BIBLIOGRAPHY BALDAZAN, WARNEIL T. APRIL...
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BALDAZAN, WARNEIL T. APRIL 2012.Growth and Profitability of SpinachF1Hybrid
‘Esmeralda’as Affected by Various Organic Fertilizers.Benguet StateUniversity, La Trinidad,
Benguet.
Adviser: Percival B. Alipit, Ph.D.
ABSTRACT
This study was conducted at Horticulture Experiment Field, Benguet State University,
La Trinidad, Benguet from January to February 2012 to evaluate the growth and yield of spinach
applied with different organic fertilizers, determine the best organic fertilizer materials for
spinach, and determine the profitability of spinach production as affected by different organic
fertilizers.
Results revealthat there were no significant differences on the number of days from
sowing to seedling emergence and to harvest. However, application of chicken dung plus 14-14-
14 or alnus leaves compost plus chicken manure significantly increased plant height and
marketable yield from which higher return on investment at 190.36% and 157.71 %, respectively
were derived.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography............................................................................................ i
Abstract…….…………………………………………………………...
i
Table of Contents.....................................................................................
ii
INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The
Crop………………………………………………………..
3
Climatic Requirements ………………...………………………
3
Nutritional Value……………………………………………….
3
Soil Preference of Spinach …………………………………….
4
Organic
Fertilizer……….............................................................
4
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials......................................................................................
8
Methods.......................................................................................
8
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Number of days from sowing to seedling emergence………….
10
Plant height…….……………………………………………….
10
Days from sowing to harvest……………….…………………..
13
Average plant weight …..………………..……………………..
13
Total yield…….……………………………….....……………..
13
Marketable yield………………………………..………………
14
Non-Marketable yield…………………………….….…………
14
Occurrence of insect pests and diseases……………………….
16
Soil analysis……………………………………………………
16
Cost and return analysis……………………………………….
16
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary……………………………….………………………
18
Conclusion…………………………..…………………………
18
Recommendation………………………………………………
18
LITERATURE CITED…………….……………..……………………
19
APPENDICES…………………………………………………………
20
1
INTRODUCTION
There are lots of vegetables being produced in the province of Benguet. Most are
grown commercially and are being sold in local and national markets. For example
cabbage, carrots, lettuce, broccoli, cauliflower, and potato are the major crops favorable
grown by farmers in the province. However, there are other vegetable crops that can be
produced under Benguet condition as such spinach, which it is very popular in other
countries and valuable due to its medicinal and nutritive values.
Spinach
(Spinaciaoleracea) belongs to the chenopodiaceae family which includes
the beet and chard. Spinach was first introduced in Europe in the thirteenth or fourteenth
century, coming from Asia, where it originated, by way of Africa (Ware, 1980).
Spinach is native to central Asia, most likely in the area of Iran. The absences of
records suggest that its domestication was fairly recent. Although it is widely distributed,
spinach is not an intensively grown crop. From 1996 to 1998, annual U.S. spinach
production averaged approximately 527 million pounds. From1996 to 1998, annual U.S.
processing spinach production averaged approximately 254 million pounds (MacMahonet
al., 2002).
According to Sukil-ap (2011) application of organic fertilizer contributes much in
the growth and development of the crop as well as in its eating quality. Organic matter
has been found to improve the physical and chemical properties of the soil. Processed
chicken manure, Sagana 100 and other organic fertilizers applied in minimal amount
compared to animal manure can provide nutrition to the crop similar to that of the
inorganic fertilizers.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
2
Spinach is not yet popular in the locality as vegetable crop but it has economic
potentials. Providing proper nutrition to the crop insures better yield and quality and
higher income of the farmers. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the growth and yield of
spinach applied with different organic fertilizers, determine the best organic fertilizer
materials for spinach production, and determine the profitability of spinach production
with the application of various organic fertilizers.
The study was conducted at the Horticulture Experiment Field, Benguet State
University, La Trinidad,Benguet from January to February 2012.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The Crop
Bonar (1994) stated that spinach of some kind was listed as a garden plant long
ago in the 15th century in Britain, when it was used in sweet dishes. In spite of this, it was
known as the ‘Spanish vegetable’ because it was thought to originate in Spain and was
introduced by the Moors. In fact, Asia is its native habitat, and it was eaten by Greeks and
Romans, not just used for medical purposes.
Like lettuce, spinach grows quickly, but unlike most lettuce varieties, it is cut-
and-come-again crop. In other words, you pull a small amount from each plant at each
picking and then allow more leaves or shoots to develop (Buczacki, 1988).
Nutritional Value
From the health point of view spinach contains a good deal of vitamin A and B, a
useful quantity of vitamin C, together with potassium, iron and calcium, but most of these
are lost if the leaves are boiled. They are better steamed, but even so the water used for
steaming becomes discolored suggesting that some goodness is still being lost. The oxalic
acid in spinach makes its calcium unavailable when boiled in water. To retain its
nutrients, it is best simmered in milk as a soup. With a low calorie value and high dietary
fiber, spinach has a great deal to commend it as a vegetable: easily grown, and prolific
crop, it has considerable dietetic use (Bonar, 1994).
Climatic Requirements
Spinach is essentially hardy, cool season crop. When fairly well hardened, it can
survive temperatures of 20F or lower without suffering injury. High temperatures and
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
4
especially long days cause spinach to bolt and produce seeds, thus destroying its market
value. In general, it is a short-season crop, maturing from 6 to 10 weeks, depending on
the prevailing climatic conditions (Ware, 1980).
Soil Preference of Spinach
Spinach grows well on a wide range of soils, but it yields best on a heavy loam. In
southwest Texas, much of the spinach is grown on well-drained alluvial soils, silt and
clay loams also are used fairly widely. In Virginia, there are acreages of spinach on sandy
and gravelly loams. Sandy soils are desired for winter and early spring crops. Muck soils
are used in north for their main crop and processing spinach. A good soil should have
good drainage and if possible be well supplied with organic matter (Ware, 1980).
Organic Fertilizer
The use of manures and fertilizers is briefly, to supply nutrients to the soil to
enable plants to make the maximum growth or produce the best crops, restore the fertility
of an exhausted soil and enrich a naturally poor soil. They may be contribute directly by
supplying plant-food, or indirectly by (a) reacting chemically or bacteriologically on
substances already present in the soil but not in a form capable of being absorbed by
plants; (b) by improving the mechanical condition of the soil, thus rendering more
penetrable to the roots of growing crops (Macmillan, 1991).
Animal manures are especially valuable in vegetable gardening, for in addition to
the plant food they contain they supply a large amount of organic matter to the soil,
which, as indicated above, assists in the liberation of plant food already present in the
soil. Their composition depends chiefly upon kind of manure (whether produced by
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
5
horses, cattle, sheep, swine or poultry), the amount litter contains, and the condition
under which it has been kept. Animal manures, whether composed or not, form a better
balanced fertilizer for many vegetables than they do for general farm crops, especially the
cereal grains. This is because of their relatively high content of nitrogen and potassium as
compared with phosphorus. Vegetables, especially those of which a vegetative part (root,
stem or leaf) constitutes the edible product, demand nitrogen in large quantities and are
less exacting in their demands for phosphorus (Lloyd, 1935).
The use of organic fertilizer and organic fertilizer-based fungicides/insecticides
result to good growth, yield, safe and tasty vegetables. Organic fertilizer makes soil good
and rich in nutrient elements. Fields with enriched soil let vegetables grow fast, healthy
and strong. Growth continuous until time of harvest because the soil continuous to
provide nutrients. Plants have fewer pest and diseases and vegetables can be harvested in
shorter days. Products are larger and look better and they contain vitamins and minerals
in larger percentage. The use of organic- based materials will let us save at least half of
chemicals and fertilizers compared with traditional farming practices (Yokomori, 2007).
McConnel (2003) state that organic fertilizers are derived from either plant or
animal materials. Not all the nutrients contained in such materials are in organic form and
those that are in organic form are not or completely available to plants. Complex organic
compounds will become part of the soil organic cycle and could perhaps have an eventual
nutrient value, depending on the activity of the soil biomass.
Compared with inorganic sources of nutrients, organic sources have the following
features:
• They are not immediately soluble in water and so not readily leached
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
6
• Because they have to breakdown to become partially soluble, they can act as
slow-release source of plant nutrient.
• They can be applied at heavy rates without risk of injury to roots or germinating
seeds as they have little ionic activity.
• They can stimulate microbial activity.
• They are much more costly per unit of plant food (unless by-products).
• The recovery of nutrients contained in the materials is low.
Organic fertilizers have restricted use in cropping systems that use mineral
fertilizer, but they do have a place in organic production systems, particularly market
gardening and horticulture where the slow-release characteristics have application for
some high-value crops that are grown.
According to Sangatan (2000) as cited by Kudan (2010) organic fertilizer/organic
manure are generally the most valuable soil conditioner. The materials from organic
fertilizer generally have low content of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium but they also
supply other essential micronutrients. As soil conditioners, organic fertilizer helps
prevent soil erosion, crashing and cracking of soil. They retain soil humidity and improve
the internal drainage of the soil.
Nitrogen and other elements contained in organic fertilizer are released slowly.
Thus, their continuous application helps build up the soil, particularly when this is done
for over a long period of time.
Organic fertilizer such as compost, animal manure,azolla,ipil-ipil, industrial
wastes, and oil seed meals can be used in place of chemical fertilizer. Organic fertilizer
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
7
should serve as supplement to inorganic fertilizer. It improves the physical make-up of
the soil and enriches the organic matter (Kudan, 2010).
According to Sangatan (2000) as cited by Kudan (2010) the color of the soil
changes from light to dark. It promotes good physical condition of the soil. The organic
fertilizer makes the soil friable and loose, resulting in the better soil aeration and
drainage, and making it easier for the roots to grow. In sandy soils, the organic matter
may be help bind together the sand particles and increase its water holding capacity. The
physical condition of organic matter itself is also ideal for mixing it with chemical
fertilizer before application. The cation exchange capacity of the soil is increased and its
nutrient availability is enhanced with the application of organic acids in humus that aids
in extracting plant nutrients from mineral soil. Organic materials supply energy and
building constituents for the multiplication of beneficial soil micro-organisms.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
8
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials
The materials thatwere used in the study were seeds of spinach F1 hybrid
‘Esmeralda’,alnus leaves compost, cocodust compost, chicken manure, BSU compost
(2.0%N,2.7%P2O5,2.4%K2O),Siglat(2.17%N,3.19%P2O5,2.27%K2O),Fedmuco(3.5%N,2.
19%P,1.44%K), measuring devices, labeling materials, recording and documenting
materials, and farm tools.
Methods
The experiment was conducted in an open field utilizing an area of 105m2with
1x5m plots. There were seven (7) fertilizer treatments with three replications. The
experiment was done following the randomized complete block design (RCBD).
Treatments were as follows:
F0- 1:1Chicken manure and 14-14-14 (Farmer’s application practice)
F1-1:1Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
F2-1:1BSU compost and Fedmuco
F3- 1:1Siglat andcocodust compost
F4- 1:1 Cocodust compost and alnus leaves compost
F5- 1:1 Fedmuco and Siglat
F6-1:1 Siglat and alnus leaves compost
The organic fertilizer mixtures described in the treatments wereapplied at 13
grams per hill and mixed thoroughly with the soil. Seeds were soon in holes, three seeds
per hill spaced 15x15 cm apart.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
9
The recommended crop maintenance in irrigation, crop protection, and other
cultural practices in spinach production were employed.
The data gathered were as follows:
1. Number of days from sowing to seedling emergence. This was taken bycoun-
ting number of days from sowing until the seedlings emerged from the soil.
2. Days from sowing to harvest. This was taken by counting the number of days
from sowing up to harvest time when the plants had reached full vegetative growth.
3. Plant height (cm). Five (5) samples were measured per treatment plot from
the base to the tip of the leaf during harvest.
4. Average plant weight (g). Ten (10) randomly uprooted plants were weighed
andthe weight was divided by ten.
5.Total yield (kg/ 5m2 plot). This was the weight of spinach plants harvested.
6.Marketable yield (kg). This was the weight of plants without defects.
7.Non-marketable yield (kg). This was the weight of rotten, malformed, and
smallsize plants.
8.Occurrence ofpestsand diseases. Insect pestsand diseases that attacked the
plants were identified and observed during the cropping period.
9. Soil Analysis. The pH, N, P, and K of the soil were determined before
application of organic fertilizer materials.
10.Cost and return analysis. The return on investment was computed using the
formula:
ROI (%) = Net Income / total expenses x 100
11.
Documentation. This was taken through photographs of the treatment plants.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
10
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Number of Days from Sowing to Seedling Emergence
Table 1 shows that there were no significant differences in the number of days
from sowing to seedling emergence as affected by the fertilizers applied.
Plant Height
Plants were significantly taller with the application of either chicken manure plus
14-14-14 or alnus leavescompost plus chicken manure (Table2).
Table 1. Number of days from sowing to seedling emergence
TREATMENT
MEAN
Chicken manure and 14-14-14
7.00a
Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
7.00a
BSU compost andFedmuco
7.00a
Siglat and cocodust
7.33a
Cocodust compost andalnus leaves compost
7.67a
Fedmuco andSiglat
7.33a
Siglat andalnusleavescompost
6.00a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% levels by DMRT
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
11
Figure 1.Overview of the experiment field
Figure 2. Harvesting of plantsFigure 3. Sample harvestedspinach plants
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
12
Chicken manure and 14-14-14
Alnus leaves compostand chicken
manure
BSU compost and Fedmuco
Siglat and cocodust compost
Cocodust compost and alnus leaves
Fedmuco and Siglat
compost
Siglat
and
alnus
leaves
compost
Figure 4.Sample treatment plants
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
13
Table 2. Plant height
TREATMENT
MEAN
(cm)
Chicken manure and 14-14-14
34.53a
Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
32.13ab
BSU compost andFedmuco
27.73bc
Siglat
andcocodust
compost
23.73c
Cocodust compost andalnus leaves compost
22.70c
Fedmuco
andSiglat
25.67c
Siglat andalnus leaves
compost
28.63bc
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% levels by DMRT
Days from Sowing to Harvest
All treatment plants reached full vegetative growth and were harvested 40 days
from sowing.
Average Plant Weight
As presented in table 3, there were no significant effects of the fertilizer
treatments onplant weight.
Total Yield
Table 4reveals that significantly higher total yield was obtainedfrom plants
applied with chicken manure plus 14-14-14 or alnus leaves compost plus chicken
manure.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
14
Table 3. Average plant weight
TREATMENT
MEAN
(g)
Chicken manure and 14-14-14
106.33a
Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
74.33a
BSU compost andFedmuco
51.33a
Siglat andcocodust compost
57.33a
Cocodustcompost andalnus leaves compost
101.67a
Fedmuco andSiglat
51.00a
Siglat andalnus leaves compost
37.00a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% levels by DMRT
Marketable Yield
Table 5 shows that the marketable yield of plants applied with chicken manure
plus 14-14-14was comparable to the yield obtained with the application ofalnus leaves
compost plus chicken manure but was significantly higher than the yield obtained from
the other treatment plants.
Non-Marketable Yield
There were no significant differences in non-marketable yield as affected by the
different fertilizers applied (Table 6).
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
15
Table 4. Total yield
TREATMENT
MEAN
(kg/5m2 plot)
Chickenmanure and 14-14-14
3.29a
Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
2.68ab
BSU compost andFedmuco
1.98bc
Siglat andcocodust compost
1.58c
Cocodust compost andalnus leaves compost
1.17c
Fedmuco andSiglat
1.83bc
Siglat andalnus leaves compost
1.65c
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% levels by DMRT
Table 5.Marketable yield
TREATMENT
MEAN
(kg/5m2 plot)
Chicken manure and 14-14-14
3.11a
Alnus leaves compostand chicken manure
2.15ab
BSU compost andFedmuco
1.89b
Siglat andcocodust compost
1.48b
Cocodust compost andalnus leaves compost
1.36b
Fedmuco andSiglat
1.72b
Siglat andalnus leaves compost
1.96b
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% levels by DMRT
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
16
Table 6.Non-marketable yield
TREATMENT
MEAN
(kg/5m2 plot)
Chicken manure and 14-14-14
0.18a
Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
0.20a
BSU compost andFedmuco
0.10a
Siglat andcocodust compost
0.11a
Cocodust compost andalnus leaves compost
0.14a
Fedmuco andSiglat
0.11a
Siglat andalnus leaves compost
0.07a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% levels by DMRT
Occurrence of Insect Pests and Diseases
During the cropping period, ants were observed attacking the seeds sown while
flea beetles and cutworms were found infesting the plants. There were no diseases found
infecting the crop.
Soil Analysis
The soil prior to the application of fertilizers had a pH of 6.59, 0.05% nitrogen, 50
ppm phosphorus, and 400 ppm potassium.
Cost and Return Analysis
Table 7 shows that the highest return on investment was obtained with the
application of chicken manure plus 14-14-14 followed by the application of alnus leaves
compost and chicken manure.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
17
Table 7. Cost and return analysis
TREATMENT
ITEM
F0
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
F6
Yield(kg/1x5m plot)
9.34 6.46 5.66 4.43
4.08 5.16
5.87
Sales 560.4
387.6
339.6
265.8
244.8
309.6
352.2
Farm Inputs:
Seeds 64
64
64
64
64
64
64
Chicken manure
54
54
-
-
-
-
-
14-14-14 75
-
-
-
-
-
-
Fedmuco -
-
90
-
-
90
-
Cocodust compost
-
-
-
41.4
41.4
-
-
Siglat -
-
-
90
-
90
90
Alnus leaves
- 32.4 -
-
- -
32.4
compost
BSU compost
-
-
82.8
-
-
82.8
-
Expenses (Php)
193
150.4
236.8 195.4 105.4
326.8
186.4
Net Income(Php)
367.4
237.2
102.8
70.4
119.4
17.2
165.8
ROI(%) 190.36
157.71
43.41
36.03
113.28
5.26
88.96
RANK 1
2
5
6
3
7
4
Note: The selling per kilogram was Php. 60.00
F0- 1:1 Chicken manure and 14-14-14 (Farmer’s application practice)
F1- 1:1 Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
F2-1:1 BSU compost and Fedmuco
F3-1:1 Siglat andcocodust compost
F4- 1:1 Cocodust compost and alnus leaves compost
F5- 1:1 Fedmuco and Siglat
F6-1:1 Siglat and alnus leaves compost
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
18
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The study was conducted at HorticultureExperiment Field of the Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet from January to February 2012 to evaluate the growth
and yield of spinach applied with different organic fertilizers, determine the best organic
fertilizer materials for spinach production, and determine the profitability of spinach
production with the applicationof different organic fertilizers.
Basedon the results,the number of days from sowing to seedling emergence and to
harvest were not significantly affected by the fertilizersapplied. However, plant height,
total, and marketable yield were significantly higher with the application of either
chicken manure plus 14-14-14 or alnus leaves compost plus chicken manure from which
higher return of investment was obtained at 190.36% and 157.71 %, respectively.
Conclusion
Higher yield and profit were obtained with the application of chicken manure and
14-14-14 or alnus leaves compost and chicken manure.
Recommendation
It is therefore recommended that spinach be applied with a combination of
chicken manure and 14-14-14 to be more productive, and for organic farming, with the
application of alnus leaves compost and chicken manure.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
19
LITERATURE CITED
BONAR, A. 1994.Vegetables.Tiger Books International PLC, London. Pp.116-117.
BUCZACKI, S. 1988. Beginner’s Guide to Gardening. First published in 1988 by Conran
Octopus Limited 37 Shelton Street London WC2H 9HN.Pp. 113.
KUDAN,J. D. 2010. Performance Evaluation of Sugarbeet (BetevulgariaL.) Varieties
as affected by organic fertilizers under La Trinidad, Benguet Condition. B.S.
Thesis.Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.Pp. 6-7.
LLOYD, J. W. 1935.Productive Vegetable Growing.4th Edition.J.B. LIPPINCOTT
COMPANY, Chicago, Philadelphia. Pp. 101-102.
MACMAHON, M. J., A. M. KOFRANEK, and V.E. RUBATZSKY.2002. 3rdEdition.
Hartman’s Plant Science: Growth, Development, and Utilization ofCultivated
Plants.Copyright by Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey
07458.Pp.459-460.
MACMILLAN, H. F. 1991.Tropical Planting and Gardening. 6th Edition.Malayan
Nature Society, Kuala Lumpur. Pp.20.
McCONNEL, P. 2003. The Agricultural Notebook.Backwell Science Ltd.Blackwell
Publishing Company.Pp.46.
WARE, G. W. 1980.Producing Vegetable Crops.3rd Edition. Copyright by the Interstate
Printers and Publishers, Inc. Pp.437-449.
SANGATAN, R. L. 2000. Practical Guide to Organic Gardening in the Philippines. Busy
Book Distributors. Quezon Cilty.
SUKIL-AP, F. B.2011. Performance of Potato (SolanumtuberosumL.)Grown from
Footed Stem Cuttings as Affected by Different Organic Fertilizers. B.S. Thesis.
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 2.
YOKOMORI M. 2007. Pilot Project forBetter Income by Organic-based
VegetableProduction. In: JAEC Organic-based Vegetables Project in Benguet,
Province,Philippines. Pp. 1-13.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
20
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Number of days from sowing to seedling emergence
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
Chickenmanure and
9.00 6.00 6.00 21.00
7.00
14-14-14
Alnus leaves
7.00 7.00 7.00 21.00
7.00
compostand chicken
manure
BSU compost
7.00 7.00 7.00 21.00
7.00
andFedmuco
Siglat andcocodust
8.00 8.00 6.00 22.00
7.33
compost
Cocodust compost
9.00 7.00 7.00 23.00
7.67
andalnus leaves
compost
Fedmucoand Siglat
8.00
8.00
6.00
22.00
7.33
Siglat plus alnus
6.00 6.00 6.00 18.00
6.00
leaves compost
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
5% 1%
Replication 2 5.809
2.904
Treatment 6 4.952
0.825
1.209ns
2.996 4.821
Error 12
8.190
0.682
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
21
Total 20
18.952
Ns- not significant
Coefficient of variation=11.72%
Appendix Table 2.Plant height (cm)
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
Chickenmanure and14-
34.60 33.30 35.70 103.60
34.53
14-14
Alnus leaves compost
33.40 32.70 30.30 96.40 32.13
and chicken manure
BSU compost
31.00 27.80 24.40 83.20 27.73
andFedmuco
Siglat andcocodust
23.70 27.80 19.70 71.20 23.73
compost
Cocodust compost
25.60 24.00 18.50 68.10 22.70
andalnus leaves compost
Fedmuco and Siglat
27.30
25.40
24.30
77.00
25.67
Siglat plus alnus leaves
27.80 24.60 33.50 85.90 28.63
compost
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
5% 1%
Replication 2 20.690
10.345
Treatment 6
335.618
55.936
5.833**
2.996 4.821
Error 12
115.0705
9.589
Total 20
471.378
**- highly significant Coefficient of variation=11.11%
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
22
Appendix Table 3. Average plant weight (g)
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
Chickenmanure and
129.00 70.00 120.00 319.00
106.33
14-14-14
Alnus leaves compost
103.00 29.00 91.00 91.00 74.33
and chicken manure
BSU compost
61.00 44.00 49.00 49.00
51.33
andFedmuco
Siglat andcocodust
62.00 90.00 20.00 20.00
57.33
compost
Cocodust compost
71.00 24.00 210.00
210.00
101.67
andalnus leaves
compost
Fedmuco and Siglat
65.00
53.00
35.00
35.00
51.00
Siglat plus alnus
25.00 15.00 71.00 71.00
37.00
leaves compost
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
5% 1%
Replication 2
5539.143
2769.571
Treatment
6
12849.81
2141.635
1.106779ns
2.996 4.821
Error 12
23220.19
1935.016
Total 20
41609.14
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
23
Ns-not significant Coefficient of variation=64.28%
Appendix Table 4. Total yield (kg/ 1x5mplot)
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
Chickenmanure and 14-
2.47 4.15 3.25 9.87 3.29
14-14
Alnus leaves compost
2.23 2.99 2.83 8.05 2.68
and chicken manure
BSU compost
2.22 1.93 1.80 5.95 1.98
andFedmuco
Siglat andcocodust
1.46 2.03 1.26 4.75 1.58
compost
Cocodust compost
1.20 1.15 1.15 3.50 1.17
andalnus leaves
compost
Fedmuco and Siglat
2.15
1.69
1.69
5.49
1.83
Siglat plus alnus leaves
1.60 2.31 2.31 4.96 1.65
compost
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
5% 1%
Replication 2 0.190
0.095
Treatment 6 9.430
1.572
6.479**
2.996 4.821
Error 12
2.911
0.243
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
24
Total 20
12.530
**-highly significant Coefficient of variation=24.30%
Appendix Table 5.Marketable yield (kg/ 1x5m plot)
REPLICATION
MEAN
TREATMENT
TOTAL
I II III
Chicken manure and
2.29 4.05 3.00
9.34
3.11
14-14-14
Alnus leaves compost
1.13 2.79 2.54
6.46
2.15
and chicken manure
BSU compost
2.13 1.84 1.69
5.66
1.89
andFedmuco
Siglat andcocodust
1.36 1.94 1.13
4.43
1.48
compost
Cocodust compost
2.01 1.04 1.03
4.08
1.36
andalnus leaves compost
Fedmuco and Siglat
1.95
1.58
1.63
5.16
1.72
Siglat plus alnus leaves
1.50 2.11 2.26
4.74
1.96
compost
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
5% 1%
2 0.666
0.333
Replication
6 6.071
1.012
3.043*
2.996 4.821
Treatment
12 3.991
0.332
Error
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
25
Total 20
10.728
*- significant Coefficient of variation=29.54%
Appendix Table 6.Non-marketable yield (kg/1x5m plot)
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II
III
Chicken manure and
0.18 0.10 0.25
0.53
0.18
14-14-14
Alnus leaves compost
0.10 0.20 0.29
0.59
0.20
and chicken manure
BSU compost
0.09 0.09 0.11
0.29
0.10
andFedmuco
Siglat andcocodust
0.10 0.09 0.13
0.32
0.11
compost
Cocodust compost
0.19 0.11 0.12
0.42
0.14
andalnus leaves
compost
Fedmuco and Siglat
0.20
0.07
0.06
0.33
0.11
Siglat andalnus leaves
0.10 0.07 0.05
0.22
0.07
compost
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
5% 1%
Replication 2 0.006
0.003
Treatment 6 0.036
0.006
1.737ns
2.996 4.821
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
26
Error 12
0.041
0.003
Total 20
0.084
Ns- not significant Coefficient of variation=45.66%
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
27
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
BALDAZAN, WARNEIL T. APRIL 2012.Growth and Profitability of SpinachF1Hybrid
‘Esmeralda’as Affected by Various Organic Fertilizers.Benguet StateUniversity, La Trinidad,
Benguet.
Adviser: Percival B. Alipit, Ph.D.
ABSTRACT
This study was conducted at Horticulture Experiment Field, Benguet State University,
La Trinidad, Benguet from January to February 2012 to evaluate the growth and yield of spinach
applied with different organic fertilizers, determine the best organic fertilizer materials for
spinach, and determine the profitability of spinach production as affected by different organic
fertilizers.
Results revealthat there were no significant differences on the number of days from
sowing to seedling emergence and to harvest. However, application of chicken dung plus 14-14-
14 or alnus leaves compost plus chicken manure significantly increased plant height and
marketable yield from which higher return on investment at 190.36% and 157.71 %, respectively
were derived.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography............................................................................................ i
Abstract…….…………………………………………………………...
i
Table of Contents.....................................................................................
ii
INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The
Crop………………………………………………………..
3
Climatic Requirements ………………...………………………
3
Nutritional Value……………………………………………….
3
Soil Preference of Spinach …………………………………….
4
Organic
Fertilizer……….............................................................
4
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials......................................................................................
8
Methods.......................................................................................
8
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Number of days from sowing to seedling emergence………….
10
Plant height…….……………………………………………….
10
Days from sowing to harvest……………….…………………..
13
Average plant weight …..………………..……………………..
13
Total yield…….……………………………….....……………..
13
Marketable yield………………………………..………………
14
Non-Marketable yield…………………………….….…………
14
Occurrence of insect pests and diseases……………………….
16
Soil analysis……………………………………………………
16
Cost and return analysis……………………………………….
16
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary……………………………….………………………
18
Conclusion…………………………..…………………………
18
Recommendation………………………………………………
18
LITERATURE CITED…………….……………..……………………
19
APPENDICES…………………………………………………………
20
1
INTRODUCTION
There are lots of vegetables being produced in the province of Benguet. Most are
grown commercially and are being sold in local and national markets. For example
cabbage, carrots, lettuce, broccoli, cauliflower, and potato are the major crops favorable
grown by farmers in the province. However, there are other vegetable crops that can be
produced under Benguet condition as such spinach, which it is very popular in other
countries and valuable due to its medicinal and nutritive values.
Spinach
(Spinaciaoleracea) belongs to the chenopodiaceae family which includes
the beet and chard. Spinach was first introduced in Europe in the thirteenth or fourteenth
century, coming from Asia, where it originated, by way of Africa (Ware, 1980).
Spinach is native to central Asia, most likely in the area of Iran. The absences of
records suggest that its domestication was fairly recent. Although it is widely distributed,
spinach is not an intensively grown crop. From 1996 to 1998, annual U.S. spinach
production averaged approximately 527 million pounds. From1996 to 1998, annual U.S.
processing spinach production averaged approximately 254 million pounds (MacMahonet
al., 2002).
According to Sukil-ap (2011) application of organic fertilizer contributes much in
the growth and development of the crop as well as in its eating quality. Organic matter
has been found to improve the physical and chemical properties of the soil. Processed
chicken manure, Sagana 100 and other organic fertilizers applied in minimal amount
compared to animal manure can provide nutrition to the crop similar to that of the
inorganic fertilizers.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
2
Spinach is not yet popular in the locality as vegetable crop but it has economic
potentials. Providing proper nutrition to the crop insures better yield and quality and
higher income of the farmers. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the growth and yield of
spinach applied with different organic fertilizers, determine the best organic fertilizer
materials for spinach production, and determine the profitability of spinach production
with the application of various organic fertilizers.
The study was conducted at the Horticulture Experiment Field, Benguet State
University, La Trinidad,Benguet from January to February 2012.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The Crop
Bonar (1994) stated that spinach of some kind was listed as a garden plant long
ago in the 15th century in Britain, when it was used in sweet dishes. In spite of this, it was
known as the ‘Spanish vegetable’ because it was thought to originate in Spain and was
introduced by the Moors. In fact, Asia is its native habitat, and it was eaten by Greeks and
Romans, not just used for medical purposes.
Like lettuce, spinach grows quickly, but unlike most lettuce varieties, it is cut-
and-come-again crop. In other words, you pull a small amount from each plant at each
picking and then allow more leaves or shoots to develop (Buczacki, 1988).
Nutritional Value
From the health point of view spinach contains a good deal of vitamin A and B, a
useful quantity of vitamin C, together with potassium, iron and calcium, but most of these
are lost if the leaves are boiled. They are better steamed, but even so the water used for
steaming becomes discolored suggesting that some goodness is still being lost. The oxalic
acid in spinach makes its calcium unavailable when boiled in water. To retain its
nutrients, it is best simmered in milk as a soup. With a low calorie value and high dietary
fiber, spinach has a great deal to commend it as a vegetable: easily grown, and prolific
crop, it has considerable dietetic use (Bonar, 1994).
Climatic Requirements
Spinach is essentially hardy, cool season crop. When fairly well hardened, it can
survive temperatures of 20F or lower without suffering injury. High temperatures and
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
4
especially long days cause spinach to bolt and produce seeds, thus destroying its market
value. In general, it is a short-season crop, maturing from 6 to 10 weeks, depending on
the prevailing climatic conditions (Ware, 1980).
Soil Preference of Spinach
Spinach grows well on a wide range of soils, but it yields best on a heavy loam. In
southwest Texas, much of the spinach is grown on well-drained alluvial soils, silt and
clay loams also are used fairly widely. In Virginia, there are acreages of spinach on sandy
and gravelly loams. Sandy soils are desired for winter and early spring crops. Muck soils
are used in north for their main crop and processing spinach. A good soil should have
good drainage and if possible be well supplied with organic matter (Ware, 1980).
Organic Fertilizer
The use of manures and fertilizers is briefly, to supply nutrients to the soil to
enable plants to make the maximum growth or produce the best crops, restore the fertility
of an exhausted soil and enrich a naturally poor soil. They may be contribute directly by
supplying plant-food, or indirectly by (a) reacting chemically or bacteriologically on
substances already present in the soil but not in a form capable of being absorbed by
plants; (b) by improving the mechanical condition of the soil, thus rendering more
penetrable to the roots of growing crops (Macmillan, 1991).
Animal manures are especially valuable in vegetable gardening, for in addition to
the plant food they contain they supply a large amount of organic matter to the soil,
which, as indicated above, assists in the liberation of plant food already present in the
soil. Their composition depends chiefly upon kind of manure (whether produced by
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
5
horses, cattle, sheep, swine or poultry), the amount litter contains, and the condition
under which it has been kept. Animal manures, whether composed or not, form a better
balanced fertilizer for many vegetables than they do for general farm crops, especially the
cereal grains. This is because of their relatively high content of nitrogen and potassium as
compared with phosphorus. Vegetables, especially those of which a vegetative part (root,
stem or leaf) constitutes the edible product, demand nitrogen in large quantities and are
less exacting in their demands for phosphorus (Lloyd, 1935).
The use of organic fertilizer and organic fertilizer-based fungicides/insecticides
result to good growth, yield, safe and tasty vegetables. Organic fertilizer makes soil good
and rich in nutrient elements. Fields with enriched soil let vegetables grow fast, healthy
and strong. Growth continuous until time of harvest because the soil continuous to
provide nutrients. Plants have fewer pest and diseases and vegetables can be harvested in
shorter days. Products are larger and look better and they contain vitamins and minerals
in larger percentage. The use of organic- based materials will let us save at least half of
chemicals and fertilizers compared with traditional farming practices (Yokomori, 2007).
McConnel (2003) state that organic fertilizers are derived from either plant or
animal materials. Not all the nutrients contained in such materials are in organic form and
those that are in organic form are not or completely available to plants. Complex organic
compounds will become part of the soil organic cycle and could perhaps have an eventual
nutrient value, depending on the activity of the soil biomass.
Compared with inorganic sources of nutrients, organic sources have the following
features:
• They are not immediately soluble in water and so not readily leached
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
6
• Because they have to breakdown to become partially soluble, they can act as
slow-release source of plant nutrient.
• They can be applied at heavy rates without risk of injury to roots or germinating
seeds as they have little ionic activity.
• They can stimulate microbial activity.
• They are much more costly per unit of plant food (unless by-products).
• The recovery of nutrients contained in the materials is low.
Organic fertilizers have restricted use in cropping systems that use mineral
fertilizer, but they do have a place in organic production systems, particularly market
gardening and horticulture where the slow-release characteristics have application for
some high-value crops that are grown.
According to Sangatan (2000) as cited by Kudan (2010) organic fertilizer/organic
manure are generally the most valuable soil conditioner. The materials from organic
fertilizer generally have low content of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium but they also
supply other essential micronutrients. As soil conditioners, organic fertilizer helps
prevent soil erosion, crashing and cracking of soil. They retain soil humidity and improve
the internal drainage of the soil.
Nitrogen and other elements contained in organic fertilizer are released slowly.
Thus, their continuous application helps build up the soil, particularly when this is done
for over a long period of time.
Organic fertilizer such as compost, animal manure,azolla,ipil-ipil, industrial
wastes, and oil seed meals can be used in place of chemical fertilizer. Organic fertilizer
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
7
should serve as supplement to inorganic fertilizer. It improves the physical make-up of
the soil and enriches the organic matter (Kudan, 2010).
According to Sangatan (2000) as cited by Kudan (2010) the color of the soil
changes from light to dark. It promotes good physical condition of the soil. The organic
fertilizer makes the soil friable and loose, resulting in the better soil aeration and
drainage, and making it easier for the roots to grow. In sandy soils, the organic matter
may be help bind together the sand particles and increase its water holding capacity. The
physical condition of organic matter itself is also ideal for mixing it with chemical
fertilizer before application. The cation exchange capacity of the soil is increased and its
nutrient availability is enhanced with the application of organic acids in humus that aids
in extracting plant nutrients from mineral soil. Organic materials supply energy and
building constituents for the multiplication of beneficial soil micro-organisms.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
8
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials
The materials thatwere used in the study were seeds of spinach F1 hybrid
‘Esmeralda’,alnus leaves compost, cocodust compost, chicken manure, BSU compost
(2.0%N,2.7%P2O5,2.4%K2O),Siglat(2.17%N,3.19%P2O5,2.27%K2O),Fedmuco(3.5%N,2.
19%P,1.44%K), measuring devices, labeling materials, recording and documenting
materials, and farm tools.
Methods
The experiment was conducted in an open field utilizing an area of 105m2with
1x5m plots. There were seven (7) fertilizer treatments with three replications. The
experiment was done following the randomized complete block design (RCBD).
Treatments were as follows:
F0- 1:1Chicken manure and 14-14-14 (Farmer’s application practice)
F1-1:1Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
F2-1:1BSU compost and Fedmuco
F3- 1:1Siglat andcocodust compost
F4- 1:1 Cocodust compost and alnus leaves compost
F5- 1:1 Fedmuco and Siglat
F6-1:1 Siglat and alnus leaves compost
The organic fertilizer mixtures described in the treatments wereapplied at 13
grams per hill and mixed thoroughly with the soil. Seeds were soon in holes, three seeds
per hill spaced 15x15 cm apart.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
9
The recommended crop maintenance in irrigation, crop protection, and other
cultural practices in spinach production were employed.
The data gathered were as follows:
1. Number of days from sowing to seedling emergence. This was taken bycoun-
ting number of days from sowing until the seedlings emerged from the soil.
2. Days from sowing to harvest. This was taken by counting the number of days
from sowing up to harvest time when the plants had reached full vegetative growth.
3. Plant height (cm). Five (5) samples were measured per treatment plot from
the base to the tip of the leaf during harvest.
4. Average plant weight (g). Ten (10) randomly uprooted plants were weighed
andthe weight was divided by ten.
5.Total yield (kg/ 5m2 plot). This was the weight of spinach plants harvested.
6.Marketable yield (kg). This was the weight of plants without defects.
7.Non-marketable yield (kg). This was the weight of rotten, malformed, and
smallsize plants.
8.Occurrence ofpestsand diseases. Insect pestsand diseases that attacked the
plants were identified and observed during the cropping period.
9. Soil Analysis. The pH, N, P, and K of the soil were determined before
application of organic fertilizer materials.
10.Cost and return analysis. The return on investment was computed using the
formula:
ROI (%) = Net Income / total expenses x 100
11.
Documentation. This was taken through photographs of the treatment plants.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
10
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Number of Days from Sowing to Seedling Emergence
Table 1 shows that there were no significant differences in the number of days
from sowing to seedling emergence as affected by the fertilizers applied.
Plant Height
Plants were significantly taller with the application of either chicken manure plus
14-14-14 or alnus leavescompost plus chicken manure (Table2).
Table 1. Number of days from sowing to seedling emergence
TREATMENT
MEAN
Chicken manure and 14-14-14
7.00a
Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
7.00a
BSU compost andFedmuco
7.00a
Siglat and cocodust
7.33a
Cocodust compost andalnus leaves compost
7.67a
Fedmuco andSiglat
7.33a
Siglat andalnusleavescompost
6.00a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% levels by DMRT
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
11
Figure 1.Overview of the experiment field
Figure 2. Harvesting of plantsFigure 3. Sample harvestedspinach plants
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
12
Chicken manure and 14-14-14
Alnus leaves compostand chicken
manure
BSU compost and Fedmuco
Siglat and cocodust compost
Cocodust compost and alnus leaves
Fedmuco and Siglat
compost
Siglat
and
alnus
leaves
compost
Figure 4.Sample treatment plants
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
13
Table 2. Plant height
TREATMENT
MEAN
(cm)
Chicken manure and 14-14-14
34.53a
Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
32.13ab
BSU compost andFedmuco
27.73bc
Siglat
andcocodust
compost
23.73c
Cocodust compost andalnus leaves compost
22.70c
Fedmuco
andSiglat
25.67c
Siglat andalnus leaves
compost
28.63bc
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% levels by DMRT
Days from Sowing to Harvest
All treatment plants reached full vegetative growth and were harvested 40 days
from sowing.
Average Plant Weight
As presented in table 3, there were no significant effects of the fertilizer
treatments onplant weight.
Total Yield
Table 4reveals that significantly higher total yield was obtainedfrom plants
applied with chicken manure plus 14-14-14 or alnus leaves compost plus chicken
manure.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
14
Table 3. Average plant weight
TREATMENT
MEAN
(g)
Chicken manure and 14-14-14
106.33a
Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
74.33a
BSU compost andFedmuco
51.33a
Siglat andcocodust compost
57.33a
Cocodustcompost andalnus leaves compost
101.67a
Fedmuco andSiglat
51.00a
Siglat andalnus leaves compost
37.00a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% levels by DMRT
Marketable Yield
Table 5 shows that the marketable yield of plants applied with chicken manure
plus 14-14-14was comparable to the yield obtained with the application ofalnus leaves
compost plus chicken manure but was significantly higher than the yield obtained from
the other treatment plants.
Non-Marketable Yield
There were no significant differences in non-marketable yield as affected by the
different fertilizers applied (Table 6).
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
15
Table 4. Total yield
TREATMENT
MEAN
(kg/5m2 plot)
Chickenmanure and 14-14-14
3.29a
Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
2.68ab
BSU compost andFedmuco
1.98bc
Siglat andcocodust compost
1.58c
Cocodust compost andalnus leaves compost
1.17c
Fedmuco andSiglat
1.83bc
Siglat andalnus leaves compost
1.65c
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% levels by DMRT
Table 5.Marketable yield
TREATMENT
MEAN
(kg/5m2 plot)
Chicken manure and 14-14-14
3.11a
Alnus leaves compostand chicken manure
2.15ab
BSU compost andFedmuco
1.89b
Siglat andcocodust compost
1.48b
Cocodust compost andalnus leaves compost
1.36b
Fedmuco andSiglat
1.72b
Siglat andalnus leaves compost
1.96b
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% levels by DMRT
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
16
Table 6.Non-marketable yield
TREATMENT
MEAN
(kg/5m2 plot)
Chicken manure and 14-14-14
0.18a
Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
0.20a
BSU compost andFedmuco
0.10a
Siglat andcocodust compost
0.11a
Cocodust compost andalnus leaves compost
0.14a
Fedmuco andSiglat
0.11a
Siglat andalnus leaves compost
0.07a
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% levels by DMRT
Occurrence of Insect Pests and Diseases
During the cropping period, ants were observed attacking the seeds sown while
flea beetles and cutworms were found infesting the plants. There were no diseases found
infecting the crop.
Soil Analysis
The soil prior to the application of fertilizers had a pH of 6.59, 0.05% nitrogen, 50
ppm phosphorus, and 400 ppm potassium.
Cost and Return Analysis
Table 7 shows that the highest return on investment was obtained with the
application of chicken manure plus 14-14-14 followed by the application of alnus leaves
compost and chicken manure.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
17
Table 7. Cost and return analysis
TREATMENT
ITEM
F0
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
F6
Yield(kg/1x5m plot)
9.34 6.46 5.66 4.43
4.08 5.16
5.87
Sales 560.4
387.6
339.6
265.8
244.8
309.6
352.2
Farm Inputs:
Seeds 64
64
64
64
64
64
64
Chicken manure
54
54
-
-
-
-
-
14-14-14 75
-
-
-
-
-
-
Fedmuco -
-
90
-
-
90
-
Cocodust compost
-
-
-
41.4
41.4
-
-
Siglat -
-
-
90
-
90
90
Alnus leaves
- 32.4 -
-
- -
32.4
compost
BSU compost
-
-
82.8
-
-
82.8
-
Expenses (Php)
193
150.4
236.8 195.4 105.4
326.8
186.4
Net Income(Php)
367.4
237.2
102.8
70.4
119.4
17.2
165.8
ROI(%) 190.36
157.71
43.41
36.03
113.28
5.26
88.96
RANK 1
2
5
6
3
7
4
Note: The selling per kilogram was Php. 60.00
F0- 1:1 Chicken manure and 14-14-14 (Farmer’s application practice)
F1- 1:1 Alnus leaves compost and chicken manure
F2-1:1 BSU compost and Fedmuco
F3-1:1 Siglat andcocodust compost
F4- 1:1 Cocodust compost and alnus leaves compost
F5- 1:1 Fedmuco and Siglat
F6-1:1 Siglat and alnus leaves compost
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
18
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The study was conducted at HorticultureExperiment Field of the Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet from January to February 2012 to evaluate the growth
and yield of spinach applied with different organic fertilizers, determine the best organic
fertilizer materials for spinach production, and determine the profitability of spinach
production with the applicationof different organic fertilizers.
Basedon the results,the number of days from sowing to seedling emergence and to
harvest were not significantly affected by the fertilizersapplied. However, plant height,
total, and marketable yield were significantly higher with the application of either
chicken manure plus 14-14-14 or alnus leaves compost plus chicken manure from which
higher return of investment was obtained at 190.36% and 157.71 %, respectively.
Conclusion
Higher yield and profit were obtained with the application of chicken manure and
14-14-14 or alnus leaves compost and chicken manure.
Recommendation
It is therefore recommended that spinach be applied with a combination of
chicken manure and 14-14-14 to be more productive, and for organic farming, with the
application of alnus leaves compost and chicken manure.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
19
LITERATURE CITED
BONAR, A. 1994.Vegetables.Tiger Books International PLC, London. Pp.116-117.
BUCZACKI, S. 1988. Beginner’s Guide to Gardening. First published in 1988 by Conran
Octopus Limited 37 Shelton Street London WC2H 9HN.Pp. 113.
KUDAN,J. D. 2010. Performance Evaluation of Sugarbeet (BetevulgariaL.) Varieties
as affected by organic fertilizers under La Trinidad, Benguet Condition. B.S.
Thesis.Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.Pp. 6-7.
LLOYD, J. W. 1935.Productive Vegetable Growing.4th Edition.J.B. LIPPINCOTT
COMPANY, Chicago, Philadelphia. Pp. 101-102.
MACMAHON, M. J., A. M. KOFRANEK, and V.E. RUBATZSKY.2002. 3rdEdition.
Hartman’s Plant Science: Growth, Development, and Utilization ofCultivated
Plants.Copyright by Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey
07458.Pp.459-460.
MACMILLAN, H. F. 1991.Tropical Planting and Gardening. 6th Edition.Malayan
Nature Society, Kuala Lumpur. Pp.20.
McCONNEL, P. 2003. The Agricultural Notebook.Backwell Science Ltd.Blackwell
Publishing Company.Pp.46.
WARE, G. W. 1980.Producing Vegetable Crops.3rd Edition. Copyright by the Interstate
Printers and Publishers, Inc. Pp.437-449.
SANGATAN, R. L. 2000. Practical Guide to Organic Gardening in the Philippines. Busy
Book Distributors. Quezon Cilty.
SUKIL-AP, F. B.2011. Performance of Potato (SolanumtuberosumL.)Grown from
Footed Stem Cuttings as Affected by Different Organic Fertilizers. B.S. Thesis.
Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 2.
YOKOMORI M. 2007. Pilot Project forBetter Income by Organic-based
VegetableProduction. In: JAEC Organic-based Vegetables Project in Benguet,
Province,Philippines. Pp. 1-13.
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
20
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Number of days from sowing to seedling emergence
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II III
Chickenmanure and
9.00 6.00 6.00 21.00
7.00
14-14-14
Alnus leaves
7.00 7.00 7.00 21.00
7.00
compostand chicken
manure
BSU compost
7.00 7.00 7.00 21.00
7.00
andFedmuco
Siglat andcocodust
8.00 8.00 6.00 22.00
7.33
compost
Cocodust compost
9.00 7.00 7.00 23.00
7.67
andalnus leaves
compost
Fedmucoand Siglat
8.00
8.00
6.00
22.00
7.33
Siglat plus alnus
6.00 6.00 6.00 18.00
6.00
leaves compost
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
5% 1%
Replication 2 5.809
2.904
Treatment 6 4.952
0.825
1.209ns
2.996 4.821
Error 12
8.190
0.682
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
21
Total 20
18.952
Ns- not significant
Coefficient of variation=11.72%
Appendix Table 2.Plant height (cm)
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
Chickenmanure and14-
34.60 33.30 35.70 103.60
34.53
14-14
Alnus leaves compost
33.40 32.70 30.30 96.40 32.13
and chicken manure
BSU compost
31.00 27.80 24.40 83.20 27.73
andFedmuco
Siglat andcocodust
23.70 27.80 19.70 71.20 23.73
compost
Cocodust compost
25.60 24.00 18.50 68.10 22.70
andalnus leaves compost
Fedmuco and Siglat
27.30
25.40
24.30
77.00
25.67
Siglat plus alnus leaves
27.80 24.60 33.50 85.90 28.63
compost
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
5% 1%
Replication 2 20.690
10.345
Treatment 6
335.618
55.936
5.833**
2.996 4.821
Error 12
115.0705
9.589
Total 20
471.378
**- highly significant Coefficient of variation=11.11%
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
22
Appendix Table 3. Average plant weight (g)
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
Chickenmanure and
129.00 70.00 120.00 319.00
106.33
14-14-14
Alnus leaves compost
103.00 29.00 91.00 91.00 74.33
and chicken manure
BSU compost
61.00 44.00 49.00 49.00
51.33
andFedmuco
Siglat andcocodust
62.00 90.00 20.00 20.00
57.33
compost
Cocodust compost
71.00 24.00 210.00
210.00
101.67
andalnus leaves
compost
Fedmuco and Siglat
65.00
53.00
35.00
35.00
51.00
Siglat plus alnus
25.00 15.00 71.00 71.00
37.00
leaves compost
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
5% 1%
Replication 2
5539.143
2769.571
Treatment
6
12849.81
2141.635
1.106779ns
2.996 4.821
Error 12
23220.19
1935.016
Total 20
41609.14
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
23
Ns-not significant Coefficient of variation=64.28%
Appendix Table 4. Total yield (kg/ 1x5mplot)
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
TOTAL
MEAN
I II III
Chickenmanure and 14-
2.47 4.15 3.25 9.87 3.29
14-14
Alnus leaves compost
2.23 2.99 2.83 8.05 2.68
and chicken manure
BSU compost
2.22 1.93 1.80 5.95 1.98
andFedmuco
Siglat andcocodust
1.46 2.03 1.26 4.75 1.58
compost
Cocodust compost
1.20 1.15 1.15 3.50 1.17
andalnus leaves
compost
Fedmuco and Siglat
2.15
1.69
1.69
5.49
1.83
Siglat plus alnus leaves
1.60 2.31 2.31 4.96 1.65
compost
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
5% 1%
Replication 2 0.190
0.095
Treatment 6 9.430
1.572
6.479**
2.996 4.821
Error 12
2.911
0.243
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
24
Total 20
12.530
**-highly significant Coefficient of variation=24.30%
Appendix Table 5.Marketable yield (kg/ 1x5m plot)
REPLICATION
MEAN
TREATMENT
TOTAL
I II III
Chicken manure and
2.29 4.05 3.00
9.34
3.11
14-14-14
Alnus leaves compost
1.13 2.79 2.54
6.46
2.15
and chicken manure
BSU compost
2.13 1.84 1.69
5.66
1.89
andFedmuco
Siglat andcocodust
1.36 1.94 1.13
4.43
1.48
compost
Cocodust compost
2.01 1.04 1.03
4.08
1.36
andalnus leaves compost
Fedmuco and Siglat
1.95
1.58
1.63
5.16
1.72
Siglat plus alnus leaves
1.50 2.11 2.26
4.74
1.96
compost
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
5% 1%
2 0.666
0.333
Replication
6 6.071
1.012
3.043*
2.996 4.821
Treatment
12 3.991
0.332
Error
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
25
Total 20
10.728
*- significant Coefficient of variation=29.54%
Appendix Table 6.Non-marketable yield (kg/1x5m plot)
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
I II
III
Chicken manure and
0.18 0.10 0.25
0.53
0.18
14-14-14
Alnus leaves compost
0.10 0.20 0.29
0.59
0.20
and chicken manure
BSU compost
0.09 0.09 0.11
0.29
0.10
andFedmuco
Siglat andcocodust
0.10 0.09 0.13
0.32
0.11
compost
Cocodust compost
0.19 0.11 0.12
0.42
0.14
andalnus leaves
compost
Fedmuco and Siglat
0.20
0.07
0.06
0.33
0.11
Siglat andalnus leaves
0.10 0.07 0.05
0.22
0.07
compost
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR
VARIATION
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
F
FREEDOM
5% 1%
Replication 2 0.006
0.003
Treatment 6 0.036
0.006
1.737ns
2.996 4.821
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
26
Error 12
0.041
0.003
Total 20
0.084
Ns- not significant Coefficient of variation=45.66%
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
27
Growth and Profitability of Spinach F1 Hybrid ‘Esmeralda’ as Affected by
Various Organic Fertilizers / Warneil T. Baldazan. 2012
Document Outline
- Growth and Profitability of SpinachF1Hybrid�Esmeralda�as Affected by Various Organic Fertilizers
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATION
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES