BIBLIOGRAPHY KET-ENG, JUDY ANN V. APRIL...
BIBLIOGRAPHY
KET-ENG, JUDY ANN V. APRIL 2012.Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage
(Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot (Pectobacteriumcarotovorum) Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Aurora F. Pinon, Ph. D
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to compare the efficacy of EM and Mokusako on the
occurrence of soft rot (Pectobacteriumcarotovorum) and on two varieties of Chinese cabbage at
storage. Shelf life, percentage weight loss and onset infections were recorded.
Results showed that Chinese cabbage variety F1 Champion had the longest shelf life of
17.25 days, had lower percentage weight loss of 2.80g after 15 days. On the other hand, CR
Matibayhad a shorter shelf life of 16.25 days and incurred the highest percentage weight loss of
4.75g after 15 days of storage
No significant interaction was observed among the variety used. However, result showed
that F1 Champion had longer shelf life. Further, results showed that variety treated with
Mokusako significantly affected the shelf life and visual quality and had the lowest percentage
weight loss. F1 champion had a lowest weight loss compared to CR Matibay which had the
highest degree of infection after 15 days Mokusako treated variety delays the occurrence of soft
rot.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………..... i
Abstract……………………………………………………………………….
i
Table of Contents……………………………………………………………..
ii
INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………. 1
REVIEW OF LITEREATURE…………………………………………….…
4
MATERIALS AND METHODS……………………………….…………….
11
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS……………………………………….…....
14
Shelf life…………………………………………………………….…
14
Visual quality………………………………….………………………
15
Percentage Weight Loss due to Pectobacterium carotovorum…….…. 17
Number of Days to Initial Infection at Butt-end and other Parts.……
18
Degree of Infection………………………………………….………...
19
Percentage of Heads Infected With soft rot……………….……..……
21
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS…….………..
25
LITERATURE CITED……………………………………………………….
27
APPENDICES………………………………………………………………... 29
1
INTRODUCTION
Chinese cabbage (Brassicapekinensis) is a semi –temperate crop. It thrives best in
cool moist area like Benguet and Mountain Province, at low elevations; it can be grown
during the cool months of the year. The optimum monthly average temperature
requirement of cabbage is 15.50C and the maximum monthly temperature should not be
more than 240C (Bandoc, 1976).
In Philippines especially in Benguet and mountain Province this crop is also
grown in commercial scale. Certainly, it is among the major source of income for the
farmers.
Farmers started growing this crop many years ago but today’s generation find that
production of Chinese cabbage entails several problems such as premature death, non
marketable yield, low quality due to poor heads also rotting of heads brought about by
diseases. Among the contributory factor to such problem is the soft rot disease caused by
a bacterium Pectobacteriumcarotovorum (Donald et al, 1997).
Soft rot caused by Pectobacteriumcarotovoruminfects Chinese cabbage in both
the field and storage. Once the crop is infected, the bacteria established it within host and
can cell disintegration giving a decayed or rotten appearance. Soft rot is one of the most
destructive diseases of vegetables that can cause greater total loss of produce than any
other bacterial diseases (Pantastico, 1975).
Chinese cabbage is highly perishable crop. It is easily damaged due to improper
handling. It is prone to diseases infection and deterioration. Being a high value
commercial crop, losses due diseases like bacterial soft rot should be minimized. Because
of the severe damage inflicted by soft rot, farmers initially spray pesticides but the
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
2
practice does not actually control the diseases very few chemical treatments effectively
control bacterial diseases in the seedbed or field condition. The inherent toxicity of most
existing chemical pesticides to non-target organic and their persistence in the
environmental has gained interest on researched efforts to find alternative and more
environmentally friendly methods of controlling pest and diseases (Woodman, 2006).
The trial on the use of effective microorganism (EM) was evaluated in this study.
Effective microorganism (EM) is in liquid form and consists of naturally occurring
beneficial microorganisms. The microbes in EM are non-harmful, non-pathogenic, not-
genetically-engineered or modified (non-GMO), and not-chemically-synthesized, and
EM is not a medicine either. The basic groups of microorganisms in EM are lactic acid
bacteria (commonly found in yogurt, cheeses), yeast (bread, beer), and phototrophic
bacteria. EM is being used successfully in the field of agriculture, fisheries, poultry, and
animal husbandry and for the preparation of compost and Bokashi. It has no harmful
effects to humans or animals and it’s environmentally friendly (Kyan, 1990).
A newMokusakois a traditionalJapanese land improver which is collected by of
cooling the exhaust smoke of charcoal kilns when burning the wood material. It contains
200 types of organic minerals which is good for plants it is a pure wood vinegar.
Theproducts originated from Japan and were proven to be effective as fertilizer and
pesticide; however, a trial on our country is necessary.
This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of EM and Mokusako on the
occurrence of soft rot (Pectobacteriumcarotovorum) in the two variety of Chinese
cabbage and to determine the percentage weight loss, Shelf life and Visual quality in the
two variety of Chinese cabbage caused by bacterial soft rot.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
3
The study was conducted in Plant Pathology Department, Benguet State
University, La Trinidad Benguet. FromSeptember 2011 to February 2012.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
4
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The Crop
Chinese cabbage also known as “Petchay Baguio” or “wombok” belongs to the
group of cultivated varieties of the species Brassicas or the “Cole crops”. It is an
herbaceous Biennial, Dicotyledonous plant having an elongated head of overlapping,
crinkled, broad stalk leaves and eaten as a vegetables in Asian cuisine. It is indigenous to
China where it had been grown for its leaves which is a good source of vitamins C and
Calcium but low fat calories (PCCARD, 2005).
Chinese cabbage ranks second to potato in importance as vegetable and cash crop
in Benguet and Mountain Province. Around 3,000 hectares are planted annually to
Chinese cabbage alone in Benguet Province. Chinesecabbage plays a very important role
in human life being used as vegetable, oil crops, forage crops and sources of vitamin C
and A (Bulangao, 1998).
The Disease
Soft rot disease caused by Pectobacteriumcarotovorum has a very wide host
range infecting large number of vegetable species belonging to different families.
Crucifers are susceptible to bacterial soft rot which include cabbage, cauliflower,
Brussels sprouts kohlrabi, turnip, radish, horseradish and rutabaga. The host range
includes genera from all the plants families of vegetables, fruits and ornamentals, nearly
about sixty-four plant species are susceptible to the disease (Walker, 2004 and
Anonymous, 1990).
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
5
Symptoms
The disease has the same appearance on each host. The affected tissue becomes
soft and slimy without much discoloration, but often accompanied by an offensive smell.
Soft rot symptoms begin as small water soaked lesion that enlarges rapidly. The affected
area becomes soft and mushy while its surface becomes discolored and somewhat
depressed tissue within affected region becomes slimy (Ware, 1937).
On Chinese cabbage, bacterial soft rot is quite common in the field as this crop is
particularly susceptible. Symptoms first appear on leaves as small water soaked lesions.
The affected tissue becomes soft and mushy with an accompanying foul smell.
Eventually the leaves, stems and roots are entirely decayed by the bacteria (Johnson,
1999).
Cruciferous plants and onions infected by soft rot bacteria, always give off a
repulsive odor. When root crops are affected in the field the lower parts of the stem may
also become infected, watery, may turn black and shrivel, causing the plants to become
stunted, wilt, and die. Infections of succulent leaves and stems are seldom important in
the field (Agrios, 1997).
Life Cycle of the Pathogen
The soft rot bacteria survives in infected fleshy organs in the field and in storage,
in debris, on roots or other parts of host plants, in pods and streams use for water
irrigation water, occasionally in the soil, and in the pupae of several insects. The disease
may first appear in the field on plants grown from previously infected seed pieces. Some
tubers, rhizomes, and bulbs become infected through wounds or lenticels after they are
set or formed in the soil. The inoculation of bacteria into fleshy organs and their further
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
6
spread in storage and in the field are greatly facilitated by insects. The soft rot bacteria
can live in all stages of insect’s vector. Moreover, the bodies of the insect larvae
(maggots) become contaminated with bacteria when they crawl about on rotting seed
pieces, carry them to healthy plants, and disseminate into wounds where they can cause
the disease. Even when the plants or storage organs are resistant to soft rot and can stop
its advance by formation of wound-cork layers, the maggots can destroy the wounds cork
as fast as it is formed, and the soft rot continuous to spread (Agrios, 1997).
Porombelon (1999) stated that Pectobacteriumcarotovorum is a plant pathogen
belonging to the family Enterobacteriaceae. It is non-spore forming and peritrichously
flagellated. P. carotovorum causes death by creating an osmotically fragile cell. It
produces extracellarpectic enzymes that destroy the integrity of the pectin. To a lesser
extent, it produces extracellular cellulose to degrade cellulose. Other exported enzymes
thought to be important in pathogenesis include hemicellulases, arabanases, xylanases
and a protease.
Pectobacteriumcarotovorum are straight rods, non- spore forming, 0.5 – 1 x 1- 3
microns occurs singly; motile withperitrichous flagella. Gram negative, facultative
anaerobic; catalyses positive, oxidase negative, urease not produced by the bacterium.
Acid is produced from D (+) glucose, D (+) hydrolyzed but the bacterium readily
hydrolyses gelatin and pectin. Optimum temperature for Pectobacteriumcarotovorum
ranges from 27-300C maximum varies from 32-400C (Bradbury, 1989).
Postharvest Losses
Improper harvesting and rough handling at the farm directly affect market quality.
Bruises and injuries later show up as brown and black patches making commodities
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
7
unattractive, some physiological disorders are attributed to improper handling Injuries
may serve as avenues for the microorganisms entry and lead to rotting, moreover,
respiration is increased remarked by the damages, injuries and storage life is thus
shortened (Pantastico, 1975).
Pantastico, 1975 also stated that postharvest losses could be attributed to
mishandling at harvest and losses due to diseases especially soft rot caused by
Pectobacteriumcarotovorum. Recent studies show that 60-70% of vegetables being
produced are wasted due to improper postharvest handling and diseases, 30-40% of
vegetables are wasted due to decay, injuries, streaming and sprouting among all these
factors, weight loss is the most estimable form of loss after harvest. Although proper
cultural management of the crops has received so much attention, proper postharvest
handling seems to be neglected by traders as well as farmers.
Loss from physiological shrinkage is often much more serious from the economic
stand point. Most vegetable loss from decay organisms is lessened as the temperature is
lowered, with few exemptions. This means the storage area should be kept low for most
commodities without allowing it to freeze. Most vegetables freeze at temperature varying
from -2.22 to 11.1oC (Work and Crew, 1937).
Storage products prolonged usefulness and some cases maintain their quality
storage life may be prolonged by proper control and management of postharvest diseases,
regulation of temperature (Pantastico, 1975).
Control
The control of bacterial soft rot of vegetables is based almost exclusively on
sanitary and cultural practices. In the field, plants should be planted in well-drained areas
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
8
and at sufficient distances to allow adequate ventilation. Susceptible plants should be
rotated with cereals or other non-susceptible varieties. Few varieties have any resistance
to soft rot and no variety is immune. Chemical sprays are generally not recommended for
the control of soft rot. Control of insects that spread the disease reduces infections both in
the field and in storage (Agrios, 1997).
Mokusako
Mokusako (wood vinegar) is a liquid obtained from the smoke when wood is
heated to produce charcoal consists of gases and vapor generated from heated wood.
When smoke is cooled in a pipe, it is condensed to a liquid and drips down the pipe. The
collected liquid is now the Mokusako. Mokusako helps in the fermentation process to
compost materials. It eliminates noxious microorganisms and enhances useful ones to
propagate. Organic materials contained mokusaku becomes nutrients to plants
microorganisms. It is also effective when it is used fertigate the soil around the plants
(Yokomori, 2009). Mokusaku is not an agricultural chemicals but it may be used as a
supplementary material. It controls some diseases such as soft rots. It can also be used as
insect repellent and foliar spray to let the plant leaves thicker, stems sturdier and
increasing plants resistance to pest and diseases (Yokomori, 2009).
Japanese product mokusako used as pesticide and fungicide was reported to be
effective in their crops. The expansion of the said mokusako users reaches the
municipalities of Benguet like Atok, Buguias, Kabayan, Kibungan, La Trinidad, Tuba
and Tublay (Catajan, 2010).
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
9
Effective microorganism (EM)
Effective Microorganism (EM) or kyuse isa microbialinoculants. It is a mixed
culture of beneficial microorganisms (primarily photosynthetic and lactic acid bacteria,
yeast, actinomycetes and fermenting fungi that can be applied as inoculants to increase
the microbial diversity of soils. This is turn, can improve soil quality and health, which
enhances, yield and quality of crops. In crop culture, EM increases the metabolic,
biological activities in the soil and photosynthetic abilities of plants (Danigos, 1996).
Effective Microorganisms (EM) is a living entity containing active microbes that
helps to enhance beneficial microbes in the soil. It can also be mixed to any compost for
fast decomposition. It improves the soil by producing ideal microorganisms which
increases soil fertility for plant growth.
The used of EM in agriculture have many significant beneficial impacts. The most
researched and stated are as follows: 1. EM promotes germination, growth, flowering,
fruiting and ripening in crop plants. It enhances the photosynthetic capacity of plants.
And EM increases the efficacy of organic matter as fertilizers. Furthermore, EM develops
resistance of plants to pest and diseases. EM suppresses soil borne pathogens and pests it
improves the physical, chemical and biological environments of the soil, and enhances
crop yields in organic systems in most environments. It also develops the soil, to improve
its ability to sustain crops.
Effective microorganisms 5 (EM5)
Effective Microorganisms5 (EM5) is a non-toxic chemical free insect repellent. It
can also be used to prevent pest and disease problems in crops. It acts by creating a
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
10
barrier around the plant, thereby protecting it from insect pests and diseases (Kyan,
1990).
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
11
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Two effective microorganisms (EM1 and EM5) and Mokusako obtained from the
Municipal Agriculture Office (MAO) of La Trinidad were tested for the control of soft
rot in two varieties of Chinese cabbage, CR Matibay and F1 Champion which are newly
harvested and free from pest and diseases with uniform sizes and stages of maturity.
Fresh specimen of bacteria (Pectobacteriumcarotovorum) was isolated in the
laboratory following the streak methods for bacterial isolation. Bacterial suspension was
prepared from a day old culture with 10ml distilled water and surface was scraped
withsterilizwwireloop. Chinese cabbage of uniform sizes and stages of maturity were
inoculated with the bacterial suspension at butt end. EM and Mokusakowere sprayed
directly at the butt ends of Chinese cabbage (F1 Champion and CRMatibay).
The treatments were individually packed with plastic cellophane and arranged in a
completely randomized design (CRD) involving 2 factor type of variety as Factor A and
EM and Mokusako treatment as Factor B.
Each treatment combination was replicated three times with three heads per
replication or a total of nine samples per treatment combination.
The treatments are as follows:
Factor A- Type of variety
V1- Cr Matibay
V2- F1 Champion
Factor B- EM and MokusakoTreatments
T0- Control
T1-Mokusaku
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
12
T2-EM1
T3-EM5
Data gathered
The following data and information were gathered to compare the efficacy of EM and
Mokusako on the incidence of bacterial soft rot on Chinese cabbage varieties CR Matibay
and F1 Champion.
1. Shelf-life. The numbers of days the produce remained were not acceptableto
consumer
2. Percentage of weight loss.
Percentage of weight loss = Initial weight- finalweightX 100
Initial
weight
3. Percentage of head infected with soft rot.
%Soft rot incidence =Total no. of heads-No. of heads with soft rot 100
Total no. of heads per treatment
4. Visual Quality. This refers to the quality variations in the appearance of Chinese
cabbage
9- Excellent, Field fresh.
7-8= Very good, slight defects
5-6= Good moderate defects.
3-4= poor, defects increasing, need trimming.
1-2= poor, limit of sale ability
5. Number of days to initial infection. The number of days to first occurrence of soft
Rot at butt-ends or other parts of Chinese cabbage variety.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
13
6. Degree of Infection. This refers to the infection of soft rot in cabbage. The rating
scale tools used were the following:
Rating Scale
Description of Infection
1
No Infection
2
1-19% of surface area infection
3
20-39% of surface area infection
4
40-60% of surface area infection
5
>60% of surface area infection
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
14
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Shelf life
Effect on Variety. The effect on the varieties shelf life is shown in Table1. Result
revealed that F1 Champion had longer Shelf life of 17.25 days compared to Cr Matibay
which had 16.25 days.
Table1. Shelf life
Variety
SHELF LIFE
(DAYS)
Cr
Matibay
16.25a
F1
Champion
17.25a
Treatment
Control 15.17b
Mokusaku
17.67a
EM1
17.33a
EM5
16.83a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level using
DMRT.
INTERACTION
Treatment
Variety
CR Matibay
F1 Champion
Control
14.66
15.66
Mokusako
17.00
18.33
EM1
16.66
18.00
EM5
16.66
17.00
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
15
Effect of treatments. The different treatments significantly affected the shelf life
of Chinese cabbage varieties. Variety treated with mokusako had the longest shelf-life of
17.67 days followed by the crops treated with EM1 with a mean of 17.33 days. Control
showed the shortest day of shelf life with a mean of 15.17 days.
These results revealed that using mokusako and EM1 can prolonged the
shelf life of the commodity. Longer shelf life on the varieties of Chinese cabbage which
treated was might due to their resistance against soft rot.
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effect observed between the
treatments and variety used.
Visual quality
Effect on Variety. Results showed that Cr Matibay had the lower visual quality
rating of 5.58 followed by F1 Champion which had a mean of 6.08 which is good and
moderate defects. As shown in figure 1 and 2.
Effect of treatments. It was observed that variety treated with
Mokusakuosignificantly delayed the deterioration of the quality both F1 Champion and
Cr Matibay in the yellowing of leaves and shriveling than the untreated variety. Variety
treated with Mokusako with a mean of 6.83 was the latest to show poor visual quality
rating after 15 days of storage compared to the untreated variety that had a mean rating
quality of 3.50 was the earliest to show poor visual quality.This is significantly different
to other treatments.
Interaction effect. F1 champion treated with Mokusako were the latest to show
deterioration with visual quality rating which is good and moderate defects after 15 days.
However, Statistical analysis revealed no significant interaction.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
16
Figure 1 a. Visual Quality of CR Matibay 15 DAI
Figure 2. Visual Quality of F1 Champion 15 DAI
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
17
Table 2. Visual quality rating (15 DAI)
Variety
Visual Quality
Rating
Cr
Matibay
5.53a
F1
Champion
6.03a
Treatment
Control 3.50b
Mokusaku
6.83a
EM1
6.67a
EM5
6.33a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level using
DMRT.
INTERACTION
Treatment
Variety
CR MATIBAY
F1 Champion
Control 3.33
3.67
Mokusako
6.67
7.00
EM1
6.33
7.00
EM5
6.00
7.00
Percentage Weight Loss due to
Pectobacteriumcaratovorum
Effect of Variety. Table 3 showed that the percentage weight loss on the varieties
after 5, 10 to 15 days. F1 Champion consistently showed a lower percentage weight loss
of 2.80g after 15 days as compared to CR Matibay of 4.75g after 15days during the
duration of the experiment, statistical analysis revealed no significant differences
between the two varieties
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
18
Table 3.Mean Weight Loss(g)
Variety Weight
loss
(%)
after
5days
10days
15
days
Cr
Matibay
1.19a
2.75a
4.75a
F1
Champion
0.74a
2.18a
2.80a
Treatment
Control 1.25a
3.46a
4.33a
Mokusaku
0.78a
2.86a
2.35a
EM1
0.73a
2.50a
3.63a
EM5
0.95a
3.05a
3.80a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level using
DMRT.
INTERACTION
Weight loss after (g)
Treatment
5days 10 days15 days
V1 V2 V1 V2 V1
V2
Control
2.17 0.67 4.17 2.75 5.12 3.55
Mokusako
1.27 0.28 3.83 1.88 2.67 2.03
EM1
0.60 0.85 3.67 1.32
5.07 2.09
EM5
0.73 1.22 3.33 2.77
4.06 3.53
Effect of EM and Mokusako. Weight loss assessments of Chinese cabbage heads
treated with Mokusako, EM1 and EM5 is shown in Table3.
The control had the highest weight losses at 5, 10 and 15 days of storage. The
lowest weight loss was obtained from those treated with EM1 at 5 days with a mean of
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
19
0.75g and Mokusakoat 15 days with a mean of 2.35. However, statistical analysis is not
significantly different to each other.
Interaction effect. Results showed that there was no significant effects observed
between the varieties and treatment the different treatment used. Although, both of the
variety was comparable to each other, this may imply that weight loss might not be
affected regardless on the treatment used.
Number of days to initial infection
Effect of variety. The effect of variety on the number of days to initial infection is
shown in Table 4. Results revealed that F1 champion showed the latest initial infection at
butt-end and other parts of head with a mean of 8.33 days compared to CR Matibay
which had a mean of 7.75 days. The variety that is untreated showed the earliest infection
at butt-end and other parts of its head. F1 Champion is less infected with
Pectobacteriumcarotovorum than CR Matibaywhich showed an earliest infection with
the pathogen leading to rapid breakdown.
Effect of EM and Mokusako. Statistically, there were significant differences
observed on the number of days to initial infection at butt-end and other parts of head.
Variety treated with Mokusako was the latest to show initial infection after 8.83 days
followed by EM1 with a mean of 8.50 days and the untreated one showed the earliest
infection with a mean of 7.170 which is significantly different to the other treatments.
Interaction effect. The combined effect on the variety and the different treatments
used affect the number of days to initial infection. F1 Champion treated with mokusako
was the latest to show initial infection at butt-end.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
20
Table 4. Number of days to initial infection at butt-end and other parts of the head
Variety
Mean
Cr
Matibay
7.75a
F1
Champion
8.33a
Treatment
Control 7.17b
Mokusaku
8.83a
EM1
8.50a
EM5
7.67a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level using
DMRT.
INTERACTION
Treatment
Variety
CR MATIBAY
F1 Champion
Control
7.00 7.33
Mokusako
8.86 9.00
EM1
8.00 9.00
EM5
7.33 8.00
Degree of Infection.
Effect of variety. Table 5 showed the mean soft rot rating on the two variety of
Chinese cabbage. Results revealed that CR Matibay obtained the highest mean rating of
4.15 compared to F1 Champion which has a mean rating of 4.05 however, revealed
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
21
nosignificant differences between the two varieties.However, statistical analysis revealed
no significant interaction.
Among the treatment used, variety treated with Mokusako was the latest to show
infection at butt-end with a mean of 3.75 followed with those treated with EM1 with a
mean of 4.33.This shows that higher degree of infection had already attacked by soft rot.
Table 5. Degree of infection
Variety
Rating
Cr
Matibay
4.15a
F1
Champion
4.05a
Treatment
Control 4.50a
Mokusaku
3.75b
EM1
4.33a
EM5
4.37a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level using
DMRT.
INTERACTION
Treatment
Variety
CR MATIBAY
F1 Champion
Control
4.67
4.00
Mokusako
3.75
3.75
EM1
4.00
3.50
EM5
4.33
4.50
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
22
Interaction Effect. There were nosignificant interaction effect between the
treatments usedhowever; Variety treated with Mokusko show the lowest degree of
infection.
Percentage of Heads Infected with Soft Rot
Effect
on
Variety. Results revealed that F1 champion and CR Matibay had the
same mean percentage of heads infected with soft rot of 78.70% after 20 days which is
significantly different with each other.
Effect of EM and Mokusako. Table 6 showed the effect of EM and Mokusako in
the percentage of head infected with soft rot was significant.
Among the treatments used the variety (F1 Champion) treated with Mokusako
had the lowest percentage infection of soft rot with a mean of 66.67% which is
significantly different of the other treatments.
Interaction effect. Result implies that using Mokusako on the varieties of Chinese
cabbage heads could decreased the respiration rates, thus delayed the occurrence of soft
rot that leads to longer shelf life of the variety stored.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
23
Table 6.Percentage of heads infected with soft rot
Variety
Head
Infection
(%)
Cr
Matibay
78.70a
F1
Champion
78.70a
Treatment
Control 83.33b
Mokusaku
66.67a
EM1
83.32a
EM5
81.47a
INTERACTION
Treatment
Variety
CR MATIBAY
F1 Champion
Control 81.46
85.18
Mokusako
66.67
66.67
EM1
81.47
77.77
EM5
85.17
81.17
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level using
DMRT
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
24
Figure3 a. Morphological characteristics of CR Matibay
b. Expiremental set-up of CR Matibay one day after inoculation.
Figure4 a. Morphlogical characteristics of F1 Champion
b. Expiremental set-up of F1 Champion one day after inoculation.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
25
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The treatments used against soft rot on Chinese cabbage at storage
were:Mokusako, EM1 and EM5. These treatments were sprayed directly on butt-ends of
Chinese cabbage.
Results of the study revealed that there were no significant interaction between
treatments and variety treated used in terms of weight loss percentage. Although all
treatments used affected the percentage weight loss of the variety; conversely untreated
shows the highest mean weight loss after 15 days. It also enhanced the shelf life and
delayed the occurrence of soft rot on 2 the varieties used.
Conclusion
Based on the results there is significant effect that occurred between the variety
and the treatment with respect to shelf life, visual quality rating and soft rot infection
although Mokusakodelayed its early occurrence and had longer shelf life during storage.
Variety treated with Mokusako retained its good quality which had a moderate
defect after termination of the study, enhanced postharvest shelf life and delayed the
occurrence of soft rot. Among the variety used F1 Champion is more resistant against
soft rot unlike CR Matibay that can easily attacked by the organisms.
Recommendation
It is therefore recommended that Mokusako can be used to control soft rot of
Chinese cabbage at storage effectively to delay the occurrence of soft rot and it could be
used to prolonged visual quality and enhanced a longer shelf life of the commodity
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
26
during storage. It is also recommended that follow- up studies must be conducted to
verify the results generated.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
27
LITERATURE CITED
AGRIOS, G.N.1997. Plant Pathology.4th Edition. Academic Press Inc., USA. Pp. 434-
437
ANONYMOUS. 1990. Postharvest Decay of Bell Paper. Bacterial Soft rot .Retrieved
October 10, 2010 from http:// www.Highland fresh.Net /tb-pepper-intro.html.
BULANGAO, L.T. 1998. Pathogenicity test of Plasmodiophorabrassicae on
Chinese cabbage Head.UnpublishedThesis.Benguet State University.
La Trinidad,Benguet. P.1
BANDOC, G.B. JR. 1976 Cabbage Cauliflower and Broccoli Vegetable production in
Southeast Asia.University of the Philippines, Los Banos, Laguna. 147p.
BRADBURY, J.F. 1989. Erwiniacarotovora,GuidetoPlant pathogenicBacteria.
CAB International Mycological Institute, Newyork. Pp67. Retrieved October
21, 2010 from http://www.avrdc.org./LC/Cabbage/softrot.html.
CATAJAN, M.E. 2010. Wood Vinegar to be used in Farming. Retrieved November 10,
2010
from
www.sunstar.com.ph/baguio/wood -vinegar-is-used-farming.
DANIGOS, E.P. 1996. Effect of Bokashi and EM1 on the Incidence of Bacterial Wilt
(Pseudomonas solanacearum) on White Potato .Unpublished Thesis.Benguet
State University. La Trinidad, Benguet. P.22.
DONALD, E.C.I.J. PORTER.R.FAGGIAN ANDR.LANCASTER.1997
Towards integrated control of clubroot.Field evaluation of treatments for
clubroot control. In: programme and summaries brennial conf.11th Australian
Plant Pathology Society, Perth.P. 38
JOHNSON, S. 1999. Blackleg and Bacterial Soft rot.PotatoFacts.Bulletin No. 2493.
University
of
main.(AVRDC.Bacterial
soft rot.Retrieved October 27, 2010 from
http://
www.avrdc.org./LC/Cabbage/soft rot.html.
KYAN, T. 1990. Kyusei Nature Farming And Technology of Effective Microorganisms.
Asia Pacific Natural Agriculture Network, Bangkok, Thailand. Pp. 6-7.
PANTASTICO, E. 1975.Postharvest Physiology, Handling and Utilazation of tropical
and subtropical Fruits and Vegetables. Westport, connection: The Avi
Publishing
Co.
547p.
PHILIPPINECOUNCILFOR AGRICULTUREFORESTRY and
NATURAL RESOURCES RESEARCH and DEVELOPMENT. 2005. Soft rot of
Chinese cabbage review of literature. Retrieved October 12, 2011 from http;//
www.Pccarrd.dostgov.ph.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
28
POROMBELON, M.CM.1999. The Prokaryotes. 2nded.RetrievedOctober
29, 2010fromhttp;//web.msl.Edu/microbio/bio221-1999/Ecarotovora,html.P.
2899
WALKER, J.C. 2004.Bacterial soft rot.In manual of vegetable plant diseases, chupp, c.
(ed).Shriti book distributors. New Delhi. Retrieved November 05, 2010 from
http;//www.highlandfresh.Net/tb pepper intro.html.
WOODMAN, H.M. 2006.“Cabbage leaves are poor man’s poultice”. British Medical
journal. Retrieved November 05, 2010 from
http;//www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full327/7412/451-c
WARE. G. W. 1975. Vegetable Crops. Danville. Illinois’. The Intersate Printers
And Publication. Inc. Pp. 277
WORK, and CREW.1975.Vegetable Productionand marketingNew YorkState
College of Agriculture. P. 48
YOKOMORI, M, 2009, Safe and Healthy Vegetables for Philippine Consumers, Japan
International Cooperation Agency.P. 4.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
29
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Shelf life
TREATMENTS REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
I II
III
V1T0
14
15
15
44.00
14.67
V1T2
16
17
18
51.00
17.00
V1T3
16
16
18
50.00
16.67
V1T4
16 17 17 50.00
16.67
SUBTOTAL
62
65
68
195.00
65.00
V2T0
16 15 16
47.00
15.67
V2T1
18
19
18
55.00
18.33
V2T2
17
19 18
54.00
18.00
V2T3
17
17
17
51.00
17.00
SUBTOTAL
68
70
69
207.00
69.00
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
30
Two-Way Table
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2
TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
44
47
91
15.17b
T1-Mokusaku
51
55
106
17.67a
T2-Em1 50
54
104
17.33a
T3-Em5 50
51
101
16.83a
TOTAL 195
207
402
MEAN
16.25a17.25a
16.75
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS
MS
FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
6.000 6.000 10.2857ns 3.24
5.29
Factor B
3
22.167 7.389 12.6667**
AB
3
1.000 0.333 0.5714ns
ERROR
16
9.333 0.583
TOTAL
23 38.500
**=
highly
significant
CV=4.56%
ns = not significant
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
31
Table 2. Visual Quality
TREATMENTS REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
I
II
III
V1T0
3.00
4.00
3.00
10.00
3.33
V1T2
8.00
6.00
6.00
20.00
6.67
V1T3
6.00 5.00
8.00 19.00
6.33
V1T4
6.00 7.00 5.00
18.00
6.00
SUBTOTAL
23.00 22.00 32.20 67.00 22.33
V2T0
4.00 3.00 4.00
11.00
3.67
V2T1
6.00
8.00
7.00
21.00
7.00
V2T2
7.00
6.00
8.00
21.00
7.00
V2T3
6.00
7.00
7.00
20.00
7.00
SUBTOTAL
23.00 24.00 26.00 73.00 24.33
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
32
Two-Way Table
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2
TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
10.00
11.00 21.00
3.50b
T1-Mokusaku
20.00 21.00
41.00
6.83a
T2-Em1 19.00
21.00 40.00
6.67a
T3-Em5 18.00
20.00 38.00
6.33a
TOTAL
66.00 73.00 140.00
MEAN
5.50a 6.08a
5.83
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS
FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
1.500 1.500
1.5652ns 3.24 5.29
Factor B
3
44.333 14.778 15.4203**
AB
3
0.167
0.56
0.0580ns
ERROR
16
15.333 0.958
TOTAL 23
61.333
**= highly significant
CV=16.78% ns = not significant
Appendix Table 3.Percentage of weight loss after 5 days
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
33
TREATMENTS REPLICATION
I II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
V1T0
0.20
2.00
4.30
6.50
2.17
V1T2
2.50
0.8
0.50
3.80
1.27
V1T3
0.50
1.10
0.20
1.80
0.6
V1T4
1.00 0.20 1.00
2.20
0.73
SUBTOTAL
4.20
4.10
6.00
14.30
4.77
V2T0
0.55 0.70 0.60
1.850
0.67
V2T1
0.3
0.50
0.05
0.85
0.28
V2T2
0.08
2.40
0.08
2.56
0.85
V2T3
1.05
2.43
0.17
3.65
11.22
SUBTOTAL
1.98 7.00 0.90 28.91
2.97
Two-Way Table
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
34
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2 TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
6.50
0.98
7.48
1.25a
T1-Mokusaku
3.80
0.85
4.65
0.78a
T2-Em1 1.80
2.56
4.36
0.73a
T3-Em5 2.20
3.65
5.85
1.95a
TOTAL
14.30 8.04 22.34
MEAN
1.19a0.67a
4.71
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
1.211 1.211 1.0810ns 3.24 5.29
Factor B
3
1.650 0.550 0.4912ns
AB
3
4.290 1.430 1.2771ns
ERROR
16
17.917 1.120
TOTAL 23
38.500
**=
highly
significant
CV=109.42%
ns = not significant
Appendix Table 4.Percentage of weight loss after 10 days
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
35
TREATMENTS REPLICATION
I
II
III TOTAL MEAN
V1T0
1.50 5.50 5.50 12.50
4.17
V1T2
5.50
5.00
1.00
11.50
3.83
V1T3
1.50
5.50
4.00
11.00
3.67
V1T4
4.50 2.00 3.50
10.00
3.33
SUBTOTAL
13.00 18.00 14.00
45.00 15.00
V2T0
2.45
2.90 2.90 8.25
2.75
V2T1
2.25
1.50
1.90
5.65
1.88
V2T2
0.18 2.60 1.20
3.68
1.33
V2T3
2.56
3.75
2.00
8.31
2.77
SUBTOTAL
7.44
10.75
8.00
26.19
8.73
Two-Way Table
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
36
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2 TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
12.50 8.25 20.75
7.05a
T1-Mokusaku
11.50
5.65
17.15
2.86a
T2-Em1 11.00
3.98
14.98
2.50a
T3-Em5 10.00
8.31
18.31
3.05a
TOTAL
45.00 26.19
70.89
MEAN
3.75a2.18
a 3.87
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
14.742 14.742 6.0276ns 3.24 5.29
Factor B
3
2.890 0.963 0.3938ns
AB
3
2.661 0.887 0.3627ns
ERROR 16
39.133
2.446
TOTAL 23
59.426
**=
highly
significant
CV=52.72%
ns = not significant
Table 5.Percentage of weight loss after 15 days
TREATMENTS REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
37
I II
III
V1T0
2.50 6.00 6.85 15.35
5.12
V1T2
6.00
5.50
2.50
14.00
4.67
V1T3
2.50
8.00
5.00
15.50
5.07
V1T4
4.50 2.50 5.00
12.20
4.07
SUBTOTAL
15.70 22.00 19.35
57.05 19.02
V2T0
2.55
3.00 5.10 10.65
3.55
V2T1
2.80
1.30
2.00
6.10
2.03
V2T2
1.98
2.65
1.65
6.28
2.09
V2T3
3.45
4.68
2.45
10.58
3.53
SUBTOTAL
10.78 11.63 11.20
22.96 7.66
Two-Way Table
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
38
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2
TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
15.35 10.65
26.00
4.33a
T1-Mokusaku
14.00
6.10
20.10
3.35a
T2-Em1 15.50
6.28
21.78
3.63a
T3-Em5
12.20 10.58 22.78
3.80a
TOTAL
57.05 33.61 90.66
MEAN
4.75a 2.80a
3.78
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS
FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
11.957 11.957 3.7533ns 3.24
5.29
Factor B
3
11.938 3.979 1.249ns
AB
3
6.190 2.063 0.6477ns
ERROR
16
50.971 3.186
TOTAL 23
81.057
**=
highly
significant
CV=50.90%
ns = not significant
Table 6. Number of days to initial infection
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
39
TREATMENTS REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
I
II
III
V1T0
7.00
7.00
7.00
21.00
7.00
V1T2
9.00
9.00
8.00
26.00
8.86
V1T3
7.00 7.00
10.00 24.00
8.00
V1T4
8.00 7.00 7.00
22.00
7.33
SUBTOTAL
31.00 30.00 32.00 93.00 31.00
V2T0
7.00 8.00 7.00
22.00
7.33
V2T1
9.00
9.00
9.00
27.00
9.00
V2T2
9.00
8.00
10.00
27.00
9.00
V2T3
8.00
8.00
8.00
24.00
8.00
SUBTOTAL
33.00 33.00 34.00 100.00
33.33
Two-Way Table
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
40
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2
TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
21.00
22.00 43.00
7.17b
T1-Mokusaku
26.00 27.00
53.00
8.83a
T2-Em1 24.00
27.00 51.00
8.50a
T3-Em5 22.00
24.00 46.00
7.67a
TOTAL
93.00 100.00 193.00
MEAN
7.75a 8.33 a 8.04
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS
FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
2.042 2.042 3.2667ns3.24 5.29
Factor B
3
10.458 3.486 5.5778**
AB
3
0.458 0.153
0.2444ns
ERROR
16
10.000 0.625
TOTAL 23
22.958
**= highly significant
CV=9.83%
ns = not significant
Table 7. Degree of Infection
TREATMENTS REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
41
I
II
III
V1T0
4.00
5.00
5.00
14.00
4.67
V1T2
3.00
4.00
5.00
11.00
3.75
V1T3
3.00 3.00
4.00 12.00
4.00
V1T4
4.00 4.00 5.00
13.00
4.33
SUBTOTAL
17.00 16.00 19.00 50.00 16.33
V2T0
4.00 3.00 4.00
11.00
4.00
V2T1
3.00
4.00
4.00
11.00
3.67
V2T2
4.00
5.00
5.00
14.00
4.67
V2T3
4.00
5.00
5.00
14.00
4.67
SUBTOTAL
15.00 17.00
18.00 51.00 17.01
Two-Way Table
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
42
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2
TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
14.00
12.00 26.00
4.37a
T1-Mokusaku
11.00 11.00
22.00
3.75a
T2-Em1 12.00
14.00 26.00
4.33a
T3-Em5 13.00
14.00 27.00
4.50a
TOTAL
50.00 51.00
101.00
MEAN
4.15a 4.05a
16.83
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS
FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05 0.01
Factor A
1
0.100 0.100 0.1714ns 3.24 5.29
Factor B
3
3.350 0.838 1.4357ns
AB
3 2.6500.662
1.1357ns
ERROR
16
17.500 0.583
TOTAL 23
22.958
**= highly significant
CV=18.63%
ns = not significant
Table 8.Percentage of heads infected with soft rot (20 DAI)
TREATMENTS REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
43
I II
III
V1T0
88.88 66.67 88.88
244.43
81.46
V1T2
66.67 66.67 66.67
200.01
66.67
V1T3
88.88 77.77 88.88
255.53
85.18
V1T4
77.77 88.88 77.77
244.42
81.47
SUBTOTAL
322.20 299.97 322.20
944.39 314.80
V2T0
88.88 77.77 88.88
255.53 85.18
V2T1
66.67 66.67 66.67
200.01 66.67
V2T2
77.77 77.77 77.77 233.31 77.77
V2T3
88.88
77.77
88.88
255.53 81.17
SUBTOTAL
322.20 299.98322.20 944.38
314.80
Two-Way Table
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
44
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2
TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
244.43
255.53
499.96
83.33b
T1-Mokusaku
200.01
200.01
400.02
66.67a
T2-Em1 255.53
233.31
488.84
83.32a
T3-Em5 244.42
255.53
499.95
81.47a
TOTAL 944.39
944.38 1,888.77
MEAN
78.70a78.70a
78.78
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS
FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
0.000 0.000 0.0000ns3.24 5.29
Factor B
3
1171.253 390.418 9.4933**
AB
3
123.395 41.132 1.002ns
ERROR
16
658.008 41.126
TOTAL 23
1952.657
**= highly significant CV=8.1%
ns = not significant
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
45
CA- UR Form 4
Benguet State University
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE
La Trinidad, Benguet
March
21,
2012
Date
APPLICATION FOR MANUSCRIPT ORAL DEFENSE
Name:
JUDY
ANN
V.
KET-ENG
Degree (Major Field):
Bachelor of Science in Agriculture (Plant Pathology)
Title of Research: POSTHARVEST MANAGEMENT OF CHINESE CABBAGE
( Brassicapekinensis) AGAINST BACTERIAL SOFTROT
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)
Endorsed: AURORA F. PINON _______
Adviser and Chairperson, Advisory Committee
Date and Time of Defense: March 21, 2012 at 9:00 AM
Place of Defense: Department of Plant Pathology , Room AC 107
______
Approved:
ANDRES A. BASALONG JOCELYN C. PEREZ___________
Member, Advisory Committee
Member, Advisory Committee and
Department Chairperson
RESULT OF ORAL DEFENSE
Name and Signature
Remarks (Passed/Failed)
AURORA F. PINON
Adviser and Chairperson, Advisory Committee
ANDRES A. BASALONG ____________________
Member, Advisory Committee
JOCELYN C.PEREZ
_________________ ___________________
Member, Advisory Committee and Department Chairperson
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
KET-ENG, JUDY ANN V. APRIL 2012.Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage
(Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot (Pectobacteriumcarotovorum) Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Aurora F. Pinon, Ph. D
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to compare the efficacy of EM and Mokusako on the
occurrence of soft rot (Pectobacteriumcarotovorum) and on two varieties of Chinese cabbage at
storage. Shelf life, percentage weight loss and onset infections were recorded.
Results showed that Chinese cabbage variety F1 Champion had the longest shelf life of
17.25 days, had lower percentage weight loss of 2.80g after 15 days. On the other hand, CR
Matibayhad a shorter shelf life of 16.25 days and incurred the highest percentage weight loss of
4.75g after 15 days of storage
No significant interaction was observed among the variety used. However, result showed
that F1 Champion had longer shelf life. Further, results showed that variety treated with
Mokusako significantly affected the shelf life and visual quality and had the lowest percentage
weight loss. F1 champion had a lowest weight loss compared to CR Matibay which had the
highest degree of infection after 15 days Mokusako treated variety delays the occurrence of soft
rot.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………..... i
Abstract……………………………………………………………………….
i
Table of Contents……………………………………………………………..
ii
INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………. 1
REVIEW OF LITEREATURE…………………………………………….…
4
MATERIALS AND METHODS……………………………….…………….
11
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS……………………………………….…....
14
Shelf life…………………………………………………………….…
14
Visual quality………………………………….………………………
15
Percentage Weight Loss due to Pectobacterium carotovorum…….…. 17
Number of Days to Initial Infection at Butt-end and other Parts.……
18
Degree of Infection………………………………………….………...
19
Percentage of Heads Infected With soft rot……………….……..……
21
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS…….………..
25
LITERATURE CITED……………………………………………………….
27
APPENDICES………………………………………………………………... 29
1
INTRODUCTION
Chinese cabbage (Brassicapekinensis) is a semi –temperate crop. It thrives best in
cool moist area like Benguet and Mountain Province, at low elevations; it can be grown
during the cool months of the year. The optimum monthly average temperature
requirement of cabbage is 15.50C and the maximum monthly temperature should not be
more than 240C (Bandoc, 1976).
In Philippines especially in Benguet and mountain Province this crop is also
grown in commercial scale. Certainly, it is among the major source of income for the
farmers.
Farmers started growing this crop many years ago but today’s generation find that
production of Chinese cabbage entails several problems such as premature death, non
marketable yield, low quality due to poor heads also rotting of heads brought about by
diseases. Among the contributory factor to such problem is the soft rot disease caused by
a bacterium Pectobacteriumcarotovorum (Donald et al, 1997).
Soft rot caused by Pectobacteriumcarotovoruminfects Chinese cabbage in both
the field and storage. Once the crop is infected, the bacteria established it within host and
can cell disintegration giving a decayed or rotten appearance. Soft rot is one of the most
destructive diseases of vegetables that can cause greater total loss of produce than any
other bacterial diseases (Pantastico, 1975).
Chinese cabbage is highly perishable crop. It is easily damaged due to improper
handling. It is prone to diseases infection and deterioration. Being a high value
commercial crop, losses due diseases like bacterial soft rot should be minimized. Because
of the severe damage inflicted by soft rot, farmers initially spray pesticides but the
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
2
practice does not actually control the diseases very few chemical treatments effectively
control bacterial diseases in the seedbed or field condition. The inherent toxicity of most
existing chemical pesticides to non-target organic and their persistence in the
environmental has gained interest on researched efforts to find alternative and more
environmentally friendly methods of controlling pest and diseases (Woodman, 2006).
The trial on the use of effective microorganism (EM) was evaluated in this study.
Effective microorganism (EM) is in liquid form and consists of naturally occurring
beneficial microorganisms. The microbes in EM are non-harmful, non-pathogenic, not-
genetically-engineered or modified (non-GMO), and not-chemically-synthesized, and
EM is not a medicine either. The basic groups of microorganisms in EM are lactic acid
bacteria (commonly found in yogurt, cheeses), yeast (bread, beer), and phototrophic
bacteria. EM is being used successfully in the field of agriculture, fisheries, poultry, and
animal husbandry and for the preparation of compost and Bokashi. It has no harmful
effects to humans or animals and it’s environmentally friendly (Kyan, 1990).
A newMokusakois a traditionalJapanese land improver which is collected by of
cooling the exhaust smoke of charcoal kilns when burning the wood material. It contains
200 types of organic minerals which is good for plants it is a pure wood vinegar.
Theproducts originated from Japan and were proven to be effective as fertilizer and
pesticide; however, a trial on our country is necessary.
This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of EM and Mokusako on the
occurrence of soft rot (Pectobacteriumcarotovorum) in the two variety of Chinese
cabbage and to determine the percentage weight loss, Shelf life and Visual quality in the
two variety of Chinese cabbage caused by bacterial soft rot.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
3
The study was conducted in Plant Pathology Department, Benguet State
University, La Trinidad Benguet. FromSeptember 2011 to February 2012.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
4
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The Crop
Chinese cabbage also known as “Petchay Baguio” or “wombok” belongs to the
group of cultivated varieties of the species Brassicas or the “Cole crops”. It is an
herbaceous Biennial, Dicotyledonous plant having an elongated head of overlapping,
crinkled, broad stalk leaves and eaten as a vegetables in Asian cuisine. It is indigenous to
China where it had been grown for its leaves which is a good source of vitamins C and
Calcium but low fat calories (PCCARD, 2005).
Chinese cabbage ranks second to potato in importance as vegetable and cash crop
in Benguet and Mountain Province. Around 3,000 hectares are planted annually to
Chinese cabbage alone in Benguet Province. Chinesecabbage plays a very important role
in human life being used as vegetable, oil crops, forage crops and sources of vitamin C
and A (Bulangao, 1998).
The Disease
Soft rot disease caused by Pectobacteriumcarotovorum has a very wide host
range infecting large number of vegetable species belonging to different families.
Crucifers are susceptible to bacterial soft rot which include cabbage, cauliflower,
Brussels sprouts kohlrabi, turnip, radish, horseradish and rutabaga. The host range
includes genera from all the plants families of vegetables, fruits and ornamentals, nearly
about sixty-four plant species are susceptible to the disease (Walker, 2004 and
Anonymous, 1990).
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
5
Symptoms
The disease has the same appearance on each host. The affected tissue becomes
soft and slimy without much discoloration, but often accompanied by an offensive smell.
Soft rot symptoms begin as small water soaked lesion that enlarges rapidly. The affected
area becomes soft and mushy while its surface becomes discolored and somewhat
depressed tissue within affected region becomes slimy (Ware, 1937).
On Chinese cabbage, bacterial soft rot is quite common in the field as this crop is
particularly susceptible. Symptoms first appear on leaves as small water soaked lesions.
The affected tissue becomes soft and mushy with an accompanying foul smell.
Eventually the leaves, stems and roots are entirely decayed by the bacteria (Johnson,
1999).
Cruciferous plants and onions infected by soft rot bacteria, always give off a
repulsive odor. When root crops are affected in the field the lower parts of the stem may
also become infected, watery, may turn black and shrivel, causing the plants to become
stunted, wilt, and die. Infections of succulent leaves and stems are seldom important in
the field (Agrios, 1997).
Life Cycle of the Pathogen
The soft rot bacteria survives in infected fleshy organs in the field and in storage,
in debris, on roots or other parts of host plants, in pods and streams use for water
irrigation water, occasionally in the soil, and in the pupae of several insects. The disease
may first appear in the field on plants grown from previously infected seed pieces. Some
tubers, rhizomes, and bulbs become infected through wounds or lenticels after they are
set or formed in the soil. The inoculation of bacteria into fleshy organs and their further
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
6
spread in storage and in the field are greatly facilitated by insects. The soft rot bacteria
can live in all stages of insect’s vector. Moreover, the bodies of the insect larvae
(maggots) become contaminated with bacteria when they crawl about on rotting seed
pieces, carry them to healthy plants, and disseminate into wounds where they can cause
the disease. Even when the plants or storage organs are resistant to soft rot and can stop
its advance by formation of wound-cork layers, the maggots can destroy the wounds cork
as fast as it is formed, and the soft rot continuous to spread (Agrios, 1997).
Porombelon (1999) stated that Pectobacteriumcarotovorum is a plant pathogen
belonging to the family Enterobacteriaceae. It is non-spore forming and peritrichously
flagellated. P. carotovorum causes death by creating an osmotically fragile cell. It
produces extracellarpectic enzymes that destroy the integrity of the pectin. To a lesser
extent, it produces extracellular cellulose to degrade cellulose. Other exported enzymes
thought to be important in pathogenesis include hemicellulases, arabanases, xylanases
and a protease.
Pectobacteriumcarotovorum are straight rods, non- spore forming, 0.5 – 1 x 1- 3
microns occurs singly; motile withperitrichous flagella. Gram negative, facultative
anaerobic; catalyses positive, oxidase negative, urease not produced by the bacterium.
Acid is produced from D (+) glucose, D (+) hydrolyzed but the bacterium readily
hydrolyses gelatin and pectin. Optimum temperature for Pectobacteriumcarotovorum
ranges from 27-300C maximum varies from 32-400C (Bradbury, 1989).
Postharvest Losses
Improper harvesting and rough handling at the farm directly affect market quality.
Bruises and injuries later show up as brown and black patches making commodities
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
7
unattractive, some physiological disorders are attributed to improper handling Injuries
may serve as avenues for the microorganisms entry and lead to rotting, moreover,
respiration is increased remarked by the damages, injuries and storage life is thus
shortened (Pantastico, 1975).
Pantastico, 1975 also stated that postharvest losses could be attributed to
mishandling at harvest and losses due to diseases especially soft rot caused by
Pectobacteriumcarotovorum. Recent studies show that 60-70% of vegetables being
produced are wasted due to improper postharvest handling and diseases, 30-40% of
vegetables are wasted due to decay, injuries, streaming and sprouting among all these
factors, weight loss is the most estimable form of loss after harvest. Although proper
cultural management of the crops has received so much attention, proper postharvest
handling seems to be neglected by traders as well as farmers.
Loss from physiological shrinkage is often much more serious from the economic
stand point. Most vegetable loss from decay organisms is lessened as the temperature is
lowered, with few exemptions. This means the storage area should be kept low for most
commodities without allowing it to freeze. Most vegetables freeze at temperature varying
from -2.22 to 11.1oC (Work and Crew, 1937).
Storage products prolonged usefulness and some cases maintain their quality
storage life may be prolonged by proper control and management of postharvest diseases,
regulation of temperature (Pantastico, 1975).
Control
The control of bacterial soft rot of vegetables is based almost exclusively on
sanitary and cultural practices. In the field, plants should be planted in well-drained areas
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
8
and at sufficient distances to allow adequate ventilation. Susceptible plants should be
rotated with cereals or other non-susceptible varieties. Few varieties have any resistance
to soft rot and no variety is immune. Chemical sprays are generally not recommended for
the control of soft rot. Control of insects that spread the disease reduces infections both in
the field and in storage (Agrios, 1997).
Mokusako
Mokusako (wood vinegar) is a liquid obtained from the smoke when wood is
heated to produce charcoal consists of gases and vapor generated from heated wood.
When smoke is cooled in a pipe, it is condensed to a liquid and drips down the pipe. The
collected liquid is now the Mokusako. Mokusako helps in the fermentation process to
compost materials. It eliminates noxious microorganisms and enhances useful ones to
propagate. Organic materials contained mokusaku becomes nutrients to plants
microorganisms. It is also effective when it is used fertigate the soil around the plants
(Yokomori, 2009). Mokusaku is not an agricultural chemicals but it may be used as a
supplementary material. It controls some diseases such as soft rots. It can also be used as
insect repellent and foliar spray to let the plant leaves thicker, stems sturdier and
increasing plants resistance to pest and diseases (Yokomori, 2009).
Japanese product mokusako used as pesticide and fungicide was reported to be
effective in their crops. The expansion of the said mokusako users reaches the
municipalities of Benguet like Atok, Buguias, Kabayan, Kibungan, La Trinidad, Tuba
and Tublay (Catajan, 2010).
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
9
Effective microorganism (EM)
Effective Microorganism (EM) or kyuse isa microbialinoculants. It is a mixed
culture of beneficial microorganisms (primarily photosynthetic and lactic acid bacteria,
yeast, actinomycetes and fermenting fungi that can be applied as inoculants to increase
the microbial diversity of soils. This is turn, can improve soil quality and health, which
enhances, yield and quality of crops. In crop culture, EM increases the metabolic,
biological activities in the soil and photosynthetic abilities of plants (Danigos, 1996).
Effective Microorganisms (EM) is a living entity containing active microbes that
helps to enhance beneficial microbes in the soil. It can also be mixed to any compost for
fast decomposition. It improves the soil by producing ideal microorganisms which
increases soil fertility for plant growth.
The used of EM in agriculture have many significant beneficial impacts. The most
researched and stated are as follows: 1. EM promotes germination, growth, flowering,
fruiting and ripening in crop plants. It enhances the photosynthetic capacity of plants.
And EM increases the efficacy of organic matter as fertilizers. Furthermore, EM develops
resistance of plants to pest and diseases. EM suppresses soil borne pathogens and pests it
improves the physical, chemical and biological environments of the soil, and enhances
crop yields in organic systems in most environments. It also develops the soil, to improve
its ability to sustain crops.
Effective microorganisms 5 (EM5)
Effective Microorganisms5 (EM5) is a non-toxic chemical free insect repellent. It
can also be used to prevent pest and disease problems in crops. It acts by creating a
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
10
barrier around the plant, thereby protecting it from insect pests and diseases (Kyan,
1990).
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
11
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Two effective microorganisms (EM1 and EM5) and Mokusako obtained from the
Municipal Agriculture Office (MAO) of La Trinidad were tested for the control of soft
rot in two varieties of Chinese cabbage, CR Matibay and F1 Champion which are newly
harvested and free from pest and diseases with uniform sizes and stages of maturity.
Fresh specimen of bacteria (Pectobacteriumcarotovorum) was isolated in the
laboratory following the streak methods for bacterial isolation. Bacterial suspension was
prepared from a day old culture with 10ml distilled water and surface was scraped
withsterilizwwireloop. Chinese cabbage of uniform sizes and stages of maturity were
inoculated with the bacterial suspension at butt end. EM and Mokusakowere sprayed
directly at the butt ends of Chinese cabbage (F1 Champion and CRMatibay).
The treatments were individually packed with plastic cellophane and arranged in a
completely randomized design (CRD) involving 2 factor type of variety as Factor A and
EM and Mokusako treatment as Factor B.
Each treatment combination was replicated three times with three heads per
replication or a total of nine samples per treatment combination.
The treatments are as follows:
Factor A- Type of variety
V1- Cr Matibay
V2- F1 Champion
Factor B- EM and MokusakoTreatments
T0- Control
T1-Mokusaku
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
12
T2-EM1
T3-EM5
Data gathered
The following data and information were gathered to compare the efficacy of EM and
Mokusako on the incidence of bacterial soft rot on Chinese cabbage varieties CR Matibay
and F1 Champion.
1. Shelf-life. The numbers of days the produce remained were not acceptableto
consumer
2. Percentage of weight loss.
Percentage of weight loss = Initial weight- finalweightX 100
Initial
weight
3. Percentage of head infected with soft rot.
%Soft rot incidence =Total no. of heads-No. of heads with soft rot 100
Total no. of heads per treatment
4. Visual Quality. This refers to the quality variations in the appearance of Chinese
cabbage
9- Excellent, Field fresh.
7-8= Very good, slight defects
5-6= Good moderate defects.
3-4= poor, defects increasing, need trimming.
1-2= poor, limit of sale ability
5. Number of days to initial infection. The number of days to first occurrence of soft
Rot at butt-ends or other parts of Chinese cabbage variety.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
13
6. Degree of Infection. This refers to the infection of soft rot in cabbage. The rating
scale tools used were the following:
Rating Scale
Description of Infection
1
No Infection
2
1-19% of surface area infection
3
20-39% of surface area infection
4
40-60% of surface area infection
5
>60% of surface area infection
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
14
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Shelf life
Effect on Variety. The effect on the varieties shelf life is shown in Table1. Result
revealed that F1 Champion had longer Shelf life of 17.25 days compared to Cr Matibay
which had 16.25 days.
Table1. Shelf life
Variety
SHELF LIFE
(DAYS)
Cr
Matibay
16.25a
F1
Champion
17.25a
Treatment
Control 15.17b
Mokusaku
17.67a
EM1
17.33a
EM5
16.83a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level using
DMRT.
INTERACTION
Treatment
Variety
CR Matibay
F1 Champion
Control
14.66
15.66
Mokusako
17.00
18.33
EM1
16.66
18.00
EM5
16.66
17.00
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
15
Effect of treatments. The different treatments significantly affected the shelf life
of Chinese cabbage varieties. Variety treated with mokusako had the longest shelf-life of
17.67 days followed by the crops treated with EM1 with a mean of 17.33 days. Control
showed the shortest day of shelf life with a mean of 15.17 days.
These results revealed that using mokusako and EM1 can prolonged the
shelf life of the commodity. Longer shelf life on the varieties of Chinese cabbage which
treated was might due to their resistance against soft rot.
Interaction effect. There were no significant interaction effect observed between the
treatments and variety used.
Visual quality
Effect on Variety. Results showed that Cr Matibay had the lower visual quality
rating of 5.58 followed by F1 Champion which had a mean of 6.08 which is good and
moderate defects. As shown in figure 1 and 2.
Effect of treatments. It was observed that variety treated with
Mokusakuosignificantly delayed the deterioration of the quality both F1 Champion and
Cr Matibay in the yellowing of leaves and shriveling than the untreated variety. Variety
treated with Mokusako with a mean of 6.83 was the latest to show poor visual quality
rating after 15 days of storage compared to the untreated variety that had a mean rating
quality of 3.50 was the earliest to show poor visual quality.This is significantly different
to other treatments.
Interaction effect. F1 champion treated with Mokusako were the latest to show
deterioration with visual quality rating which is good and moderate defects after 15 days.
However, Statistical analysis revealed no significant interaction.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
16
Figure 1 a. Visual Quality of CR Matibay 15 DAI
Figure 2. Visual Quality of F1 Champion 15 DAI
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
17
Table 2. Visual quality rating (15 DAI)
Variety
Visual Quality
Rating
Cr
Matibay
5.53a
F1
Champion
6.03a
Treatment
Control 3.50b
Mokusaku
6.83a
EM1
6.67a
EM5
6.33a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level using
DMRT.
INTERACTION
Treatment
Variety
CR MATIBAY
F1 Champion
Control 3.33
3.67
Mokusako
6.67
7.00
EM1
6.33
7.00
EM5
6.00
7.00
Percentage Weight Loss due to
Pectobacteriumcaratovorum
Effect of Variety. Table 3 showed that the percentage weight loss on the varieties
after 5, 10 to 15 days. F1 Champion consistently showed a lower percentage weight loss
of 2.80g after 15 days as compared to CR Matibay of 4.75g after 15days during the
duration of the experiment, statistical analysis revealed no significant differences
between the two varieties
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
18
Table 3.Mean Weight Loss(g)
Variety Weight
loss
(%)
after
5days
10days
15
days
Cr
Matibay
1.19a
2.75a
4.75a
F1
Champion
0.74a
2.18a
2.80a
Treatment
Control 1.25a
3.46a
4.33a
Mokusaku
0.78a
2.86a
2.35a
EM1
0.73a
2.50a
3.63a
EM5
0.95a
3.05a
3.80a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level using
DMRT.
INTERACTION
Weight loss after (g)
Treatment
5days 10 days15 days
V1 V2 V1 V2 V1
V2
Control
2.17 0.67 4.17 2.75 5.12 3.55
Mokusako
1.27 0.28 3.83 1.88 2.67 2.03
EM1
0.60 0.85 3.67 1.32
5.07 2.09
EM5
0.73 1.22 3.33 2.77
4.06 3.53
Effect of EM and Mokusako. Weight loss assessments of Chinese cabbage heads
treated with Mokusako, EM1 and EM5 is shown in Table3.
The control had the highest weight losses at 5, 10 and 15 days of storage. The
lowest weight loss was obtained from those treated with EM1 at 5 days with a mean of
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
19
0.75g and Mokusakoat 15 days with a mean of 2.35. However, statistical analysis is not
significantly different to each other.
Interaction effect. Results showed that there was no significant effects observed
between the varieties and treatment the different treatment used. Although, both of the
variety was comparable to each other, this may imply that weight loss might not be
affected regardless on the treatment used.
Number of days to initial infection
Effect of variety. The effect of variety on the number of days to initial infection is
shown in Table 4. Results revealed that F1 champion showed the latest initial infection at
butt-end and other parts of head with a mean of 8.33 days compared to CR Matibay
which had a mean of 7.75 days. The variety that is untreated showed the earliest infection
at butt-end and other parts of its head. F1 Champion is less infected with
Pectobacteriumcarotovorum than CR Matibaywhich showed an earliest infection with
the pathogen leading to rapid breakdown.
Effect of EM and Mokusako. Statistically, there were significant differences
observed on the number of days to initial infection at butt-end and other parts of head.
Variety treated with Mokusako was the latest to show initial infection after 8.83 days
followed by EM1 with a mean of 8.50 days and the untreated one showed the earliest
infection with a mean of 7.170 which is significantly different to the other treatments.
Interaction effect. The combined effect on the variety and the different treatments
used affect the number of days to initial infection. F1 Champion treated with mokusako
was the latest to show initial infection at butt-end.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
20
Table 4. Number of days to initial infection at butt-end and other parts of the head
Variety
Mean
Cr
Matibay
7.75a
F1
Champion
8.33a
Treatment
Control 7.17b
Mokusaku
8.83a
EM1
8.50a
EM5
7.67a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level using
DMRT.
INTERACTION
Treatment
Variety
CR MATIBAY
F1 Champion
Control
7.00 7.33
Mokusako
8.86 9.00
EM1
8.00 9.00
EM5
7.33 8.00
Degree of Infection.
Effect of variety. Table 5 showed the mean soft rot rating on the two variety of
Chinese cabbage. Results revealed that CR Matibay obtained the highest mean rating of
4.15 compared to F1 Champion which has a mean rating of 4.05 however, revealed
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
21
nosignificant differences between the two varieties.However, statistical analysis revealed
no significant interaction.
Among the treatment used, variety treated with Mokusako was the latest to show
infection at butt-end with a mean of 3.75 followed with those treated with EM1 with a
mean of 4.33.This shows that higher degree of infection had already attacked by soft rot.
Table 5. Degree of infection
Variety
Rating
Cr
Matibay
4.15a
F1
Champion
4.05a
Treatment
Control 4.50a
Mokusaku
3.75b
EM1
4.33a
EM5
4.37a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level using
DMRT.
INTERACTION
Treatment
Variety
CR MATIBAY
F1 Champion
Control
4.67
4.00
Mokusako
3.75
3.75
EM1
4.00
3.50
EM5
4.33
4.50
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
22
Interaction Effect. There were nosignificant interaction effect between the
treatments usedhowever; Variety treated with Mokusko show the lowest degree of
infection.
Percentage of Heads Infected with Soft Rot
Effect
on
Variety. Results revealed that F1 champion and CR Matibay had the
same mean percentage of heads infected with soft rot of 78.70% after 20 days which is
significantly different with each other.
Effect of EM and Mokusako. Table 6 showed the effect of EM and Mokusako in
the percentage of head infected with soft rot was significant.
Among the treatments used the variety (F1 Champion) treated with Mokusako
had the lowest percentage infection of soft rot with a mean of 66.67% which is
significantly different of the other treatments.
Interaction effect. Result implies that using Mokusako on the varieties of Chinese
cabbage heads could decreased the respiration rates, thus delayed the occurrence of soft
rot that leads to longer shelf life of the variety stored.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
23
Table 6.Percentage of heads infected with soft rot
Variety
Head
Infection
(%)
Cr
Matibay
78.70a
F1
Champion
78.70a
Treatment
Control 83.33b
Mokusaku
66.67a
EM1
83.32a
EM5
81.47a
INTERACTION
Treatment
Variety
CR MATIBAY
F1 Champion
Control 81.46
85.18
Mokusako
66.67
66.67
EM1
81.47
77.77
EM5
85.17
81.17
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level using
DMRT
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
24
Figure3 a. Morphological characteristics of CR Matibay
b. Expiremental set-up of CR Matibay one day after inoculation.
Figure4 a. Morphlogical characteristics of F1 Champion
b. Expiremental set-up of F1 Champion one day after inoculation.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
25
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The treatments used against soft rot on Chinese cabbage at storage
were:Mokusako, EM1 and EM5. These treatments were sprayed directly on butt-ends of
Chinese cabbage.
Results of the study revealed that there were no significant interaction between
treatments and variety treated used in terms of weight loss percentage. Although all
treatments used affected the percentage weight loss of the variety; conversely untreated
shows the highest mean weight loss after 15 days. It also enhanced the shelf life and
delayed the occurrence of soft rot on 2 the varieties used.
Conclusion
Based on the results there is significant effect that occurred between the variety
and the treatment with respect to shelf life, visual quality rating and soft rot infection
although Mokusakodelayed its early occurrence and had longer shelf life during storage.
Variety treated with Mokusako retained its good quality which had a moderate
defect after termination of the study, enhanced postharvest shelf life and delayed the
occurrence of soft rot. Among the variety used F1 Champion is more resistant against
soft rot unlike CR Matibay that can easily attacked by the organisms.
Recommendation
It is therefore recommended that Mokusako can be used to control soft rot of
Chinese cabbage at storage effectively to delay the occurrence of soft rot and it could be
used to prolonged visual quality and enhanced a longer shelf life of the commodity
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
26
during storage. It is also recommended that follow- up studies must be conducted to
verify the results generated.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
27
LITERATURE CITED
AGRIOS, G.N.1997. Plant Pathology.4th Edition. Academic Press Inc., USA. Pp. 434-
437
ANONYMOUS. 1990. Postharvest Decay of Bell Paper. Bacterial Soft rot .Retrieved
October 10, 2010 from http:// www.Highland fresh.Net /tb-pepper-intro.html.
BULANGAO, L.T. 1998. Pathogenicity test of Plasmodiophorabrassicae on
Chinese cabbage Head.UnpublishedThesis.Benguet State University.
La Trinidad,Benguet. P.1
BANDOC, G.B. JR. 1976 Cabbage Cauliflower and Broccoli Vegetable production in
Southeast Asia.University of the Philippines, Los Banos, Laguna. 147p.
BRADBURY, J.F. 1989. Erwiniacarotovora,GuidetoPlant pathogenicBacteria.
CAB International Mycological Institute, Newyork. Pp67. Retrieved October
21, 2010 from http://www.avrdc.org./LC/Cabbage/softrot.html.
CATAJAN, M.E. 2010. Wood Vinegar to be used in Farming. Retrieved November 10,
2010
from
www.sunstar.com.ph/baguio/wood -vinegar-is-used-farming.
DANIGOS, E.P. 1996. Effect of Bokashi and EM1 on the Incidence of Bacterial Wilt
(Pseudomonas solanacearum) on White Potato .Unpublished Thesis.Benguet
State University. La Trinidad, Benguet. P.22.
DONALD, E.C.I.J. PORTER.R.FAGGIAN ANDR.LANCASTER.1997
Towards integrated control of clubroot.Field evaluation of treatments for
clubroot control. In: programme and summaries brennial conf.11th Australian
Plant Pathology Society, Perth.P. 38
JOHNSON, S. 1999. Blackleg and Bacterial Soft rot.PotatoFacts.Bulletin No. 2493.
University
of
main.(AVRDC.Bacterial
soft rot.Retrieved October 27, 2010 from
http://
www.avrdc.org./LC/Cabbage/soft rot.html.
KYAN, T. 1990. Kyusei Nature Farming And Technology of Effective Microorganisms.
Asia Pacific Natural Agriculture Network, Bangkok, Thailand. Pp. 6-7.
PANTASTICO, E. 1975.Postharvest Physiology, Handling and Utilazation of tropical
and subtropical Fruits and Vegetables. Westport, connection: The Avi
Publishing
Co.
547p.
PHILIPPINECOUNCILFOR AGRICULTUREFORESTRY and
NATURAL RESOURCES RESEARCH and DEVELOPMENT. 2005. Soft rot of
Chinese cabbage review of literature. Retrieved October 12, 2011 from http;//
www.Pccarrd.dostgov.ph.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
28
POROMBELON, M.CM.1999. The Prokaryotes. 2nded.RetrievedOctober
29, 2010fromhttp;//web.msl.Edu/microbio/bio221-1999/Ecarotovora,html.P.
2899
WALKER, J.C. 2004.Bacterial soft rot.In manual of vegetable plant diseases, chupp, c.
(ed).Shriti book distributors. New Delhi. Retrieved November 05, 2010 from
http;//www.highlandfresh.Net/tb pepper intro.html.
WOODMAN, H.M. 2006.“Cabbage leaves are poor man’s poultice”. British Medical
journal. Retrieved November 05, 2010 from
http;//www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full327/7412/451-c
WARE. G. W. 1975. Vegetable Crops. Danville. Illinois’. The Intersate Printers
And Publication. Inc. Pp. 277
WORK, and CREW.1975.Vegetable Productionand marketingNew YorkState
College of Agriculture. P. 48
YOKOMORI, M, 2009, Safe and Healthy Vegetables for Philippine Consumers, Japan
International Cooperation Agency.P. 4.
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
29
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Shelf life
TREATMENTS REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
I II
III
V1T0
14
15
15
44.00
14.67
V1T2
16
17
18
51.00
17.00
V1T3
16
16
18
50.00
16.67
V1T4
16 17 17 50.00
16.67
SUBTOTAL
62
65
68
195.00
65.00
V2T0
16 15 16
47.00
15.67
V2T1
18
19
18
55.00
18.33
V2T2
17
19 18
54.00
18.00
V2T3
17
17
17
51.00
17.00
SUBTOTAL
68
70
69
207.00
69.00
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
30
Two-Way Table
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2
TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
44
47
91
15.17b
T1-Mokusaku
51
55
106
17.67a
T2-Em1 50
54
104
17.33a
T3-Em5 50
51
101
16.83a
TOTAL 195
207
402
MEAN
16.25a17.25a
16.75
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS
MS
FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
6.000 6.000 10.2857ns 3.24
5.29
Factor B
3
22.167 7.389 12.6667**
AB
3
1.000 0.333 0.5714ns
ERROR
16
9.333 0.583
TOTAL
23 38.500
**=
highly
significant
CV=4.56%
ns = not significant
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
31
Table 2. Visual Quality
TREATMENTS REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
I
II
III
V1T0
3.00
4.00
3.00
10.00
3.33
V1T2
8.00
6.00
6.00
20.00
6.67
V1T3
6.00 5.00
8.00 19.00
6.33
V1T4
6.00 7.00 5.00
18.00
6.00
SUBTOTAL
23.00 22.00 32.20 67.00 22.33
V2T0
4.00 3.00 4.00
11.00
3.67
V2T1
6.00
8.00
7.00
21.00
7.00
V2T2
7.00
6.00
8.00
21.00
7.00
V2T3
6.00
7.00
7.00
20.00
7.00
SUBTOTAL
23.00 24.00 26.00 73.00 24.33
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
32
Two-Way Table
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2
TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
10.00
11.00 21.00
3.50b
T1-Mokusaku
20.00 21.00
41.00
6.83a
T2-Em1 19.00
21.00 40.00
6.67a
T3-Em5 18.00
20.00 38.00
6.33a
TOTAL
66.00 73.00 140.00
MEAN
5.50a 6.08a
5.83
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS
FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
1.500 1.500
1.5652ns 3.24 5.29
Factor B
3
44.333 14.778 15.4203**
AB
3
0.167
0.56
0.0580ns
ERROR
16
15.333 0.958
TOTAL 23
61.333
**= highly significant
CV=16.78% ns = not significant
Appendix Table 3.Percentage of weight loss after 5 days
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
33
TREATMENTS REPLICATION
I II
III
TOTAL
MEAN
V1T0
0.20
2.00
4.30
6.50
2.17
V1T2
2.50
0.8
0.50
3.80
1.27
V1T3
0.50
1.10
0.20
1.80
0.6
V1T4
1.00 0.20 1.00
2.20
0.73
SUBTOTAL
4.20
4.10
6.00
14.30
4.77
V2T0
0.55 0.70 0.60
1.850
0.67
V2T1
0.3
0.50
0.05
0.85
0.28
V2T2
0.08
2.40
0.08
2.56
0.85
V2T3
1.05
2.43
0.17
3.65
11.22
SUBTOTAL
1.98 7.00 0.90 28.91
2.97
Two-Way Table
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
34
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2 TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
6.50
0.98
7.48
1.25a
T1-Mokusaku
3.80
0.85
4.65
0.78a
T2-Em1 1.80
2.56
4.36
0.73a
T3-Em5 2.20
3.65
5.85
1.95a
TOTAL
14.30 8.04 22.34
MEAN
1.19a0.67a
4.71
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
1.211 1.211 1.0810ns 3.24 5.29
Factor B
3
1.650 0.550 0.4912ns
AB
3
4.290 1.430 1.2771ns
ERROR
16
17.917 1.120
TOTAL 23
38.500
**=
highly
significant
CV=109.42%
ns = not significant
Appendix Table 4.Percentage of weight loss after 10 days
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
35
TREATMENTS REPLICATION
I
II
III TOTAL MEAN
V1T0
1.50 5.50 5.50 12.50
4.17
V1T2
5.50
5.00
1.00
11.50
3.83
V1T3
1.50
5.50
4.00
11.00
3.67
V1T4
4.50 2.00 3.50
10.00
3.33
SUBTOTAL
13.00 18.00 14.00
45.00 15.00
V2T0
2.45
2.90 2.90 8.25
2.75
V2T1
2.25
1.50
1.90
5.65
1.88
V2T2
0.18 2.60 1.20
3.68
1.33
V2T3
2.56
3.75
2.00
8.31
2.77
SUBTOTAL
7.44
10.75
8.00
26.19
8.73
Two-Way Table
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
36
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2 TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
12.50 8.25 20.75
7.05a
T1-Mokusaku
11.50
5.65
17.15
2.86a
T2-Em1 11.00
3.98
14.98
2.50a
T3-Em5 10.00
8.31
18.31
3.05a
TOTAL
45.00 26.19
70.89
MEAN
3.75a2.18
a 3.87
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
14.742 14.742 6.0276ns 3.24 5.29
Factor B
3
2.890 0.963 0.3938ns
AB
3
2.661 0.887 0.3627ns
ERROR 16
39.133
2.446
TOTAL 23
59.426
**=
highly
significant
CV=52.72%
ns = not significant
Table 5.Percentage of weight loss after 15 days
TREATMENTS REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
37
I II
III
V1T0
2.50 6.00 6.85 15.35
5.12
V1T2
6.00
5.50
2.50
14.00
4.67
V1T3
2.50
8.00
5.00
15.50
5.07
V1T4
4.50 2.50 5.00
12.20
4.07
SUBTOTAL
15.70 22.00 19.35
57.05 19.02
V2T0
2.55
3.00 5.10 10.65
3.55
V2T1
2.80
1.30
2.00
6.10
2.03
V2T2
1.98
2.65
1.65
6.28
2.09
V2T3
3.45
4.68
2.45
10.58
3.53
SUBTOTAL
10.78 11.63 11.20
22.96 7.66
Two-Way Table
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
38
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2
TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
15.35 10.65
26.00
4.33a
T1-Mokusaku
14.00
6.10
20.10
3.35a
T2-Em1 15.50
6.28
21.78
3.63a
T3-Em5
12.20 10.58 22.78
3.80a
TOTAL
57.05 33.61 90.66
MEAN
4.75a 2.80a
3.78
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS
FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
11.957 11.957 3.7533ns 3.24
5.29
Factor B
3
11.938 3.979 1.249ns
AB
3
6.190 2.063 0.6477ns
ERROR
16
50.971 3.186
TOTAL 23
81.057
**=
highly
significant
CV=50.90%
ns = not significant
Table 6. Number of days to initial infection
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
39
TREATMENTS REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
I
II
III
V1T0
7.00
7.00
7.00
21.00
7.00
V1T2
9.00
9.00
8.00
26.00
8.86
V1T3
7.00 7.00
10.00 24.00
8.00
V1T4
8.00 7.00 7.00
22.00
7.33
SUBTOTAL
31.00 30.00 32.00 93.00 31.00
V2T0
7.00 8.00 7.00
22.00
7.33
V2T1
9.00
9.00
9.00
27.00
9.00
V2T2
9.00
8.00
10.00
27.00
9.00
V2T3
8.00
8.00
8.00
24.00
8.00
SUBTOTAL
33.00 33.00 34.00 100.00
33.33
Two-Way Table
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
40
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2
TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
21.00
22.00 43.00
7.17b
T1-Mokusaku
26.00 27.00
53.00
8.83a
T2-Em1 24.00
27.00 51.00
8.50a
T3-Em5 22.00
24.00 46.00
7.67a
TOTAL
93.00 100.00 193.00
MEAN
7.75a 8.33 a 8.04
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS
FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
2.042 2.042 3.2667ns3.24 5.29
Factor B
3
10.458 3.486 5.5778**
AB
3
0.458 0.153
0.2444ns
ERROR
16
10.000 0.625
TOTAL 23
22.958
**= highly significant
CV=9.83%
ns = not significant
Table 7. Degree of Infection
TREATMENTS REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
41
I
II
III
V1T0
4.00
5.00
5.00
14.00
4.67
V1T2
3.00
4.00
5.00
11.00
3.75
V1T3
3.00 3.00
4.00 12.00
4.00
V1T4
4.00 4.00 5.00
13.00
4.33
SUBTOTAL
17.00 16.00 19.00 50.00 16.33
V2T0
4.00 3.00 4.00
11.00
4.00
V2T1
3.00
4.00
4.00
11.00
3.67
V2T2
4.00
5.00
5.00
14.00
4.67
V2T3
4.00
5.00
5.00
14.00
4.67
SUBTOTAL
15.00 17.00
18.00 51.00 17.01
Two-Way Table
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
42
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2
TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
14.00
12.00 26.00
4.37a
T1-Mokusaku
11.00 11.00
22.00
3.75a
T2-Em1 12.00
14.00 26.00
4.33a
T3-Em5 13.00
14.00 27.00
4.50a
TOTAL
50.00 51.00
101.00
MEAN
4.15a 4.05a
16.83
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS
FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05 0.01
Factor A
1
0.100 0.100 0.1714ns 3.24 5.29
Factor B
3
3.350 0.838 1.4357ns
AB
3 2.6500.662
1.1357ns
ERROR
16
17.500 0.583
TOTAL 23
22.958
**= highly significant
CV=18.63%
ns = not significant
Table 8.Percentage of heads infected with soft rot (20 DAI)
TREATMENTS REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
43
I II
III
V1T0
88.88 66.67 88.88
244.43
81.46
V1T2
66.67 66.67 66.67
200.01
66.67
V1T3
88.88 77.77 88.88
255.53
85.18
V1T4
77.77 88.88 77.77
244.42
81.47
SUBTOTAL
322.20 299.97 322.20
944.39 314.80
V2T0
88.88 77.77 88.88
255.53 85.18
V2T1
66.67 66.67 66.67
200.01 66.67
V2T2
77.77 77.77 77.77 233.31 77.77
V2T3
88.88
77.77
88.88
255.53 81.17
SUBTOTAL
322.20 299.98322.20 944.38
314.80
Two-Way Table
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
44
TREATMENT VARIETY
V1
V2
TOTAL MEAN
TO-Control
244.43
255.53
499.96
83.33b
T1-Mokusaku
200.01
200.01
400.02
66.67a
T2-Em1 255.53
233.31
488.84
83.32a
T3-Em5 244.42
255.53
499.95
81.47a
TOTAL 944.39
944.38 1,888.77
MEAN
78.70a78.70a
78.78
ANOVA TABLE
SOURCE OF
DF
SS MS
FC
TABULAR F
VARIENCE
0.05
0.01
Factor A
1
0.000 0.000 0.0000ns3.24 5.29
Factor B
3
1171.253 390.418 9.4933**
AB
3
123.395 41.132 1.002ns
ERROR
16
658.008 41.126
TOTAL 23
1952.657
**= highly significant CV=8.1%
ns = not significant
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
45
CA- UR Form 4
Benguet State University
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE
La Trinidad, Benguet
March
21,
2012
Date
APPLICATION FOR MANUSCRIPT ORAL DEFENSE
Name:
JUDY
ANN
V.
KET-ENG
Degree (Major Field):
Bachelor of Science in Agriculture (Plant Pathology)
Title of Research: POSTHARVEST MANAGEMENT OF CHINESE CABBAGE
( Brassicapekinensis) AGAINST BACTERIAL SOFTROT
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)
Endorsed: AURORA F. PINON _______
Adviser and Chairperson, Advisory Committee
Date and Time of Defense: March 21, 2012 at 9:00 AM
Place of Defense: Department of Plant Pathology , Room AC 107
______
Approved:
ANDRES A. BASALONG JOCELYN C. PEREZ___________
Member, Advisory Committee
Member, Advisory Committee and
Department Chairperson
RESULT OF ORAL DEFENSE
Name and Signature
Remarks (Passed/Failed)
AURORA F. PINON
Adviser and Chairperson, Advisory Committee
ANDRES A. BASALONG ____________________
Member, Advisory Committee
JOCELYN C.PEREZ
_________________ ___________________
Member, Advisory Committee and Department Chairperson
Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot
(Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)/ Judy Ann V. Ket‐Eng. 2012
Document Outline
- Postharvest Management of Chinese cabbage(Brassica pekinensis) against Bacterial soft rot (Pectobacteriumcarotovorum)
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES