BIBLIOGRAPHY DONGLAL, GLENDA P. ...
BIBLIOGRAPHY
DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011. Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and
Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of Garden Pea. Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Leoncia L. Tandang, PhD.
ABSTRACT
The seven selected advanced lines of garden pea were characterized and evaluated based
on their agromorphological characteristics, growth and fresh pod yield. All lines differed
significantly in majority of the parameters observed in this study. All the selected advanced lines
emerged in seven DAS, flowered within 30 to 46 DAE, set pod from 40 to 51 DAE and matured
five to seven days from pod setting.
Based on the cost and return analysis from growing the selected advanced lines
evaluated, line 153-1 gave highest profit followed by lines 153-2 and 109-2.
Line 109-1 and CLG were most accepted and very much liked by the farmers due to their
pod characteristics and low weight loss during storage.
TABLE OF CONTENT
Page
Bibliography…..……………………………………………………………….
i
Abstract....……………………………………………………………………….
i
Table of Contents...……...……………………………………………………….
ii
INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………….
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE…...……………………………………………….
3
MATERIALS AND METHODS……….……………………………………….
7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………...……………………………………….
15
Number of Days from Sowing to
Emergence to Flowering and Pod
setting…………………………………………………………………….
15
Number of Days from Pod setting
to Pod maturity from Emergence
to First and Last Harvesting……..……………………………………….
16
Node Number Bearing First
Flower, First and Last Pod……….………………………………………
17
Number of Flower Cluster per
Plant, Flower per Cluster,
Flower per Plant………..………………………………………………..
18
Leaves per Plant……..…………………………………………………..
19
Number of Pods per Cluster and
per Plant……….…………………….......................................................
20
Internodes and Tendril Length…………..………………………………
21
Plant Height at Flowering and
Maturity…………………………………………………………………
21
Pod Width and Length…………..………………………………………
22
Terminal Leaflet Length and Width………..……………………………
23
Reaction to Leaf miner and
Powdery mildew……..…………………………………………………..
23
Weight of Fresh Pod Yield
per Plot (kg/5m2)
…………………………......................................
24
Leaf, Flower and Pod Characteristics…………………………………...
25
Farmers Preferences……..………………………………………………
26
Return on Cash Expenses (ROCE)……...………………………………
26
Post-harvest characteristics……...………………………………………
27
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION………………….
29
Summary………………………………………………………………...
29
Conclusion………………….……………………………………………
30
Recommendation…………………………………………...……………
31
LITERATURE CITED………….………………………………………………
32
APPENDICES…………..………………………………………………………
33
1
INTRODUCTION
Garden Pea (Pisum sativum) known as sweet pea is one of the common crops
grown by Benguet farmers. The crop originated in Europe and from there takes
throughout the world. Peas are annual, leguminous plant with long, weak, herbaceous
stems. The stems are about to 24 inches to 28 inches long. The pale green leaves consists
of one to three leaflet with a terminal tendril the blossom are reddish purple or white, the
pods usually contain four to nine seeds (Dolorit, 1974). This legume is an important
garden and field crop throughout the temperate regions, where it is grown for fresh peas.
In the tropics, a garden pea is grown only at high altitude or during the cool season. Like
most legumes, garden pea is a good source of protein and vitamins. The fresh green pod
of garden pea contains 6.7% protein, 6.4% fat, 15.5% carbohydrates and 2.2% fiber
(Purseglove, 1972). In addition, garden pea is able to fix nitrogen but it still needs
supplemental application of fertilizer to supply the major elements required in order for
the plant to attain maximum yield.
Since garden pea is one of the most important food legumes in term of world
production, there is a need to introduce and evaluate new breeding line in order to know
the best varieties that are best suited in an area. Most of the accepted variety of garden
pea is high yielding and resistant to pest and disease. Consumer’s preference must also be
considered because even if a variety is high yielding if the consumers or the farmer
growers do not like its pod and other traits, it would affect its demand or marketability.
Highland farmers like in Benguet cannot identify the exact variety of garden pea
which gives higher yield with good quality pods. Therefore it is important for them to
note some of the new breeding lines of garden pea. This study will help Benguet farmers
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
2
to choose and determine which line is suitable in local condition of La Trinidad during
regular cropping season when the demand for the crop is great.
This study was undertaken with the following objectives:
1. to characterize and evaluate the selected advanced lines of garden pea in
La Trinidad, Benguet;
2.
to determine the acceptability and post harvest quality of selected
advanced lines of garden pea in La Trinidad, Benguet; and
3.
to determine the profitability on producing selected advanced lines of
garden pea in La Trinidad, Benguet.
The study was conducted at Benguet State University – Institute of Plant Breeding
Highland Crop Research Station (BSU-IPB HCRS) experimental field from November,
2010 to February, 2011.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Varietal Evaluation and Selection
The variety to be selected should be high yielding, resistant to pest and diseases,
and early maturing. These traits would make possible the growing of a crop less
expensive and more productive. Moreover choosing the right variety will minimize
problems associated with water and fertilizer management so that high yield will be
obtained. Yield performance of any variety is affected by environmental factors like soil
condition, climate and incidence of pest and diseases (PCARRD, 1989).
Bay-an (2000) reported that many of the agricultural experimental stations
conducting varietal screening of economical crops recommended varieties to determine if
it is adapted to a particular area or condition where the crop is to be planted.
To know the best variety to plant must be the first consideration in planting
garden pea. The best variety that is adapted to the locality should be selected. Using the
right variety ensures high yield and better quality of the produce. However, before a
variety is recommended it has to undergo a series of varietal evaluation.
Trial planting will be done to test new varieties suitable to a certain locality before
planting in a wide scale. Varietal evaluation is important in order to observe performance
character such as high yielding, vigor and maturity. These qualities are seldom found in
one variety. A farmer has to select for the right variety that suit his own condition and
consumer needs as well (HARRDEC, 1996).
Annogue (1997) evaluated eleven promising lines of garden pea under La
Trinidad Benguet condition. He reported that CGP 158 produced the highest yield per
plot and per hectare. It was the earliest to mature and it produced the most number of
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
4
pods per hectare. CGP 158 was also resistant to leaf miner and produced good quality
pods and seeds.
Bay-an (2000) evaluated the performance and acceptability of six promising
garden pea variety produced by BSU-IPB HRCS in Atok, Benguet. Results showed that
all the six varieties were suitable to the locality because if their good yield which ranged
from 2.82-4.61 tons per hectare. They were also vigorous and mildly resistant to leaf
miner. Trinidad was highest yielder but it was moderately liked because of its bigger
pods. Taichung 89-001 and the Chinese garden pea were preferred due to their small
pods.
In 2006, Gawidan evaluated ten garden pea entries for both fresh pod and seed
yield under La Trinidad condition. Significant differences were observed among the ten
entries of garden pea evaluated in terms of number of days to first and last flowering,
number of nodes to first flower, number of pods per plant, pod width and fresh pod yield
per plot. N2634, 89-001 and CLG produced the highest fresh pod yield per plot per
hectare. CGP 59 was observed to have moderate resistance to leaf miner and Ascochyta
leaf spot.
Recently, Del-amen (2009) evaluated the performance and farmers acceptability
of six promising lines of garden pea. Result showed that the six promising lines were
suitable in Madaymen because of their good growth and fresh pod yield that ranged from
8.65-11.43 kg/10m2. They were all vigorous and highly resistant to leaf miner and
powdery mildew. CGP 34 and CGP 110 were the tallest while Kalantao was the shortest
at 35 DAP. All the six lines showed high resistance to leaf miner and powdery mildew
except for the CGP 18A which had mild resistance to powdery mildew. CGP 110 and
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
5
Kalantao produced the highest marketable and total fresh pod yield per plot but Kalantao
was disliked by the farmers because of its big sized and curve pods, despite of its
sweetness and crunchiness.
Storage Conditions for Fresh Vegetables
Harvested perishable products are living tissues with continuing metabolism, and
are thus subject to respiration, water loss and cell softening throughout the post harvest
system. The storage life of a product varies with species, variety and pre-harvest
conditions particularly quality and maturity. That given much scope for control lies in
post harvest management of the two most important determinants of storage life and
quality, which are respiration and transpiration. Both needs to be limited but not stopped
and proper control of temperature and relative humidity is the key to maximizing storage
life and marketable quality (Beattie, 1992).
Ware (1975) stated that vegetables vary widely in perishability some can be
stored for several months, while others retain quality for only three or four days in
storage. For those that stored well, storage is essential to prolong the season and
facilitates orderly marketing. Many of the very perishable crops are often grown some
distance from market. They have to be handled promptly and stored under proper
conditions until they reach the consumer.
Fresh vegetables intended for storage should be as free as possible from skin
breaks, bruises, decay and other deterioration. Bruises and other mechanical damage not
only destruct the appearance of the product but are the principal avenues for entrance of
decay organisms. Mechanical damage also increases moisture loss.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
6
Maximum storage life of vegetables can be obtained by storing a high quality
product harvested at the right maturity, free from injuries and diseases, and stored
promptly. Keeping quality may be influenced by cultivar, climate, soil, cultural
conditions, maturity and handling practices before storage.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
7
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of 135 m2 was thoroughly cleaned and prepared. The area was divided
into three blocks, consisting of nine plots each with a dimension of 1m x 5m2 including
border plots. The treatments were laid out using Randomized Complete Block Design
(RCBD) with three replications.
Two seeds per hill were sown at a depth of 2-3 cm with a distance of 20cm
between hills and between rows. There were two rows per plot. All the necessary cultural
and management practices of farmers growing garden pea were employed uniformly such
as weeding, irrigation, and others. Trellis was provided at 35 day after planting; Vines
were bound with plastic twine allowing the plants to cling to the trellis.
The following selected advanced lines together with the commercial variety and
newly NSIC Approved Variety were obtained from Benguet State University- Institute of
Plant Breeding (BSU-IPB) Highland Crop Research Station (HCRS) served as
treatments:
Treatment
Advanced line
T1
148-2
T2
109-1
T3
109-2
T4
153-1
T5
153-2
T6
Betag
T7 (ck)
Chinese light green
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
8
Data Gathered
A. Quantitative Characters
1. Maturity
a. Number of days from sowing to emergence. This was obtained by
counting the number of days from sowing to emergence.
b. Number of days from emergence to flowering. This was recorded by
counting the number of days from emergence to the time when at least 50% of the plant
per plot had at least two fully opened flowers.
c. Number of days from flowering to pod setting. This was obtained by
counting the numbers of days from flowering until the pods begin to develop.
d. Number of days from pod setting to pod maturity. This was recorded by
counting the number of days from pod setting to pod maturity.
e. Number of days from emergence to first and last harvesting. This was
recorded by counting the number of days from flowering to first and last harvesting.
2. Leaf Characteristics
a. Leaflet length (cm). This was measured using a foot ruler from the base
of the leaflet to the leaf tip of ten random sample leaves per treatment at 35 days after
planting.
b. Leaflet width (cm). Leaf width of ten samples used in gathering leaf
length was gathered by measuring the broadest part of the leaf using a foot rule at 35 days
after planting.
c. Number of leaves per plant. This was recorded by counting the number
of leaves of ten sample plants per replication during harvesting.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
9
d. Tendril length (cm). This was measured from the base to the tip of the
ten random sample tendril per treatment using a ruler when pod were fully mature.
3. Stem Characteristics
a. Number of nodes per plant. This was counted from the base of the plant
to the tip of the main stem of the ten sample plants per treatment during the last harvest.
b. Node number bearing first flower cluster. This was recorded by
counting the node from the base of the plant to the node bearing the first flower cluster in
five sample plants per treatment.
c. Node number bearing first pod. This was recorded by counting the node
bearing first pod cluster in five sample plants per treatment.
d. Node number bearing last pod. This was recorded by counting the node
bearing last pod cluster in five sample plants per treatment.
e. Internodes length (cm). This was measured by getting the mean length
of three internodes at the midpoint of the plant.
f. Number of branches. This was obtained by counting the number of
branches of the plants one week before harvesting.
g. Plant height at maturity (cm). This was measured from the base of the
plant to the tip in ten sample plant using a meter stick at maturity.
4. Flower Characteristics
a. Number of flowers per plant. This was recorded by counting the flowers
per plant in ten sample plants per treatment per replication at the peak of flowering.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
10
b. Number of flowers per cluster. This was recorded by counting the
flowers per cluster in ten sample plants per treatment per replication at the peak of
flowering.
c. Number of flower clusters per plant. This was recorded by counting the
flower cluster per plant in ten sample plants per treatment per replication around 50 days
after planting.
d. Plant height at flowering (cm). This was recorded by measuring the
height of the plant from the base of the plant to the first flower.
5. Pod Characteristics
a. Pod length (cm). This was obtained by measuring the length of ten
random sample pods per treatment from the base to the tip of pod.
b. Pod width (cm). This was obtained by measuring the broadest part of
sample pods used in gathering pod length using foot rule.
c. Number of pods per cluster. This was obtained by getting the number of
pods per cluster from ten random sample plants per plot.
d. Number of pod per plant. This was obtained by counting the number of
pods per plant from ten sample plants per plot.
e. Percent pod set per plant. This was computed using the formula:
Percent pod set (%) = total number of pods per plant x 100
total number of flowers per plant
f. Pod straightness. This was recorded as irregular, curve or straight.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
11
6. Yield Characteristics
a. Weight of marketable fresh pods per plot (kg/5m2). This was recorded
by weighing the marketable pods per plot from first to last harvest. Marketable pods are
straight pods, smooth, and free from damages.
b. Weight of non-marketable pods per plot (kg/5m2). This was recorded by
weighing the non- marketable pods per plot per treatment. These are the pods that are
over-matured, malformed and damaged by insects pest and diseases.
c. Total yield per plot (kg/5m2). This was recorded by getting the total
weight of marketable and non-marketable pods per plot per treatment throughout the
harvest period.
d. Computed pod yield (tons/ha). This was recorded by multiplying the
total yield per plot in kg/5m2 x 2.0, Where 2.0 is the factor used to convert yield per plot
(kg/5m2) in ton/ha assuming one hectare effective area.
B. Qualitative Characters
1. Leaf color. This was recorded as green, light green, yellow, dark green.
2. Flower color. This was recorded when 50% of the plant per plot have fully
opened flowers.
3. Pod color. This was recorded as green, light green, yellow, dark green.
4. Pod shape. This was recorded as flat, round, curve or straight.
5. Stringiness. This was recorded during the harvest and recorded whether green
pod is stingy or string less, stringy if there is pod suture string when snapped and string
less when there is no pod suture.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
12
6. Waxiness of pod. This was recorded by observing the presence or absence of
wax in the pods.
7. Shininess of pod. This was recorded as shiny, dull or glossy.
8. Reaction to leaf miner infestation. This was gathered using the following scale
used by Tandang et al. (2008):
Scale
Description
Remarks
1
No damage/infestation
Highly resistant
2
1-25% infestations
Moderately resistant
3
26-50% infestations
Resistant
4
51-75% infestations
Moderately susceptible
5
76-100% infestations Very susceptible
9. Reaction to powdery mildew. This was gathered using the following scale used
by Tandang et al. (2008):
Scale
Description
Remarks
1
No damage/infestation
Highly resistant
2
1-25% of the total leaves per
plants per plot are infected Moderately resistant
3
26-50% of the total leaves per
plants per plot are infected Resistant
4
51-75% of the total leaves per
plants per plot are infected Moderately susceptible
5
76-100% of the total leaves per
plants per plot are infected Very susceptible
10. Farmer’s preferences. Ten farmers were invited to make their own selection
and express their reasons for accepting and not accepting the selected advanced lines of
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
13
garden pea. Selection was based on pod yield and quality after harvest. Other reasons for
selecting were noted.
Sensory evaluation of selected advanced lines was done by the farmers according
to growth, pod appearance, pod color, crunchiness, and their general acceptability.
11. Return on Cash Expense (ROCE). This was determined using the following
formula:
ROCE (%) = Gross Sales- Total Expenses x 100
Total expenses
12. Post harvest characteristics. This includes the loss in weight, the change in
color, appearance, and crunchiness of pods per treatment.
a. Loss in weight. This was computed by subtracting from initial weight (the
weight just harvest), the final weight (the weight of pods after one week storage under
ordinary room condition)
b. Pod color. Pods per treatment were observed for their predominant color in
seven days after storage.
c. Pod appearance. Pods per treatment were observed for their appearance in
seven days after storage.
d. Crunchiness. Pods were evaluated whether they are crunchy, slightly crunchy
and not crunchy.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
14
Analysis of Data
All quantitative data were analyzed using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for
Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. The significance of
differences among treatment means were tested using the Duncan’s Multiple Range Test
(DMRT) at 5% level of significance.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
15
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Number of Days from Emergence
to Flowering and Pod Setting
The seven advanced lines of garden pea studied emerged within seven days after
sowing. Betag was the earliest to produce flower within 30 days after emergence (DAE)
and 109-1 was the latest to flower at 46 days after emergence (Table 1).
Lines 148-2, 153-2 and Betag produced pod two days earlier than the lines 153-1
and CLG with in 40 DAE. Lines 109-1 and 109-2 were the latest period to produce pods
at 51 DAE.
Table 1. Number of days from emergence to flowering and pod setting of the seven
selected advanced lines of garden pea
NUMBER OF DAYS FROM EMERGENCE TO
LINES
FLOWERING
POD SETTING
148-2
30e
40c
153-1
37c
42b
153-2
35d
40c
109-1
46a
51a
109-2
44b
51a
Betag
30e
40c
CLG (ck)
35d
42b
CV (%)
00
00
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
16
Number of days from Pod setting to
Pod Maturity from Emergence to First
and Last Harvesting
Table 2 shows that lines 153-1, 153-2 and 109-1 the earliest to set pod five days
after flowering. Other advanced lines set pod two to five days later. Table 2 also shows
the number of days from pod setting to maturity. The lines first harvested are 148-2,153-
1,153-2 and Betag with in 47 DAE. Lines 109-1, 109-2 and CLG were harvested nine
days later. The seven selected advanced lines of garden pea differed significantly in the
number of days from emergence to last harvesting (Table 2). Lines 148-2, 153-1, 153-2
and Betag reached last pod harvesting within 65 DAE while 109-1, 109-2 and CLG had
last harvesting four days later.
Table 2. Number of days from flowering to pod setting, from pod setting to pod maturity,
from emergence to last harvesting of advanced lines of garden pea
NUMBER OF DAYS FROM
LINES
POD SETTING TO
EMERGENCE TO HARVESTING
POD MATURITY
FIRST
LAST
148-2
7a
47b
65b
153-4
5c
47b
65b
153-2
7b
47b
65b
109-1
5c
56a
69a
109-2
5c
56a
69a
Betag
7b
47b
65b
CLG
5c
56a
69a
CV (%)
00
00
00
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
17
Node Number Bearing First Flower,
First and Last Pod
Table 3 shows the node number bearing first flower cluster, first pod and last pod.
Results showed that the seven selected advanced lines of garden pea produced their first
flower cluster and first pod on their 7th to 15th node. The last pod developed on the 10th to
19th node. Lines 148-2 produced first flower cluster within the seventh node and first pod
developed at 10th node. Line 109-2 had the highest node number bearing first flower
cluster in the 15th node where first pod also developed while its last pod developed at 19th
node. Other lines developed their first pod at the 11th to 12th node and last pod at 14th
node. The differences observed in this study could be attributed to their genetic
differences.
Table 3. Node number bearing first flower cluster, first and last pod of the seven
advanced lines of garden pea
NODE NUMBER BEARING
LINES
FIRST FLOWER
FIRST POD
LAST POD
CLUSTER
148-2
7e
7e
10d
153-1
11c
11c
14c
153-2
11c
11c
14c
109-1
12b
12b
18b
109-2
15a
15a
19a
Betag
11c
11c
14c
CLG
10d
10d
14c
CV (%)
2.88
2.88
2.19
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
18
Number of Flower Cluster per Plant
Flower per Cluster, Flower per Plant
Highly significant differences among the seven selected advanced lines of garden
pea were noted on the number of flowers cluster per plant (Table 4). Line 153-1 and 153-
2 had the least flower cluster per plant (3). Line 109-1 had the highest number of flower
cluster per plant followed by Betag. Other line had four to five flower clusters per plant.
The six advanced lines were observed to have two flowers per cluster except for
Betag which had only one flower per cluster (Table 4). Line 109-1 had 12 flowers per
plant while the other lines had five to nine flowers per plant. The six lines produced
purple flower except CLG that produced white flowers.
Table 4. Number of flower cluster per plant, flower per cluster and flower per plant of
seven advanced lines of garden pea
NUMBER OF FLOWER
LINES
CLUSTER PER
PER CLUSTER
PER PLANT
PLANT
148-2
4c
2 a
8 c
153-1
3d
2 a
6 d
153-2
3d
2 a
6 d
109-1
6a
2 a
12 a
109-2
4 c
2 a
9b
Betag
5 b
1 b
5 e
CLG
4 c
2 a
8 c
CV (%)
7.39
00
6.09
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
19
Number of Branches, Nodes and Leaves per Plant
There were highly significant differences among the treatment means of seven
selected advanced lines of garden pea based in the number of branches per plant, number
of node plant and number of leaves per plant (Table 5). All the lines had one branch
except for CLG which had two branches per plant. The number of branches differed
significantly among the selected advanced lines evaluated which could be due to their
genetic differences. Line 109-1 had the highest number of nodes per plant while line 148-
2 had the least number of nodes. Line 109-2 had 409 leaves per plant. Other lines had 289
to 391 leaves.
Table 5. Number of branches, nodes and leaves per plant of the seven advanced lines of
garden pea
NUMBER OF
BRANCHES PER
NODE PER PLANT
LEAVES PER
LINES
PLANT
PLANT
148-2
1b
11d
289c
153-1
1b
15c
391a
153-2
1b
15c
368ab
109-1
1b
19a
372ab
109-2
1b
16b
409a
Betag
1b
16b
380ab
CLG
2a
15c
330cb
CV (%)
18.33
1.47
7.82
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
20
Number of Pods per Cluster and per Plant
There were highly significant differences were noted on the number of pods per
cluster among the selected advanced lines studied. The selected advanced lines were
double-podded except Betag which had only one pod per cluster (Table 6).
The seven selected advanced lines evaluated also differed significantly in terms of
number of pods per plant. Lines 109-1 produced the highest number of pods per plant
followed by 109-2 while 153-2 and Betag produced the fewest pods per plant. Other line
had six to eight pods per plant (Table 6).
Table 6. Number of pods per cluster and pods per plant of the seven advanced lines of
garden pea
NUMBER OF PODS
LINES
PER CLUSTER
PER PLANT
148-2
2 a
7c
153-1
2 a
6 d
153-2
2 a
5 e
109-1
2 a
12 a
109-2
2 a
8 b
Betag
1 b
5 e
CLG
2 a
7c
CV (%)
00
19.43
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
21
Internodes and Tendril Length
There were highly significant differences in the internodes and tendril length
among the seven advanced lines of garden pea (Table 7).
The selected advanced lines of garden pea 109-1 had the longest internode while
CLG had the shortest internode. Lines 148-2 had the longest tendril followed by 109-1
and CLG. The shortest tendril was measured in line 153-2.
Plant Height at Flowering and Maturity
There were highly significant differences observed on plant height at period of
flowering and maturity. The seven selected advanced lines of garden pea line 109-1 had
the tallest plant at flowering and maturity stage.
Table 7. Internodes and tendril length of seven advanced lines of garden pea
LINE
INTERNODE LENGTH TENDRIL LENGTH
(cm) (cm)
148-2
8.03e
10.33 a
153-1
8.15 d
7.76 d
153-2
7.85 f
6.20 f
109-1
8.76 a
9.66 b
109-2
8.47 b
6.86 e
Betag
8.22 c
8.20 cd
CLG
6.92 g
8.50 c
CV (%)
0.23
4.36
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
22
It was followed by 109-2. The shortest plants were recorded, in CLG at flowering
and in line 148-2 at maturity stage together with CLG. There was an increasing height
measurement from flowering to maturity as showed on Table 8.
Pod Width and Length
Highly significant differences were noted on the length and width of pods among
the treatment means of garden pea lines evaluated. Betag had the longest pod and lines
153-1 had the shortest pod together with 109-1, 153-2 and CLG. The widest pods
measured were lines 148-2 and CLG had narrowest pods.
Table 8. Plant height at flowering and maturity of seven advanced lines of garden pea
PLANT HEIGHT AT
LINES
FLOWERING (cm)
MATURITY (cm)
148-2
75f
89e
153-1
91d
108d
153-2
95 c
106d
109-1
112 a
147a
109-2
107 b
138b
Betag
86 e
128c
CLG
74 g
93e
CV (%)
0.24
1.25
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
23
Table 9. Pod length and width of seven advanced lines of garden pea
LINES
POD LENGTH (cm)
POD WIDTH (cm)
148-2
7.95b
1.50a
153-1
6.81g
1.33f
153-2
6.84f
1.49b
109-1
6.91e
1.41d
109-2
7.26c
1.37e
Betag
8.12a
1.43c
CLG
6.93d
1.27g
CV (%)
0.18
0.42
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Terminal Leaflet Length and Width
Highly significant differences were noted on the terminal leaflet length and width
among the advanced lines of garden pea evaluated. Betag had the longest and widest
terminal leaflet while CLG had the shortest and narrowest terminal leaflet length (table
10).
Reaction to Leaf Miner and Powdery Mildew
All the seven selected advanced lines of garden pea evaluated exhibited moderate
resistance to leaf miner infestation and moderate susceptibility to powdery mildew at 65
days after emergence.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
24
Table 10. Leaflet length and width of seven advanced lines of garden pea
LEAFLET
LINES
LENGTH(cm)
WIDTH(cm)
148-2
5.11c
4.16c
153-1
4.85d
3.36f
153-2
5.30b
4.34b
109-1
5.07c
3.73d
109-2
4.94d
3.48e
Betag
5.43a
4.47a
CLG
4.07b
3.13g
CV (%)
1.04
1.69
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Weight of fresh pod yield per plot (kg/5m2)
Table 11 shows that there were significant differences among the seven selected
advanced lines of garden pea in term of fresh pod yield per plot. Betag had the highest
weight of marketable fresh pod yield per plot (2.02kg/5m2). Other lines had 1.54 to
1.82kg/5m2. CLG had the lowest weight of marketable and non-marketable fresh pod
yield per plot (1.46kg/5m2 and 0.46kg/5m2. Line 153-2 had the highest weight of non-
marketable fresh pod yield.
The pods harvested per plot throughout the harvesting period were not all
marketable pods due to late harvesting, leaf miner infestation and powdery mildew
infection. Betag produced significantly highest total fresh pod yield about 2.54kg/5m2
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
25
while CLG produced lowest total yield (1.90kg). other lines produced 2.32kg to
2.45kg/5m2. It was significantly different from the total yield of other treatment means
(Table 11).
There were also significant differences on the computed yield per hectare. Amng
the selected advanced lines of garden pea studied Betag produced the highest fresh pod
yield per hectare (5.08T/ha) and CLG produced the lowest yield of 3.80T/ha. Other lines
produced 4.64 to 4.90 T/ha of fresh pod yield.
Leaf, Flower and Pod Characteristics
CLG had light green leaf while the six lines had medium green leaves. All lines
were observed to have purple flower except for CLG which had white flowers. Line 109-
1 and CLG had light green pod color. All the six lines had straight, flat pod shape except
Table 11. Weight of fresh pod yield per plot of seven advanced lines of garden pea
FRESH POD YIELD (kg/5m2)
LINES
MARKETABLE
NON-
TOTAL
COMPUTED
MARKETABLE
YIELD
YIELD (T/ha)
148-2
1.76c
0.560bc
2.32d
4.64e
153-1
1.82b
0.590b
2.41bc
4.82c
153-2
1.81bc
0.640a
2.45b
4.90b
109-1
1.54d
0.520c
2.06e
4.12f
109-2
1.81bc
0.570bc
2.39c
4.78d
Betag
2.02a
0.520c
2.54a
5.08a
CLG
1.46e
0.430d
1.90f
3.80g
CV (%)
5.11
28.68
1.37
1.91
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
26
for Betag which had slightly curve pod. The seven lines of garden pea had stringy pods.
CLG and 109-1 had waxy and shiny pods and all the other five lines had non-waxy, dull
pods.
Farmers Preferences
Ten farmers were invited to make their own selection among the advanced lines.
Selections were based on pod yield, pod appearance, color, crunchiness and acceptability.
Lines 148-2 and Betag were disliked by farmers in term of pod appearance and pod
acceptability due to its broadest pods but liked in pod color and crunchiness while other
lines were generally liked by the farmers. Lines 109-1 together with CLG were very
much liked by the farmers in general acceptability due to its shiny pods (Table 12).
In addition, farmers considered the price of quality pods in the market as their
preference. 148-2 and Betag were least preferred because of its bigger pod size that
commanded lower price in the market.
Return Cash Expenses (ROCE)
Table 13 shows the different ROCE computed from growing the seven selected
advanced lines evaluated. Lines 153-1 had the highest ROCE with 1.92% followed by
153-1 and 109-2. CLG and 109-1 produced negative ROCE due to lower weight of
marketable pods while 148-2 (-15.11) had also negative result of ROCE because of its
poor pods quality.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
27
Table 12. Farmer’s preferences of seven advanced lines of garden pea based on pod
characteristics
LINES APPEARANCE COLOR CRUNCHINESS ACCEPTABILITY REMARK
148-2
disliked
liked
liked
disliked
broad pod
153-1
liked
liked
liked
liked
Small pod
153-2
liked
liked
liked
liked
Good for
storage
109-1
liked
liked
liked
very much liked
Shiny pod
109-2
liked
liked
liked
liked
Good for
storage
Betag
disliked
liked
liked
disliked
Broad pod
CLG
liked
liked
liked
very much like
Shiny pod
Postharvest characteristics
One hundred grams of fresh pods per lines were weighed and observed for its
pods characteristics within one week (7 days) of storage under ordinary room condition.
In this study, it was observed that 148-2,153-1 and Betag Lost 25 percent in
weight after seven days of storage. 109-2, 153-2 and CLG lost 13 percent while 109-1
lost 10 percent. As to the color, appearance and crunchiness, all the garden pea selected
advanced lines did not change after one week of storage but it was observed that the pod
lost its freshness or pods become shriveled (Table 14).
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
28
Table 13. Cost and return analysis of seven advanced lines of garden pea
LINES
FRESH POD
COST OF
GROSS
NET
ROCE
YIELD
PRODUCTION INCOME
INCOME
(%)
(kg/5m2)
(PhP)
(PhP)
(PhP)
148-2
1.76c
178.57
140
-37.77
-21.15
153-1
1.82b
178.57
182
3.43
1.92
153-2
1.81bc
178.57
181
1.01
0.56
109-1
1.54d
178.57
154
-24.57
-36.76
109-2
1.81bc
178.57
181
1.01
0.56
Betag
2.02a
178.57
160
-18.57
-10.39
CLG
1.46e
178.57
146
-32.57
-18.24
-Total expenses include land preparation, irrigation, fertilizer, seeds and maintenance
-Selling price: 153-1,153-2,109-1,109-2, and CLG = P 100/Kg 148-2
and Betag= P80.00/ Kg.
Table 14. Loss in weight of seven selected advanced lines of garden pea after seven days
storage
LINES
WEIGHT LOSS (%)
CHANGE IN COLOR
148-2
25
No change in color
153-1
25
No change in color
153-2
13
No change in color
109-1
10
No change in color
109-2
13
No change in color
Betag
25
No change in color
CLG
13
No change in color
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
29
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
This study was conducted to characterize and evaluate the growth and pod yield
of seven advanced lines of garden pea; determine the acceptability and post-harvest
quality, and also determine the ROCE of selected advanced lines of garden pea.
All the selected advanced lines emerged in seven DAS, flowered within 30 to 46
DAE, set pod from 40 to 51 DAE and matured five to seven days from pod setting.
The earliest to produce flower was Betag and line 148-2 in 30 DAE while the
other lines flowered in 35 to 46 DAE. Betag had only one flower per cluster while the six
lines had two flowers per cluster. They produced one to two branches, 11 to 19 nodes per
plant and 289 to 409 leaves per plant. Line 109-1 had the longest internode while line
148-2 had longest tendril. Plant height did not differ significantly among the lines
measured although there was increasing measurement from flowering to fresh pod
maturity.
There were significant differences among the seven selected advanced lines of
garden pea in term of fresh pod yield per plot. Betag had the highest weight of
marketable fresh pod yield per plot (2.02kg/5m2). Other lines had 1.54 to 1.82kg/5m2.
CLG had the lowest weight of marketable and non-marketable fresh pod yield per plot
(1.46kg/5m2 and 0.46kg/5m2). Line 153-2 had the highest weight of non-marketable fresh
pod yield. Betag produced significantly highest total fresh pod yield about 2.54kg/5m2
while CLG produced lowest total yield (1.90kg). Other lines produced 2.32kg to
2.45kg/5m2. It was significantly different from the total yield of other treatment means.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
30
There were also significant differences on the computed yield per hectare. Among
the selected advanced lines of garden pea studied Betag produced the highest fresh pod
yield per hectare (5.08 t/ha) and CLG produced the lowest yield of 3.80 T/ha. Other lines
produced 4.64 to 4.90 T/ha of fresh pod yield.
Based on the post-harvest characteristics of the selected advanced lines after one
week of storage in ordinary room condition line 148-2, line153-1 and Betag had the
highest weight lost 25 percent while CLG had the lowest weight lost of 10 percent.
Line 153-1 had the highest ROCE with 1.92% followed by line 153-2 and line
109-2. Other lines registered negative ROCE.
Conclusion
Highly significant differences among the seven advanced lines of garden pea were
observed in majority of the parameters measured in this study. There were significant
differences observed in number of flower per plant, weight of marketable fresh pod yield
and total fresh yield per plot among the selected advanced lines of garden pea studied.
The seven selected advanced lines of garden pea characterized were not significantly
different in the number of flower per plant and weight of non-marketable fresh pod yield.
Line 109-1 had the best characteristics in term on number of flower per cluster,
number of node per plant, number of pods per plant, number of pods per cluster and plant
height. It is also very much liked by the farmers for its pods quality together with CLG.
Betag produced the highest total fresh pod yield due to pod characteristics.
Selected advanced lines 153-1, 153-2 and 109-2 were noted to have positive
ROCE due to high yield, pod quality and resistance to leaf miner. Line 109-1 had better
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
31
potential for storage under ordinary room condition within seven days after harvesting
due to lesser weight loss.
Recommendation
The significant differences in the characteristics of the seven selected advanced
lines of garden pea studied could be used for further evaluation. Lines 109-1, 109-2, 153-
1 and 153-2 had best characters observed and measured in this study. Lines 153-1, 153-2
and 109-2 had highest ROCE. Line 109-1 had better potential for storage.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
32
LITERATURE CITED
ANNOGUE, W.D. 1997. Evaluation and Correlation Analysis of Eleven Promising lines
of Garden Pea BS Thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 2.
BAY-AN, N.B. 2000. Performance and acceptability of promising garden pea in Atok.
1996. Benguet. BS Thesis. Benguet State University, LaTrinidad, Benguet. P. 7.
BEATTIE, S.P.1992. Primer Post Harvest Handling of Horticultural Crops. Haworth
Press, Inc. USA. Pp. 73-74.
Del-AMEN, M. 2009. Growth, yield and farmer’s acceptability of promisng lines of
garden pea. BS Thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P.2.
DOLORIT, B.D. 1974. Vegetable Production. Tokyo, Japan: Overseas Corporation
Agency. Pp. 106 – 107.
GAWIDAN, L.P. 2006. Fresh Pod and Seed Yield of Garden Pea entries in La Trinidad,
Benguet BS Thesis, Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 47.
HIGHLAND CULTURAL RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT CONSORTIUM
(HARRDEC). 1996. Highland Garden Pea Techno Guide. Benguet State
University. La Trinidad,Benguet. P. 34.
PHILIPPINE COUNCIL FOR AGRICULTURE AND RESOURCES, RESEARCH
AND DEVELOPMENT (PCARRD). 1989. Sustainable Development through
Organic Agriculture. Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines, Pp. 16,18,20.
PURSEGLOVE, J.W. Tropical Crops Dicotyledon. Copyright Longman Group Limited,
United Kingdom. Pp.265-267.
TANDANG, L.L., KIMEU, A.M., AMILOS, B.A., BAGTILA, J.G., KEBASEN, B.B.,
and G.R. MAGHIRANG. 2008. Benguet State University In-house Review.
Report formats for completed projects. Benguet State University, La Trinidad,
Benguet. P. 2.
WARE, JEORGE. 1975. Producing Vegetable Crop. The Interstate and Publisher Inc.
Publisher Inc. USA. P. 185.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
33
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Number of days from sowing to emergence
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
7
7
7
21
7
153 – 1
7
7
7
21
7
153 – 2
7
7
7
21
7
109 – 1
7
7
7
21
7
109 – 2
7
7
7
21
7
Betag
7
7
7
21
7
CLG
7
7
7
21
7
TOTAL
49
49
49
MEAN
7
7
7
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
34
Appendix Table 2. Number of days from emergence to flowering
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
30
30
30
90
30a
153 – 1
37
37
37
111
37c
153 – 2
35
35
35
105
35b
109 – 1
46
46
46
138
46d
109 – 2
44
44
44
132
44c
Betag
30
30
30
90
30a
CLG
35
35
35
105
35b
TOTAL
257
257
257
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM
SQUARES
SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
Infty
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
706.28
117.71
Infty
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
20
706.28
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 0.0%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
35
Appendix Table 3. Number of days from flowering to pod setting
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
10
10
10
30
10
153 – 1
5
5
5
15
5
153 – 2
5
5
5
15
5
109 – 1
5
5
5
15
5
109 – 2
7
7
7
21
7
Betag
10
10
10
30
10
CLG
7
7
7
21
7
TOTAL
49
49
49
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
Infty
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
90.00
15.00
Infty
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
20
90.00
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 0.0%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
36
Appendix Table 4. Number of days from pod setting to pod maturity
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
7
7
7
21
7
153 – 1
5
5
5
15
5
153 – 2
7
7
7
21
7
109 – 1
5
5
5
15
5
109 – 2
5
5
5
15
5
Betag
7
7
7
21
7
CLG
5
5
5
15
5
TOTAL
41
41
41
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
Infty
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
20.57
3.43
Infty
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
20
20.57
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 0.0%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
37
Appendix Table 5. Number of days from emergence to last harvesting
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
65
65
65
195
65a
153 – 1
65
65
65
195
65a
153 – 2
65
65
65
195
65a
109 – 1
69
69
69
207
69b
109 – 2
69
69
69
207
69b
Betag
65
65
65
195
65a
CLG (CK)
69
69
69
207
69b
TOTAL
467
467
467
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
Infty
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
82.28
13.71
Infty
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
20
82.28
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 0.0%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
38
Appendix Table 6. Leaflet length (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
5.15
5.13
5.05
15.33
5.11c
153 – 1
5.84
4.88
4.85
14.57
4.85d
153 – 2
5.33
5.28
5.31
15.92
5.30b
109 – 1
5.04
5.06
5.16
15.23
5.07c
109 – 2
4.92
5.0
4.91
14.83
4.94d
Betag
5.45
5.4
5.39
16.3
5.43a
CLG (CK)
4.05
4.03
4.13
12.21
4.07e
TOTAL
34.75
34.84
34.8
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.0005
0.0002
165.53ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
3.55
0.59
220.68**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.03
0.002
TOTAL
20
3.58
** = Highly significant
CV (%) = 1.04%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
39
Appendix Table 7. Leaflet width (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
4.18
4.16
4.15
12.49
4.16c
153 – 1
3.37
3.35
3.38
10.1
3.36f
153 – 2
4.39
4.30
4.35
13.04
4.34b
109 – 1
3.74
3.72
3.75
11.21
3.73d
109 – 2
3.49
3.48
3.48
10.45
3.48e
Betag
4.49
4.45
4.48
13.42
4.47a
CLG (CK)
3.1
3.3
3.0
9.4
3.13g
TOTAL
26.76
26.76
26.59
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.002
0.001
0.33ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
4.86
0.80
193.09**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.05
0.004
TOTAL
20
4.91
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 1.69%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
40
Appendix Table 8. Number of leaves per plant
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
311
300
256
867
289c
153 – 1
448
348
379
1175
391.66a
153 – 2
400
359
344
1103
367.66ab
109 – 1
414
381
321
1116
372ab
109 – 2
404
414
410
1228
409.33a
Betag
367
377
396
1140
380ab
CLG
330
321
340
991
330.33cb
TOTAL
2674
2500
2446
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
4056
2028
5.25*
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
29709.90
4951.65
6.14**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
9670.66
805.88
TOTAL
20
43436.57
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 7.82%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
41
Appendix Table 9. Tendril length (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
10
11
10
31
10.33a
153 – 1
7.8
7.9
7.6
23.3
7.76d
153 – 2
6.0
6.2
6.4
18.6
6.2f
109 – 1
10
9.0
10
29
9.66b
109 – 2
6.8
7.0
6.8
20.6
6.86e
Betag
8.3
8.0
8.3
24.6
8.2cd
CLG (CK)
8.6
8.5
8.6
25.7
8.56c
TOTAL
57.5
57.6
57.7
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.002
0.001
0.01ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
38.39
6.39
49.15**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
1.55
0.13
TOTAL
20
39.94
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 4.36%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
42
Appendix Table 10. Number of nodes per plant
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
11.0
11.8
11.2
34
11.33e
153 – 1
18.6
18.4
18.1
55.1
18.36a
153 – 2
15.8
15.9
16.0
47.7
15.9b
109 – 1
14.8
14.6
14.2
43.6
14.53d
109 – 2
15.4
15.3
15.0
45.7
15.23c
Betag
15.8
15.8
15.5
47.1
15.7b
CLG (CK)
14.8
14.5
14.5
44.8
14.93d
TOTAL
106.2
106.3
104.5
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.29
0.14
2.95ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
79.34
13.22
267.02**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.59
0.05
TOTAL
20
80.22
** = Highly significant
CV (%) = 1.47
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
43
Appendix Table 11. Node number bearing first flower cluster
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
7.4
7.8
7.2
22.4
7.46e
153 – 1
12.6
12.1
12.9
37.6
12.53b
153 – 2
15.8
15.0
15.9
46.7
15.56a
109 – 1
11.8
11.6
11.4
34.4
11.46c
109 – 2
11.6
11.3
11.5
34.4
11.46c
Betag
11.4
11.8
11.2
34.4
11.46c
CLG (CK)
10.4
10.1
10.8
31.3
10.43d
TOTAL
81
79.7
80
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.07
0.03
0.31ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
104.26
17.37
156.72**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
1.33
0.11
TOTAL
20
105.66
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =2.88%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
44
Appendix Table 12. Node number bearing first pod
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
7.4
7.8
7.2
22.4
7.46e
153 – 1
12.6
12.1
12.9
37.6
12.53b
153 – 2
15.8
15.0
15.9
46.7
15.56a
109 – 1
11.8
11.6
11.4
34.4
11.46c
109 – 2
11.6
11.3
11.5
34.4
11.46c
Betag
11.4
11.8
11.2
34.4
11.46c
CLG (CK)
10.4
10.5
10.8
31.3
10.43d
TOTAL
81
79.7
80
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.07
0.03
0.31ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
104.25
17.37
156.72**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
1.33
0.11
TOTAL
20
105.65
** = Highly significant
CV (%) =2.89%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
45
Appendix Table 13. Node number bearing last pod
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
10.6
10.8
10.1
31.5
10.00e
153 – 1
18.0
18.3
18.7
55
10.50d
153 – 2
15.2
15.5
15.6
46.3
18.33a
109 – 1
14.6
14.8
14.0
43.4
14.46cd
109 – 2
14.4
15.0
15.4
44.8
14.93b
Betag
14.8
15.1
14.8
44.7
14.90b
CLG (CK)
14.6
14.8
15.0
44.4
14.80c
TOTAL
102.2
104.3
103.6
310.1
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.33
0.16
1.56ns
3.89 6.96
Treatment
6
94.52
0.10
150.02** 3.00 4.82
Error
12
1.26
TOTAL
20
96.10
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =2.19%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
46
Appendix Table 14. Internodes length (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
8.06
8.0
8.03
24.09
8.03e
153 – 1
8.79
8.75
8.76
26.3
8.76a
153 – 2
8.49
8.45
8.47
25.41
8.47b
109 – 1
8.16
8.14
8.16
24.46
8.15d
109 – 2
7.82
7.85
7.88
23.55
7.85f
Betag
8.23
8.20
8.25
24.68
8.22c
CLG (CK)
6.93
6.90
6.93
20.76
6.92c
TOTAL
56.48
56.29
56.48
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.003
0.001
3.87ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
6.10
1.01
2842.85** 3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.004
0.0004
TOTAL
20
6.11
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =0.23%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
47
Appendix Table 15. Number of branches
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
1
1
1
3
1.00b
153 – 1
1
1
1
3
1.00b
153 – 2
1
1
1
3
1.00b
109 – 1
1
1
1
3
1.00b
109 – 2
1
1
1
3
1.00b
Betag
1
1
1
3
1.00b
CLG (CK)
3
2
2
7
2.33a
TOTAL
1.28
1.14
1.14
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.95
0.47
1.00ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
4.57
0.76
16.00**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.57
0.05
TOTAL
20
5.24
** = Highly significant
CV (%) =18.33%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
48
Appendix Table 16. Plant height at maturity (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
88.4
90.2
91
269.6
89.86f
153 – 1
14.5
148
150.6
443.6
147.86a
153 – 2
138.6
139
136.8
414.4
138.13b
109 – 1
105.2
110
109.9
324.6
108.2d
109 – 2
103.5
108.7
105.9
318.1
106.03d
Betag
127.7
128.5
129
385.2
128.4c
CLG (CK)
91.1
93.6
94.8
279.5
93.16f
TOTAL
799.5
818
817.5
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
31.74
15.87
7.48**
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
9070.79
1311.79
712.12**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
25.47
2.12
TOTAL
20
9128.01
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =1.25%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
49
Appendix Table 17. Number of flowers per plant
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
8.29
7.72
8.41
24.48
8.16c
153 – 1
6.45
6.48
6.36
19.29
6.43d
153 – 2
5.10
6.80
6.50
18.40
6.13c
109 – 1
11.62
12.92
12.15
36.69
12.23a
109 – 2
9.20
9.10
9.0
27.30
9.10b
Betag
5.36
5.08
5.04
15.48
5.16e
CLG (CK)
8.33
7.89
8.11
24.33
8.11c
TOTAL
54.35
55.99
55.63
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.21
0.10
0.45ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
99.27
16.54
71.28**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
2.78
0.23
TOTAL
20
102.26
**= Significant
CV (%) =6.09%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
50
Appendix Table 18. Number of flowers per cluster
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
2
2
2
6
2a
153 – 1
2
2
2
6
2a
153 – 2
2
2
2
6
2a
109 – 1
2
2
2
6
2a
109 – 2
2
2
2
6
2a
Betag
1
1
1
3
1b
CLG (CK)
2
2
2
6
2a
TOTAL
13
13
13
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
infty
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
2.57
0.43
Infty
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
20
2.57
**= High significant
CV (%) = 0.00%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
51
Appendix Table 19. Number of flowers cluster per plant
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
3.65
4.99
4.35
12.99
4.33c
153 – 1
3.50
3.10
3.20
9.80
3.26f
153 – 2
3.60
3.40
3.20
10.20
3.40ef
109 – 1
6.40
6.30
6.20
18.90
6.30a
109 – 2
4.30
4.00
3.50
11.80
3.93e
Betag
5.20
5.30
5.10
15.60
5.20b
CLG (CK)
4.20
4.30
4.28
13.78
4.26d
TOTAL
30.85
31.39
29.83
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.18
0.09
0.86ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
20.33
3.39
32.36**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
1.26
0.10
TOTAL
20
21.76
**= Highly significant
C V (%) =7.39%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
52
Appendix Table 20. Plant height at flowering (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
75.7
76
75.8
227.5
75.83f
153 – 1
112.5
112.1
112.5
337.1
112.36a
153 – 2
107.1
108
108
323.1
107.7b
109 – 1
91.3
91.8
91.7
274.8
91.6d
109 – 2
95.5
95.6
95.5
286.6
95.53c
Betag
86.7
86.8
86.7
260.2
86.53e
CLG (CK)
74.6
75
74.9
224.5
74.83g
TOTAL
643.4
645.3
645.1
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF
COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM
SQUARES
SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.31
0.15
3.00ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
3773.03
628.83
12133.8**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.62
0.05
TOTAL
20
3773.96
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =0.24%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
53
Appendix Table 21. Pod length (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
7.99
7.92
7.95
23.86
7.95c
153 – 1
6.92
6.90
6.91
20.73
9.91a
153 – 2
7.28
7.25
7.26
21.79
7.26d
109 – 1
6.82
6.80
6.82
20.49
6.81g
109 – 2
6.85
6.83
6.86
20.54
6.84f
Betag
8.14
8.13
8.11
24.38
8.12b
CLG (CK)
6.94
6.92
6.95
20.81
6.93e
TOTAL
50.94
50.75
50.86
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.002
0.001
7.09**
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
5.49
0.91
4988.47**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.002
0.0001
TOTAL
20
5.49
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =0.14%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
54
Appendix Table 22. Pod width (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
1.51
1.5
1.5
4.51
1.50a
153 – 1
1.42
1.41
1.42
4.25
1.41d
153 – 2
1.33
1.36
1.37
4.11
1.37e
109 – 1
1.34
1.33
1.34
4.01
1.33e
109 – 2
1.49
1.48
1.5
4.47
1.49b
Betag
1.44
1.44
1.45
4.33
1.41c
CLG (CK)
1.27
1.28
1.25
3.33
1.27c
TOTAL
9.85
9.3
9.36
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.29
0.01
4.04*
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
12.26
0.01
559.65**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.04
0.004
TOTAL
20
12.03
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =0.18%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
55
Appendix Table 23. Number of pod per cluster
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
2
2
2
6
2a
153 – 1
2
2
2
6
2a
153 – 2
2
2
2
6
2a
109 – 1
2
2
2
6
2a
109 – 2
2
2
2
6
2a
Betag
1
1
1
3
1b
CLG (CK)
2
2
2
6
2a
TOTAL
13
13
13
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
Infty
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
2.57
0.42
Infty
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
20
2.57
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =0.00%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
56
Appendix Table 24. Number of pods per plant
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
8.4
5.0
6.5
19.9
6.63d
109 – 1
11.5
12.5
12.00
36.0
12.00a
109 – 2
8.0
9.0
7.0
24.0
8.00b
153 – 1
4.2
6.2
7.3
17.7
5.90e
153 – 2
5.6
4.6
4.2
14.4
4.80f
Betag
4.1
4.8
5.3
14.2
4.73fg
CLG (ck)
8.0
7.0
6.0
21.0
7.00c
TOTAL
49.8
49.1
48.3
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.16
0.08
0.06ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
111.97
18.66
13.33**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
16.85
1.40
TOTAL
20
138.98
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =16.90 %
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
57
Appendix Table 25. Percent pod set per plant
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
84.9
85
85.5
255.4
85.13 c
109 – 1
87.6
87.5
87.7
262.7
87.56 b
109 – 2
84.9
85
85
254.9
84.96 c
153 – 1
83.6
83.3
83.5
250.9
83.63 e
153 – 2
89.1
90
89.3
268.9
89.63 a
Betag
84.3
84.5
84.6
25.4
84.46 c
CLG (ck)
89.6
89.9
89.5
269
89.66 a
TOTAL
604
605.7
605.5
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.25
0.12
2.47ns
6.89
6.93
Treatment
6
112.58
18.77
375.4**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.60
0.05
TOTAL
20
113.43
**= Highly significant CV (%) =0.25 %
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
58
Appendix Table 26. Weight of marketable fresh pod yield per plant (kg/5m2)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
1.80
1.78
1.70
5.28
1.76 c
109 – 1
1.48
1.59
1.55
4.62
1.54 d
109 – 2
1.84
1.77
1.82
5.43
1.81 bc
153 – 1
1.82
1.83
1.81
5.46
1.82 b
153 – 2
1.72
1.95
1.76
5.43
1.81 bc
Betag
2.04
1.97
2.05
6.06
2.02 a
CLG (ck)
1.42
1.69
1.27
4.38
1.46 e
TOTAL
12.12
12.58
11.96
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.04
0.02
2.5ns
3.89
6.93
Treatment
6
0.65
0.11
13.75**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.10
0.008
TOTAL
20
0.79
**= Highly significant CV (%) =5.11%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
59
Appendix Table 27. Weight of non-marketable fresh pods yield per plant (kg/5m2)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
0.31
0.55
0.82
1.68
0.560bc
109 – 1
0.42
0.35
0.81
1.58
0.520d
109 – 2
0.55
0.44
0.72
1.71
0.570b
153 – 1
0.61
0.61
0.55
1.77
0.540c
153 – 2
0.80
0.65
0.49
1.94
0.64 a
Betag
0.53
0.45
0.58
1.56
0.520d
CLG (ck)
0.31
0.35
0.64
1.03
0.430e
TOTAL
3.53
3.4
4.61
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.12
0.06
2.5ns
3.89
6.93
Treatment
6
0.8
0.013
0.54ns
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.29
0.024
TOTAL
20
0.49
ns = Not significant CV (%) = 28.68%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
60
Appendix Table 28. Total yield per plot (kg/5m2)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
2.30
2.34
2.32
6.96
2.32 d
109 – 1
2.07
2.08
2.03
36.18
2.06 e
109 – 2
2.43
2.40
2.34
7.17
2.39 c
153 – 1
2.44
2.39
2.40
7.23
2.41 c
153 – 2
2.40
2.47
2.48
7.35
2.45 b
Betag
2.55
2.56
2.51
7.62
2.54 a
CLG (ck)
1.89
1.88
1.95
5.72
1.90 f
TOTAL
16.08
16.12
16.03
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.89
6.93
Treatment
6
0.94
0.16
160**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.02
0.001
TOTAL
20
0.96
**= Highly significant CV (%) = 1.37%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011. Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and
Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of Garden Pea. Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Leoncia L. Tandang, PhD.
ABSTRACT
The seven selected advanced lines of garden pea were characterized and evaluated based
on their agromorphological characteristics, growth and fresh pod yield. All lines differed
significantly in majority of the parameters observed in this study. All the selected advanced lines
emerged in seven DAS, flowered within 30 to 46 DAE, set pod from 40 to 51 DAE and matured
five to seven days from pod setting.
Based on the cost and return analysis from growing the selected advanced lines
evaluated, line 153-1 gave highest profit followed by lines 153-2 and 109-2.
Line 109-1 and CLG were most accepted and very much liked by the farmers due to their
pod characteristics and low weight loss during storage.
TABLE OF CONTENT
Page
Bibliography…..……………………………………………………………….
i
Abstract....……………………………………………………………………….
i
Table of Contents...……...……………………………………………………….
ii
INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………….
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE…...……………………………………………….
3
MATERIALS AND METHODS……….……………………………………….
7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………...……………………………………….
15
Number of Days from Sowing to
Emergence to Flowering and Pod
setting…………………………………………………………………….
15
Number of Days from Pod setting
to Pod maturity from Emergence
to First and Last Harvesting……..……………………………………….
16
Node Number Bearing First
Flower, First and Last Pod……….………………………………………
17
Number of Flower Cluster per
Plant, Flower per Cluster,
Flower per Plant………..………………………………………………..
18
Leaves per Plant……..…………………………………………………..
19
Number of Pods per Cluster and
per Plant……….…………………….......................................................
20
Internodes and Tendril Length…………..………………………………
21
Plant Height at Flowering and
Maturity…………………………………………………………………
21
Pod Width and Length…………..………………………………………
22
Terminal Leaflet Length and Width………..……………………………
23
Reaction to Leaf miner and
Powdery mildew……..…………………………………………………..
23
Weight of Fresh Pod Yield
per Plot (kg/5m2)
…………………………......................................
24
Leaf, Flower and Pod Characteristics…………………………………...
25
Farmers Preferences……..………………………………………………
26
Return on Cash Expenses (ROCE)……...………………………………
26
Post-harvest characteristics……...………………………………………
27
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION………………….
29
Summary………………………………………………………………...
29
Conclusion………………….……………………………………………
30
Recommendation…………………………………………...……………
31
LITERATURE CITED………….………………………………………………
32
APPENDICES…………..………………………………………………………
33
1
INTRODUCTION
Garden Pea (Pisum sativum) known as sweet pea is one of the common crops
grown by Benguet farmers. The crop originated in Europe and from there takes
throughout the world. Peas are annual, leguminous plant with long, weak, herbaceous
stems. The stems are about to 24 inches to 28 inches long. The pale green leaves consists
of one to three leaflet with a terminal tendril the blossom are reddish purple or white, the
pods usually contain four to nine seeds (Dolorit, 1974). This legume is an important
garden and field crop throughout the temperate regions, where it is grown for fresh peas.
In the tropics, a garden pea is grown only at high altitude or during the cool season. Like
most legumes, garden pea is a good source of protein and vitamins. The fresh green pod
of garden pea contains 6.7% protein, 6.4% fat, 15.5% carbohydrates and 2.2% fiber
(Purseglove, 1972). In addition, garden pea is able to fix nitrogen but it still needs
supplemental application of fertilizer to supply the major elements required in order for
the plant to attain maximum yield.
Since garden pea is one of the most important food legumes in term of world
production, there is a need to introduce and evaluate new breeding line in order to know
the best varieties that are best suited in an area. Most of the accepted variety of garden
pea is high yielding and resistant to pest and disease. Consumer’s preference must also be
considered because even if a variety is high yielding if the consumers or the farmer
growers do not like its pod and other traits, it would affect its demand or marketability.
Highland farmers like in Benguet cannot identify the exact variety of garden pea
which gives higher yield with good quality pods. Therefore it is important for them to
note some of the new breeding lines of garden pea. This study will help Benguet farmers
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
2
to choose and determine which line is suitable in local condition of La Trinidad during
regular cropping season when the demand for the crop is great.
This study was undertaken with the following objectives:
1. to characterize and evaluate the selected advanced lines of garden pea in
La Trinidad, Benguet;
2.
to determine the acceptability and post harvest quality of selected
advanced lines of garden pea in La Trinidad, Benguet; and
3.
to determine the profitability on producing selected advanced lines of
garden pea in La Trinidad, Benguet.
The study was conducted at Benguet State University – Institute of Plant Breeding
Highland Crop Research Station (BSU-IPB HCRS) experimental field from November,
2010 to February, 2011.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Varietal Evaluation and Selection
The variety to be selected should be high yielding, resistant to pest and diseases,
and early maturing. These traits would make possible the growing of a crop less
expensive and more productive. Moreover choosing the right variety will minimize
problems associated with water and fertilizer management so that high yield will be
obtained. Yield performance of any variety is affected by environmental factors like soil
condition, climate and incidence of pest and diseases (PCARRD, 1989).
Bay-an (2000) reported that many of the agricultural experimental stations
conducting varietal screening of economical crops recommended varieties to determine if
it is adapted to a particular area or condition where the crop is to be planted.
To know the best variety to plant must be the first consideration in planting
garden pea. The best variety that is adapted to the locality should be selected. Using the
right variety ensures high yield and better quality of the produce. However, before a
variety is recommended it has to undergo a series of varietal evaluation.
Trial planting will be done to test new varieties suitable to a certain locality before
planting in a wide scale. Varietal evaluation is important in order to observe performance
character such as high yielding, vigor and maturity. These qualities are seldom found in
one variety. A farmer has to select for the right variety that suit his own condition and
consumer needs as well (HARRDEC, 1996).
Annogue (1997) evaluated eleven promising lines of garden pea under La
Trinidad Benguet condition. He reported that CGP 158 produced the highest yield per
plot and per hectare. It was the earliest to mature and it produced the most number of
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
4
pods per hectare. CGP 158 was also resistant to leaf miner and produced good quality
pods and seeds.
Bay-an (2000) evaluated the performance and acceptability of six promising
garden pea variety produced by BSU-IPB HRCS in Atok, Benguet. Results showed that
all the six varieties were suitable to the locality because if their good yield which ranged
from 2.82-4.61 tons per hectare. They were also vigorous and mildly resistant to leaf
miner. Trinidad was highest yielder but it was moderately liked because of its bigger
pods. Taichung 89-001 and the Chinese garden pea were preferred due to their small
pods.
In 2006, Gawidan evaluated ten garden pea entries for both fresh pod and seed
yield under La Trinidad condition. Significant differences were observed among the ten
entries of garden pea evaluated in terms of number of days to first and last flowering,
number of nodes to first flower, number of pods per plant, pod width and fresh pod yield
per plot. N2634, 89-001 and CLG produced the highest fresh pod yield per plot per
hectare. CGP 59 was observed to have moderate resistance to leaf miner and Ascochyta
leaf spot.
Recently, Del-amen (2009) evaluated the performance and farmers acceptability
of six promising lines of garden pea. Result showed that the six promising lines were
suitable in Madaymen because of their good growth and fresh pod yield that ranged from
8.65-11.43 kg/10m2. They were all vigorous and highly resistant to leaf miner and
powdery mildew. CGP 34 and CGP 110 were the tallest while Kalantao was the shortest
at 35 DAP. All the six lines showed high resistance to leaf miner and powdery mildew
except for the CGP 18A which had mild resistance to powdery mildew. CGP 110 and
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
5
Kalantao produced the highest marketable and total fresh pod yield per plot but Kalantao
was disliked by the farmers because of its big sized and curve pods, despite of its
sweetness and crunchiness.
Storage Conditions for Fresh Vegetables
Harvested perishable products are living tissues with continuing metabolism, and
are thus subject to respiration, water loss and cell softening throughout the post harvest
system. The storage life of a product varies with species, variety and pre-harvest
conditions particularly quality and maturity. That given much scope for control lies in
post harvest management of the two most important determinants of storage life and
quality, which are respiration and transpiration. Both needs to be limited but not stopped
and proper control of temperature and relative humidity is the key to maximizing storage
life and marketable quality (Beattie, 1992).
Ware (1975) stated that vegetables vary widely in perishability some can be
stored for several months, while others retain quality for only three or four days in
storage. For those that stored well, storage is essential to prolong the season and
facilitates orderly marketing. Many of the very perishable crops are often grown some
distance from market. They have to be handled promptly and stored under proper
conditions until they reach the consumer.
Fresh vegetables intended for storage should be as free as possible from skin
breaks, bruises, decay and other deterioration. Bruises and other mechanical damage not
only destruct the appearance of the product but are the principal avenues for entrance of
decay organisms. Mechanical damage also increases moisture loss.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
6
Maximum storage life of vegetables can be obtained by storing a high quality
product harvested at the right maturity, free from injuries and diseases, and stored
promptly. Keeping quality may be influenced by cultivar, climate, soil, cultural
conditions, maturity and handling practices before storage.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
7
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of 135 m2 was thoroughly cleaned and prepared. The area was divided
into three blocks, consisting of nine plots each with a dimension of 1m x 5m2 including
border plots. The treatments were laid out using Randomized Complete Block Design
(RCBD) with three replications.
Two seeds per hill were sown at a depth of 2-3 cm with a distance of 20cm
between hills and between rows. There were two rows per plot. All the necessary cultural
and management practices of farmers growing garden pea were employed uniformly such
as weeding, irrigation, and others. Trellis was provided at 35 day after planting; Vines
were bound with plastic twine allowing the plants to cling to the trellis.
The following selected advanced lines together with the commercial variety and
newly NSIC Approved Variety were obtained from Benguet State University- Institute of
Plant Breeding (BSU-IPB) Highland Crop Research Station (HCRS) served as
treatments:
Treatment
Advanced line
T1
148-2
T2
109-1
T3
109-2
T4
153-1
T5
153-2
T6
Betag
T7 (ck)
Chinese light green
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
8
Data Gathered
A. Quantitative Characters
1. Maturity
a. Number of days from sowing to emergence. This was obtained by
counting the number of days from sowing to emergence.
b. Number of days from emergence to flowering. This was recorded by
counting the number of days from emergence to the time when at least 50% of the plant
per plot had at least two fully opened flowers.
c. Number of days from flowering to pod setting. This was obtained by
counting the numbers of days from flowering until the pods begin to develop.
d. Number of days from pod setting to pod maturity. This was recorded by
counting the number of days from pod setting to pod maturity.
e. Number of days from emergence to first and last harvesting. This was
recorded by counting the number of days from flowering to first and last harvesting.
2. Leaf Characteristics
a. Leaflet length (cm). This was measured using a foot ruler from the base
of the leaflet to the leaf tip of ten random sample leaves per treatment at 35 days after
planting.
b. Leaflet width (cm). Leaf width of ten samples used in gathering leaf
length was gathered by measuring the broadest part of the leaf using a foot rule at 35 days
after planting.
c. Number of leaves per plant. This was recorded by counting the number
of leaves of ten sample plants per replication during harvesting.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
9
d. Tendril length (cm). This was measured from the base to the tip of the
ten random sample tendril per treatment using a ruler when pod were fully mature.
3. Stem Characteristics
a. Number of nodes per plant. This was counted from the base of the plant
to the tip of the main stem of the ten sample plants per treatment during the last harvest.
b. Node number bearing first flower cluster. This was recorded by
counting the node from the base of the plant to the node bearing the first flower cluster in
five sample plants per treatment.
c. Node number bearing first pod. This was recorded by counting the node
bearing first pod cluster in five sample plants per treatment.
d. Node number bearing last pod. This was recorded by counting the node
bearing last pod cluster in five sample plants per treatment.
e. Internodes length (cm). This was measured by getting the mean length
of three internodes at the midpoint of the plant.
f. Number of branches. This was obtained by counting the number of
branches of the plants one week before harvesting.
g. Plant height at maturity (cm). This was measured from the base of the
plant to the tip in ten sample plant using a meter stick at maturity.
4. Flower Characteristics
a. Number of flowers per plant. This was recorded by counting the flowers
per plant in ten sample plants per treatment per replication at the peak of flowering.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
10
b. Number of flowers per cluster. This was recorded by counting the
flowers per cluster in ten sample plants per treatment per replication at the peak of
flowering.
c. Number of flower clusters per plant. This was recorded by counting the
flower cluster per plant in ten sample plants per treatment per replication around 50 days
after planting.
d. Plant height at flowering (cm). This was recorded by measuring the
height of the plant from the base of the plant to the first flower.
5. Pod Characteristics
a. Pod length (cm). This was obtained by measuring the length of ten
random sample pods per treatment from the base to the tip of pod.
b. Pod width (cm). This was obtained by measuring the broadest part of
sample pods used in gathering pod length using foot rule.
c. Number of pods per cluster. This was obtained by getting the number of
pods per cluster from ten random sample plants per plot.
d. Number of pod per plant. This was obtained by counting the number of
pods per plant from ten sample plants per plot.
e. Percent pod set per plant. This was computed using the formula:
Percent pod set (%) = total number of pods per plant x 100
total number of flowers per plant
f. Pod straightness. This was recorded as irregular, curve or straight.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
11
6. Yield Characteristics
a. Weight of marketable fresh pods per plot (kg/5m2). This was recorded
by weighing the marketable pods per plot from first to last harvest. Marketable pods are
straight pods, smooth, and free from damages.
b. Weight of non-marketable pods per plot (kg/5m2). This was recorded by
weighing the non- marketable pods per plot per treatment. These are the pods that are
over-matured, malformed and damaged by insects pest and diseases.
c. Total yield per plot (kg/5m2). This was recorded by getting the total
weight of marketable and non-marketable pods per plot per treatment throughout the
harvest period.
d. Computed pod yield (tons/ha). This was recorded by multiplying the
total yield per plot in kg/5m2 x 2.0, Where 2.0 is the factor used to convert yield per plot
(kg/5m2) in ton/ha assuming one hectare effective area.
B. Qualitative Characters
1. Leaf color. This was recorded as green, light green, yellow, dark green.
2. Flower color. This was recorded when 50% of the plant per plot have fully
opened flowers.
3. Pod color. This was recorded as green, light green, yellow, dark green.
4. Pod shape. This was recorded as flat, round, curve or straight.
5. Stringiness. This was recorded during the harvest and recorded whether green
pod is stingy or string less, stringy if there is pod suture string when snapped and string
less when there is no pod suture.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
12
6. Waxiness of pod. This was recorded by observing the presence or absence of
wax in the pods.
7. Shininess of pod. This was recorded as shiny, dull or glossy.
8. Reaction to leaf miner infestation. This was gathered using the following scale
used by Tandang et al. (2008):
Scale
Description
Remarks
1
No damage/infestation
Highly resistant
2
1-25% infestations
Moderately resistant
3
26-50% infestations
Resistant
4
51-75% infestations
Moderately susceptible
5
76-100% infestations Very susceptible
9. Reaction to powdery mildew. This was gathered using the following scale used
by Tandang et al. (2008):
Scale
Description
Remarks
1
No damage/infestation
Highly resistant
2
1-25% of the total leaves per
plants per plot are infected Moderately resistant
3
26-50% of the total leaves per
plants per plot are infected Resistant
4
51-75% of the total leaves per
plants per plot are infected Moderately susceptible
5
76-100% of the total leaves per
plants per plot are infected Very susceptible
10. Farmer’s preferences. Ten farmers were invited to make their own selection
and express their reasons for accepting and not accepting the selected advanced lines of
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
13
garden pea. Selection was based on pod yield and quality after harvest. Other reasons for
selecting were noted.
Sensory evaluation of selected advanced lines was done by the farmers according
to growth, pod appearance, pod color, crunchiness, and their general acceptability.
11. Return on Cash Expense (ROCE). This was determined using the following
formula:
ROCE (%) = Gross Sales- Total Expenses x 100
Total expenses
12. Post harvest characteristics. This includes the loss in weight, the change in
color, appearance, and crunchiness of pods per treatment.
a. Loss in weight. This was computed by subtracting from initial weight (the
weight just harvest), the final weight (the weight of pods after one week storage under
ordinary room condition)
b. Pod color. Pods per treatment were observed for their predominant color in
seven days after storage.
c. Pod appearance. Pods per treatment were observed for their appearance in
seven days after storage.
d. Crunchiness. Pods were evaluated whether they are crunchy, slightly crunchy
and not crunchy.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
14
Analysis of Data
All quantitative data were analyzed using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for
Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. The significance of
differences among treatment means were tested using the Duncan’s Multiple Range Test
(DMRT) at 5% level of significance.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
15
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Number of Days from Emergence
to Flowering and Pod Setting
The seven advanced lines of garden pea studied emerged within seven days after
sowing. Betag was the earliest to produce flower within 30 days after emergence (DAE)
and 109-1 was the latest to flower at 46 days after emergence (Table 1).
Lines 148-2, 153-2 and Betag produced pod two days earlier than the lines 153-1
and CLG with in 40 DAE. Lines 109-1 and 109-2 were the latest period to produce pods
at 51 DAE.
Table 1. Number of days from emergence to flowering and pod setting of the seven
selected advanced lines of garden pea
NUMBER OF DAYS FROM EMERGENCE TO
LINES
FLOWERING
POD SETTING
148-2
30e
40c
153-1
37c
42b
153-2
35d
40c
109-1
46a
51a
109-2
44b
51a
Betag
30e
40c
CLG (ck)
35d
42b
CV (%)
00
00
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
16
Number of days from Pod setting to
Pod Maturity from Emergence to First
and Last Harvesting
Table 2 shows that lines 153-1, 153-2 and 109-1 the earliest to set pod five days
after flowering. Other advanced lines set pod two to five days later. Table 2 also shows
the number of days from pod setting to maturity. The lines first harvested are 148-2,153-
1,153-2 and Betag with in 47 DAE. Lines 109-1, 109-2 and CLG were harvested nine
days later. The seven selected advanced lines of garden pea differed significantly in the
number of days from emergence to last harvesting (Table 2). Lines 148-2, 153-1, 153-2
and Betag reached last pod harvesting within 65 DAE while 109-1, 109-2 and CLG had
last harvesting four days later.
Table 2. Number of days from flowering to pod setting, from pod setting to pod maturity,
from emergence to last harvesting of advanced lines of garden pea
NUMBER OF DAYS FROM
LINES
POD SETTING TO
EMERGENCE TO HARVESTING
POD MATURITY
FIRST
LAST
148-2
7a
47b
65b
153-4
5c
47b
65b
153-2
7b
47b
65b
109-1
5c
56a
69a
109-2
5c
56a
69a
Betag
7b
47b
65b
CLG
5c
56a
69a
CV (%)
00
00
00
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
17
Node Number Bearing First Flower,
First and Last Pod
Table 3 shows the node number bearing first flower cluster, first pod and last pod.
Results showed that the seven selected advanced lines of garden pea produced their first
flower cluster and first pod on their 7th to 15th node. The last pod developed on the 10th to
19th node. Lines 148-2 produced first flower cluster within the seventh node and first pod
developed at 10th node. Line 109-2 had the highest node number bearing first flower
cluster in the 15th node where first pod also developed while its last pod developed at 19th
node. Other lines developed their first pod at the 11th to 12th node and last pod at 14th
node. The differences observed in this study could be attributed to their genetic
differences.
Table 3. Node number bearing first flower cluster, first and last pod of the seven
advanced lines of garden pea
NODE NUMBER BEARING
LINES
FIRST FLOWER
FIRST POD
LAST POD
CLUSTER
148-2
7e
7e
10d
153-1
11c
11c
14c
153-2
11c
11c
14c
109-1
12b
12b
18b
109-2
15a
15a
19a
Betag
11c
11c
14c
CLG
10d
10d
14c
CV (%)
2.88
2.88
2.19
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
18
Number of Flower Cluster per Plant
Flower per Cluster, Flower per Plant
Highly significant differences among the seven selected advanced lines of garden
pea were noted on the number of flowers cluster per plant (Table 4). Line 153-1 and 153-
2 had the least flower cluster per plant (3). Line 109-1 had the highest number of flower
cluster per plant followed by Betag. Other line had four to five flower clusters per plant.
The six advanced lines were observed to have two flowers per cluster except for
Betag which had only one flower per cluster (Table 4). Line 109-1 had 12 flowers per
plant while the other lines had five to nine flowers per plant. The six lines produced
purple flower except CLG that produced white flowers.
Table 4. Number of flower cluster per plant, flower per cluster and flower per plant of
seven advanced lines of garden pea
NUMBER OF FLOWER
LINES
CLUSTER PER
PER CLUSTER
PER PLANT
PLANT
148-2
4c
2 a
8 c
153-1
3d
2 a
6 d
153-2
3d
2 a
6 d
109-1
6a
2 a
12 a
109-2
4 c
2 a
9b
Betag
5 b
1 b
5 e
CLG
4 c
2 a
8 c
CV (%)
7.39
00
6.09
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
19
Number of Branches, Nodes and Leaves per Plant
There were highly significant differences among the treatment means of seven
selected advanced lines of garden pea based in the number of branches per plant, number
of node plant and number of leaves per plant (Table 5). All the lines had one branch
except for CLG which had two branches per plant. The number of branches differed
significantly among the selected advanced lines evaluated which could be due to their
genetic differences. Line 109-1 had the highest number of nodes per plant while line 148-
2 had the least number of nodes. Line 109-2 had 409 leaves per plant. Other lines had 289
to 391 leaves.
Table 5. Number of branches, nodes and leaves per plant of the seven advanced lines of
garden pea
NUMBER OF
BRANCHES PER
NODE PER PLANT
LEAVES PER
LINES
PLANT
PLANT
148-2
1b
11d
289c
153-1
1b
15c
391a
153-2
1b
15c
368ab
109-1
1b
19a
372ab
109-2
1b
16b
409a
Betag
1b
16b
380ab
CLG
2a
15c
330cb
CV (%)
18.33
1.47
7.82
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
20
Number of Pods per Cluster and per Plant
There were highly significant differences were noted on the number of pods per
cluster among the selected advanced lines studied. The selected advanced lines were
double-podded except Betag which had only one pod per cluster (Table 6).
The seven selected advanced lines evaluated also differed significantly in terms of
number of pods per plant. Lines 109-1 produced the highest number of pods per plant
followed by 109-2 while 153-2 and Betag produced the fewest pods per plant. Other line
had six to eight pods per plant (Table 6).
Table 6. Number of pods per cluster and pods per plant of the seven advanced lines of
garden pea
NUMBER OF PODS
LINES
PER CLUSTER
PER PLANT
148-2
2 a
7c
153-1
2 a
6 d
153-2
2 a
5 e
109-1
2 a
12 a
109-2
2 a
8 b
Betag
1 b
5 e
CLG
2 a
7c
CV (%)
00
19.43
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
21
Internodes and Tendril Length
There were highly significant differences in the internodes and tendril length
among the seven advanced lines of garden pea (Table 7).
The selected advanced lines of garden pea 109-1 had the longest internode while
CLG had the shortest internode. Lines 148-2 had the longest tendril followed by 109-1
and CLG. The shortest tendril was measured in line 153-2.
Plant Height at Flowering and Maturity
There were highly significant differences observed on plant height at period of
flowering and maturity. The seven selected advanced lines of garden pea line 109-1 had
the tallest plant at flowering and maturity stage.
Table 7. Internodes and tendril length of seven advanced lines of garden pea
LINE
INTERNODE LENGTH TENDRIL LENGTH
(cm) (cm)
148-2
8.03e
10.33 a
153-1
8.15 d
7.76 d
153-2
7.85 f
6.20 f
109-1
8.76 a
9.66 b
109-2
8.47 b
6.86 e
Betag
8.22 c
8.20 cd
CLG
6.92 g
8.50 c
CV (%)
0.23
4.36
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
22
It was followed by 109-2. The shortest plants were recorded, in CLG at flowering
and in line 148-2 at maturity stage together with CLG. There was an increasing height
measurement from flowering to maturity as showed on Table 8.
Pod Width and Length
Highly significant differences were noted on the length and width of pods among
the treatment means of garden pea lines evaluated. Betag had the longest pod and lines
153-1 had the shortest pod together with 109-1, 153-2 and CLG. The widest pods
measured were lines 148-2 and CLG had narrowest pods.
Table 8. Plant height at flowering and maturity of seven advanced lines of garden pea
PLANT HEIGHT AT
LINES
FLOWERING (cm)
MATURITY (cm)
148-2
75f
89e
153-1
91d
108d
153-2
95 c
106d
109-1
112 a
147a
109-2
107 b
138b
Betag
86 e
128c
CLG
74 g
93e
CV (%)
0.24
1.25
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
23
Table 9. Pod length and width of seven advanced lines of garden pea
LINES
POD LENGTH (cm)
POD WIDTH (cm)
148-2
7.95b
1.50a
153-1
6.81g
1.33f
153-2
6.84f
1.49b
109-1
6.91e
1.41d
109-2
7.26c
1.37e
Betag
8.12a
1.43c
CLG
6.93d
1.27g
CV (%)
0.18
0.42
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Terminal Leaflet Length and Width
Highly significant differences were noted on the terminal leaflet length and width
among the advanced lines of garden pea evaluated. Betag had the longest and widest
terminal leaflet while CLG had the shortest and narrowest terminal leaflet length (table
10).
Reaction to Leaf Miner and Powdery Mildew
All the seven selected advanced lines of garden pea evaluated exhibited moderate
resistance to leaf miner infestation and moderate susceptibility to powdery mildew at 65
days after emergence.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
24
Table 10. Leaflet length and width of seven advanced lines of garden pea
LEAFLET
LINES
LENGTH(cm)
WIDTH(cm)
148-2
5.11c
4.16c
153-1
4.85d
3.36f
153-2
5.30b
4.34b
109-1
5.07c
3.73d
109-2
4.94d
3.48e
Betag
5.43a
4.47a
CLG
4.07b
3.13g
CV (%)
1.04
1.69
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significant using
DMRT.
Weight of fresh pod yield per plot (kg/5m2)
Table 11 shows that there were significant differences among the seven selected
advanced lines of garden pea in term of fresh pod yield per plot. Betag had the highest
weight of marketable fresh pod yield per plot (2.02kg/5m2). Other lines had 1.54 to
1.82kg/5m2. CLG had the lowest weight of marketable and non-marketable fresh pod
yield per plot (1.46kg/5m2 and 0.46kg/5m2. Line 153-2 had the highest weight of non-
marketable fresh pod yield.
The pods harvested per plot throughout the harvesting period were not all
marketable pods due to late harvesting, leaf miner infestation and powdery mildew
infection. Betag produced significantly highest total fresh pod yield about 2.54kg/5m2
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
25
while CLG produced lowest total yield (1.90kg). other lines produced 2.32kg to
2.45kg/5m2. It was significantly different from the total yield of other treatment means
(Table 11).
There were also significant differences on the computed yield per hectare. Amng
the selected advanced lines of garden pea studied Betag produced the highest fresh pod
yield per hectare (5.08T/ha) and CLG produced the lowest yield of 3.80T/ha. Other lines
produced 4.64 to 4.90 T/ha of fresh pod yield.
Leaf, Flower and Pod Characteristics
CLG had light green leaf while the six lines had medium green leaves. All lines
were observed to have purple flower except for CLG which had white flowers. Line 109-
1 and CLG had light green pod color. All the six lines had straight, flat pod shape except
Table 11. Weight of fresh pod yield per plot of seven advanced lines of garden pea
FRESH POD YIELD (kg/5m2)
LINES
MARKETABLE
NON-
TOTAL
COMPUTED
MARKETABLE
YIELD
YIELD (T/ha)
148-2
1.76c
0.560bc
2.32d
4.64e
153-1
1.82b
0.590b
2.41bc
4.82c
153-2
1.81bc
0.640a
2.45b
4.90b
109-1
1.54d
0.520c
2.06e
4.12f
109-2
1.81bc
0.570bc
2.39c
4.78d
Betag
2.02a
0.520c
2.54a
5.08a
CLG
1.46e
0.430d
1.90f
3.80g
CV (%)
5.11
28.68
1.37
1.91
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
26
for Betag which had slightly curve pod. The seven lines of garden pea had stringy pods.
CLG and 109-1 had waxy and shiny pods and all the other five lines had non-waxy, dull
pods.
Farmers Preferences
Ten farmers were invited to make their own selection among the advanced lines.
Selections were based on pod yield, pod appearance, color, crunchiness and acceptability.
Lines 148-2 and Betag were disliked by farmers in term of pod appearance and pod
acceptability due to its broadest pods but liked in pod color and crunchiness while other
lines were generally liked by the farmers. Lines 109-1 together with CLG were very
much liked by the farmers in general acceptability due to its shiny pods (Table 12).
In addition, farmers considered the price of quality pods in the market as their
preference. 148-2 and Betag were least preferred because of its bigger pod size that
commanded lower price in the market.
Return Cash Expenses (ROCE)
Table 13 shows the different ROCE computed from growing the seven selected
advanced lines evaluated. Lines 153-1 had the highest ROCE with 1.92% followed by
153-1 and 109-2. CLG and 109-1 produced negative ROCE due to lower weight of
marketable pods while 148-2 (-15.11) had also negative result of ROCE because of its
poor pods quality.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
27
Table 12. Farmer’s preferences of seven advanced lines of garden pea based on pod
characteristics
LINES APPEARANCE COLOR CRUNCHINESS ACCEPTABILITY REMARK
148-2
disliked
liked
liked
disliked
broad pod
153-1
liked
liked
liked
liked
Small pod
153-2
liked
liked
liked
liked
Good for
storage
109-1
liked
liked
liked
very much liked
Shiny pod
109-2
liked
liked
liked
liked
Good for
storage
Betag
disliked
liked
liked
disliked
Broad pod
CLG
liked
liked
liked
very much like
Shiny pod
Postharvest characteristics
One hundred grams of fresh pods per lines were weighed and observed for its
pods characteristics within one week (7 days) of storage under ordinary room condition.
In this study, it was observed that 148-2,153-1 and Betag Lost 25 percent in
weight after seven days of storage. 109-2, 153-2 and CLG lost 13 percent while 109-1
lost 10 percent. As to the color, appearance and crunchiness, all the garden pea selected
advanced lines did not change after one week of storage but it was observed that the pod
lost its freshness or pods become shriveled (Table 14).
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
28
Table 13. Cost and return analysis of seven advanced lines of garden pea
LINES
FRESH POD
COST OF
GROSS
NET
ROCE
YIELD
PRODUCTION INCOME
INCOME
(%)
(kg/5m2)
(PhP)
(PhP)
(PhP)
148-2
1.76c
178.57
140
-37.77
-21.15
153-1
1.82b
178.57
182
3.43
1.92
153-2
1.81bc
178.57
181
1.01
0.56
109-1
1.54d
178.57
154
-24.57
-36.76
109-2
1.81bc
178.57
181
1.01
0.56
Betag
2.02a
178.57
160
-18.57
-10.39
CLG
1.46e
178.57
146
-32.57
-18.24
-Total expenses include land preparation, irrigation, fertilizer, seeds and maintenance
-Selling price: 153-1,153-2,109-1,109-2, and CLG = P 100/Kg 148-2
and Betag= P80.00/ Kg.
Table 14. Loss in weight of seven selected advanced lines of garden pea after seven days
storage
LINES
WEIGHT LOSS (%)
CHANGE IN COLOR
148-2
25
No change in color
153-1
25
No change in color
153-2
13
No change in color
109-1
10
No change in color
109-2
13
No change in color
Betag
25
No change in color
CLG
13
No change in color
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
29
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
This study was conducted to characterize and evaluate the growth and pod yield
of seven advanced lines of garden pea; determine the acceptability and post-harvest
quality, and also determine the ROCE of selected advanced lines of garden pea.
All the selected advanced lines emerged in seven DAS, flowered within 30 to 46
DAE, set pod from 40 to 51 DAE and matured five to seven days from pod setting.
The earliest to produce flower was Betag and line 148-2 in 30 DAE while the
other lines flowered in 35 to 46 DAE. Betag had only one flower per cluster while the six
lines had two flowers per cluster. They produced one to two branches, 11 to 19 nodes per
plant and 289 to 409 leaves per plant. Line 109-1 had the longest internode while line
148-2 had longest tendril. Plant height did not differ significantly among the lines
measured although there was increasing measurement from flowering to fresh pod
maturity.
There were significant differences among the seven selected advanced lines of
garden pea in term of fresh pod yield per plot. Betag had the highest weight of
marketable fresh pod yield per plot (2.02kg/5m2). Other lines had 1.54 to 1.82kg/5m2.
CLG had the lowest weight of marketable and non-marketable fresh pod yield per plot
(1.46kg/5m2 and 0.46kg/5m2). Line 153-2 had the highest weight of non-marketable fresh
pod yield. Betag produced significantly highest total fresh pod yield about 2.54kg/5m2
while CLG produced lowest total yield (1.90kg). Other lines produced 2.32kg to
2.45kg/5m2. It was significantly different from the total yield of other treatment means.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
30
There were also significant differences on the computed yield per hectare. Among
the selected advanced lines of garden pea studied Betag produced the highest fresh pod
yield per hectare (5.08 t/ha) and CLG produced the lowest yield of 3.80 T/ha. Other lines
produced 4.64 to 4.90 T/ha of fresh pod yield.
Based on the post-harvest characteristics of the selected advanced lines after one
week of storage in ordinary room condition line 148-2, line153-1 and Betag had the
highest weight lost 25 percent while CLG had the lowest weight lost of 10 percent.
Line 153-1 had the highest ROCE with 1.92% followed by line 153-2 and line
109-2. Other lines registered negative ROCE.
Conclusion
Highly significant differences among the seven advanced lines of garden pea were
observed in majority of the parameters measured in this study. There were significant
differences observed in number of flower per plant, weight of marketable fresh pod yield
and total fresh yield per plot among the selected advanced lines of garden pea studied.
The seven selected advanced lines of garden pea characterized were not significantly
different in the number of flower per plant and weight of non-marketable fresh pod yield.
Line 109-1 had the best characteristics in term on number of flower per cluster,
number of node per plant, number of pods per plant, number of pods per cluster and plant
height. It is also very much liked by the farmers for its pods quality together with CLG.
Betag produced the highest total fresh pod yield due to pod characteristics.
Selected advanced lines 153-1, 153-2 and 109-2 were noted to have positive
ROCE due to high yield, pod quality and resistance to leaf miner. Line 109-1 had better
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
31
potential for storage under ordinary room condition within seven days after harvesting
due to lesser weight loss.
Recommendation
The significant differences in the characteristics of the seven selected advanced
lines of garden pea studied could be used for further evaluation. Lines 109-1, 109-2, 153-
1 and 153-2 had best characters observed and measured in this study. Lines 153-1, 153-2
and 109-2 had highest ROCE. Line 109-1 had better potential for storage.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
32
LITERATURE CITED
ANNOGUE, W.D. 1997. Evaluation and Correlation Analysis of Eleven Promising lines
of Garden Pea BS Thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 2.
BAY-AN, N.B. 2000. Performance and acceptability of promising garden pea in Atok.
1996. Benguet. BS Thesis. Benguet State University, LaTrinidad, Benguet. P. 7.
BEATTIE, S.P.1992. Primer Post Harvest Handling of Horticultural Crops. Haworth
Press, Inc. USA. Pp. 73-74.
Del-AMEN, M. 2009. Growth, yield and farmer’s acceptability of promisng lines of
garden pea. BS Thesis. Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P.2.
DOLORIT, B.D. 1974. Vegetable Production. Tokyo, Japan: Overseas Corporation
Agency. Pp. 106 – 107.
GAWIDAN, L.P. 2006. Fresh Pod and Seed Yield of Garden Pea entries in La Trinidad,
Benguet BS Thesis, Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. P. 47.
HIGHLAND CULTURAL RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT CONSORTIUM
(HARRDEC). 1996. Highland Garden Pea Techno Guide. Benguet State
University. La Trinidad,Benguet. P. 34.
PHILIPPINE COUNCIL FOR AGRICULTURE AND RESOURCES, RESEARCH
AND DEVELOPMENT (PCARRD). 1989. Sustainable Development through
Organic Agriculture. Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines, Pp. 16,18,20.
PURSEGLOVE, J.W. Tropical Crops Dicotyledon. Copyright Longman Group Limited,
United Kingdom. Pp.265-267.
TANDANG, L.L., KIMEU, A.M., AMILOS, B.A., BAGTILA, J.G., KEBASEN, B.B.,
and G.R. MAGHIRANG. 2008. Benguet State University In-house Review.
Report formats for completed projects. Benguet State University, La Trinidad,
Benguet. P. 2.
WARE, JEORGE. 1975. Producing Vegetable Crop. The Interstate and Publisher Inc.
Publisher Inc. USA. P. 185.
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
33
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Number of days from sowing to emergence
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
7
7
7
21
7
153 – 1
7
7
7
21
7
153 – 2
7
7
7
21
7
109 – 1
7
7
7
21
7
109 – 2
7
7
7
21
7
Betag
7
7
7
21
7
CLG
7
7
7
21
7
TOTAL
49
49
49
MEAN
7
7
7
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
34
Appendix Table 2. Number of days from emergence to flowering
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
30
30
30
90
30a
153 – 1
37
37
37
111
37c
153 – 2
35
35
35
105
35b
109 – 1
46
46
46
138
46d
109 – 2
44
44
44
132
44c
Betag
30
30
30
90
30a
CLG
35
35
35
105
35b
TOTAL
257
257
257
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM
SQUARES
SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
Infty
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
706.28
117.71
Infty
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
20
706.28
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 0.0%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
35
Appendix Table 3. Number of days from flowering to pod setting
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
10
10
10
30
10
153 – 1
5
5
5
15
5
153 – 2
5
5
5
15
5
109 – 1
5
5
5
15
5
109 – 2
7
7
7
21
7
Betag
10
10
10
30
10
CLG
7
7
7
21
7
TOTAL
49
49
49
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
Infty
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
90.00
15.00
Infty
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
20
90.00
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 0.0%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
36
Appendix Table 4. Number of days from pod setting to pod maturity
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
7
7
7
21
7
153 – 1
5
5
5
15
5
153 – 2
7
7
7
21
7
109 – 1
5
5
5
15
5
109 – 2
5
5
5
15
5
Betag
7
7
7
21
7
CLG
5
5
5
15
5
TOTAL
41
41
41
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
Infty
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
20.57
3.43
Infty
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
20
20.57
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 0.0%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
37
Appendix Table 5. Number of days from emergence to last harvesting
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
65
65
65
195
65a
153 – 1
65
65
65
195
65a
153 – 2
65
65
65
195
65a
109 – 1
69
69
69
207
69b
109 – 2
69
69
69
207
69b
Betag
65
65
65
195
65a
CLG (CK)
69
69
69
207
69b
TOTAL
467
467
467
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
Infty
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
82.28
13.71
Infty
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
20
82.28
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 0.0%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
38
Appendix Table 6. Leaflet length (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
5.15
5.13
5.05
15.33
5.11c
153 – 1
5.84
4.88
4.85
14.57
4.85d
153 – 2
5.33
5.28
5.31
15.92
5.30b
109 – 1
5.04
5.06
5.16
15.23
5.07c
109 – 2
4.92
5.0
4.91
14.83
4.94d
Betag
5.45
5.4
5.39
16.3
5.43a
CLG (CK)
4.05
4.03
4.13
12.21
4.07e
TOTAL
34.75
34.84
34.8
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.0005
0.0002
165.53ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
3.55
0.59
220.68**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.03
0.002
TOTAL
20
3.58
** = Highly significant
CV (%) = 1.04%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
39
Appendix Table 7. Leaflet width (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
4.18
4.16
4.15
12.49
4.16c
153 – 1
3.37
3.35
3.38
10.1
3.36f
153 – 2
4.39
4.30
4.35
13.04
4.34b
109 – 1
3.74
3.72
3.75
11.21
3.73d
109 – 2
3.49
3.48
3.48
10.45
3.48e
Betag
4.49
4.45
4.48
13.42
4.47a
CLG (CK)
3.1
3.3
3.0
9.4
3.13g
TOTAL
26.76
26.76
26.59
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.002
0.001
0.33ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
4.86
0.80
193.09**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.05
0.004
TOTAL
20
4.91
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 1.69%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
40
Appendix Table 8. Number of leaves per plant
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
311
300
256
867
289c
153 – 1
448
348
379
1175
391.66a
153 – 2
400
359
344
1103
367.66ab
109 – 1
414
381
321
1116
372ab
109 – 2
404
414
410
1228
409.33a
Betag
367
377
396
1140
380ab
CLG
330
321
340
991
330.33cb
TOTAL
2674
2500
2446
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
4056
2028
5.25*
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
29709.90
4951.65
6.14**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
9670.66
805.88
TOTAL
20
43436.57
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 7.82%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
41
Appendix Table 9. Tendril length (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
10
11
10
31
10.33a
153 – 1
7.8
7.9
7.6
23.3
7.76d
153 – 2
6.0
6.2
6.4
18.6
6.2f
109 – 1
10
9.0
10
29
9.66b
109 – 2
6.8
7.0
6.8
20.6
6.86e
Betag
8.3
8.0
8.3
24.6
8.2cd
CLG (CK)
8.6
8.5
8.6
25.7
8.56c
TOTAL
57.5
57.6
57.7
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.002
0.001
0.01ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
38.39
6.39
49.15**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
1.55
0.13
TOTAL
20
39.94
**= Highly significant
CV (%) = 4.36%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
42
Appendix Table 10. Number of nodes per plant
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
11.0
11.8
11.2
34
11.33e
153 – 1
18.6
18.4
18.1
55.1
18.36a
153 – 2
15.8
15.9
16.0
47.7
15.9b
109 – 1
14.8
14.6
14.2
43.6
14.53d
109 – 2
15.4
15.3
15.0
45.7
15.23c
Betag
15.8
15.8
15.5
47.1
15.7b
CLG (CK)
14.8
14.5
14.5
44.8
14.93d
TOTAL
106.2
106.3
104.5
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.29
0.14
2.95ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
79.34
13.22
267.02**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.59
0.05
TOTAL
20
80.22
** = Highly significant
CV (%) = 1.47
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
43
Appendix Table 11. Node number bearing first flower cluster
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
7.4
7.8
7.2
22.4
7.46e
153 – 1
12.6
12.1
12.9
37.6
12.53b
153 – 2
15.8
15.0
15.9
46.7
15.56a
109 – 1
11.8
11.6
11.4
34.4
11.46c
109 – 2
11.6
11.3
11.5
34.4
11.46c
Betag
11.4
11.8
11.2
34.4
11.46c
CLG (CK)
10.4
10.1
10.8
31.3
10.43d
TOTAL
81
79.7
80
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.07
0.03
0.31ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
104.26
17.37
156.72**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
1.33
0.11
TOTAL
20
105.66
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =2.88%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
44
Appendix Table 12. Node number bearing first pod
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
7.4
7.8
7.2
22.4
7.46e
153 – 1
12.6
12.1
12.9
37.6
12.53b
153 – 2
15.8
15.0
15.9
46.7
15.56a
109 – 1
11.8
11.6
11.4
34.4
11.46c
109 – 2
11.6
11.3
11.5
34.4
11.46c
Betag
11.4
11.8
11.2
34.4
11.46c
CLG (CK)
10.4
10.5
10.8
31.3
10.43d
TOTAL
81
79.7
80
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.07
0.03
0.31ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
104.25
17.37
156.72**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
1.33
0.11
TOTAL
20
105.65
** = Highly significant
CV (%) =2.89%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
45
Appendix Table 13. Node number bearing last pod
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
10.6
10.8
10.1
31.5
10.00e
153 – 1
18.0
18.3
18.7
55
10.50d
153 – 2
15.2
15.5
15.6
46.3
18.33a
109 – 1
14.6
14.8
14.0
43.4
14.46cd
109 – 2
14.4
15.0
15.4
44.8
14.93b
Betag
14.8
15.1
14.8
44.7
14.90b
CLG (CK)
14.6
14.8
15.0
44.4
14.80c
TOTAL
102.2
104.3
103.6
310.1
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.33
0.16
1.56ns
3.89 6.96
Treatment
6
94.52
0.10
150.02** 3.00 4.82
Error
12
1.26
TOTAL
20
96.10
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =2.19%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
46
Appendix Table 14. Internodes length (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
8.06
8.0
8.03
24.09
8.03e
153 – 1
8.79
8.75
8.76
26.3
8.76a
153 – 2
8.49
8.45
8.47
25.41
8.47b
109 – 1
8.16
8.14
8.16
24.46
8.15d
109 – 2
7.82
7.85
7.88
23.55
7.85f
Betag
8.23
8.20
8.25
24.68
8.22c
CLG (CK)
6.93
6.90
6.93
20.76
6.92c
TOTAL
56.48
56.29
56.48
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.003
0.001
3.87ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
6.10
1.01
2842.85** 3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.004
0.0004
TOTAL
20
6.11
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =0.23%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
47
Appendix Table 15. Number of branches
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
1
1
1
3
1.00b
153 – 1
1
1
1
3
1.00b
153 – 2
1
1
1
3
1.00b
109 – 1
1
1
1
3
1.00b
109 – 2
1
1
1
3
1.00b
Betag
1
1
1
3
1.00b
CLG (CK)
3
2
2
7
2.33a
TOTAL
1.28
1.14
1.14
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.95
0.47
1.00ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
4.57
0.76
16.00**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.57
0.05
TOTAL
20
5.24
** = Highly significant
CV (%) =18.33%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
48
Appendix Table 16. Plant height at maturity (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
88.4
90.2
91
269.6
89.86f
153 – 1
14.5
148
150.6
443.6
147.86a
153 – 2
138.6
139
136.8
414.4
138.13b
109 – 1
105.2
110
109.9
324.6
108.2d
109 – 2
103.5
108.7
105.9
318.1
106.03d
Betag
127.7
128.5
129
385.2
128.4c
CLG (CK)
91.1
93.6
94.8
279.5
93.16f
TOTAL
799.5
818
817.5
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
31.74
15.87
7.48**
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
9070.79
1311.79
712.12**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
25.47
2.12
TOTAL
20
9128.01
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =1.25%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
49
Appendix Table 17. Number of flowers per plant
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
8.29
7.72
8.41
24.48
8.16c
153 – 1
6.45
6.48
6.36
19.29
6.43d
153 – 2
5.10
6.80
6.50
18.40
6.13c
109 – 1
11.62
12.92
12.15
36.69
12.23a
109 – 2
9.20
9.10
9.0
27.30
9.10b
Betag
5.36
5.08
5.04
15.48
5.16e
CLG (CK)
8.33
7.89
8.11
24.33
8.11c
TOTAL
54.35
55.99
55.63
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.21
0.10
0.45ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
99.27
16.54
71.28**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
2.78
0.23
TOTAL
20
102.26
**= Significant
CV (%) =6.09%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
50
Appendix Table 18. Number of flowers per cluster
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
2
2
2
6
2a
153 – 1
2
2
2
6
2a
153 – 2
2
2
2
6
2a
109 – 1
2
2
2
6
2a
109 – 2
2
2
2
6
2a
Betag
1
1
1
3
1b
CLG (CK)
2
2
2
6
2a
TOTAL
13
13
13
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
infty
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
2.57
0.43
Infty
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
20
2.57
**= High significant
CV (%) = 0.00%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
51
Appendix Table 19. Number of flowers cluster per plant
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
3.65
4.99
4.35
12.99
4.33c
153 – 1
3.50
3.10
3.20
9.80
3.26f
153 – 2
3.60
3.40
3.20
10.20
3.40ef
109 – 1
6.40
6.30
6.20
18.90
6.30a
109 – 2
4.30
4.00
3.50
11.80
3.93e
Betag
5.20
5.30
5.10
15.60
5.20b
CLG (CK)
4.20
4.30
4.28
13.78
4.26d
TOTAL
30.85
31.39
29.83
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.18
0.09
0.86ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
20.33
3.39
32.36**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
1.26
0.10
TOTAL
20
21.76
**= Highly significant
C V (%) =7.39%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
52
Appendix Table 20. Plant height at flowering (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
75.7
76
75.8
227.5
75.83f
153 – 1
112.5
112.1
112.5
337.1
112.36a
153 – 2
107.1
108
108
323.1
107.7b
109 – 1
91.3
91.8
91.7
274.8
91.6d
109 – 2
95.5
95.6
95.5
286.6
95.53c
Betag
86.7
86.8
86.7
260.2
86.53e
CLG (CK)
74.6
75
74.9
224.5
74.83g
TOTAL
643.4
645.3
645.1
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF
COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM
SQUARES
SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.31
0.15
3.00ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
3773.03
628.83
12133.8**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.62
0.05
TOTAL
20
3773.96
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =0.24%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
53
Appendix Table 21. Pod length (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
7.99
7.92
7.95
23.86
7.95c
153 – 1
6.92
6.90
6.91
20.73
9.91a
153 – 2
7.28
7.25
7.26
21.79
7.26d
109 – 1
6.82
6.80
6.82
20.49
6.81g
109 – 2
6.85
6.83
6.86
20.54
6.84f
Betag
8.14
8.13
8.11
24.38
8.12b
CLG (CK)
6.94
6.92
6.95
20.81
6.93e
TOTAL
50.94
50.75
50.86
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.002
0.001
7.09**
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
5.49
0.91
4988.47**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.002
0.0001
TOTAL
20
5.49
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =0.14%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
54
Appendix Table 22. Pod width (cm)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
1.51
1.5
1.5
4.51
1.50a
153 – 1
1.42
1.41
1.42
4.25
1.41d
153 – 2
1.33
1.36
1.37
4.11
1.37e
109 – 1
1.34
1.33
1.34
4.01
1.33e
109 – 2
1.49
1.48
1.5
4.47
1.49b
Betag
1.44
1.44
1.45
4.33
1.41c
CLG (CK)
1.27
1.28
1.25
3.33
1.27c
TOTAL
9.85
9.3
9.36
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.29
0.01
4.04*
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
12.26
0.01
559.65**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.04
0.004
TOTAL
20
12.03
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =0.18%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
55
Appendix Table 23. Number of pod per cluster
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
2
2
2
6
2a
153 – 1
2
2
2
6
2a
153 – 2
2
2
2
6
2a
109 – 1
2
2
2
6
2a
109 – 2
2
2
2
6
2a
Betag
1
1
1
3
1b
CLG (CK)
2
2
2
6
2a
TOTAL
13
13
13
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
Infty
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
2.57
0.42
Infty
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.00
0.00
TOTAL
20
2.57
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =0.00%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
56
Appendix Table 24. Number of pods per plant
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
8.4
5.0
6.5
19.9
6.63d
109 – 1
11.5
12.5
12.00
36.0
12.00a
109 – 2
8.0
9.0
7.0
24.0
8.00b
153 – 1
4.2
6.2
7.3
17.7
5.90e
153 – 2
5.6
4.6
4.2
14.4
4.80f
Betag
4.1
4.8
5.3
14.2
4.73fg
CLG (ck)
8.0
7.0
6.0
21.0
7.00c
TOTAL
49.8
49.1
48.3
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.16
0.08
0.06ns
3.89
6.96
Treatment
6
111.97
18.66
13.33**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
16.85
1.40
TOTAL
20
138.98
**= Highly significant
CV (%) =16.90 %
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
57
Appendix Table 25. Percent pod set per plant
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
84.9
85
85.5
255.4
85.13 c
109 – 1
87.6
87.5
87.7
262.7
87.56 b
109 – 2
84.9
85
85
254.9
84.96 c
153 – 1
83.6
83.3
83.5
250.9
83.63 e
153 – 2
89.1
90
89.3
268.9
89.63 a
Betag
84.3
84.5
84.6
25.4
84.46 c
CLG (ck)
89.6
89.9
89.5
269
89.66 a
TOTAL
604
605.7
605.5
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.25
0.12
2.47ns
6.89
6.93
Treatment
6
112.58
18.77
375.4**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.60
0.05
TOTAL
20
113.43
**= Highly significant CV (%) =0.25 %
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
58
Appendix Table 26. Weight of marketable fresh pod yield per plant (kg/5m2)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
1.80
1.78
1.70
5.28
1.76 c
109 – 1
1.48
1.59
1.55
4.62
1.54 d
109 – 2
1.84
1.77
1.82
5.43
1.81 bc
153 – 1
1.82
1.83
1.81
5.46
1.82 b
153 – 2
1.72
1.95
1.76
5.43
1.81 bc
Betag
2.04
1.97
2.05
6.06
2.02 a
CLG (ck)
1.42
1.69
1.27
4.38
1.46 e
TOTAL
12.12
12.58
11.96
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.04
0.02
2.5ns
3.89
6.93
Treatment
6
0.65
0.11
13.75**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.10
0.008
TOTAL
20
0.79
**= Highly significant CV (%) =5.11%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
59
Appendix Table 27. Weight of non-marketable fresh pods yield per plant (kg/5m2)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
0.31
0.55
0.82
1.68
0.560bc
109 – 1
0.42
0.35
0.81
1.58
0.520d
109 – 2
0.55
0.44
0.72
1.71
0.570b
153 – 1
0.61
0.61
0.55
1.77
0.540c
153 – 2
0.80
0.65
0.49
1.94
0.64 a
Betag
0.53
0.45
0.58
1.56
0.520d
CLG (ck)
0.31
0.35
0.64
1.03
0.430e
TOTAL
3.53
3.4
4.61
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.12
0.06
2.5ns
3.89
6.93
Treatment
6
0.8
0.013
0.54ns
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.29
0.024
TOTAL
20
0.49
ns = Not significant CV (%) = 28.68%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
60
Appendix Table 28. Total yield per plot (kg/5m2)
BLOCK
TREATMENT
I
II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
148 – 2
2.30
2.34
2.32
6.96
2.32 d
109 – 1
2.07
2.08
2.03
36.18
2.06 e
109 – 2
2.43
2.40
2.34
7.17
2.39 c
153 – 1
2.44
2.39
2.40
7.23
2.41 c
153 – 2
2.40
2.47
2.48
7.35
2.45 b
Betag
2.55
2.56
2.51
7.62
2.54 a
CLG (ck)
1.89
1.88
1.95
5.72
1.90 f
TOTAL
16.08
16.12
16.03
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF
DEGREE
SUM OF MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULATED F
VARIATION
OF
FREEDOM SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
Block
2
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.89
6.93
Treatment
6
0.94
0.16
160**
3.00
4.82
Error
12
0.02
0.001
TOTAL
20
0.96
**= Highly significant CV (%) = 1.37%
Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability and Post-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of
Garden Pea. DONGLAL, GLENDA P. APRIL 2011
Document Outline
- Growth, Fresh Pod Yield, Acceptability andPost-Harvest Quality of Selected Advanced Lines of Garden Pea
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF CONTENT
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES