to flowering. This was taken by counting
the number of days from the day of emergence to the time when at least 50 % of the
plants had fully-opened flowers.
4. Number of days to maturity. This was taken by counting the number of
days from emergence to first harvesting of fresh pods.
5. Final plant height (cm). This was taken by measuring sample plants in
each soil plot from the soil surface to the tip of the plant at first harvest of the pods.
6. Total number of pods per plot. This was taken counting the number of
pods per cluster developed per plot.
B. Yield components
1. Number and weight of marketable pods per plot (g). Marketable pods are
not deformed and free from insect pest and diseases. The marketable pods were counted
and weighted from the first to last harvest.
2. Number and weight of non-marketable pods per plot (g). Non-marketable
pods are deformed and not free from insect pests and diseases. The non-marketable pods
were counted and weighted from the first to last harvest.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
11
3. Total fresh seed yield per plot. This is the sum of all marketable and non-
marketable fresh pods.
4. Total seed yield per hectare. This was taken using the formula:
Seed
yield/plot
Seed yield (tons/ha) =
x 10,000
5 m2
5. Total fresh pods /hectare. This was taken using the formula:
Total fresh pods yield/plot
Fresh pods yield (tons/ha) =
x 10,000
5m2
C. Pest and disease incidence
1. Pod borer. this was taken using the following rating scale:
SCALE DESCRIPTION REMARKS
1
No infection
Highly resistance
2
1-25% of the total plant/plot was infected
Mild resistance
3
25-50% of the total plant/plot was infected
Moderate resistance
4
50-75% of the total plant/plot was infected
Susceptible
5
76-100% of the total plant/plot was
Very susceptible
infected
2. Bean rust. This was taken using the following rating scale:
SCALE DESCRIPTION REMARKS
1
No infection
Highly resistance
2
1-25 % of the total plant/plot was infected Mild resistance
3
25-50 % of the total plant/plot was
Moderate resistance
infected
4
50-75 % of the total plant/plot was
Susceptible
infected
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
12
5
76-100 % of the total plant/plot was
Very susceptible
infected
D. Return on the cash expenses
1. Return on cash expenses. This was computed by the following:
Net profit
ROCE =
x 100
Total cost of production
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
13
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Percent Germination
Effect of variety. Table 1 shows the percent germination of the three pole snap
bean varieties. The high germination percentage for the three varieties indicate high
quality of seeds used in the study. The slight statistical differences observed among the
treatments are not of actual marked influence.
Effect of soil amendments. It was observed that three soil amendments did not
affect the percent germination of pole snap bean (Table 1). For seed germination it
appears that Garden compost, Coconut coir dust and Carbonized rice hull had no
enhancing or depressive effect on common bean seeds
Table 1. Percent germination, percent survival as affected by variety and soil
amendments
PERCENT
TREATMENT
GERMINATION SURVIVAL
Factor (a)
Alno 91.89 b
90.55 b
Maroon (Beta)
92.89 a
92.11 a
Stonehill 92.67 a
91.22 b
Factor (b)
Garden compost
92.44
91.11
Coco coir dust
92.56
91.44
Carbonized rice hull
92.44
91.33
a x b
ns
ns
CV (%)
0.43
0.74
Means of the same letter are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
14
Interaction effect. Result revealed no significant interaction effect of the variety
and soil amendments on germination.
Percent Survival
Effect of variety. The three varieties tested exhibited fairly high percent survival,
further proving that the seeds used were of high quality. Statistically, no significant
differences were among the three varieties used.
Effect of soil amendments. Table 1 also shows the percent survival of the pole
snap bean. Statistically analysis revealed no significant differences on the percent
survival of plants applied with different soil amendments.
Interaction effect. The variety and soil amendment interaction did not influence
the survival percentage in snap bean (Table 1).
Number of Days to Flowering
Effect of variety. Among the three varieties. Maroon (Beta) and Stone hill were
the earliest to flower at 36 DAE. Alno variety was observed to have flowered one day
later (Table 2).
In planting in a higher elevation and using six varieties pole snap bean, Neyney
found that Alno flowered in 45 days which was 1 to 4 days ahead than the other varieties.
Differenced on the days to flowering could be attributed to varietal characteristics of the
plant .
Effect of soil amendments. Table 2 shows the number of days to flowering of
pole snap bean as affected by the three soil amendments. Statistically analysis, revealed
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
15
no significant influence of the different soil amendments used on the number of days to
flowering of the snap bean plants.
The used of Coconut coir dust and Carbonized rice hull was found to enhance the
flowering of bush snap bean by 1 day (Daguyam, 2006). However this finding
corroborates the result of Buena (2004) testing Coco coir dust.
Interaction effect. Statistically, there was no interaction effect of variety and soil
amendment on the number of days to flowering. This indicated that the three varieties
have similar adaptability to the soil amendments tested.
Days of Maturity
Effect of variety. Table 2 shows the number of days to maturity of pole snap bean
varieties. It was observed that the Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill were the earliest to
mature at 42 DAP. Statistically, however, no significant difference was revealed.
Table 2. Days from planting to flowering, days from maturity and plant height as affected
by variety and soil amendments
TREATMENT
DAYS TO:
PLANT HEIGHT
FLOWERING MATURITY
(cm)
Factor (a)
Alno 37 b
43 b
318
Maroon (Beta)
36 a
42 a
349
Stonehill 36 a
42 a
319
Factor (b)
Garden compost
36
42
331
Coco coir dust
36
42
328
Carbonized rice hull
36
42
328
a x b
ns
ns
ns
CV (%)
0 .53
0 .45
11 .33
Means of the same letter are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
16
The trends follows that number of days to maturity where pole snap bean varieties
flowered earlier were also noted to have matured earlier.
Effect of soil amendments. The number of days to maturity as affected by the
three soil amendments is shown in Table 2. It was observed that the three soil
amendments did not influence the number of days to maturity.
Interaction effect. Results, revealed that there was no interaction effect of variety
and soil amendment on the number of days to maturity.
Plant Height
Effect of variety. Statistical analysis, revealed no significant difference on the
plant height of three pole snap bean varieties tested. This is similar to findings of Paredes
(2003).
Effect of soil amendments. Table 2 also shows the plant height of the pole snap
bean as affected by the different soil amendments. Statistical analysis, also showed no
significant differences on the plant height of the plant although Garden compost seem to
enhance the tallest plants.
In potato, Carbonized rice hull enhanced plant height, specially when applied with
some amount of inorganic fertilizer. The height of potato was sufficiently affected by the
presence or absence of organic fertilizer and the amount of the different organic fertilizer
applied (Cezar, 2005).
Interaction effect. The interaction between the varieties and soil amendments did
not produce significant results.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
17
Number of Pods Per Plot
Effect of variety. Table 3 shows the number of pods per plot of pole snap bean
varieties. Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill had higher number of pods per plot than Alno.
Although, Alno had lesser number of pods, its pods were noted to be longer than those of
Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill.
Effect of soil amendments. The three soil amendments tested did not influence
the number of pods per plot although Garden compost exhibited high number of pods per
plot (Table 3).
Interaction effect. It was observed that there were significant interaction effect of
variety and soil amendments on the number of pods per plot. Maroon (Beta) seem to
perform better under any of the three soil amendments except Stonehill grown with
Garden compost. Alno did not respond well to the same treatments. Apparently, Maroon
(Beta) could be better suited to low input condition than either Alno or Stonehill (Fig. 1).
280
270
260
r Plot
250
240
230
220
210
200
u
mber of Pods Pe
N
190
180
GC
CCD
CRH
Alno
Stonehill
Maroon (Beta)
Fig. 1. Number of pods per plot as affected by varieties and soil amendments
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
18
Table 3. Numbers of pods, marketable and non-marketable pods per plot as affected by
variety and soil amendments
TREATMENT
NUMBER OF:
PODS/PLOT MARKETABLE
NON-MARKETABLE
Factor (a)
Alno 192 b
802 ab
17 b
Maroon (Beta)
259 a
1,357 a
21 a
Stonehill 237 a
1,291 a
18 b
Factor (b)
Garden compost
242
1,185 ab
19
Coco coir dust
223
1,037 b
19
Carbonized rice hull
224
1,227 a
17
a x b
*
* **
CV (%)
10 .49
14 .66
12 .83
Means of the same letter are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance
Number of Marketable Fresh Pods Per Plot
Effect of variety. Maroon and Stonehill exhibited high number of marketable
pods per plot. The factors affecting the number of marketable pods per plot were
temperature pest and disease incidence and others.
Effect of soil amendments. Table 3 also shows the number of marketable pods
per plot of the three varieties of pole snap bean as affected by soil amendments. It was
observed that the Carbonized rice hull as soil additive gave higher number of marketable
pods per plot.
Interaction effect. Differences on number of marketable pods per plot of the three
varieties in response to soil amendments were found to be statistically significant.
Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill grown in soil with Carbonized rice hull as soil additive
enhance the higher number of marketable pods per plot (Fig. 2).
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
19
1600
1500
1400
1300
Pods Per Plot 1200
b
le 1100
1000
k
eta
900
800
of Mar
700
600
u
mber
GC
CCD
CRH
N
Alno
Stonehill
Maroon (Beta)
Fig. 2. Number of marketable pods per plot as affected by varieties and soil
amendments
Number of Non-marketable Pods Per Plot
Effect of variety. It was observed that Maroon (Beta) had higher number of non-
marketable pods per plot. For the number of non-marketable pods per plot shows that
more of the pods are shorter and deformed.
Effect of soil amendments. The use of soil amendments did not influence the
number of non-marketable pods per plot although plants subjected to Coco coir dust
appear to have higher number of non-marketable pods.
Interaction effect. There was no interaction effect between the three varieties and
the soil amendment on the number of non-marketable pods per plot.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
20
Weight of Marketable Fresh
Pods Per Plot (kg)
Effect of variety. Table 4 shows the weight of marketable pods per plot.
Marketable pods are not deformed and free from the pests and diseases. Results show
that Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill exhibited heavier marketable pods per plot compared to
Alno. This could be an indication that Maroon (Beta) or Stonehill have higher yield
potential than Alno.
Effect of soil amendments. It was observed that Garden compost exhibited high
weighted of marketable pods per plot.
Interaction effect. Interaction between variety and soil amendment did not
enhance heavier marketable pods per plot.
Table 4. Weight of marketable and non-marketable pods per plot as affected by variety
and soil amendments
WEIGHT OF:
TREATMENT
MARKETABLE
NON-MARKETABLE
(kg)
(kg)
Factor (a)
Alno 6 .03
2
.69
Maroon (Beta)
8 .24
3 .80
Stonehill 7 .78
3
.52
Factor (b)
Garden compost
7 .49
3 .43
Coco coir dust
7 .20
3 .26
Carbonized rice hull
7 .36
3 .32
a x b
**
ns
CV (%)
8 .60
20 .69
Means of the same letter are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
21
Weight of Non-Marketable
Pods Per Plot (kg)
Effect of variety. Table 4 also shows the weight of non-marketable pods per plot.
The three varieties produced non-marketable pods which were almost half of the
marketable pod yield. This results is not really desirable. Some conditions in the
experimental area may have been not so favorable for snap bean production.
Effect of soil amendments. It was observed that the three soil amendments did
not affect the weight of non-marketable pods per plot of the three pole snap bean.
Interaction effect. Statistical analysis revealed no significant interaction of the
three varieties applied with the different soil amendments. Non-marketable pods were
deformed, short and damage by the pest and diseases.
Total Fresh Pod Yield
Per Hectare (t/ha)
Effect of variety. Maroon (Beta) produced the heaviest fresh pods weight with a
mean of 2,408.33 t/ha followed by Stonehill with a mean of 2,231.56 t/ha and the least
weight was the Alno with a 1,764.89 t/ha. Such significant differences among the
treatments could be attributed to their varietal characteristics.
Effect of soil amendments. The result indicates that using any of the three soil
amendments did not influence the production of pods though it was observed that the soil
with Garden compost gave the highest pod yield per hectare.
Interaction effect. Maroon (Beta) with Garden compost as soil amendment
produced the heaviest fresh pod yield per hectare. Statistical analysis revealed significant
interaction effect of variety and soil amendments (Fig. 3).
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
22
2,800
2,700
a
)
2,600
2,500
2,400
ds (t/h
2,300
Po
2,200
sh
2,100
2,000
1,900
l Fre
1,800
1,700
Tota
1,600
1,500
GC
CCD
CRH
Alno
Stonehill
Maroon (Beta)
Fig. 3. Total fresh pod yield per hectare as affected by varieties and soil
amendments
Total Yield Per Plot (g)
Effect of variety. It was observed that the Maroon (Beta) produce the higher yield
per plot than the Stonehill and Alno. The statistical differences observed among the
treatments are influence by the genetic potential of the variety to produce higher yield.
Effect of soil amendments. Statistical analysis, soil amendments did not
appreciably affect the total common bean (Table 5).
Interaction effect. It was observed that the total yield per plot was not influenced
by the different soil amendments.
Total Seed Yield
Per Hectare (t/ha)
Effect of variety. Statistical analysis revealed no significant influence of the
varieties on the total seed yield per hectare although Maroon (Beta) exhibited numerically
higher total seed yield.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
23
Table 5. Total fresh pods yield per hectare as affected by variety and soil amendments
TOTAL FRESH
TOTAL YIELD
TOTAL SEED
TREATMENT
PODS/HECTARE
PER PLOT
YIELD/HECTARE
(t/ha)
(g)
(t/ha)
Factor (a)
Alno 1,764.89 c
8,824.4 c
1,966 .7
Maroon (Beta)
2,408.33 a
11,984.4 a
2,233 .3
Stonehill 2,231.56 b
11,300.2 b
2,011 .1
Factor (b)
Garden compost
2,207.56
11,038.0
2,044 .4
Coco coir dust
2,082.11
10,443.3
2,144 .4
Carbonized rice hull
2,115.11
10,627.8
2,022 .2
a x b
*
**
**
CV (%)
5.89
5.7 5
16 .92
Means of the same letter are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance
Effect of soil amendments. Table 5 also shows the total seed yield per plot as
affected by soil amendments. Result shows no significant influence of soil amendments
on the seed yield per hectare. In potato, the use of Carbonized rice hull and Coco coir
dust did not influence soil chemical properties but they enhanced the productivity of the
potato (Cezar, 2005).
Interaction effect. Statistically, there was no significant interaction between the
variety and soil amendments.
Reaction to Pod Borer
and Bean Rust
It was observed that all the varieties grown with different soil amendments were
mildly resistant against bean rust (Table 6). For pod borer, mild resistance was showed
by Alno while Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill were moderately resistant. This reaction may
have been affected by the low temperature that occurred during the experiment.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
24
Table 6. Pest (pod borer) and disease (bean rust) incidence as affected by variety and soil
amendments
VARIETY POD
BORER* BEAN
RUST*
Alno 2
2
Maroon (Beta)
3
2
Stonehill 3
2
*Rating scale: 1 – Highly resistant; 2 – Mild resistant; 3 – Moderate resistant; 4 –
Susceptible; 5 – Very susceptible
Return on Cash Expenses
Effect of variety. All the pole snap bean varieties evaluated for seed and fresh
pod production were found to be profitable under Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition
as evidenced by the computed return on cash expenses (ROCE). It was observed that
Maroon (Beta) gave the highest ROCE of 101.04 % followed with the Stonehill that gave
ROCE of 84.50 %. The least ROCE was obtained on Alno with 69.62 % (Table 7).
Effect of soil amendments. The ROCE of pole snap bean as affected by the soil
amendment is shown in Table 8. It was observed that the plants applied with Coco coir
dust registered the highest ROCE of 91.10 % while plant applied with Carbonized rice
hull had an ROCE of 84.39 %. The plant applied with compost had the lowest ROCE
with 80.03 %. Pole snap bean for fresh and seed production with any of the soil
amendments applied had been proven to be profitable (Table 8).
Interaction effect. The highest ROCE was obtained from Maroon (Beta) planted
on soil added with Coco coir dust while the lowest ROCE was obtained from Alno using
Garden compost as soil amendments. It was observed that the soil amendments influence
the three varieties (Table 9).
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
25
Table 7. Return on cash expenses of producing three pole snap bean varieties under
Taloy Norte, Benguet condition
SEED
FRESH
GROSS
TOTAL
VARIETY
NET
ROCE
YIELD
POD YIELD
SALE
EXPENSES
INCOME
(%)
(kg)
(kg)
(PhP)
(PhP)
Alno
5.33 6.03 1,453.1 856.7 596.4
69.62
Maroon
(Beta)
6.23 8.24 1,722.3 856.7 865.6
101.04
Stonehill
5.7 7.78 1,580.6 856.7 723.9
84.50
• Total expenses include land preparation, seed cost, cost of soil amendments, care
and management includes weeding and watering
• Selling price: Seeds = PhP 250.00 /kg
Fresh pod = PhP 20.00 /kg
Table 8. Return on cash expenses of producing pole snap bean varieties with soil
amendments under Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition
SOIL
SEED
FRESH
GROSS
TOTAL
NET
ROCE
YIELD
POD YIELD
SALE
EXPENSES
AMENDMENTS
INCOME
(%)
(kg)
(kg)
(PhP)
(PhP)
Garden compost
5.57
7.49
1,542.3
856.7
685.6
80.03
Coco coir dust
5.97
7.20
1,636.5
856.7
779.9
91.10
Carbonized rice 5.73 7.36 1,579.7 856.7 723
84.39
hull
• Total expenses include land preparation, seed cost, cost of soil amendments, care
and management includes weeding and watering
• Selling price: Seeds = PhP 250.00 /kg
Fresh pod = PhP 20.00 /kg
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
26
Table 9. Return on cash expenses of producing pole snap bean varieties applied with
different soil amendments under Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition
SEED
FRESH
GROSS
TOTAL
VARIETY
NET
ROCE
YIELD
POD YIELD
SALE
EXPENSES
INCOME
(%)
(kg)
(kg)
(PhP)
(PhP)
Soil
amendments
Alno
Compost 5.1 6.06 1,396.2 856.7 593.5
62.97
CCD
5.2 6.04 1,420.8 856.7 564.1
65.85
CRH
5.7 5.98 1,544.6 856.7 687.9
80.30
Maroon
(Beta)
Compost 5.3 8.45 1,494.0 856.7 637.3
74.39
CCD
6.8 8.31 1,866.2 856.7
1,009.5
117.84
CRH
6.6 7.96 1,809.2 856.7 952.5
111.18
Stonehill
Compost 6.3 7.96 1,734.2 856.7 877.5
102.43
CCD
5.9 7.25 1,620.0 856.7 763.3
89.10
CRH
4.9 8.15 1,388 856.7 531.3
62.02
• Total expenses include land preparation, seed cost, cost of soil amendments, care
and management includes weeding and watering
• Selling price: Seeds = PhP 250.00 /kg
Fresh pod = PhP 20.00 /kg
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
27
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The study was conducted at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet to determine the variety
best suited in Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition; determine the effect of three
organic-based soil amendments on the growth and yield of pole snap bean; identify the
interaction of pole snap bean varieties applied with organic-based soil amendments; and
determine the economic benefits of pole snap bean varieties applied with organic-based
soil amendments.
Based on the result, it was find out that Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill exhibited
fairly high percent germination percent survival, number of days to flowering, number of
days to maturity and number of pods per plot. Maroon (Beta) enhance of higher percent
survival, number of non-marketable pods per plot, total yield per plot and total fresh pod
per hectare. For the plant height, weight of non-marketable pods per plot and total seed
yield per hectare revealed no significant influence.
It was observe that the three soil amendments had no enhancing or depressive
effect on common bean seeds in percent germination, percent survival, number of day to
flowering, number of days to maturity, plant height, number of pods per plot, number of
non-marketable pods, weight of non-marketable and marketable pods, total fresh pods per
hectare, total yield per plot and total seed yield per hectare. For the number of
marketable pods per plot, it appears that Carbonized rice hull as soil additive gave the
higher number of marketable pods.
The variety and soil amendments interaction did not influence the percent
germination, percent survival, number of days to flowering and maturity, plant height,
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
28
weight of non-marketable pods. It was observed that there were significant interaction
effect of variety and soil amendments on the number of pods per plot. Maroon (Beta)
seems to perform better under any of the three soil amendments except Stonehill grown
with Garden compost. Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill grown in soil with Carbonized rice
hull as soil additive enhance the higher number of marketable pods per plot. Maroon
(Beta) with Garden compost as soil amendment produced the heaviest fresh pod yield per
hectare.
Maroon (Beta) with Coco coir dust obtained the highest ROCE.
Conclusion
The best combination for the variety and soil amendments for growth and yield
were Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill with any of the three soil amendments. Maroon (Beta)
with Coco coir dust obtained the higher ROCE.
Recommendation
Based on the condition of the study, it is recommended that the best variety suited
in Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition is Maroon (Beta). For the growth and yield,
Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill with any of the three soil amendments are recommended.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
29
LITERATURE CITED
ANONYMOUS. 1999. Environmentally friendly retrieved: October 2008.
http://www.organicbeansoline.com/site88514/page/388589.
AYONG. M. T. 2007. Organic fertilization on the seed quality of garden pea. BS
Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp.34-35.
BOSLENG, M. L. 2004. Performance of potato as influenced by lime and coconut coir
dust application. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 1-2, 5-6.
BRICKBAUER, E. A. and W. P. MORTENSON. 1978. Approved practices in crop
production condition. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 26-27.
BUENA, C. G. 2004. Seed production of garden pea applied with dolomite and coco coir
dust. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 14-15.
CEZAR, M. A. 2005. Potato production as affected by carbonized rice hull and coconut
coir dust. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 15-16, 26-27.
DAGUYAM, N. B. 2006. Growth and seed yield of bush snap bean as affected by soil
amendments under La Trinidad, Benguet condition. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad
Benguet. Pp. 5-8.
GEORGE R. A. 1985. Vegetable seed production. Logman Inc, New York. Pp. 239-240.
GUTAMAN, J. 2004. The paradox of organic farming in California. Retrieved: October,
2007. En.wikipedia.org/wiki/organic-farming-90k.
KUEPPER, G. 2003. Organic soybean production. Retrieved: October, 2007. C.T.120.
http://www.attra.org/attar-pub/organicsoy.html-33k-cached.
LAZO, D. B. 2006. Organic fertilization on the post harvest quality of processing potato.
BS Thesis, BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 30-31.
MULCHINO, R. T. 2007. On farm evaluation of potential snap bean at varieties at
Gusaran, Kabayan, Benguet condition. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp.
16-17.
NEYNEY, B. C. 2005. Pod setting and fresh pod yield potential of commonly grown
pole snap bean in La Trinidad, Benguet. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. P.
11.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
30
sPALAROAN, G. U. 2006. Agronomic characters of potato entries applied with organic
fertilizers under La Trinidad, Benguet condition. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad
Benguet. Pp. 4-8.
PAREDES, O. P. 2003. Evaluation of bush snap beans in Long-long La Trinidad,
Benguet. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. P. 11.
PARNERS, R. 1986. Organic and inorganic fertilizers. Wood End Agricultural Institute
Pp. 16-27.
REGMI, S. K. 1990. Varietal evaluation of promising lines and path coefficient analysis
in pole snap beans. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 81.
SIMSIM. P.F. 2007. Organic fertilization on the seed of pole snap bean. BS Thesis.
BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 38-39.
SUNG-CHING, A. 1992. The use of organic fertilizers in crop production collection of
information seminar. Suweon Korea. Pp. 29-30.
THOMPSON, H. and U. KELLY. 1957. Vegetable crops. 5th ed. New York Mc Graw
Books Co. Inc. Pp. 77-79.
WORK, D. and J. CREW. 1995. Vegetable production and marketing. 2nd ed. Wiley
Book Co. New York. Pp. 103-377.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
APPENDICES
APPENDIX TABLE 1. Percent germination (%)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 92
92
92 276
92.00
S2 92
91
92 275
91.67
S3 92
92
92 276
92.00
V2S1 93
93
92 278
92.67
S2 93
93
93 279
93.00
S3 93
93
93 279
93.00
V3S1 92
93
93 279
92.67
S2 93
93
93 279
93.00
S3 92
93
92 277
92.33
TOTAL 832 833 832 2,497
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
276 275 276
827
275.67
Maroon
(Beta)
278 279 279
836
278.67
Stonehill 279 279 279
837
279.00
TOTAL 835 833 834
2,500
833.34
MEAN
277.67
277.67
278
833.33
277.78
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
0.07
0.04
0.23 ns 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
4.96
2.48
15.31 ns 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
0.07
0.04
0.23 ns 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
1.04
0.26
1.60 ns 3.01
4.77
Error 16
2.59
0.16
Total 26
8.74
0.16
ns – Not significant
CV (%) =0.43
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
32
APPENDIX TABLE 2. Percent survival (%)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 90
90
92
272
90.67
S2 90
90
91
271
90.33
S3 90
90
92
272
90.67
V2S1 92
92
92
276
92.00
S2 92
92
92
276
92.00
S3 92
93
92
276
92.33
V3S1 91
90
91
276
90.67
S2 92
92
92
276
92.00
S3 90
92
91
273
91.00
TOTAL 819
821
825
2,465
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
272 271 272
815
271.67
Maroon
(Beta)
276 276 276
828
276.00
Stonehill 276 276 273
825
275.00
TOTAL 824 823 821
2,468
822.67
MEAN
274.67
274.33
273.67
822.67
274.22
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
2.07
1.04
2.29 n 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
10.96
5.48
12.08 n 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
0.52
0.26
0.57 n 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
2.81
0.70
1.55ns 3.01
4.77
Error 16
7.26
0.45
Total 26
23.63
ns – Not significant
CV (%) =0.74
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
33
APPENDIX TABLE 3. Number of days to flowering
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 37
37
37
111
37.00
S2 37
37
37
111
37.00
S3 36
37
37
110
36.67
V2S1 36
36
36
108
36.00
S2 36
36
36
108
36.00
S3 36
36
36
108
36.00
V3S1 36
36
36
108
36.00
S2 36
36
36
108
36.00
S3 36
36
36
108
36.00
TOTAL
326
294
294
914
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
111 111 110
332
110.67
Maroon
(Beta)
108 108 108
324
108.00
Stonehill 108 108 108
324
108.00
TOTAL 327 327 326
980
326.67
MEAN
109
109
108.67
326.67
108.89
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
0.07
0.04
1.00 n 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
4.74
2.38
64.00 n 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
0.07
0.04
1.00 n 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
0.15
0.04
1.00ns 3.01
4.77
Error 16
0.59
0.37
Total 26
5.63
ns – Not significant
CV (%) =0.45
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
34
APPENDIX TABLE 4. Number of days to maturity
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 43
43
43
129
43.00
S2 43
43
43
129
43.00
S3 42
43
43
128
42.67
V2S1 42
42
42
126
42.00
S2 42
42
42
126
42.00
S3 42
42
42
126
42.00
V3S1 42
42
42
126
42.00
S2 42
42
42
126
42.00
S3 42
42
42
126
42.00
TOTAL
380
381
381
1,142
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
129 129 128
386
128.67
Maroon
(Beta)
126 126 126
378
126.00
Stonehill 126 126 126
378
126.00
TOTAL 381 381 380
1,142
380.67
MEAN
127
384
126.67
381.67
126.89
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
0.07
0.04
1.00ns 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
4.74
2.37
64.00ns 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
0.074
0.04
1.00ns 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
0.15
0.04
1.00ns 3.01
4.77
Error 16
0.59
0.04
Total 26
5.63
ns – Not significant
CV (%) =0.53
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
35
APPENDIX TABLE 5. Final plant height (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 318.17
325.83
344.43
988.43
329.48
S2 323.50
287.17
356.76
967.43
322.48
S3 269.33
301.62
332.05
903.00
301.00
V2S1 397.67
346.33
281.79
1,025.79
341.93
S2 312.88
370.50
388.73
1,072.11
357.37
S3 365.00
287.80
392.21
1,045.01
348.34
V3S1 325.60
293.82
343.23
962.65
320.88
S2 344.33
288.30
271.75
904.38
301.46
S3 325.82
337.34
339.46
1,002.62
334.21
TOTAL
2,982.30
2,838.71
3,050.41
8,871.43
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
988.43 967.43 903.00
2,858.86
952.95
Maroon
(Beta)
1,025.79 1,072.11 1,045.01
3,142.91
1,047.64
Stonehill 962.65
904.38
1,002.62
2,869.65
956.55
TOTAL 2,976.87 2,943.92 2,950.63
8,871.42
2,957.14
MEAN
992.29 981.31 983.54
2,957.14
985.71
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
2,595.33
1,297.66
0.90
3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
5,758.22 2,879.11
2.08
3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
67.38
33.69
0.02
3.63
6.23
v x s
4
3,241.95
810.48
0.59ns 3.01
4.77
Error 16
22,160.90
1,385.06
Total 26
33,823.78
ns – Not significant
CV (%) = 11.33
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
36
APPENDIX TABLE 6. Numbers of pods per plot
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 197
191
198
586
195.33
S2 192
192
189
573
191.00
S3 189
185
194
568
189.33
V2S1 269
258
264
791
263.67
S2 258
247
249
754
251.33
S3 259
242
288
789
263.00
V3S1 237
338
226
801
267.00
S2 235
227
218
680
226.67
S3 229
205
221
655
218.33
TOTAL
2,065
2,085
2,047
6,197
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
586 573 568
1,727
575.67
Maroon
(Beta)
791 754 789
2,334
778.00
Stonehill 801 680 655
656.18
218.73
TOTAL 2,178 2,007 2,012
6,197
1,572.40
MEAN
726
669
670.67
2,065.67
524.13
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
80.30
40.15
0.07* 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
21,293.85 10,646.92
18.37* 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
2,104.52
1,052.26
1.82* 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
2,306.37
576.59
1.00* 3.01
4.77
Error 16
9,271.70
579.48
Total 26
35,056.74
* – Significant
CV (%) = 10.49
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
37
APPENDIX TABLE 7. Number of marketable pods per plot
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 710
900
844
2,484
818.00
S2 744
912
714
2,370
790.00
S3 906
810
680
2,396
798.67
V2S1 1,430
1,506
1,389
4,325
1,441.67
S2 1,370
1,058
1,509
3,937
1,312.33
S3 1,182
1,667
1,102
3,951
1,317.00
V3S1 1,281
1,287
1,322
3,890
1,296.67
S2 9,948
1,026
1,056
3,030
1,010.00
S3 1,821
1,443
1,382
4,464
1,548.67
TOTAL
10,392
10,609
9,998
30,999
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
2,454 2,370 2,396
7,220
2,406.67
Maroon
(Beta)
4,325 3,937 3,951
12,213
4,071
Stonehill 3,890 3,030 4,646
11,566
3,855.33
TOTAL 10,669 9,337
10,993
30,999
10,333.00
MEAN
3,556.33
3,112.33
3,664.33
10,333
3,44.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
24,572.07 12,286.04
0.43* 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
1,652,269.40 826,134.70
29.05* 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
178,686.59 79,397.92
3.14* 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
317,591.70 79,397.92
2.79* 3.01
4.77
Error 16
455,091.26 288,443.20
Total 26
2,628,210.96
* – Significant
CV (%) = 14.66
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
38
APPENDIX TABLE 8. Number of non-marketable pods per plot
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 202
302
280
784
261.33
S2 358
272
260
890
292.67
S3 305
281
276
862
287.33
V2S1 545
610
600
1,755
585.00
S2 292
608
340
1,240
413.33
S3 340
338
282
960
320.00
V3S1 268
286
339
893
297.67
S2 608
260
393
1,161
387.00
S3 261
282
262
805
268.33
TOTAL
3,179
3,239
2,932
9,350
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
784 890 862
2,536
845.33
Maroon (Beta)
1,755
1,240
960
3,955
1,318.33
Stonehill 893
1,161
805
2,859
953.00
TOTAL 3,432 3,291 2,627
9,350
3,116.66
MEAN
1,144
1,097
875.67
3,116.67 1,038.89
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
3.27
1.64
0.30
3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
77.66
38.83
7.00
3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
23.16
11.58
2.09
3.63
6.23
v x s
4
53.82
13.45
2.42** 3.01
4.77
Error 16
88.81
5.55
Total 26
246.72
** – Highly significant
CV (%) = 12.83
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
39
APPENDIX TABLE 9. Weight of marketable pods per plot (g)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 5,030
6,700
6,460
18,190
6,063.33
S2 5,900
7,060
5,150
18,110
6,036.67
S3 6,820
6,030
5,090
17,940
5,980.00
V2S1 8,290
8690
8,380
25,360
8,453.33
S2 8,200
8,020
8,700
24,920
8,306.67
S3 7,380
8,420
8,080
23,880
7,960.00
V3S1 7,450
8,280
8,160
23,890
7,963.33
S2 6,390
7,350
8,020
21,760
7,253.33
S3
8,360
8,230
7,860
24,450
8,150
TOTAL
63,820
68,780
65,900
98,500
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno 18,190
18,110
17,940
54,240
18,080.00
Maroon (Beta)
25,360
24,920
23,880
52,668 17,556.00
Stonehill 23,890
21,760 24,450
70,100
23,366.67
TOTAL 67,440
64,790
66,270
177,008
59,002.61
MEAN
22,480
2,156.67
22,090
59,002.7 19,667.56
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
1,378,607.40 689,303.7
1.70 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
24,623,318.52 12,311,659.3
30.86 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
391,918.52 195,959.3
0.49 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
1,346,970.37 336742.6
0.84** 3.01
4.77
Error 16
6,382,392.59 398,899.5
Total 26
34,123,207.40
** – Highly significant
CV (%) = 8.59
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
40
APPENDIX TABLE 10. Weight of non-marketable pods per plot (g)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 1,500
3,400
2,500
7,400
2,466.67
S2 2,500
2,2500
3,300
8,000
2,666.67
S3 1,900
3,700
3,200
8,800
2,933.33
V2S1 4,100
4,400
4,700
13,200
4,400.00
S2 3,500
4,300
2,400
10,200
3,400.00
S3 4,000
3,900
2,900
10,800
3,600.00
V3S1 3,400
3,000
3,900
10,300
3,433.33
S2 4,400
3,200
3,500
11,000
3,666.67
S3 3,300
3,700
3,300
10,300
3,433.33
TOTAL
28,500
31,800
29,700
90,000
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
7,400 8,000 8,800
24,200
8,066.67
Maroon
(Beta)
13,200 10,200 10,800
24,200
11,400.00
Stonehill 10,300 11,000 10,300
31,600
10,533.33
TOTAL 30,900 29,200 29,900
90,000
30,000.00
MEAN
10,300
9,733.33
9,966.67
30,000 10,000.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
579,409.40
293,703.7
0.62 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
6,018,518.518 3,009,259.2
6.31 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
145,185.18
72,592.6
0.15 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
2,002,925.92
501,481.5
1.05ns 3.01
4.77
Error 16
7,625,925.92
476,620.4
Total 26
16,382,962.96
ns – Not significant
CV (%) = 20.69
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
41
APPENDIX TABLE 11. Total fresh pods yield per hectare (t/ha)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 1,506
2,020
1,792
5,318
1,772.67
S2 1,680
1,852
1,690
5,222
1,740.67
S3 1,740
1,946
1,658
5,344
1,781.33
V2S1 2,478
2,618
2,616
7,712
2,570.67
S2 2,340
2,464
2,220
7,024
2,341.33
S3 2,276
2,464
2,196
6,936
2,312.00
V3S1 2,170
2,256
2,412
6,838
2,279.33
S2 2,076
2,110
2,304
6,490
2,163.33
S3 2,138
2,386
2,232
6,756
2,252.00
TOTAL
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
5,318 5,222 5,344
15,884
5,294.67
Maroon
(Beta)
7,712 7,024 6,936
21,672
7,224.00
Stonehill 6,838 6,490 6,756
20,084
6,694.67
TOTAL 19,868 18,736 19,036
57,640
19,213.34
MEAN
6,622.67
6,245.33
6,345.33 19,213.33 6,404.45
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
163,743.18 81,871.59
6.43* 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
1,989,146.74 994,573.37
78.08* 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
76,113.85 38,056.93
2.99* 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
68,668.59 17,167.15
1.35* 3.01
4.77
Error 16
203,809.48 12,738.09
Total 26
* – Significant
CV (%) = 5.29
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
42
APPENDIX TABLE 12. Total yield per plot (g)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 7,530
10,100
8,960
26,590
8,863.33
S2 8,400
9,260
8,450
26,110
8,703.33
S3 8,700
9,730
8,290
26,720
8,906.67
V2S1 12,390
13,090
13,080
38,560
12,853.33
S2 11,700
12,320
11,100
35,120
11,706.67
S3 11,380
12,320
10,980
34,680
11,560.00
V3S1 10,850
11,282
12,060
3,410
11,396.67
S2 10,690
10,550
11,520
32,760
10,920.00
S3 11,660
11,930
11,260
34,750
11,583.33
TOTAL
93,300
100,580
95,600
289,480
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
26,590 26,110 26,720
79,420 26,473.33
Maroon
(Beta)
38,360 35,120 34,680
108,360 36,120.00
Stonehill 34,190 32,760 34,750
101,700 33,900.00
TOTAL 99,340 93,990 96,150
289.480 96,493.00
MEAN
99,343 31,330 32,050
96,493.33 32,164.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
3,197,031.41 1,598,515.7
4.23 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
49,749,706.96 24,874,853.5
65.75 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
1,667,791.41 833,895.7
2.20 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
2,648,107.26 662,026.8
1.75** 3.01
4.77
Error 16
6,052,837.93 378,302.4
Total 26
63,315,474.96
** – Highly significant
CV (%) = 5.75
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
43
APPENDIX TABLE 13. Total seed yield per hectare (t/ha)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 2,500
1,600
1,800
5,900
1,966.67
S2 1,900
1,400
2,500
5,800
1,933.33
S3 2,000
1,700
2,300
6,000
2,000.00
V2S1 1,800
2,00
1,900
5,700
1,900.00
S2 1,900
2,800
2,600
7,300
2,433.33
S3 2,100
2,800
2,200
7,100
2,366.67
V3S1 2,000
2,300
3,500
6,800
2,266.67
S2 1,900
2,100
2,200
6,200
2,066.67
S3 1,700
1,500
2,900
5,100
1,700.00
TOTAL
17,800
18,200
19,900
55,900
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
5,900 5,800 6,000
17,700
5,900.00
Maroon
(Beta)
5,700 7,300 7,100
20,100
6,700.00
Stonehill 6,800 6,200 5,100
18,100
6,033.33
TOTAL 18,400 19,300 18,200
55,900
18,633.33
MEAN
6,133.33
6,433.33
6,066.67
18,633.33 6,211.11
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
276,296.30 1,381,448.15 1.13* 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
367,407.40 183,703.70 1.50* 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
76,296.29 38,148.15 0.31* 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
93,259.59 233,148.15
1.90** 3.01
4.77
Error 16
1,963,703.70 122,731.48
Total 26
3,616,296.30
* – Highly significant
CV (%) = 16.92
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
SARMOYAN, JENIFER QUEEN B. APRIL 2008. Production of Pole Snap
Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition.
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Dr. Danilo P. Padua, PhD.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to determine the variety best suited in Taloy Norte,
Tuba, Benguet condition; determine the effect of three organic-based soil amendments on
the growth and yield of pole snap bean; identify the interaction of pole snap bean
varieties applied with organic-based soil amendments; and determine the economic
benefits of pole snap bean varieties applied with organic-based soil amendments.
Study shows that Maroon (Beta) is the best variety suited in Taloy Norte, Tuba,
Benguet condition. Maroon (Beta) bean was the most responsive to Carbonized rice hull
as soil amendment in terms of yield, but in growth Maroon (Beta) was more responsive to
garden compost. The interaction of Maroon (Beta) and Coco coir dust were significantly
on number of marketable pods per plot, and the number of pods per plot observed on
Maroon (Beta) in combination with garden compost.
With the good performance of Maroon (Beta), it is highly recommended for fresh
pod and seed production under Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition for higher return on
cash expense. Likewise, Coco coir dust as soil amendment is also recommended for
higher marketable seed and fresh pod yield. Stonehill with Carbonized rice hull as soil
amendment could be an alternative choice.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Table of Contents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ii
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
Environmental Requirements of Snap bean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
Varietal Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
Effect of Organic Amendments to Soil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
Effect of Coco Coir Dust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
Effect of Carbonized Rice Hull . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
MATERIALS AND METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Percent Germination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Percent Survival . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14
Number of Days to Flowering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14
Days of Maturity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
Plant Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
Number of Pods Per Plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
Number of Marketable Fresh Pods Per Plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
18
Number of Non-marketable Pods Per Plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
Weight of Marketable Fresh
Pods Per Plot (kg) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20
ii
Weight of Non-Marketable
Pods Per Plot (kg) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
Total Fresh Pod Yield
Per Hectare (t/ha) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
Total Yield Per Plot (g) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Total Seed Yield
Per Hectare (t/ha) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Reaction to Pod Borer
and Bean Rust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23
Return on Cash Expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
24
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
27
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
27
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
28
Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
28
LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
31
iii
INTRODUCTION
Snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris), also known as common bean is grown for its
seeds or tender and green pods. It is an annual crop that can be grown profitably in high
elevated areas in the tropics. In lower elevation, yield was significantly lower (George,
1985).
Buyers tend to buy legumes as substitutes for meat products when the prices of
the meat products are too expensive. Legumes are recognized as important source of
protein, vitamins, and minerals such as calcium and phosphorus which maybe consumed
as dry seeds or as green fresh pods for human nutrition (Work and Crew, 1995).
Costumers are turning to organic food because they believe it to be tastier, as well
as healthier, both for themselves and the environment. Despite the higher cost for
organic products, costumers are willing to pay for their preferences.
Organic farming is environmentally friendly. Organic inputs keep dangerous
chemicals out of the environment and maintain the natural balance of ecosystems.
Furthermore, organic farming employs many positive environmental practices such as
recycling and composting and helps maintain soil health through natural methods
(Anonymous, 1999).
Organic farms use natural methods of protection from pest such as those derived
from plants. Natural pesticides are a last resort, while growing healthier, disease resistant
plants, using cover crops and crop rotation, and encouraging beneficial insects and birds
are the primary methods of pest control. The most common organic pesticides used by
most organic farmers include, Bt pytethrum and retonone. On the other hand,
conventional farming uses large quantities of pesticides through techniques such as crop
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
2
dusting. People who work with pesticides have an increase risk of developing
Parkinson’s disease. If the herbicide parquet and fungicide maneb mix together may
cause brain damage in mice. But some organic pesticides, such as retonone, have high
toxicity that affects the fishes and aquatic creatures, including mammals and humans
(Guthman, 2004).
Legumes are highly recommended for crop rotation and green manuring due to
their capability to fix atmosphere nitrogen to plants in usable form with the aid of some
species of bacteria. The system of nitrogen fixation can offer economically acceptable
and environment friendly way of applying fertilizer by reducing chemical inputs
(Brickbauer and Mortenson, 1978).
Snap bean production is one of the main sources of income of the farmers in
highlands. The production of snap bean should therefore be given due attention. One of
the ways to increase production is through the use of the varieties that are high in yielding
and resistant to pest and diseases that are best adapted in the locality. Some farmers do
not consider much the importance of the variety and quality of seeds they use for the
production. In this case, there is need to evaluate different varieties in the different
growing areas to identify the varieties that are high yielding and suited in growing areas.
Although they claim that organic food is expensive than conventional food and
thus too highly priced to be affordable to persons on a lower income. Organic products
typically cost 10 % to 40 % more than similar conventionally produced products.
Processed organic foods vary greatly in price when compared to their conventional
counterparts. But despite the highly priced of organic products costumers are willing to
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
3
pay for their preferences. Organic food is tastier, as well as healthier, both for their
health and environment (Kuepper, 2003).
Organic products have higher cost because it reflects many of the cost as
conventional foods in terms of growing, harvesting, transporting and storage. It must
meet stricter regulations, governing all these steps so that the process is often more labor
and management intensive, and farming tends to be a smaller scale. There is mounting
evidence that is all the indirect cost of conventional food production were factored into
the price of food, organic foods would cost the same, or more likely is cheaper
(Anonymous, 1999).
The objectives of the study were to:
1. determine the variety best suited in Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition;
2. determine the effect of three organic-based soil amendments on the growth
and yield of pole snap bean;
3. identify the interaction of pole snap bean varieties applied with organic-based
soil amendments; and
4. determine the economic benefits of pole snap bean varieties applied with
organic-based soil amendments.
The study was conducted at Taloy Norte, Tuba, and Benguet from December
2007 to March 2008.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
4
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Environmental Requirements of Snap bean
Snap beans grow best in areas with temperature between 15 to 21ºC like in
Benguet. Bush varieties can tolerate low temperature better than the climbing varieties
and can tolerate warm temperature up to 25ºC.
Snap beans grow well in loose textured soil with good drainage. They can
tolerate soil pH of 5.5 to 6.5 but perform best between pH ranges of 5.8 to 6.0. Soils that
crust or cake easily resulted in poor crop stand. Well-drained bottomland in the mountain
has been most satisfactory. Plowing under green manure crops will increase the organic
matter of the soil as well as improve the yield and quality of the beans.
Varietal Evaluation
Varietal evaluation is done to find out those varieties of crops that are adapted to
the grower’s need, is very important. But after testing most attention should be paid to
test strains and stocks of varieties selected because great differences exist between strains
of many crops and is the only by trial that superior varieties are found (Thompson and
Kelly, 1957).
Varietal evaluation is done to gather data on plant character, yield and pod quality
(Regmi, 1990) as well as to observe characters such as earliness, vigor, maturity and
keeping quality because different varieties have a wide range of difference (Work and
Crew, 1995). It is done therefore to ascertain adaptability of varieties in a certain
locality.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
5
Evaluation of different snap bean varieties have been continuously conducted in
various parts of Benguet. Working on six varieties, Mulchino (2007) concluded that Blue
lake and Taichung are the varieties suited for Gusaran, Kabayan, Benguet due to their
high return on cash expenses. Cayso (2005) evaluated ten varieties of pole snap bean
collected from different places according to plant growth, flowering habit, maturity, and
highest number of pods per plot, and resistant to pest and disease. She found out that
Blue lake, Maccarao, and B-12 have good performance in terms of yield reaction to pest
and diseases and adaptability under Basil, Tublay, Benguet condition.
Effect of Organic Amendments to Soil
The best way to improve soil fertility is to increase its organic matter content.
Organic matter is a source of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sulfur nutrients which soil
organisms require and retain. These nutrients slowly become available as the organic
matter continues to decompose. Organic materials can therefore supply the nutritional
requirements of the crops. Most of the magnesium, calcium, and potassium in the
decaying organic residues are discarded by the soil organisms during the first stage of
decomposition and these nutrients are quickly available to plants. Supply of organic
matter without excess of nitrogen will decrease the incidence of potato scab by
encouraging other soil microorganisms that will compete with the scab producing
organisms.
Organic fertilizers improve the soil physical properties, whether they are applied
to heavy soil or sandy soil. The loosen up clay soils and improve the water retention of
sandy soils. The fibrous portion of organic matter which is high carbon content promotes
soil aggregation to improve the permeability and aeration of clay soil, while its ability to
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
6
absorb moisture helps in the granulation of sandy soils and improve their water holding
capacity. It is also mentioned that in the use of organic matter for the biological control
of the soil borne diseases of nematodes, some types of organic matter reduces the
population of pathogens soil microorganism such as fusarium and others could
potentially used as a safe and low cost disease control (Sung Ching, 1992)
Some result on fertilizer application shows that the physical and chemical
properties of the soil were highly affected by organic fertilizer. The soil bulk density was
lowered especially on plots applied with wild sunflower. The values in all the treatments
were higher than the ideal bulk density value of 1.33 g/cc. Soil water holding capacity
were also increased by organic fertilizers used, hog, manure application had the highest
increased in water holding capacity. Wild sunflower application significantly increased
the soil pH (Lazo, 2006). Application of organic fertilizer such as compost, wild flower,
and chicken dung increases the seed yield and improve the quality of the pole snap bean
(Simsim, 2007). Plants Applied with compost produced the highest yield in potato under
La Trinidad condition. Entry 676089 was the best performing potato entry in terms of
resistance to pest and diseases (Palaroan, 2006).
Effect of Coco Coir Dust
Coco coir dust is a mixture of short and powder fibers. It has a pH of 5.5-5.6 and
usually contains higher level of potassium, sodium and chlorine than peat. Coco coir dust
can be used as a substitute for peat when reducing container grown viburnum and lilac
and presumably other woody plants. It is composed of millions of capillary micro-
sponges that absorb and hold water up to eight times its own weight. The natural pH is
between 5.5 to 6.5 and it has a very high ability to exchange cations. It has a very high
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
7
water holding capacity and good air porosity and does not compact like sawdust
(Bosleng, 2004).
Vavrina (1992) as cited by Daguyan stated that coco coir dust is biodegradable
and has superior structural ability, water absorption ability and drainage, and cation
exchange capacity compared to either sphagnum peat or sedge peat. Small amount of
nitrogen draw down occurred with coco coir dust, but typical production fertilization
practices would likely compensate for the amount of nitrogen loss. It has high level of
potassium that proves more benefits than a detriment to plant growth. The higher the pH
of coco coir, dust may allow less time to add the coco coir dust based medium.
Effect of Carbonized Rice Hull
Gaw (2003) as cited by Cezar claimed that rice hull which is made from the husk
of palay, carefully carbonized and completely sterilized contains high amounts of carbon
essential for proper development of seedlings when added to the mix, it makes the
medium loose for better root penetration. It also makes the medium hold fertilizer longer.
Carbonized rice hull can also serve as a moisture retention helper or as a weed
growth inhibitor in the soil. When rice hull is burned, the remaining ash serves as mix
for fertilizers finely ground rice hull are also used as a components in commercial mixed
fertilizers. The rice hull prevents caking of other fertilizers components (Cezar, 2005).
Carbonated rice hull is an excellent soil conditioner. Continuous applications of
carbonized rice hull replenish the nutrient lost from the soil as a result of continuous use
of inorganic fertilizer. It has high air permeability since it is porous and bulky, and has
the ability to replenish air in the soil. It is also favorable habitat for beneficial
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
8
microorganisms in the soil because it is sterilized from disease organisms (Daguyam,
2006).
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
9
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of 270 square meters was prepared and divided into 27 plots. Each block
was composed of 3 plots measuring 1 m x 10 m. The experiment was laid out in 3 x 3
factorial in randomized complete design (RCBD) with three replications.
Snap beans seeds were planted, 2 to 3 seeds per hill at distances of 20 cm between
hills and 50 cm between rows. The organic- based soil amendments were applied at the
rate of 20 kg/10 meter square during the land preparation. Cultural management
practices such as irrigation, weeding and hilling up were uniformly employed to all the
treatments.
Half of the plots was used for fresh pod production and the other half for seed
yield.
The treatments were the following:
Factor
A
–
Variety
(V)
V1
–
Alno
V2
–
Maroon
(Beta)
V3
–
Stonehill
Factor B – Organic-based soil amendments
S1
–
Garden
compost
S2 – Coco coir dust
S3 – Carbonated rice hull
Data Gathered
A. Vegetative characters
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
10
1. Percent germination. This was taken 10 days after planting. It was
determined using the formula:
Total number of plants germinated
% Germination =
x 100
Total number of plants planted
2. Plant survival (cm). This was taken 2 weeks after germination. It was
determined using the formula:
Total number of plants survived
Percent survival =
x 100
Total number of germinated seeds
3. Number of days from planting to flowering. This was taken by counting
the number of days from the day of emergence to the time when at least 50 % of the
plants had fully-opened flowers.
4. Number of days to maturity. This was taken by counting the number of
days from emergence to first harvesting of fresh pods.
5. Final plant height (cm). This was taken by measuring sample plants in
each soil plot from the soil surface to the tip of the plant at first harvest of the pods.
6. Total number of pods per plot. This was taken counting the number of
pods per cluster developed per plot.
B. Yield components
1. Number and weight of marketable pods per plot (g). Marketable pods are
not deformed and free from insect pest and diseases. The marketable pods were counted
and weighted from the first to last harvest.
2. Number and weight of non-marketable pods per plot (g). Non-marketable
pods are deformed and not free from insect pests and diseases. The non-marketable pods
were counted and weighted from the first to last harvest.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
11
3. Total fresh seed yield per plot. This is the sum of all marketable and non-
marketable fresh pods.
4. Total seed yield per hectare. This was taken using the formula:
Seed
yield/plot
Seed yield (tons/ha) =
x 10,000
5 m2
5. Total fresh pods /hectare. This was taken using the formula:
Total fresh pods yield/plot
Fresh pods yield (tons/ha) =
x 10,000
5m2
C. Pest and disease incidence
1. Pod borer. this was taken using the following rating scale:
SCALE DESCRIPTION REMARKS
1
No infection
Highly resistance
2
1-25% of the total plant/plot was infected
Mild resistance
3
25-50% of the total plant/plot was infected
Moderate resistance
4
50-75% of the total plant/plot was infected
Susceptible
5
76-100% of the total plant/plot was
Very susceptible
infected
2. Bean rust. This was taken using the following rating scale:
SCALE DESCRIPTION REMARKS
1
No infection
Highly resistance
2
1-25 % of the total plant/plot was infected Mild resistance
3
25-50 % of the total plant/plot was
Moderate resistance
infected
4
50-75 % of the total plant/plot was
Susceptible
infected
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
12
5
76-100 % of the total plant/plot was
Very susceptible
infected
D. Return on the cash expenses
1. Return on cash expenses. This was computed by the following:
Net profit
ROCE =
x 100
Total cost of production
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
13
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Percent Germination
Effect of variety. Table 1 shows the percent germination of the three pole snap
bean varieties. The high germination percentage for the three varieties indicate high
quality of seeds used in the study. The slight statistical differences observed among the
treatments are not of actual marked influence.
Effect of soil amendments. It was observed that three soil amendments did not
affect the percent germination of pole snap bean (Table 1). For seed germination it
appears that Garden compost, Coconut coir dust and Carbonized rice hull had no
enhancing or depressive effect on common bean seeds
Table 1. Percent germination, percent survival as affected by variety and soil
amendments
PERCENT
TREATMENT
GERMINATION SURVIVAL
Factor (a)
Alno 91.89 b
90.55 b
Maroon (Beta)
92.89 a
92.11 a
Stonehill 92.67 a
91.22 b
Factor (b)
Garden compost
92.44
91.11
Coco coir dust
92.56
91.44
Carbonized rice hull
92.44
91.33
a x b
ns
ns
CV (%)
0.43
0.74
Means of the same letter are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
14
Interaction effect. Result revealed no significant interaction effect of the variety
and soil amendments on germination.
Percent Survival
Effect of variety. The three varieties tested exhibited fairly high percent survival,
further proving that the seeds used were of high quality. Statistically, no significant
differences were among the three varieties used.
Effect of soil amendments. Table 1 also shows the percent survival of the pole
snap bean. Statistically analysis revealed no significant differences on the percent
survival of plants applied with different soil amendments.
Interaction effect. The variety and soil amendment interaction did not influence
the survival percentage in snap bean (Table 1).
Number of Days to Flowering
Effect of variety. Among the three varieties. Maroon (Beta) and Stone hill were
the earliest to flower at 36 DAE. Alno variety was observed to have flowered one day
later (Table 2).
In planting in a higher elevation and using six varieties pole snap bean, Neyney
found that Alno flowered in 45 days which was 1 to 4 days ahead than the other varieties.
Differenced on the days to flowering could be attributed to varietal characteristics of the
plant .
Effect of soil amendments. Table 2 shows the number of days to flowering of
pole snap bean as affected by the three soil amendments. Statistically analysis, revealed
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
15
no significant influence of the different soil amendments used on the number of days to
flowering of the snap bean plants.
The used of Coconut coir dust and Carbonized rice hull was found to enhance the
flowering of bush snap bean by 1 day (Daguyam, 2006). However this finding
corroborates the result of Buena (2004) testing Coco coir dust.
Interaction effect. Statistically, there was no interaction effect of variety and soil
amendment on the number of days to flowering. This indicated that the three varieties
have similar adaptability to the soil amendments tested.
Days of Maturity
Effect of variety. Table 2 shows the number of days to maturity of pole snap bean
varieties. It was observed that the Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill were the earliest to
mature at 42 DAP. Statistically, however, no significant difference was revealed.
Table 2. Days from planting to flowering, days from maturity and plant height as affected
by variety and soil amendments
TREATMENT
DAYS TO:
PLANT HEIGHT
FLOWERING MATURITY
(cm)
Factor (a)
Alno 37 b
43 b
318
Maroon (Beta)
36 a
42 a
349
Stonehill 36 a
42 a
319
Factor (b)
Garden compost
36
42
331
Coco coir dust
36
42
328
Carbonized rice hull
36
42
328
a x b
ns
ns
ns
CV (%)
0 .53
0 .45
11 .33
Means of the same letter are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
16
The trends follows that number of days to maturity where pole snap bean varieties
flowered earlier were also noted to have matured earlier.
Effect of soil amendments. The number of days to maturity as affected by the
three soil amendments is shown in Table 2. It was observed that the three soil
amendments did not influence the number of days to maturity.
Interaction effect. Results, revealed that there was no interaction effect of variety
and soil amendment on the number of days to maturity.
Plant Height
Effect of variety. Statistical analysis, revealed no significant difference on the
plant height of three pole snap bean varieties tested. This is similar to findings of Paredes
(2003).
Effect of soil amendments. Table 2 also shows the plant height of the pole snap
bean as affected by the different soil amendments. Statistical analysis, also showed no
significant differences on the plant height of the plant although Garden compost seem to
enhance the tallest plants.
In potato, Carbonized rice hull enhanced plant height, specially when applied with
some amount of inorganic fertilizer. The height of potato was sufficiently affected by the
presence or absence of organic fertilizer and the amount of the different organic fertilizer
applied (Cezar, 2005).
Interaction effect. The interaction between the varieties and soil amendments did
not produce significant results.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
17
Number of Pods Per Plot
Effect of variety. Table 3 shows the number of pods per plot of pole snap bean
varieties. Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill had higher number of pods per plot than Alno.
Although, Alno had lesser number of pods, its pods were noted to be longer than those of
Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill.
Effect of soil amendments. The three soil amendments tested did not influence
the number of pods per plot although Garden compost exhibited high number of pods per
plot (Table 3).
Interaction effect. It was observed that there were significant interaction effect of
variety and soil amendments on the number of pods per plot. Maroon (Beta) seem to
perform better under any of the three soil amendments except Stonehill grown with
Garden compost. Alno did not respond well to the same treatments. Apparently, Maroon
(Beta) could be better suited to low input condition than either Alno or Stonehill (Fig. 1).
280
270
260
r Plot
250
240
230
220
210
200
u
mber of Pods Pe
N
190
180
GC
CCD
CRH
Alno
Stonehill
Maroon (Beta)
Fig. 1. Number of pods per plot as affected by varieties and soil amendments
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
18
Table 3. Numbers of pods, marketable and non-marketable pods per plot as affected by
variety and soil amendments
TREATMENT
NUMBER OF:
PODS/PLOT MARKETABLE
NON-MARKETABLE
Factor (a)
Alno 192 b
802 ab
17 b
Maroon (Beta)
259 a
1,357 a
21 a
Stonehill 237 a
1,291 a
18 b
Factor (b)
Garden compost
242
1,185 ab
19
Coco coir dust
223
1,037 b
19
Carbonized rice hull
224
1,227 a
17
a x b
*
* **
CV (%)
10 .49
14 .66
12 .83
Means of the same letter are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance
Number of Marketable Fresh Pods Per Plot
Effect of variety. Maroon and Stonehill exhibited high number of marketable
pods per plot. The factors affecting the number of marketable pods per plot were
temperature pest and disease incidence and others.
Effect of soil amendments. Table 3 also shows the number of marketable pods
per plot of the three varieties of pole snap bean as affected by soil amendments. It was
observed that the Carbonized rice hull as soil additive gave higher number of marketable
pods per plot.
Interaction effect. Differences on number of marketable pods per plot of the three
varieties in response to soil amendments were found to be statistically significant.
Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill grown in soil with Carbonized rice hull as soil additive
enhance the higher number of marketable pods per plot (Fig. 2).
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
19
1600
1500
1400
1300
Pods Per Plot 1200
b
le 1100
1000
k
eta
900
800
of Mar
700
600
u
mber
GC
CCD
CRH
N
Alno
Stonehill
Maroon (Beta)
Fig. 2. Number of marketable pods per plot as affected by varieties and soil
amendments
Number of Non-marketable Pods Per Plot
Effect of variety. It was observed that Maroon (Beta) had higher number of non-
marketable pods per plot. For the number of non-marketable pods per plot shows that
more of the pods are shorter and deformed.
Effect of soil amendments. The use of soil amendments did not influence the
number of non-marketable pods per plot although plants subjected to Coco coir dust
appear to have higher number of non-marketable pods.
Interaction effect. There was no interaction effect between the three varieties and
the soil amendment on the number of non-marketable pods per plot.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
20
Weight of Marketable Fresh
Pods Per Plot (kg)
Effect of variety. Table 4 shows the weight of marketable pods per plot.
Marketable pods are not deformed and free from the pests and diseases. Results show
that Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill exhibited heavier marketable pods per plot compared to
Alno. This could be an indication that Maroon (Beta) or Stonehill have higher yield
potential than Alno.
Effect of soil amendments. It was observed that Garden compost exhibited high
weighted of marketable pods per plot.
Interaction effect. Interaction between variety and soil amendment did not
enhance heavier marketable pods per plot.
Table 4. Weight of marketable and non-marketable pods per plot as affected by variety
and soil amendments
WEIGHT OF:
TREATMENT
MARKETABLE
NON-MARKETABLE
(kg)
(kg)
Factor (a)
Alno 6 .03
2
.69
Maroon (Beta)
8 .24
3 .80
Stonehill 7 .78
3
.52
Factor (b)
Garden compost
7 .49
3 .43
Coco coir dust
7 .20
3 .26
Carbonized rice hull
7 .36
3 .32
a x b
**
ns
CV (%)
8 .60
20 .69
Means of the same letter are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
21
Weight of Non-Marketable
Pods Per Plot (kg)
Effect of variety. Table 4 also shows the weight of non-marketable pods per plot.
The three varieties produced non-marketable pods which were almost half of the
marketable pod yield. This results is not really desirable. Some conditions in the
experimental area may have been not so favorable for snap bean production.
Effect of soil amendments. It was observed that the three soil amendments did
not affect the weight of non-marketable pods per plot of the three pole snap bean.
Interaction effect. Statistical analysis revealed no significant interaction of the
three varieties applied with the different soil amendments. Non-marketable pods were
deformed, short and damage by the pest and diseases.
Total Fresh Pod Yield
Per Hectare (t/ha)
Effect of variety. Maroon (Beta) produced the heaviest fresh pods weight with a
mean of 2,408.33 t/ha followed by Stonehill with a mean of 2,231.56 t/ha and the least
weight was the Alno with a 1,764.89 t/ha. Such significant differences among the
treatments could be attributed to their varietal characteristics.
Effect of soil amendments. The result indicates that using any of the three soil
amendments did not influence the production of pods though it was observed that the soil
with Garden compost gave the highest pod yield per hectare.
Interaction effect. Maroon (Beta) with Garden compost as soil amendment
produced the heaviest fresh pod yield per hectare. Statistical analysis revealed significant
interaction effect of variety and soil amendments (Fig. 3).
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
22
2,800
2,700
a
)
2,600
2,500
2,400
ds (t/h
2,300
Po
2,200
sh
2,100
2,000
1,900
l Fre
1,800
1,700
Tota
1,600
1,500
GC
CCD
CRH
Alno
Stonehill
Maroon (Beta)
Fig. 3. Total fresh pod yield per hectare as affected by varieties and soil
amendments
Total Yield Per Plot (g)
Effect of variety. It was observed that the Maroon (Beta) produce the higher yield
per plot than the Stonehill and Alno. The statistical differences observed among the
treatments are influence by the genetic potential of the variety to produce higher yield.
Effect of soil amendments. Statistical analysis, soil amendments did not
appreciably affect the total common bean (Table 5).
Interaction effect. It was observed that the total yield per plot was not influenced
by the different soil amendments.
Total Seed Yield
Per Hectare (t/ha)
Effect of variety. Statistical analysis revealed no significant influence of the
varieties on the total seed yield per hectare although Maroon (Beta) exhibited numerically
higher total seed yield.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
23
Table 5. Total fresh pods yield per hectare as affected by variety and soil amendments
TOTAL FRESH
TOTAL YIELD
TOTAL SEED
TREATMENT
PODS/HECTARE
PER PLOT
YIELD/HECTARE
(t/ha)
(g)
(t/ha)
Factor (a)
Alno 1,764.89 c
8,824.4 c
1,966 .7
Maroon (Beta)
2,408.33 a
11,984.4 a
2,233 .3
Stonehill 2,231.56 b
11,300.2 b
2,011 .1
Factor (b)
Garden compost
2,207.56
11,038.0
2,044 .4
Coco coir dust
2,082.11
10,443.3
2,144 .4
Carbonized rice hull
2,115.11
10,627.8
2,022 .2
a x b
*
**
**
CV (%)
5.89
5.7 5
16 .92
Means of the same letter are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance
Effect of soil amendments. Table 5 also shows the total seed yield per plot as
affected by soil amendments. Result shows no significant influence of soil amendments
on the seed yield per hectare. In potato, the use of Carbonized rice hull and Coco coir
dust did not influence soil chemical properties but they enhanced the productivity of the
potato (Cezar, 2005).
Interaction effect. Statistically, there was no significant interaction between the
variety and soil amendments.
Reaction to Pod Borer
and Bean Rust
It was observed that all the varieties grown with different soil amendments were
mildly resistant against bean rust (Table 6). For pod borer, mild resistance was showed
by Alno while Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill were moderately resistant. This reaction may
have been affected by the low temperature that occurred during the experiment.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
24
Table 6. Pest (pod borer) and disease (bean rust) incidence as affected by variety and soil
amendments
VARIETY POD
BORER* BEAN
RUST*
Alno 2
2
Maroon (Beta)
3
2
Stonehill 3
2
*Rating scale: 1 – Highly resistant; 2 – Mild resistant; 3 – Moderate resistant; 4 –
Susceptible; 5 – Very susceptible
Return on Cash Expenses
Effect of variety. All the pole snap bean varieties evaluated for seed and fresh
pod production were found to be profitable under Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition
as evidenced by the computed return on cash expenses (ROCE). It was observed that
Maroon (Beta) gave the highest ROCE of 101.04 % followed with the Stonehill that gave
ROCE of 84.50 %. The least ROCE was obtained on Alno with 69.62 % (Table 7).
Effect of soil amendments. The ROCE of pole snap bean as affected by the soil
amendment is shown in Table 8. It was observed that the plants applied with Coco coir
dust registered the highest ROCE of 91.10 % while plant applied with Carbonized rice
hull had an ROCE of 84.39 %. The plant applied with compost had the lowest ROCE
with 80.03 %. Pole snap bean for fresh and seed production with any of the soil
amendments applied had been proven to be profitable (Table 8).
Interaction effect. The highest ROCE was obtained from Maroon (Beta) planted
on soil added with Coco coir dust while the lowest ROCE was obtained from Alno using
Garden compost as soil amendments. It was observed that the soil amendments influence
the three varieties (Table 9).
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
25
Table 7. Return on cash expenses of producing three pole snap bean varieties under
Taloy Norte, Benguet condition
SEED
FRESH
GROSS
TOTAL
VARIETY
NET
ROCE
YIELD
POD YIELD
SALE
EXPENSES
INCOME
(%)
(kg)
(kg)
(PhP)
(PhP)
Alno
5.33 6.03 1,453.1 856.7 596.4
69.62
Maroon
(Beta)
6.23 8.24 1,722.3 856.7 865.6
101.04
Stonehill
5.7 7.78 1,580.6 856.7 723.9
84.50
• Total expenses include land preparation, seed cost, cost of soil amendments, care
and management includes weeding and watering
• Selling price: Seeds = PhP 250.00 /kg
Fresh pod = PhP 20.00 /kg
Table 8. Return on cash expenses of producing pole snap bean varieties with soil
amendments under Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition
SOIL
SEED
FRESH
GROSS
TOTAL
NET
ROCE
YIELD
POD YIELD
SALE
EXPENSES
AMENDMENTS
INCOME
(%)
(kg)
(kg)
(PhP)
(PhP)
Garden compost
5.57
7.49
1,542.3
856.7
685.6
80.03
Coco coir dust
5.97
7.20
1,636.5
856.7
779.9
91.10
Carbonized rice 5.73 7.36 1,579.7 856.7 723
84.39
hull
• Total expenses include land preparation, seed cost, cost of soil amendments, care
and management includes weeding and watering
• Selling price: Seeds = PhP 250.00 /kg
Fresh pod = PhP 20.00 /kg
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
26
Table 9. Return on cash expenses of producing pole snap bean varieties applied with
different soil amendments under Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition
SEED
FRESH
GROSS
TOTAL
VARIETY
NET
ROCE
YIELD
POD YIELD
SALE
EXPENSES
INCOME
(%)
(kg)
(kg)
(PhP)
(PhP)
Soil
amendments
Alno
Compost 5.1 6.06 1,396.2 856.7 593.5
62.97
CCD
5.2 6.04 1,420.8 856.7 564.1
65.85
CRH
5.7 5.98 1,544.6 856.7 687.9
80.30
Maroon
(Beta)
Compost 5.3 8.45 1,494.0 856.7 637.3
74.39
CCD
6.8 8.31 1,866.2 856.7
1,009.5
117.84
CRH
6.6 7.96 1,809.2 856.7 952.5
111.18
Stonehill
Compost 6.3 7.96 1,734.2 856.7 877.5
102.43
CCD
5.9 7.25 1,620.0 856.7 763.3
89.10
CRH
4.9 8.15 1,388 856.7 531.3
62.02
• Total expenses include land preparation, seed cost, cost of soil amendments, care
and management includes weeding and watering
• Selling price: Seeds = PhP 250.00 /kg
Fresh pod = PhP 20.00 /kg
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
27
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The study was conducted at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet to determine the variety
best suited in Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition; determine the effect of three
organic-based soil amendments on the growth and yield of pole snap bean; identify the
interaction of pole snap bean varieties applied with organic-based soil amendments; and
determine the economic benefits of pole snap bean varieties applied with organic-based
soil amendments.
Based on the result, it was find out that Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill exhibited
fairly high percent germination percent survival, number of days to flowering, number of
days to maturity and number of pods per plot. Maroon (Beta) enhance of higher percent
survival, number of non-marketable pods per plot, total yield per plot and total fresh pod
per hectare. For the plant height, weight of non-marketable pods per plot and total seed
yield per hectare revealed no significant influence.
It was observe that the three soil amendments had no enhancing or depressive
effect on common bean seeds in percent germination, percent survival, number of day to
flowering, number of days to maturity, plant height, number of pods per plot, number of
non-marketable pods, weight of non-marketable and marketable pods, total fresh pods per
hectare, total yield per plot and total seed yield per hectare. For the number of
marketable pods per plot, it appears that Carbonized rice hull as soil additive gave the
higher number of marketable pods.
The variety and soil amendments interaction did not influence the percent
germination, percent survival, number of days to flowering and maturity, plant height,
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
28
weight of non-marketable pods. It was observed that there were significant interaction
effect of variety and soil amendments on the number of pods per plot. Maroon (Beta)
seems to perform better under any of the three soil amendments except Stonehill grown
with Garden compost. Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill grown in soil with Carbonized rice
hull as soil additive enhance the higher number of marketable pods per plot. Maroon
(Beta) with Garden compost as soil amendment produced the heaviest fresh pod yield per
hectare.
Maroon (Beta) with Coco coir dust obtained the highest ROCE.
Conclusion
The best combination for the variety and soil amendments for growth and yield
were Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill with any of the three soil amendments. Maroon (Beta)
with Coco coir dust obtained the higher ROCE.
Recommendation
Based on the condition of the study, it is recommended that the best variety suited
in Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet condition is Maroon (Beta). For the growth and yield,
Maroon (Beta) and Stonehill with any of the three soil amendments are recommended.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
29
LITERATURE CITED
ANONYMOUS. 1999. Environmentally friendly retrieved: October 2008.
http://www.organicbeansoline.com/site88514/page/388589.
AYONG. M. T. 2007. Organic fertilization on the seed quality of garden pea. BS
Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp.34-35.
BOSLENG, M. L. 2004. Performance of potato as influenced by lime and coconut coir
dust application. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 1-2, 5-6.
BRICKBAUER, E. A. and W. P. MORTENSON. 1978. Approved practices in crop
production condition. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 26-27.
BUENA, C. G. 2004. Seed production of garden pea applied with dolomite and coco coir
dust. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 14-15.
CEZAR, M. A. 2005. Potato production as affected by carbonized rice hull and coconut
coir dust. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 15-16, 26-27.
DAGUYAM, N. B. 2006. Growth and seed yield of bush snap bean as affected by soil
amendments under La Trinidad, Benguet condition. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad
Benguet. Pp. 5-8.
GEORGE R. A. 1985. Vegetable seed production. Logman Inc, New York. Pp. 239-240.
GUTAMAN, J. 2004. The paradox of organic farming in California. Retrieved: October,
2007. En.wikipedia.org/wiki/organic-farming-90k.
KUEPPER, G. 2003. Organic soybean production. Retrieved: October, 2007. C.T.120.
http://www.attra.org/attar-pub/organicsoy.html-33k-cached.
LAZO, D. B. 2006. Organic fertilization on the post harvest quality of processing potato.
BS Thesis, BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 30-31.
MULCHINO, R. T. 2007. On farm evaluation of potential snap bean at varieties at
Gusaran, Kabayan, Benguet condition. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp.
16-17.
NEYNEY, B. C. 2005. Pod setting and fresh pod yield potential of commonly grown
pole snap bean in La Trinidad, Benguet. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. P.
11.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
30
sPALAROAN, G. U. 2006. Agronomic characters of potato entries applied with organic
fertilizers under La Trinidad, Benguet condition. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad
Benguet. Pp. 4-8.
PAREDES, O. P. 2003. Evaluation of bush snap beans in Long-long La Trinidad,
Benguet. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. P. 11.
PARNERS, R. 1986. Organic and inorganic fertilizers. Wood End Agricultural Institute
Pp. 16-27.
REGMI, S. K. 1990. Varietal evaluation of promising lines and path coefficient analysis
in pole snap beans. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 81.
SIMSIM. P.F. 2007. Organic fertilization on the seed of pole snap bean. BS Thesis.
BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp. 38-39.
SUNG-CHING, A. 1992. The use of organic fertilizers in crop production collection of
information seminar. Suweon Korea. Pp. 29-30.
THOMPSON, H. and U. KELLY. 1957. Vegetable crops. 5th ed. New York Mc Graw
Books Co. Inc. Pp. 77-79.
WORK, D. and J. CREW. 1995. Vegetable production and marketing. 2nd ed. Wiley
Book Co. New York. Pp. 103-377.
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
APPENDICES
APPENDIX TABLE 1. Percent germination (%)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 92
92
92 276
92.00
S2 92
91
92 275
91.67
S3 92
92
92 276
92.00
V2S1 93
93
92 278
92.67
S2 93
93
93 279
93.00
S3 93
93
93 279
93.00
V3S1 92
93
93 279
92.67
S2 93
93
93 279
93.00
S3 92
93
92 277
92.33
TOTAL 832 833 832 2,497
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
276 275 276
827
275.67
Maroon
(Beta)
278 279 279
836
278.67
Stonehill 279 279 279
837
279.00
TOTAL 835 833 834
2,500
833.34
MEAN
277.67
277.67
278
833.33
277.78
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
0.07
0.04
0.23 ns 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
4.96
2.48
15.31 ns 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
0.07
0.04
0.23 ns 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
1.04
0.26
1.60 ns 3.01
4.77
Error 16
2.59
0.16
Total 26
8.74
0.16
ns – Not significant
CV (%) =0.43
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
32
APPENDIX TABLE 2. Percent survival (%)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 90
90
92
272
90.67
S2 90
90
91
271
90.33
S3 90
90
92
272
90.67
V2S1 92
92
92
276
92.00
S2 92
92
92
276
92.00
S3 92
93
92
276
92.33
V3S1 91
90
91
276
90.67
S2 92
92
92
276
92.00
S3 90
92
91
273
91.00
TOTAL 819
821
825
2,465
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
272 271 272
815
271.67
Maroon
(Beta)
276 276 276
828
276.00
Stonehill 276 276 273
825
275.00
TOTAL 824 823 821
2,468
822.67
MEAN
274.67
274.33
273.67
822.67
274.22
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
2.07
1.04
2.29 n 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
10.96
5.48
12.08 n 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
0.52
0.26
0.57 n 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
2.81
0.70
1.55ns 3.01
4.77
Error 16
7.26
0.45
Total 26
23.63
ns – Not significant
CV (%) =0.74
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
33
APPENDIX TABLE 3. Number of days to flowering
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 37
37
37
111
37.00
S2 37
37
37
111
37.00
S3 36
37
37
110
36.67
V2S1 36
36
36
108
36.00
S2 36
36
36
108
36.00
S3 36
36
36
108
36.00
V3S1 36
36
36
108
36.00
S2 36
36
36
108
36.00
S3 36
36
36
108
36.00
TOTAL
326
294
294
914
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
111 111 110
332
110.67
Maroon
(Beta)
108 108 108
324
108.00
Stonehill 108 108 108
324
108.00
TOTAL 327 327 326
980
326.67
MEAN
109
109
108.67
326.67
108.89
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
0.07
0.04
1.00 n 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
4.74
2.38
64.00 n 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
0.07
0.04
1.00 n 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
0.15
0.04
1.00ns 3.01
4.77
Error 16
0.59
0.37
Total 26
5.63
ns – Not significant
CV (%) =0.45
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
34
APPENDIX TABLE 4. Number of days to maturity
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 43
43
43
129
43.00
S2 43
43
43
129
43.00
S3 42
43
43
128
42.67
V2S1 42
42
42
126
42.00
S2 42
42
42
126
42.00
S3 42
42
42
126
42.00
V3S1 42
42
42
126
42.00
S2 42
42
42
126
42.00
S3 42
42
42
126
42.00
TOTAL
380
381
381
1,142
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
129 129 128
386
128.67
Maroon
(Beta)
126 126 126
378
126.00
Stonehill 126 126 126
378
126.00
TOTAL 381 381 380
1,142
380.67
MEAN
127
384
126.67
381.67
126.89
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
0.07
0.04
1.00ns 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
4.74
2.37
64.00ns 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
0.074
0.04
1.00ns 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
0.15
0.04
1.00ns 3.01
4.77
Error 16
0.59
0.04
Total 26
5.63
ns – Not significant
CV (%) =0.53
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
35
APPENDIX TABLE 5. Final plant height (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 318.17
325.83
344.43
988.43
329.48
S2 323.50
287.17
356.76
967.43
322.48
S3 269.33
301.62
332.05
903.00
301.00
V2S1 397.67
346.33
281.79
1,025.79
341.93
S2 312.88
370.50
388.73
1,072.11
357.37
S3 365.00
287.80
392.21
1,045.01
348.34
V3S1 325.60
293.82
343.23
962.65
320.88
S2 344.33
288.30
271.75
904.38
301.46
S3 325.82
337.34
339.46
1,002.62
334.21
TOTAL
2,982.30
2,838.71
3,050.41
8,871.43
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
988.43 967.43 903.00
2,858.86
952.95
Maroon
(Beta)
1,025.79 1,072.11 1,045.01
3,142.91
1,047.64
Stonehill 962.65
904.38
1,002.62
2,869.65
956.55
TOTAL 2,976.87 2,943.92 2,950.63
8,871.42
2,957.14
MEAN
992.29 981.31 983.54
2,957.14
985.71
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
2,595.33
1,297.66
0.90
3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
5,758.22 2,879.11
2.08
3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
67.38
33.69
0.02
3.63
6.23
v x s
4
3,241.95
810.48
0.59ns 3.01
4.77
Error 16
22,160.90
1,385.06
Total 26
33,823.78
ns – Not significant
CV (%) = 11.33
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
36
APPENDIX TABLE 6. Numbers of pods per plot
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 197
191
198
586
195.33
S2 192
192
189
573
191.00
S3 189
185
194
568
189.33
V2S1 269
258
264
791
263.67
S2 258
247
249
754
251.33
S3 259
242
288
789
263.00
V3S1 237
338
226
801
267.00
S2 235
227
218
680
226.67
S3 229
205
221
655
218.33
TOTAL
2,065
2,085
2,047
6,197
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
586 573 568
1,727
575.67
Maroon
(Beta)
791 754 789
2,334
778.00
Stonehill 801 680 655
656.18
218.73
TOTAL 2,178 2,007 2,012
6,197
1,572.40
MEAN
726
669
670.67
2,065.67
524.13
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
80.30
40.15
0.07* 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
21,293.85 10,646.92
18.37* 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
2,104.52
1,052.26
1.82* 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
2,306.37
576.59
1.00* 3.01
4.77
Error 16
9,271.70
579.48
Total 26
35,056.74
* – Significant
CV (%) = 10.49
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
37
APPENDIX TABLE 7. Number of marketable pods per plot
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 710
900
844
2,484
818.00
S2 744
912
714
2,370
790.00
S3 906
810
680
2,396
798.67
V2S1 1,430
1,506
1,389
4,325
1,441.67
S2 1,370
1,058
1,509
3,937
1,312.33
S3 1,182
1,667
1,102
3,951
1,317.00
V3S1 1,281
1,287
1,322
3,890
1,296.67
S2 9,948
1,026
1,056
3,030
1,010.00
S3 1,821
1,443
1,382
4,464
1,548.67
TOTAL
10,392
10,609
9,998
30,999
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
2,454 2,370 2,396
7,220
2,406.67
Maroon
(Beta)
4,325 3,937 3,951
12,213
4,071
Stonehill 3,890 3,030 4,646
11,566
3,855.33
TOTAL 10,669 9,337
10,993
30,999
10,333.00
MEAN
3,556.33
3,112.33
3,664.33
10,333
3,44.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
24,572.07 12,286.04
0.43* 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
1,652,269.40 826,134.70
29.05* 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
178,686.59 79,397.92
3.14* 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
317,591.70 79,397.92
2.79* 3.01
4.77
Error 16
455,091.26 288,443.20
Total 26
2,628,210.96
* – Significant
CV (%) = 14.66
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
38
APPENDIX TABLE 8. Number of non-marketable pods per plot
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 202
302
280
784
261.33
S2 358
272
260
890
292.67
S3 305
281
276
862
287.33
V2S1 545
610
600
1,755
585.00
S2 292
608
340
1,240
413.33
S3 340
338
282
960
320.00
V3S1 268
286
339
893
297.67
S2 608
260
393
1,161
387.00
S3 261
282
262
805
268.33
TOTAL
3,179
3,239
2,932
9,350
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
784 890 862
2,536
845.33
Maroon (Beta)
1,755
1,240
960
3,955
1,318.33
Stonehill 893
1,161
805
2,859
953.00
TOTAL 3,432 3,291 2,627
9,350
3,116.66
MEAN
1,144
1,097
875.67
3,116.67 1,038.89
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
3.27
1.64
0.30
3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
77.66
38.83
7.00
3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
23.16
11.58
2.09
3.63
6.23
v x s
4
53.82
13.45
2.42** 3.01
4.77
Error 16
88.81
5.55
Total 26
246.72
** – Highly significant
CV (%) = 12.83
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
39
APPENDIX TABLE 9. Weight of marketable pods per plot (g)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 5,030
6,700
6,460
18,190
6,063.33
S2 5,900
7,060
5,150
18,110
6,036.67
S3 6,820
6,030
5,090
17,940
5,980.00
V2S1 8,290
8690
8,380
25,360
8,453.33
S2 8,200
8,020
8,700
24,920
8,306.67
S3 7,380
8,420
8,080
23,880
7,960.00
V3S1 7,450
8,280
8,160
23,890
7,963.33
S2 6,390
7,350
8,020
21,760
7,253.33
S3
8,360
8,230
7,860
24,450
8,150
TOTAL
63,820
68,780
65,900
98,500
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno 18,190
18,110
17,940
54,240
18,080.00
Maroon (Beta)
25,360
24,920
23,880
52,668 17,556.00
Stonehill 23,890
21,760 24,450
70,100
23,366.67
TOTAL 67,440
64,790
66,270
177,008
59,002.61
MEAN
22,480
2,156.67
22,090
59,002.7 19,667.56
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
1,378,607.40 689,303.7
1.70 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
24,623,318.52 12,311,659.3
30.86 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
391,918.52 195,959.3
0.49 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
1,346,970.37 336742.6
0.84** 3.01
4.77
Error 16
6,382,392.59 398,899.5
Total 26
34,123,207.40
** – Highly significant
CV (%) = 8.59
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
40
APPENDIX TABLE 10. Weight of non-marketable pods per plot (g)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 1,500
3,400
2,500
7,400
2,466.67
S2 2,500
2,2500
3,300
8,000
2,666.67
S3 1,900
3,700
3,200
8,800
2,933.33
V2S1 4,100
4,400
4,700
13,200
4,400.00
S2 3,500
4,300
2,400
10,200
3,400.00
S3 4,000
3,900
2,900
10,800
3,600.00
V3S1 3,400
3,000
3,900
10,300
3,433.33
S2 4,400
3,200
3,500
11,000
3,666.67
S3 3,300
3,700
3,300
10,300
3,433.33
TOTAL
28,500
31,800
29,700
90,000
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
7,400 8,000 8,800
24,200
8,066.67
Maroon
(Beta)
13,200 10,200 10,800
24,200
11,400.00
Stonehill 10,300 11,000 10,300
31,600
10,533.33
TOTAL 30,900 29,200 29,900
90,000
30,000.00
MEAN
10,300
9,733.33
9,966.67
30,000 10,000.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
579,409.40
293,703.7
0.62 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
6,018,518.518 3,009,259.2
6.31 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
145,185.18
72,592.6
0.15 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
2,002,925.92
501,481.5
1.05ns 3.01
4.77
Error 16
7,625,925.92
476,620.4
Total 26
16,382,962.96
ns – Not significant
CV (%) = 20.69
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
41
APPENDIX TABLE 11. Total fresh pods yield per hectare (t/ha)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 1,506
2,020
1,792
5,318
1,772.67
S2 1,680
1,852
1,690
5,222
1,740.67
S3 1,740
1,946
1,658
5,344
1,781.33
V2S1 2,478
2,618
2,616
7,712
2,570.67
S2 2,340
2,464
2,220
7,024
2,341.33
S3 2,276
2,464
2,196
6,936
2,312.00
V3S1 2,170
2,256
2,412
6,838
2,279.33
S2 2,076
2,110
2,304
6,490
2,163.33
S3 2,138
2,386
2,232
6,756
2,252.00
TOTAL
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
5,318 5,222 5,344
15,884
5,294.67
Maroon
(Beta)
7,712 7,024 6,936
21,672
7,224.00
Stonehill 6,838 6,490 6,756
20,084
6,694.67
TOTAL 19,868 18,736 19,036
57,640
19,213.34
MEAN
6,622.67
6,245.33
6,345.33 19,213.33 6,404.45
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
163,743.18 81,871.59
6.43* 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
1,989,146.74 994,573.37
78.08* 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
76,113.85 38,056.93
2.99* 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
68,668.59 17,167.15
1.35* 3.01
4.77
Error 16
203,809.48 12,738.09
Total 26
* – Significant
CV (%) = 5.29
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
42
APPENDIX TABLE 12. Total yield per plot (g)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 7,530
10,100
8,960
26,590
8,863.33
S2 8,400
9,260
8,450
26,110
8,703.33
S3 8,700
9,730
8,290
26,720
8,906.67
V2S1 12,390
13,090
13,080
38,560
12,853.33
S2 11,700
12,320
11,100
35,120
11,706.67
S3 11,380
12,320
10,980
34,680
11,560.00
V3S1 10,850
11,282
12,060
3,410
11,396.67
S2 10,690
10,550
11,520
32,760
10,920.00
S3 11,660
11,930
11,260
34,750
11,583.33
TOTAL
93,300
100,580
95,600
289,480
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
26,590 26,110 26,720
79,420 26,473.33
Maroon
(Beta)
38,360 35,120 34,680
108,360 36,120.00
Stonehill 34,190 32,760 34,750
101,700 33,900.00
TOTAL 99,340 93,990 96,150
289.480 96,493.00
MEAN
99,343 31,330 32,050
96,493.33 32,164.33
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
3,197,031.41 1,598,515.7
4.23 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
49,749,706.96 24,874,853.5
65.75 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
1,667,791.41 833,895.7
2.20 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
2,648,107.26 662,026.8
1.75** 3.01
4.77
Error 16
6,052,837.93 378,302.4
Total 26
63,315,474.96
** – Highly significant
CV (%) = 5.75
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
43
APPENDIX TABLE 13. Total seed yield per hectare (t/ha)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
V1S1 2,500
1,600
1,800
5,900
1,966.67
S2 1,900
1,400
2,500
5,800
1,933.33
S3 2,000
1,700
2,300
6,000
2,000.00
V2S1 1,800
2,00
1,900
5,700
1,900.00
S2 1,900
2,800
2,600
7,300
2,433.33
S3 2,100
2,800
2,200
7,100
2,366.67
V3S1 2,000
2,300
3,500
6,800
2,266.67
S2 1,900
2,100
2,200
6,200
2,066.67
S3 1,700
1,500
2,900
5,100
1,700.00
TOTAL
17,800
18,200
19,900
55,900
TWO-WAY TABLE
SOIL AMENDMENTS
VARIETY
GARDEN
COCO COIR
CARBONIZED
TOTAL MEAN
COMPOST
DUST
RICE HULL
Alno
5,900 5,800 6,000
17,700
5,900.00
Maroon
(Beta)
5,700 7,300 7,100
20,100
6,700.00
Stonehill 6,800 6,200 5,100
18,100
6,033.33
TOTAL 18,400 19,300 18,200
55,900
18,633.33
MEAN
6,133.33
6,433.33
6,066.67
18,633.33 6,211.11
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
DEGREES
TABULATED
SOURCE OF
SUM OF
MEAN
COMPUTED
OF
F
VARIANCE
SQUARES
SQUARE
F
FREEDOM
0.05 0.01
Block 2
276,296.30 1,381,448.15 1.13* 3.63
6.23
Variety (v)
2
367,407.40 183,703.70 1.50* 3.63
6.23
Soil amendments (s)
2
76,296.29 38,148.15 0.31* 3.63
6.23
v x s
4
93,259.59 233,148.15
1.90** 3.01
4.77
Error 16
1,963,703.70 122,731.48
Total 26
3,616,296.30
* – Highly significant
CV (%) = 16.92
Production of Pole Snap Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments
at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition / Jenifer Queen B. Sarmoyan. 2008
Document Outline
- Production of Pole Snap
Bean Under Organic-Based Soil Amendments at Taloy Norte, Tuba, Benguet Condition
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- ABSTRACT
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES