BIBLIOGRAPHY FIANZA, MICHAEL JORDAN V. APRIL...
BIBLIOGRAPHY
FIANZA, MICHAEL JORDAN V. APRIL 2012. Growth and Yield of
Potato(Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under Paoay, Atok, Benguet
condition.Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Danilo P. Padua, Ph.D
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted atPaoay, Atok, Benguet;determine the growth and yield
performance of potato seed tuber as affected by soil enhancers; determine the best soil
enhancers for potato production; and compare the profitability of potato stem cuttings and
seed tuber using soil enhancers through return on cash expenditures (ROCE).
Based on the results, plants applied withVitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14) performed the
best in terms of its growth, survival, vigorousness, and canopy cover at 30 DAP, 45 DAP,
and 60DAP, it also produced the highest and heaviest tubers and was the highest yield.
Based on the result of the study, Vitazyme was the best soil enhancer out of the 3
soil enhancers that were used in the study.
On the return on cash expenses, all the soil enhancers had positive income but
quite low ranging only from 11.5 (Nitromax + 0.60kg T-14) to 18.7 (Vitazyme + 0.60kg
T-14). The effect of the soil enhancers could be better appreciated though during the
succeeding planting.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ii
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
MATERIALS AND METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
Meteorological Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
Soil Chemical Properties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
Number of Days from Planting to
Emergence and Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
Percentage Plant Survival . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
Plant Vigor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
18
Initial and Final Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
Canopy Cover at 30, 45 and 60
Days After Planting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20
Number and Weight of Marketable Tubers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
Number and Weight of Non marketable Tubers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Yield per Plot and Computed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under Paoay, Atok,
Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
Yield Tons per Hectare . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23
Late Blight Occurrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
24
Leaf Miner Incidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
25
Return on Cash Expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
25
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . …... . . . . . . . . . . . .
27
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .
28
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .
28
LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . .
30
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
32
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under Paoay, Atok,
Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
INTRODUCTION
Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) was a crop introduced in the highlands of the
Cordillera between 1930's to 1940's by the Americans, who established the Camp John
Hay Recreational Base in Baguio City. Beginning at this time, potato production created
big business opportunities for the Cordillera farmers (Aquino, 2009).
Currently, potato is the fourth largest source of food in the world after rice, wheat,
and corn. Every year, 350 million tons of potatoes are produced and 52 percent of these
are in developing countries (Tacio, 2011).
In many potato producing areas, Benguet included, one of the major constraints in
potato production is the poor quality of planting material (Khatri, 1995) and soil
degradation due to continuous cropping.
In traditional potato production, the success and failure of commercial production
depends principally on the quality of tubers planted. However, to further increase profit,
other planting materials such as rooted stem cuttings should be considered. Rooted stem
cuttings are available at 8-15 days as compared to seed tubers with dormancy period of 8-
15 months (Tacio, 2011).
The relatively new technology of using potato stem cuttings for production is still
not widely practiced. Farmers still prefer potato tubers as planting material which they
save from their previous operations. However, even with the presence of both stem
cuttings and seed tubers, a continuous supply of quality planting materials, which is the
basic input in crop production, is not guaranteed (Bryan, 1984).
New products like soil enhancers are coming out to help in bringing back the soil
nutrients that are lost due to continuous cropping. The product promises greater yield,
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
2
higher profit, lesser cost of production and better protection to the environment. If such
products are proven effective, this study could be very meaningful in increasing potato
production, profit and environmental care.
The objectives of the study were as follows:
1. to determine the growth and yield performance of potato seed tuber as affected
by soil enhancers;
2. to determine the best soil enhancers for potato production; and
3. to compare the profitability of potato stem cuttings and seed tuber using soil
enhancers through return on cash expenditures (ROCE).
The research was conducted from November, 2011 until January, 2012 at Paoay,
Atok, Benguet.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
At present, most farmers in Benguet grow the Granola cultivar. The farmers
prefer this variety because it is adapted to the wet and dry cropping seasons as well as
warm and cold weather condition. This variety has been with the farmers for almost 15
cropping generations (Ayangdan, 1998). New selections, I-1085 (Po4) and LBR 1-5 (BSU
Po3) are recommended for the highlands. I-1085 is resistant to late blight and suitable for
French fries processing. The selection LBR 1-5 is the first highland potato variety
entirely developed through hybridization and selection in the Philippines.
One of the major constrains to potato production in the Philippine highlands is the
occurrence of Phythopthorainfestans, commonly known as late blight. Highland farmers
spray 20 times per season making fungicide application about 50% of the total cost of
production. The use of resistant varieties is the best and most economical control against
this major destructive disease. (Nisperoset al., 1984)
Use of Stem Cuttings and Seed Tubers
Cole and Wright (1957), as cited by Bryan (1984) stated that the utilization of
cuttings as planting materials was the first alternative to seed tubers. It was shown that
eight plants from one tuber could produce 5000 rooted cuttings in six months by cloning
and re cloning. The first practical use of stem cutting seems to be more related to removal
of non systematic disease such as ervina and phoma spp.
Ba-a (2002) noted that seed tubers as a planting material for three varieties
granola, Igorota and Raniag gave higher yield than stem cuttings for potato production in
Abiang, Atok Benguet. Among the three varieties evaluated, Igorota produced the highest
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
4
yield and has the highest return as investment. Seed tuber as planting materials was
proven to be better than the stem cuttings.
On the other hand, rooted stem cuttings serve not only as low cost planting
materials but also as a source for clean and healthy planting materials. Vander Zaag et al.
(1988) reported that under optimal management, stem cuttings give high competitive
yields with tuber seeds with over 20 tons per hectare. Plant survival varied with
genotypes but tuber size was generally similar to that from seed tuber grown.
Soil Enhancers Defined
Soil enhancer could be a mixture of quality organic materials and beneficial
micro- organisms that have a reviving action on the natural environment. Most of the
organisms are used in the food processing industry and in the field of probiotic medicine.
The fermentation process converts sugars and proteins, which are easily decomposed into
organic acids and amino acids. Unlike the decomposition process, fermentation of
organic matter conserves much of the energy in the constituent components of Soil
Enhancer. This means that there still is a lot of energy available in the Soil Enhancer
which is available to give to the soil and the plants and organisms in it. All materials used
in Soil Enhancer are of organic origin. Soil Enhancer supplies many nutrients to the soil it
is not intended to be a replacement for a standard fertilizer regime. (Bokashi, 2011)
Effect of Soil Enhancers
Soil treated with soil enhancer has shown increased fertility by increasing the soil
organic matter content and available nutrients, providing nutrients and stimulatory
compounds to growing plants, improving the soil porosity and permeability and
increasing the micro-biomass of the soil.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
5
The stimulation of microbial activity means the soil is able to degrade more plant
residues more rapidly releasing nutrients and improving soil organic matter quality
(Bokashi, 2011).
Benefits of Using Soil Enhancer
Using Soil enhancer regularly Releases nutrients from the soil, Increase soil
microbial activity, Improve soil structure and water holding capacity. Increase
photosynthetic capacity of plants, Suppress soil borne pathogens and pests, Improve plant
growth. Soil Enhancer is environmental friendly and easy to use, it is non-toxic and GE
free (Agricultural Biotech Inc. 2000).
Besides improving the growth of the plant, it also benefits soil characteristics. Soil
structure may markedly improve over time because of, increased root growth, and thus
more root channels, Greater polysaccharide production by microbes to glue clay platelets
together; only 0.2% more polysaccharide can markedly improve structure, improved
mycorrhizal activity, creating sac-like structures. (Agricultural Biotech Inc. 2000)
Improvement of soil structure, mean cleavage planes and burrows creating
channels to promote readily exchange of air and water because of greater earthworm
activity. Increased water infiltration, and consequently decrease in soil erosion and soil
runoff. Reduced soil compaction for better soil absorption of nutrients and water for
greater yield (Agricultural Biotech Inc. 2000).
Results of Some Studies on the Different soil
Enhancers
Fingh (2008) recorded the effect of vitazyme on potato growth, yield, and income.
Results showed that the seed and in-furrow treatments, plus a foliar-soil application,
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
6
hastened emergence and early growth. At harvest, the vitazyme treatments greatly
increased tuber number, by 79% for the seed treatments and by 52% for the in-furrow
treatment. The valuable 28 to 55 mm tuber size was much greater for the vitazyme
applications: 24% for the seed treatment and 14% for the in-furrow treatment. The yield
increases for vitazyme treatments presented in the report were small, 5% for the seed
treatment but based upon much greater tuber numbers and considerably higher
percentage of 28 to 55 mm tubers for both vitazyme treatments, these two yields should
have been much higher than reported. Likewise, the modest income improvements with
vitazyme should be higher than the above chart shows. It is apparent from this study that
vitazyme does indeed improve potato production and profits in India.
Fisher (2011) found in his study that nirtromax can stimulate growth and biomass
in potatoes. Results have shown 25% increase in yield, better plant growth and bigger
size of potato tubers. It was further noted that the stimulatory activity in potato could be
seen at concentrations as low as 1%.
Flickr (2010) Stated that Organic farmers place a high value of dolomite, both for
its capacity to “sweeten” the soil by lowering its acidity and for its tendency to act as a
secondary fertilizer and neutralizes soil acidity to increases activity of soil bacteria,
especially for tomatoes and related plants and just by using lime it actually gives more
profit for farmers because it increases there yield. But even many veteran horticulturalists
have little idea of what dolomite actually is, except that in general it’s a mineral.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
7
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of 250 ms was thoroughly prepared and divided into two sets with three
blocks for each set and later subdivided to 25 plots measuring 1m x 5m (Figures). The
potato seed tubers and stem cuttings were planted in double row plots at a distance of
30cmx30cm between hills and rows.
The experiment was laid-out using randomized complete block design (RCBD).
Treatments were the following:
T0- Control (no fertilizer)
T1- 0.60 kg (T-14)
T2- vitazyme + 0.60 kg (T-14)
T3- vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
T4- Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
T5- Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
T6- Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
T7-Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Fertilizer Application
Three weeks after planting, the plants were side-dressed with complete fertilizers
(14-14-14) at a rate of 80-80-80 NPK kg per hectare. Hilling up was done to cover the
side-dressed fertilizer.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
8
Soil Enhancer’s Active Ingredients
And Methods of Application
Soil enhancers
Active ingredient
Method of application
Vitazyme Potassium
(k2O)-0.80%
Vitazyme was applied to
Iron (Fe) as Cu EDTA– seed tubers before planting.
0.07%
Vitazyme was
Zn (Zn) as Zn EDTA-0.06% applied as a foliar spray, or
Water (H2O)- 100%
via drip or sprinkler
Brassinosteroids
irrigation to plants every
Triacontanol
30, 45, 60 days.
Glycosids
B vitamins
Nitromax
Nitrogen (N)% 0.24
One liter ofnitromax
Phosphorus (P2O5)% 0.002
was Mixed to 100 parts
Potassium (K2O)% 0.74
water then it was allowed to
Protein% 0.56
stand in a closed plastic
Zinc (Zn), ppm 6.05
container. It was not
Copper (Cu), ppm 2.42
exposed to daylight for 36
Manganese (Mn), ppm
hours at 24 0C or higher to
10.28
activate.
Iron (Fe), ppm 52.62
Application
Bacillus species
It was Applied at
seedling stage at the rate of
1:100 liter per hectare then
it was alternately applied to
freshly plowed moist soil 3
days before planting, and
sprayed every after 7 days.
Dolomite CaO-39.6%
Dolomite was applied to the
MgO-15.9%
soil to give time for the
dolomite to work with the
soil and the next day it was
mixed with the soil before
planting.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
9
Figure 1. Overview of the experimental area at 60, 75, 90 days after planting and just
after harvesting
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
10
Data Gathered
1.Meteorological data. The temperature, relative humidity, rainfall and sunshine
duration were taken from the municipality of Sayangan, Atok, Benguet (LGU- PAG-
ASA).
2. Soil chemical properties. Soil samples were taken before planting and after
harvesting. Soil pH, organic matter, nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium were analyzed
by theDepartment of Agriculture, Regional Field Unit 1, San Fernando City, La Union.
3. Growth Parameter
a. Plant survival (%). This was the number of plants that survived taken 30 days
after planting.
% Survival = Number of Transplanted seedling that Survived X 100
Total Number of Plants Transplanted
b. Plant vigor. This was gathered 30, 45 and 60 days after transplanting using the
CIP rating scale:
Scale Description Remarks
1
Plants are weak with few stems and Poor vigor
leaves; very pale.
2
Plants are weak with few thin stems Less vigorous
and leaves; pale
3
Better than less vigorous
Vigorous
4
Plants are moderately strong with Moderately
robust stems and leaves; leaves are vigorous
light green in color.
5
Plants are strong with robust stems Highly vigorous
and leaves; Leaves are light to dark
green in color.
c. Initial height (cm). This was measured using five random sample plants per
plot, ten days after planting.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
11
d. Final height (cm). This was measured using five random sample plants used in
getting the initial height 15 days before harvesting. Plants were measured from the base
up to the tip of the tallest shoot.
e. Canopy cover. This was gathered at 45, 60 and 75 days using a wooden frame
measuring 120 cm x 6 cm and having equally sized grids of 12 cm x 6 cm. Having the
grid over the foliage of two representatives previously marked plants, grids covered with
effective leaves were counted.
4. Maturity
a. Number of days from planting to emergence. This was recorded by counting
the days starting from planting the stem cuttings to emergence.
b. Number of days from emergence to harvesting. This was recorded by counting
the number of days from emergence to harvesting (Figure 2).
5. Yield Component
a. Number of marketable and weight of marketable tubers. All tubers of
marketable quality were counted and weighed at harvest and were classified into XL,
large, medium and marble sizes.
b. Number and weight of non- marketable tubers. This was obtained by counting
and weighing all tubers with malformedations, damaged by pest and diseases and had
more than 10% greening.
c. Total yield per plot (kg). This is the sum of the marketable and non-marketable
tubers that were counted and weighed.
d. Computed yield (tons/ha). Yield was computed using the formula:
Yield (t/ha) =
Total marketable yield/plot x 10,000m2
10m2 x 1000
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
12
6. Pest and Disease Incidence
a. Leaf miner. The reaction was recorded at 30 and 40 DAP using the following
rating scale (CIP, 2001):
Scale
Description
Remarks
1
Less than 20% of plants per Highly
resistant
plot is infested
2
21-40% of the plants per plot Moderately
resistant
infested
3
41-60% of the plants per plot Susceptible
infested
4
61-80% of the plants per plot
Moderately
Infested
susceptible
5
81-100% of the plants per plot
Very
susceptible
infested
b. Late blight. This was gathered at 30, 45, 60 DAP using the CIP scale
(Henfling, 1987).
Blight (%) CIP
Scale
Description
1
1
No blight to be seen
01-1
1
Very few plants in larger plots with a lesion. Not
more than 2 lesions per 10m or row (+ 30
plants).
1.1-2
2
Up to 10 small lesions per plants
3.1-10
3
Up to 30 small lesions per plant, or up to 1 in
each 20 leaflets attacked.
10.1-24
4
Most plants are visibly attacked and 1 in 3
leaflets infected. Few multiple infections per
leaflet.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
13
Blight (%)
CIP Scale
Description
25-49
5
Nearly every leaflet with lesions. Multiple
infections per leaflet are common. Filed plot
looks green, but all plants in plot are blighted.
50-74
6
Every plant blighted and half the leaf area
destroyed by blight. Plots look green- flecked
and brown; blight is very obvious.
75-90
7
As previous, but ¾ of each plant blighted. Lower
branches may be overwhelmingly killed off, and
the only green leaves, if any, are spindly due to
extensive foliage loss. Plot looks neither brown
nor green.
91-97
8
Some leaves and stems are green, Plot looks
brown with some green patches.
97.1-99.9
9
Few green leaves, almost all with blight lesions,
remain. Many stem lesions. Plot looks brown.
100
9
All leaves and stems dead.
Remarks: 1 – highly resistant; 2-3 resistant; 4-5 moderately resistant; 6-7
moderately susceptible; 8-9 susceptible.
7. Other Data
a. Return on cash expenses. This was computed using the formula:
ROCE = Gross income – production cost x 100
Production cost
Analysis of Data
All quantitative data were analyzed through the analysis of variance (ANOVA)
for Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. Significance of
differences among the treatment means was tested using the Duncan’s Multiple Range
Test (DMRT).
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
14
T0-Control (no fertilizer)
T1-0.60 kg (T-14)
T2-vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
T3- vitazyme + 0.30 kg
T4- Nitromax + 0.60 kg
T5- Nitromax + 0.30 kg
(T-14)
(T-14)
(T-14)
T6- Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
T7-Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Figure 2. Potato Plants at 90 days before harvesting
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
15
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Meteorological Data During the Study Period
Table 1 shows the air temperature, relative humidity, rainfall and total sunshine
duration during the study period. Maximum daytime air temperature ranged from 23.5 to
19.2oC while the minimum air temperature ranged from 10.1 to 11.6oC with an air
temperature mean of 15.86oC. Relative humidity was 73.66% and rainfall amount is 1.6
mm. Total sunshine duration in minute ranged from 381.4 to 377.00 with a mean of 375.
Potato grows best in areas with temperatures ranging from 17oC to 22oC with a
mean of 19oC and average relative humidity of 86% (NPRCRTC, n.d.). The temperature
that prevailed during the study period somehow depressed the potato growth especially
during the months of December and January.
Table 1. Meteorological data during the study period (November, 2011 – January, 2012)
AIR TEMPERATURE
RELATIVE RAINFALL SUNSHINE
MONTH
(OC)
HUMIDITY AMOUNT
DURATION
MIN MAX MEAN (%) (mm) (min)
November 15.2 23.5 19.35
76
2.5
381.40
December
11.6
19.2
15.4 72 2.3 377.00
January 10.1 15.6 12.85
73
0
366.60
MEAN 12.3 19.43 15.86 73.66
1.6
375
Source: Sayangan, Atok, Benguet (LGU- PAG-ASA)
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
16
Soil Chemical Properties
Soil chemical properties of the farm before planting is shown in Table 2. It was
observed that the soil pH is slightly acidic. The average soil pH for potato production
should range from 5.6 to 6.5 with high organic matter (NPRCRTC n.d.).
Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium were observed to be low, since the organic
matter is also low. Parnes (1986) stated that organic matter is the principal source of
nitrogen, phosphorus and sulfur nutrients which organisms require. A typical agricultural
soil may contain 1.5% organic matter in the top 15 cm of the soil surface.The greater the
amounts of organic matter in the soil the better are the physical properties of the soil
(Alam et al., 20010).
Nitrogen is needed for vegetative growth. However, application of high amount of
nitrogen may prolong the maturity of the crop. Total nitrogen content of the top 25cm of
most soils ranges from 0.03 to 0.4%. About 0.95 % or more of total nitrogen in the soil in
organic forms (e.g. Proteins, amino acids, amino sugar and other complex N compounds),
may not be available directly to growing plants.
Phosphorus contributed to the early development of the crop and early
tuberization. It may increase the number of tuber production per plant. Although organic
Table 2. Chemical properties of the soil before planting and after harvest
pH OM(%) N(%) P(ppm)
K(ppm)
Before
planting 6.68 3.0 0.15 81 310
After harvest
6.0
3.5
0.19
98
315
Analyzed by: Department of Agriculture, Regional Field Unit 1, San Fernando City, La
Union
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
17
source of phosphorus are slowly available, they are very important since organic
phosphorus may account for up to 90% of the total soil phosphorous. Organic phosphorus
can be supplied to the soil by the addition of manure, municipal waste and the
accumulation of microbial and plant residues.
Potassium increases the dry matter content and helps prevent black spot damage
and blue discoloration after cooking. It also improves the storage quality of potato.
Potassium is regarded as one of the most important nutrients for plant because it plays an
important role in water transportation, photosynthesis and other metabolic activities
throughout the plant growth and development (Motavalli, 2005).
Number of Days from Planting to
Emergence and Harvesting
Table 3 shows the number of days from planting to emergence and to harvesting
of potato as affected by the treatments. Statistical analysis shows highly significant
differences among treatments. It showsthat Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14) garnered the
Table 3. Number of days from planting to emergence and harvesting of potato applied
with soil enhancer
DAYS TO
TREATMENT
EMERGENCE HARVESTING
Control (no fertilizer)
14.00a
76.00e
0.60 kg (T-14)
14.00a
76.00e
Vitazyme + 0.60kg(T-14)
10.00de
80.00ab
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
10.00e
80.00a
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
11.00cd
79.00bc
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
11.00c
79.00c
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
13.00b
77.00d
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
12.00b
78.00d
CV (%)
4.64
0.71
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
18
earliest days from planting to emergence (10.00), while control plants emerged the latest
(14.00 days) and harvested the latest (73.00 days). Plants under the different treatments
emerged and harvested at the same time.
Plant Survival
The percentage plant survival at 30 days after planting (DAP) varied
statistically.Table 2 shows that plants applied with Vitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 and
Vitazyme +0.30 kg T-14 obtained the highest percentage survival but not significantly
different with the other treatments. The results reveal that the soil enhancers used did not
affect the plant survival.
Plant Vigor
Plant vigor of potato applied with soil enhancer is shown in table 5. Plant vigor
was evaluated based on the stand of plants. It was observed that most of the treatments
were moderately vigorous while others were less vigorous.
Table 4. Plant survival of potato at 30 DAP of potato tubers applied with soil Enhancer
TREATMENT
PLANT SURVIVAL (%)
Control (no fertilizer)
95.73
0.60 kg (T-14)
96.93
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
100.00
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
100.00
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
97.30
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
96.97
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
92.43
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
98.47
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
19
Plant Height at 30 and 90 DAP
Plant height of potato plants at 30 and 90 DAP of the different treatment is
presented in Table 6. At 30 DAP, plants applied with Vitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 and
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg T-14 significantly registered the tallest plants with heights of 6.48
cm and 6.15 cm, respectively, but comparable with the other treatments. Control (no
fertilizers) plants were the shortest (4.60 cm).
Table 5. Plant vigor at 30, 45 and 60 days after planting (DAP) of potato applied with
soil enhancers.
TREATMENT
PLANT VIGOR
30 DAP
45 DAP
60 DAP
Control(no fertilizer)
Less vigorous
Less vigorous
Less
Vigorous
0.60 kg (T-14)
Less vigorous
Vigorous
Vigorous
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
Moderately
Moderately
Moderately
Vigorous
Vigorous
Vigorous
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Moderately
Vigorous Vigorous
Vigorous
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Moderately
Moderately
Moderately
Vigorous
Vigorous
Vigorous
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Vigorous
Vigorous
Vigorous
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Vigorous
Vigorous
Moderately
Vigorous
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T‐14)
Moderately
Moderately
Moderately
Vigorous
vigorous
Vigorous
Means followed by the same letter are no significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
20
Table 6. Height of potato plants at 30 and 90 DAP applied with soil enhancer
TREATMENT
PLANT HEIGHT (cm)
30DAP 90DAP
Control (no fertilizer)
4.60b
14.07d
0.60 kg (T-14)
5.65d
17.40c
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
6.48a
26.00a
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
6.15b
24.40a
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
5.93c
20.13b
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.90c
19.80b
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.78cd
21.60b
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
5.47e 20.80b
CV (%)
1.78
5.11
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Canopy Cover at 30, 45 and 60 Days after Planting
Table 7 shows the canopy cover of the potato plants at 3 stages. At 30 DAP,plants
applied with Vitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 exhibited the widest canopy of 4.19 followed by
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg T-14 with the mean of 4.14, while un fertilized plants had the
narrowest canopy cover of 4.61.
At 45 DAP, canopy cover of all treatments increased with Plants applied
withVitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 and 0.30 kg T-14 again having the widest canopy cover of
6.05. This was followed by plants applied withNitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14) with a mean of
5.853 while unfertilized plants had the narrowest canopy of 4.61.
At 60 DAP, plants applied withVitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 still had the significantly
widest canopy cover with 9.53.Unfertilized plants (Control) were observed to have
narrow canopy cover of 6.98.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
21
The two treatments w/ Vitazyme had more than 30% canopy cover than the
control at both 45 and 60 DAP. Those applied w/ Nitromax or Dolomite had 22% with
less canopy cover than the other treatments. Obviously, Vitazyme possesses materials
that can enhance potato vegetative growth. To a lesser extent, both Nitromax and
Dolomite exhibited the same trait. It was observed that all the treatments with high
canopy covers were resistant to late blight infection.
Number and Weight of Marketable Tubers
The average number and weight of marketable tubers is shown in Table 8.
Statistical analysis showed significant differences among treatments. Plants applied with
Vitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 had increased its number and weight of marketable tubers by
32-38% and unfertilized plants(control)had 22% with less number and weight of
marketable tubers than the other treatments. This result indicates that Vitazyme has
contents that can enhance tuber production, while both Nitromax and Dolomite has the
same effect.
Table 7. Canopy cover of potato tubers using soil enhancer
CANOPY COVER
TREATMENT
30 DAP
45 DAP
60 DAP
Control(no fertilizer)
3.513d
4.607d
6.980d
0.60 kg (T-14)
3.767c
5.467c
7.547c
vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
4.193ab
6.047a
9.533a
vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4.143b
6.047a
9.107a
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
4.107b
5.853ab
8.487b
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4.067b
5.713abc
8.297b
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4.047b
5.720abc
8.320b
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
4.133b
5.660abc
8.167b
CV (%)
3.65
3.35
3.70
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
22
The results reveal that the soil enhancers used did affect the number and
weight of tubers. Basically, number and weight of tubers is controlled or influenced by
environmental factors.However, there are also other factors that affect the number and
weight of tubers such as pest, diseases, nutrient and water availability which should be
taken into account.
Number and Weight of Non Marketable Tubers
Table 9 shows the average number and weight of non-marketable tubers.
Statistical analysis showed no significant variations in terms of the number of tubers but
highly significant differences among treatments were observed in terms of the
weight.Unfertilized plants (Control) had more number of tubers (69.67) and weight (1.57
kg) and plants applied with Dolomite + 0.60 kg T-14 had the least number of tubers
(44.33) but had weighed more than a kilo.
Table 8. Number and weight of marketable tubers applied with soil enhancer
MARKETABLE TUBERS
TREATMENT
NUMBER
WEIGHT
(per plot/ 5m2)
(kg/5m2)
Control(no fertilizer)
56.67c
2.50f
0.60 kg (T-14)
67.67bc
3.23ef
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
69.00bc
6.60a
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
87.67a
6.23ab
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
81.33ab
5.33bc
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
80.67ab
5.60ab
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
67.00bc
4.17de
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
80.33ab 4.50cd
CV% 11.31
12.07
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
23
This result validates the findings that the soil enhancers used really affect the number and
weight of tubers.
Total Yield per Plot and Computed
Yield per Hectare
The yield per plot and computed yield per hectare as affected by the different
treatments are shown in Table 10 and Figure 3. The results show that plants fertilized
with the combination of Vitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 fertilizer had the highest yield of 7.23
kg per plot and 14.48 tons/ha. This was followed by the plants fertilized with Vitazyme +
80-80-80kg/ha T-14, and Nitromax + 0.60kg T-14 with means of 6.57 per plot and 13.73
tons/ha. There were highly significant differences observed among the treatments.
Table 9. Number and weight of non marketable tubers applied with soil enhancers
NON- MARKETABLE
NUMBER OF TUBERS
WEIGHT OF TUBER
TREATMENT
(per plot/ 5m2)
(kg/5m2)
Control(no fertilizer)
69.67
1.57
0.60 kg (T-14)
71.67
1.40
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
55.33
0.90
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg(T-14)
54.00
0.63
Nitromax + 0.60 kg(T-14)
63.67
1.03
Nitromax + 0.30 kg(T-14)
60.33
0.97
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
49.00
1.13
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
44.33
1.20
CV% 8.48
15.73
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
24
Table 10. Total yield per plot and computed yield tons per hectare of potato tubers
applied with soil enhancer
COMPUTED YIELD
TREATMENT
Total yield (kg/5m2) t/ha
Control (no fertilizer)
4.07e
8.13e
0.60 kg (T-14)
4.63de
9.27de
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
7.23a
14.47a
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
7.13a
14.27a
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
6.57abc
13.73abc
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
6.37ab
12.13ab
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.30cd
10.60cd
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
5.70bcd 11.40bcd
CV (%)
1.78
5.11
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Late Blight Occurrence
Table 11 shows the late blight infection at 30, 45 and 60 DAP of the eight
treatments. Most of the treatments had shown consistent trend in relation to late blight
occurrence. Plants applied with Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14) were consistently resistant to
late blight infection at 30, 45 and 60 DAP. Most of the treatments were observed to be
moderately resistant and resistant except for plants applied with vitazyme + 0.60kg T-14,
Nitromax + 0.60kg T-14, Dolomite + 0.60kg T-14, and control which were observed to
be moderately resistant.
Increase of late blight infection from 30 to 60 DAP could be due to the
scattered rain showers during the period.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
25
T0-Control(no fertilizer)
T1-0.60 kg (T-14)
T2- Vitazyme + 0.60kg
(T-14)
T3- Vitazyme + 0.30 kg
T4- Nitromax + 0.30 kg
T5- Nitromax + 0.30 kg
(T-14)
(T-14)
(T-14)
T6- Dolomite + 0.30 kg T7- Dolomite + 0.60 kg
(T-14)
(T-14)
Figure 3. Harvested potato tubers at 90 days after planting
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
26
Leaf Miner incidence
Visual rating for leaf miner incidence was done at 30 to 45 DAP. It was
observed that most of the treatments were highly resistant at 30 and 45 DAP except for
control (no fertilizer), 0.60 kgT-14 and Dolomite + 0.60kg T-14 which is moderately
resistant (Table 12).
Low leaf miner incidence could be due to the crop diversity practiced in the
study area.
Table 11. Late blight infection of potato plants applied with soil enhancer
TREATMENT
LATE BLIGHT
30 DAP
45 DAP
60 DAP
Control(no fertilizer)
Moderately
Moderately
Moderately
Resistant
Resistant
Resistant
0.60 kg (T-14)
Resistant Resistant Resistant
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
Highly
Resistant Resistant
Resistant
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Resistant Resistant
Moderately
Resistant
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Highly
Moderately
Moderately
Resistant
Resistant
Resistant
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Resistant Moderately
Moderately
Resistant
Resistant
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Resistant
Moderately
Moderately
Resistant
Resistant
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Highly
Resistant Resistant
Resistant
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
27
Table 12. Leaf miner incidence of potato plants applied with soil enhancers
LEAF MINER
TREATMENT
30 DAP
45 DAP
Control (no fertilizer)
Moderately Resistant
Moderately Resistant
0.60 kg (T-14)
Moderately Resistant
Moderately Resistant
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
Highly Resistant
Highly Resistant
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Highly Resistant
Highly Resistant
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Highly Resistant
Highly Resistant
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Highly Resistant
Highly Resistant
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Highly Resistant
Highly Resistant
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Moderately Resistant
Moderately Resistant
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Return on Cash Expense
Table 13 shows the cost and return analysis on potato production using
different soil enhancers. Computation shows that plants applied with Vitazyme + 0.60kg
T-14 had the highest computed ROCE fallowed by Vitazyme + 0.30kg T-14.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
Table 13.Return on Cash Expenses (ROCE) of potato applied with soil enhancer
SOIL ENHANCER TREATMENT
PARTICULARS Control(no
0.60 kg
vitazyme +
vitazyme + Nitromax + Nitromax + Dolomite + Dolomite +
fertilizer)
Farmers
0.60kg
0.30 kg
0.60 kg
0.30 kg
0.30 kg
0.60 kg
Practice
Farmers
Farmers
Farmers
Farmers
Farmers
Farmers
Practice
Practice
Practice
Practice
Practice
Practice
Marketable
2.50
3.23
6.60
6.23
5.33
2.50
2.50
2.50
tubers
Expenses
Fertilizer
14.50
14.50
7.50
14.50
7.50
7.50
14.50
Chemicals
56.00
56.00
56.00
56.00
56.00
56.00
56.00
56.00
Labors
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
Soil enhancer
83.00
83.00
83.00
83.00
60.00
60.00
Total expenses
156.00
170.50
253.50
196.50
247.50
246.50
223.50
230.50
Gross sales
975.00
126.10
257.40
243.10
208.00
168.00
162.50
175.50
Net income
-58.00
-44.90
39.00
46.60
37.00
25.00
24.00
23.00
ROCE
-6.50
-8.70
18.70
17.60
11.50
11.90
11.50
14.90
*The harvested tubers were sold at Php 13 per kilogram.
27
25
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The study was conducted at Sayangan, Paoay, Atok Benguet from November
2011 to January 2012. The objectives of the study were to determine the growth and yield
performance of potato seed tubers as affected by soil enhancers; identify the best soil
enhancers for potato production; and compare the profitability of potato
productionapplied with soil enhancers through return on cash expenditures (ROCE).
Significant differences were observed in the growth and yield performance of
potato applied with soil enhancers. Plants applied withVitazyme + 0.60kg T-14 and
Vitazyme + 0.30kg T-14 had the highest percentage plant survival. Some of the
treatments were rated moderately vigorous, others were vigorous and control was rated
less vigorous as with farmers practice but not significantly different with the other
treatments. Applied ofVitazyme + 0.60kg T-14 produced the tallest plants and control
was recorded to be the shortest plant. At 30, 45 and 60 DAP, plants applied
withVitazyme + 0.60kg T-14 produced the tallest plants and control was recorded to be
the shortest plant. At 30, 45 and 60 DAP, plants applied with Vitazyme + 0.60kg T-14
had greater canopy cover than the other treatments. All the treatments consistently
exhibited high resistances to leaf miner at 30 DAP to 45 DAP except with the control (no
fertilizer). Plants applied with T-14 alone and Dolomite + 0.60kg T-14 was recorded to
be moderately resistant to leaf miner. Application of Vitazyme + 0.60kg T-14 produced
themostnumber and heaviest tubers.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
26
Conclusion
Based on the results, plants applied withVitazyme + 0.60kg T-14 performed
the best in terms of its growth, survival, vigorousness, and canopy cover at 30 DAP, 45
DAP, and 60DAP. The plants also produced the highest and heaviest tubers and had the
highest yield.
Vitazyme was the best soil enhancer out of the three soil enhancers that were
used in the study.
On the return on cash expenses, all the soil enhancers had positive income but
quite low ranging only from 11.5% (Nitromax + 0.60kg T-14) to 18.7% (Vitazyme +
0.60kg T-14). The effect of the soil enhancers could be better appreciated during the
succeeding planting seasons.
Recommendation
Application ofVitazyme + 0.60kg T-14 is recommended since it performed
the best in terms of plant growth, survival, vigor, and canopy cover at 30 DAP, 45 DAP,
and 60 DAP.
The study shows that there is profitability of potato tubers applied with soil
enhancers.
Further studies using soil enhancers in other farms and planting months are
recommended to verify the results. Since some of the soil enhancers are new, the
potential of soil enhancers is highly beneficial for the soil and for potato production.
These soil enhancers are also recommended for organic production.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
27
LITERATURE CITED
AGRICULTURAL BIOTECH INCORPORATED. 2000.Benefits of Using Soil
Enhancer. Retrieved June 10, 2011 from
http://www.agbioinc.com/How_Vitazyme_Works.html.
ALAM, S.M. and M.A. KHAN. 2001. Organic Matter. Retrieved March 24, 2007 from
htt://www.pakistaneconomist.com/issue 28/iqe6.htm.
AQUINO M.U. 2009 Potato Seed System, Bureau of Agricultural Research. Retrieved
June 10, 2011 from http://maidon.pcarrd.dost.gov.ph/regional
consortia/harrdec/accomplishments.htm.
AYANGDAN, N.S 1998 Indexing of virus infection in Benguet State University and
farmers. Potato cultivars using stem cuttings. BS Thesis. Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 4-5.
BA-A, O.L. 2002. Potato production using rooted stem cuttings and see tubers of tree
varieties in Abiang, Atok, Benguet. BS.Thesis.Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 25-26.
BOKASHI, Z. 2011. Soil Enhancer, “The totally natural way to reduce, reuse and recycle
organic waste. Retrieved June 10, 2011 from http://www.zingbokashi.co.nz/soil-
enhance.htm.
BRYAN, J.E. 1984. Methods of Rapid Multiplication Techniques for Potato
Propagation.Innovative methods for propagating potatoes. Report of XVIII
planning conference held in Peru, on 10-14th of December Pp. 259-260.
International Potato Center (CIP) 2001. Fact sheets. International potato center (CIP).
FINGH, B. 2008. Crop Results on Potato Using Vitazyme, Vital Earth Resources 706
East Broad way, Gale water, Texas 75647. Retrieved June 10, 2011 from
http://www.plantdesigns.com/vitazyme/whatisit.asp.
FISHER, R.W. 2011. Crop Results on Potato Using Nitromax, and It’s Benefits.
Retrieved January 20, 2011 from http://agraconew.com/nitromax.htm.
FLICKR, Q. 2010 Using Dolomite in Organic Gardens. Retrieved October 01,2011 from
http://site.cleanairgardening.com/info/the-dirt-on-dolomite-using-dolomite in
organic gardens.html.
GAYAO, B.T., A. BOTANGEN, P. DALANG, E. SANO, M. WALLACE, and V.
MACARIO. 1987. Cost and return analysis of on farm potato production using
stem cuttings: Benguet State University Graduate school Res. J.L: 79-91.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
28
HENFLING, J.W. 1987. Technical Information Bulletin 4: Late Blight of Potato. CIP,
Peru.
INTERNATIONAL POTATO CENTER (CIP). 2001. Plant Breeding for Durable
Resistance to Pest and Disease. Retrieved July 20, 2011 from
Online:http://www.growseed.org/potato-breedibg.html.
KHATRI, B.B. 1995. Management studies on seed production using different planting
material. Ms Thesis (Pub.). Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Pp. 3.
MOTAVALLI, P. 2005. Nutrient News.Retrieved March 24, 2007 from
http://www.missouri.edu/-umcsnrsoil and http://www.pub05/nl2005rex/htm.
NISPEROS, Z.C., E.D. BASOL and N. TORRES. 1984. Evaluation of potato (solanum
sp.) cultivars for yield and resistance to phytophthorainfestance in the Philippine
highlands. The potato in ASIA and the pacific region research. Research result
presented in a series of working paper. CIP VII 1-84.
PARNES, R. 1986. Organic and inorganic fertilizers.Wood Ends Agricultural
institute.Pp. 213, 219.
SANO, E.O. and O.K BAUTISTA 1982. Integrated storage studies on potatoes in the
Philippines. Northern Philippines Root Crop Research and Training
Center.Benguet State University. La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp 1-2.
TACIO, H.D. 2011. Potato Production reports by Sun. Star Publishing, Inc. Retrieved
June 10, 2011 from http://www.sunstar.com.ph/davao/theres-more-potato-french-
fries-chips.
VANDER, Z., P.B. SUSANA, V. RSCOBAR and A.L. DEMAGANTE. 1988. The status
and potential of true potato seeds and rooted cuttings as viable potato planting
materials in isohy-pothermic environment. Proceeding of the workshop on the
tropical agronomy potato in cunning china on June 12-15, Pp.88.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
29
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Meteorological data during the study period
AIR
TEMPERATURE
RELATIVE
RAINFALL
SUNSHINE
HUMIDITY (%) AMOUNT(mm) DURATION(cm)
MONTH MIN MAX
November
1st Week
14.7 22.8
80
10.4
262.2
2nd Week
15.6 23.7
75
0
426.8
3rd Week
14.3 23.8
75
0
457.7
4th Week
15.8
24.5
86
0.7
307.7
MEAN 15.2 23.5
80
2.5
381.4
December
1st Week
15.0 24.7
75
4.4
371.1
2nd Week
15.3 24.3
79
5.1
375.4
3rd Week
15.6 23.8
75
0.5
480.0
4th Week
16.1
23.8
81
0
420.0
MEAN 15.6 24.2
78
2.4
387.0
January
1st Week
15.1
24.3 78
0.1 447.4
2nd Week
14.5
24.5 73
0
266.5
3rd Week
14.1 23.7
80
0
315.4
4th Week
13.2
24.0
80
0
440.5
MEAN 13.9 23.9
77
0.03
386.6
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
30
Appendix Table 2. Plant survival
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
89.9
99.9
97.4
95.733
0.60 kg (T-14)
100 95.4 95.4
96.933
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
100 100 100
100.000
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
100
100
100
100.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
95.4
96.5
100
97.300
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
90.9
100
100
96.967
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
90.9
91.9
94.5
92.433
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
100
100
95.4
98.467
TOTAL 109.5
111.9
111.8
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 21.663
10.832
Treatment 7 126.856
18.122
1.88ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
134.370
9.598
Total
23
282.889
Ns= not Significant Coefficient of Variance = 3.19%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
31
Appendix Table 3. Plant vigor at 30 days after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
2
3
2
2.333
0.60 kg (T-14)
2 2 3
2.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
4 3 4
3.667
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4 4 3
3.667
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
3 4 4
3.667
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4 3 3
3.333
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3
4
3
3.333
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
4
3
4
3.667
TOTAL 3.71
7.71
3.71
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.000 0.000
Treatment 7 7.167
1.024
2.68ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
5.333
0.381
Total
23
12.500
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variance = 18.99%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
32
Appendix Table 4. Plant vigor at 45 days after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
2
2
3
2.333
0.60 kg (T-14)
3 3 3
3.000
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
4 3 4
3.667
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3 4 3
3.333
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
3 4 4
3.000
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3 3 4
2.667
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3
3
3
3.000
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
3
4
4
3.667
TOTAL 3.42
3.71
4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.333 0.167
Treatment 7 4.500
0.643
1.80ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
5.000
0.357
Total
23
9.833
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variance = 19.38 %
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
33
Appendix Table 5. Plant vigor at 60 days after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
3 2 2
2.333
0.60 kg (T-14)
3 4 3
3.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
4 4 4
4.000
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3 3 4
3.333
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
4 4 3
3.667
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3 4 3
3.333
Dolomite + 0.30 kg(T-14)
3
4
4
3.667
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
3
4
4
3.667
TOTAL 3.71
4.14
3.85
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.583 0.292
Treatment 7 5.167
0.738
2.53ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.083
0.292
Total
23
9.833
ns= not Significant Coefficient of Variance = 15.81 %
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
34
Appendix Table 6. Initial height
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
4.56
4.6
4.64
4.600
0.60 kg (T-14)
5.64 5.74 5.58
5.653
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
6.38 6.64 6.42
6.480
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
6.22 6.04 6.2
6.153
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
6.04 5.92 5.82
5.157
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.82 5.88 6
5.900
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.82
5.84
5.68
5.780
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
5.46
5.38
5.56
5.467
TOTAL 6.56
6.57
6.55
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.001 0.001
Treatment
7
6.486
0.927
88.75**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
0.416
0.010
Total
23
6.634
**= Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 1.78 %
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
35
Appendix Table 7. Final height (cm)
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
14 13.8
14.4
14.067
0.60 kg (T-14)
17.2 18.2
16.8
17.400
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
25.4 27
25.6
26.000
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg(T-14)
23.8 24
25.4
24.400
Nitromax + 0.60 kg(T-14)
20 21.2
19.2
20.133
Nitromax + 0.30 kg(T-14)
19.6 21
18.8
19.800
Dolomite + 0.30 kg(T-14)
21.4
23.8
19.6
21.600
Dolomite + 0.60 kg(T-14)
21.4
22.6
22.6
20.800
TOTAL 23.25
24.51
23.2
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 11.590
5.795
Treatment
7
295.132
42.162
38.27**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
15.423
1.102
Total
23
322.145
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 5.11%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
36
Appendix Table 8. Canopy cover at 45 days after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
3.5 3.54
3.5
3.513
0.60 kg (T-14)
3.68 3.78
3.84
3.767
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
4.48 4.38
4.38
4.413
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4.28 3.88
4.42
4.193
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
3.98 4.18
4.16
4.107
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4.28 3.94
3.98
4.067
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3.92
3.98
4.24 4.047
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
4.18
3.94
4.28
4.133
TOTAL 3.43
4.51
32.8
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.088 0.044
Treatment
7
1.584
0.226
10.48**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
0.302
0.022
Total
23
1.974
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 3.65%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
37
Appendix Table 9. Canopy cover at 60 days after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
4.7 4.54 4.58
4.607
0.60 kg(T-14)
5 5.6 5.8
5.467
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
6 6.1 6.04
6.047
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
6.2 6.04 5.9
6.047
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
5.84 5.9 5.82
5.853
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.7 5.64 5.8
5.713
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.64
5.8
5.72
5.720
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
5.88
5.74
5.44
5.660
TOTAL 44.96
6.48
6.44
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.014 0.007
Treatment
7
4.459
0.637
17.83**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
0.500
0.036
Total
23
1.974
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 3.35%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
38
Appendix Table 10. Canopy cover at 75 days after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
7.08 6.88 6.98
6.980
0.60 kg (T-14)
7.74 7.52 7.38
7.547
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
10.02 9.54 9.04
9.533
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
9 9.38
8.94
9.107
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
8.84 8.14 8.48
8.487
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
8.34 8.38 8.18
8.297
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
7.8
8.84
8.32
8.320
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
8.34
8.08
8.08
8.167
TOTAL 9.59
9.53
9.34
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.215 0.108
Treatment
7
13.604
1.943
20.60**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
1.320
0.094
Total
23
15.140
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 3.70%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
39
Appendix Table 11. Number of days from planting to harvesting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
76 77 76
76.333
0.60 kg (T-14)
77 76 76
76.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
80 80 79
79.667
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
80 80 80
80.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
79 80 78
79.000
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
78 79 79
78.667
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
78
77
77
77.333
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
78
78
77
77.667
TOTAL 89.42
89.57
88.85
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 1.750 0.875
Treatment
7
42.625
6.089
20.06**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.250
0.304
Total
23
48.625
** = highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 0.71 %
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
40
Appendix Table 12. Number of days from planting to emergence
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
MEAN
I II
III
Control(no fertilizer)
14
13
14
13.667
0.60 kg (T-14)
13
14
14
13.667
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
10 10 11
10.333
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
10 10 10
10.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
11 10 12
11.000
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
12 11 11
11.333
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
12
13
13
12.667
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
12
12
13
12.333
TOTAL
13.42 13.28 14
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
Replication 2 1.750
0.875
Treatment
7
42.625
6.089
20.06**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.250
0.304
Total
23
48.625
** = highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 4.64 %
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
41
Appendix Table 13. Number of days from planting to harvesting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
76 77 76
76.333
0.60 kg (T-14)
77 76 76
76.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
80 80 79
79.667
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
80 80 80
80.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
79 80 78
79.000
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
78 79 79
78.667
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
78
77
77
77.333
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
78
78
77
77.667
TOTAL 89.42
89.57
88.85
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 1.750 0.875
Treatment
7
42.625
6.089
20.06**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.250
0.304
Total
23
48.625
** = highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 0.71 %
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
42
Appendix Table 14. Number of marketable tubers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
68 46 56
14.067
0.60 kg (T-14)
73 62 68
17.400
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
81 68 58
26.000
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
94 83 86
24.400
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
88 91 65
20.133
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
92 67 83
19.800
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
85
64
52
21.600
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
85
71
85
20.800
TOTAL 95.14
78.85
79
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 1073.583
536.792
Treatment
7
2217.958
316.851
4.55**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
974.417
69.601
Total
23
4265.958
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.31%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
43
Appendix Table 15. Weight of marketable tubers (kg)
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
3.2
3
1.3
2.500
0.60 kg (T-14)
4.5 3.2 2
3.233
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
8.3 7 4.5
6.600
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
7.2 6 5.5
6.233
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
7 4.5
4.5
5.333
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
7.2 4.6 5
5.600
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.8
4
2.7
4.167
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
6.2
4.3
3
4.500
TOTAL 7.05
5.22
4.07
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 27.761
13.880
Treatment
7
43.343
6.192
18.66**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.646
0.332
Total
23
75.750
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 12.07%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
44
Appendix Table 16. Number of non-marketable tubers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
63 82 64
69.667
0.60 kg (T-14)
33 79 103
71.667
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
59 59 48
55.333
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
79 38 45
54.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
66 68 57
63.667
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
53 49 79
60.333
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
70
40
37
49.000
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
62
44
27
44.333
TOTAL 69.28
65.57
65.71
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 54.250
27.125
Treatment 7
1948.000
278.286
0.69ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
5625.750
401.839
Total
23
7628.000
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.31%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
45
Appendix Table 17. Weight of non-marketable tubers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
1.5 1.2 2
1.567
0.60 kg (T-14)
1.4 1.4 1.4
1.400
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
0.7 0.6 0.6
0.633
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
0.8 0.7 1.2
0.900
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
1.2 0.7 1.2
1.033
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
1 0.7
1.2
0.967
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
1
1
1.4
1.133
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
1
1
1.6
1.200
TOTAL 1.2
1.04
1.51
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.691 0.345
Treatment
7
1.796
0.257
8.50**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
0.427
0.030
Total
23
2910
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.31%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
46
Appendix Table 18. Total yield per plot
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
4.7 4.2 3.3
4.067
0.60 kg (T-14)
5.9 4.6 3.4
4.633
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
9 7.6 5.1
7.233
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
8 6.7 6.7
7.133
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
8.2 5.2 5.7
6.367
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
8.2 5.3 6.2
6.567
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
6.8
5
4.1
5.300
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
7.2
5.3
4.6
5.700
TOTAL 8.28
6.27
5.58
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 24.128
12.064
Treatment
7
27.965
3.995
9.46**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
5.912
0.422
Total
23
58.005
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.06%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
47
Appendix Table 19. Computed yield tons/ha
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
9,400 8,400 6,600
8.133
0.60 kg (T-14)
11,800 9,200 6,800
9.267
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
18,000 15,200 10,200
14.467
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
16,000 13,400 13,400
14.267
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
16,400 10,400 11,400
12.733
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
16,400 10,600 12,400
13.133
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
13,600
10,000
8,200 10.600
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
14,400
10,600
9,200
11.400
TOTAL 16,571
12,542
11,171
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 96.510
48.225
Treatment
7
111.860
15.980
9.46**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
23.650
1.680
Total
23
232.02
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.06%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
48
Appendix Table 20. Leaf miner infestation 30 day after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
MEAN
I II III
Control(no fertilizer)
1.58 1.22 1.58
1.667
0.60 kg (T-14)
1.22 1.58 1.58
1.667
Vitazyme + 0.60kg( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.22
1.000
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.22
1.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.22
1.000
Nitromax + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.58 1.22
1.333
Dolomite + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.22
1.22
1.000
Dolomite + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.58
1.58
1.667
TOTAL 1.44
1.54
1.54
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.333 0.167
Treatment 7 2.292
0.327
1.96ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
2.333
0.167
Total
23
4.958
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.09%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
49
Appendix Table 21. Leaf miner infestation 40 day after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
1.58 1.22 1.58
1.667
0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.58 1.58
1.667
Vitazyme + 0.60kg( T-14)
1.58 1.22 1.22
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.22
1.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.58
1.333
Nitromax + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.58 1.22
1.333
Dolomite + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.22
1.22 1.333
Dolomite + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.58
1.22
1.667
TOTAL 1.49
1.54
1.54
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.583 0.292
Treatment 7 1.167
0.167
0.57ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.083
0.292
Total
23
5.833
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.31%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
50
Appendix Table 22. Late blight infestation 30 day after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
1.22 1.58 1.58
1.667
0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.58
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.22 1.22
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.22
1.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.58 1.22
1.333
Nitromax + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.22
1.000
Dolomite + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.58
1.22
1.333
Dolomite + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.22
1.22
1.000
TOTAL 1.44
1.54
1.49
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.250 0.125
Treatment 7 1.167
0.167
0.76ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
3.083
0.220
Total
23
4.500
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 12.90%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
51
Appendix Table 23. Late blight infestation 40 day after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
III MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
1.22 1.58
1.58
1.667
0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22
1.58
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.22
1.22
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.22
1.22
1.333
Nitromax + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.58
1.58
1.667
Nitromax + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.58
1.22
1.667
Dolomite + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.58
1.58
1.58 2.000
Dolomite + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.58
1.22
1.333
TOTAL 1.6
1.65
1.6
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.083 0.042
Treatment 7 1.292
0.185
0.56ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.583
0.327
Total
23
5.958
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 14.56%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
52
Appendix Table 24. Late blight infestation 60 day after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
1.22 1.58 1.58
1.667
0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.58
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.22 1.22
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.58 1.22
1.667
Nitromax + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.58 1.58
1.667
Nitromax + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.58 1.22
1.667
Dolomite + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.58
1.58
1.22
1.667
Dolomite + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.58
1.22
1.333
TOTAL 1.6
1.70
1.54
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.583 0.292
Treatment 7 0.625
0.089
0.26ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.750
0.339
Total
23
5.958
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 14.82%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
FIANZA, MICHAEL JORDAN V. APRIL 2012. Growth and Yield of
Potato(Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under Paoay, Atok, Benguet
condition.Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Danilo P. Padua, Ph.D
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted atPaoay, Atok, Benguet;determine the growth and yield
performance of potato seed tuber as affected by soil enhancers; determine the best soil
enhancers for potato production; and compare the profitability of potato stem cuttings and
seed tuber using soil enhancers through return on cash expenditures (ROCE).
Based on the results, plants applied withVitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14) performed the
best in terms of its growth, survival, vigorousness, and canopy cover at 30 DAP, 45 DAP,
and 60DAP, it also produced the highest and heaviest tubers and was the highest yield.
Based on the result of the study, Vitazyme was the best soil enhancer out of the 3
soil enhancers that were used in the study.
On the return on cash expenses, all the soil enhancers had positive income but
quite low ranging only from 11.5 (Nitromax + 0.60kg T-14) to 18.7 (Vitazyme + 0.60kg
T-14). The effect of the soil enhancers could be better appreciated though during the
succeeding planting.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ii
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
MATERIALS AND METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
Meteorological Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
Soil Chemical Properties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
Number of Days from Planting to
Emergence and Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
Percentage Plant Survival . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
Plant Vigor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
18
Initial and Final Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
Canopy Cover at 30, 45 and 60
Days After Planting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20
Number and Weight of Marketable Tubers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
Number and Weight of Non marketable Tubers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Yield per Plot and Computed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under Paoay, Atok,
Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
Yield Tons per Hectare . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23
Late Blight Occurrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
24
Leaf Miner Incidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
25
Return on Cash Expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
25
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . …... . . . . . . . . . . . .
27
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .
28
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .
28
LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . .
30
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
32
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under Paoay, Atok,
Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
INTRODUCTION
Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) was a crop introduced in the highlands of the
Cordillera between 1930's to 1940's by the Americans, who established the Camp John
Hay Recreational Base in Baguio City. Beginning at this time, potato production created
big business opportunities for the Cordillera farmers (Aquino, 2009).
Currently, potato is the fourth largest source of food in the world after rice, wheat,
and corn. Every year, 350 million tons of potatoes are produced and 52 percent of these
are in developing countries (Tacio, 2011).
In many potato producing areas, Benguet included, one of the major constraints in
potato production is the poor quality of planting material (Khatri, 1995) and soil
degradation due to continuous cropping.
In traditional potato production, the success and failure of commercial production
depends principally on the quality of tubers planted. However, to further increase profit,
other planting materials such as rooted stem cuttings should be considered. Rooted stem
cuttings are available at 8-15 days as compared to seed tubers with dormancy period of 8-
15 months (Tacio, 2011).
The relatively new technology of using potato stem cuttings for production is still
not widely practiced. Farmers still prefer potato tubers as planting material which they
save from their previous operations. However, even with the presence of both stem
cuttings and seed tubers, a continuous supply of quality planting materials, which is the
basic input in crop production, is not guaranteed (Bryan, 1984).
New products like soil enhancers are coming out to help in bringing back the soil
nutrients that are lost due to continuous cropping. The product promises greater yield,
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
2
higher profit, lesser cost of production and better protection to the environment. If such
products are proven effective, this study could be very meaningful in increasing potato
production, profit and environmental care.
The objectives of the study were as follows:
1. to determine the growth and yield performance of potato seed tuber as affected
by soil enhancers;
2. to determine the best soil enhancers for potato production; and
3. to compare the profitability of potato stem cuttings and seed tuber using soil
enhancers through return on cash expenditures (ROCE).
The research was conducted from November, 2011 until January, 2012 at Paoay,
Atok, Benguet.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
At present, most farmers in Benguet grow the Granola cultivar. The farmers
prefer this variety because it is adapted to the wet and dry cropping seasons as well as
warm and cold weather condition. This variety has been with the farmers for almost 15
cropping generations (Ayangdan, 1998). New selections, I-1085 (Po4) and LBR 1-5 (BSU
Po3) are recommended for the highlands. I-1085 is resistant to late blight and suitable for
French fries processing. The selection LBR 1-5 is the first highland potato variety
entirely developed through hybridization and selection in the Philippines.
One of the major constrains to potato production in the Philippine highlands is the
occurrence of Phythopthorainfestans, commonly known as late blight. Highland farmers
spray 20 times per season making fungicide application about 50% of the total cost of
production. The use of resistant varieties is the best and most economical control against
this major destructive disease. (Nisperoset al., 1984)
Use of Stem Cuttings and Seed Tubers
Cole and Wright (1957), as cited by Bryan (1984) stated that the utilization of
cuttings as planting materials was the first alternative to seed tubers. It was shown that
eight plants from one tuber could produce 5000 rooted cuttings in six months by cloning
and re cloning. The first practical use of stem cutting seems to be more related to removal
of non systematic disease such as ervina and phoma spp.
Ba-a (2002) noted that seed tubers as a planting material for three varieties
granola, Igorota and Raniag gave higher yield than stem cuttings for potato production in
Abiang, Atok Benguet. Among the three varieties evaluated, Igorota produced the highest
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
4
yield and has the highest return as investment. Seed tuber as planting materials was
proven to be better than the stem cuttings.
On the other hand, rooted stem cuttings serve not only as low cost planting
materials but also as a source for clean and healthy planting materials. Vander Zaag et al.
(1988) reported that under optimal management, stem cuttings give high competitive
yields with tuber seeds with over 20 tons per hectare. Plant survival varied with
genotypes but tuber size was generally similar to that from seed tuber grown.
Soil Enhancers Defined
Soil enhancer could be a mixture of quality organic materials and beneficial
micro- organisms that have a reviving action on the natural environment. Most of the
organisms are used in the food processing industry and in the field of probiotic medicine.
The fermentation process converts sugars and proteins, which are easily decomposed into
organic acids and amino acids. Unlike the decomposition process, fermentation of
organic matter conserves much of the energy in the constituent components of Soil
Enhancer. This means that there still is a lot of energy available in the Soil Enhancer
which is available to give to the soil and the plants and organisms in it. All materials used
in Soil Enhancer are of organic origin. Soil Enhancer supplies many nutrients to the soil it
is not intended to be a replacement for a standard fertilizer regime. (Bokashi, 2011)
Effect of Soil Enhancers
Soil treated with soil enhancer has shown increased fertility by increasing the soil
organic matter content and available nutrients, providing nutrients and stimulatory
compounds to growing plants, improving the soil porosity and permeability and
increasing the micro-biomass of the soil.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
5
The stimulation of microbial activity means the soil is able to degrade more plant
residues more rapidly releasing nutrients and improving soil organic matter quality
(Bokashi, 2011).
Benefits of Using Soil Enhancer
Using Soil enhancer regularly Releases nutrients from the soil, Increase soil
microbial activity, Improve soil structure and water holding capacity. Increase
photosynthetic capacity of plants, Suppress soil borne pathogens and pests, Improve plant
growth. Soil Enhancer is environmental friendly and easy to use, it is non-toxic and GE
free (Agricultural Biotech Inc. 2000).
Besides improving the growth of the plant, it also benefits soil characteristics. Soil
structure may markedly improve over time because of, increased root growth, and thus
more root channels, Greater polysaccharide production by microbes to glue clay platelets
together; only 0.2% more polysaccharide can markedly improve structure, improved
mycorrhizal activity, creating sac-like structures. (Agricultural Biotech Inc. 2000)
Improvement of soil structure, mean cleavage planes and burrows creating
channels to promote readily exchange of air and water because of greater earthworm
activity. Increased water infiltration, and consequently decrease in soil erosion and soil
runoff. Reduced soil compaction for better soil absorption of nutrients and water for
greater yield (Agricultural Biotech Inc. 2000).
Results of Some Studies on the Different soil
Enhancers
Fingh (2008) recorded the effect of vitazyme on potato growth, yield, and income.
Results showed that the seed and in-furrow treatments, plus a foliar-soil application,
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
6
hastened emergence and early growth. At harvest, the vitazyme treatments greatly
increased tuber number, by 79% for the seed treatments and by 52% for the in-furrow
treatment. The valuable 28 to 55 mm tuber size was much greater for the vitazyme
applications: 24% for the seed treatment and 14% for the in-furrow treatment. The yield
increases for vitazyme treatments presented in the report were small, 5% for the seed
treatment but based upon much greater tuber numbers and considerably higher
percentage of 28 to 55 mm tubers for both vitazyme treatments, these two yields should
have been much higher than reported. Likewise, the modest income improvements with
vitazyme should be higher than the above chart shows. It is apparent from this study that
vitazyme does indeed improve potato production and profits in India.
Fisher (2011) found in his study that nirtromax can stimulate growth and biomass
in potatoes. Results have shown 25% increase in yield, better plant growth and bigger
size of potato tubers. It was further noted that the stimulatory activity in potato could be
seen at concentrations as low as 1%.
Flickr (2010) Stated that Organic farmers place a high value of dolomite, both for
its capacity to “sweeten” the soil by lowering its acidity and for its tendency to act as a
secondary fertilizer and neutralizes soil acidity to increases activity of soil bacteria,
especially for tomatoes and related plants and just by using lime it actually gives more
profit for farmers because it increases there yield. But even many veteran horticulturalists
have little idea of what dolomite actually is, except that in general it’s a mineral.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
7
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of 250 ms was thoroughly prepared and divided into two sets with three
blocks for each set and later subdivided to 25 plots measuring 1m x 5m (Figures). The
potato seed tubers and stem cuttings were planted in double row plots at a distance of
30cmx30cm between hills and rows.
The experiment was laid-out using randomized complete block design (RCBD).
Treatments were the following:
T0- Control (no fertilizer)
T1- 0.60 kg (T-14)
T2- vitazyme + 0.60 kg (T-14)
T3- vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
T4- Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
T5- Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
T6- Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
T7-Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Fertilizer Application
Three weeks after planting, the plants were side-dressed with complete fertilizers
(14-14-14) at a rate of 80-80-80 NPK kg per hectare. Hilling up was done to cover the
side-dressed fertilizer.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
8
Soil Enhancer’s Active Ingredients
And Methods of Application
Soil enhancers
Active ingredient
Method of application
Vitazyme Potassium
(k2O)-0.80%
Vitazyme was applied to
Iron (Fe) as Cu EDTA– seed tubers before planting.
0.07%
Vitazyme was
Zn (Zn) as Zn EDTA-0.06% applied as a foliar spray, or
Water (H2O)- 100%
via drip or sprinkler
Brassinosteroids
irrigation to plants every
Triacontanol
30, 45, 60 days.
Glycosids
B vitamins
Nitromax
Nitrogen (N)% 0.24
One liter ofnitromax
Phosphorus (P2O5)% 0.002
was Mixed to 100 parts
Potassium (K2O)% 0.74
water then it was allowed to
Protein% 0.56
stand in a closed plastic
Zinc (Zn), ppm 6.05
container. It was not
Copper (Cu), ppm 2.42
exposed to daylight for 36
Manganese (Mn), ppm
hours at 24 0C or higher to
10.28
activate.
Iron (Fe), ppm 52.62
Application
Bacillus species
It was Applied at
seedling stage at the rate of
1:100 liter per hectare then
it was alternately applied to
freshly plowed moist soil 3
days before planting, and
sprayed every after 7 days.
Dolomite CaO-39.6%
Dolomite was applied to the
MgO-15.9%
soil to give time for the
dolomite to work with the
soil and the next day it was
mixed with the soil before
planting.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
9
Figure 1. Overview of the experimental area at 60, 75, 90 days after planting and just
after harvesting
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
10
Data Gathered
1.Meteorological data. The temperature, relative humidity, rainfall and sunshine
duration were taken from the municipality of Sayangan, Atok, Benguet (LGU- PAG-
ASA).
2. Soil chemical properties. Soil samples were taken before planting and after
harvesting. Soil pH, organic matter, nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium were analyzed
by theDepartment of Agriculture, Regional Field Unit 1, San Fernando City, La Union.
3. Growth Parameter
a. Plant survival (%). This was the number of plants that survived taken 30 days
after planting.
% Survival = Number of Transplanted seedling that Survived X 100
Total Number of Plants Transplanted
b. Plant vigor. This was gathered 30, 45 and 60 days after transplanting using the
CIP rating scale:
Scale Description Remarks
1
Plants are weak with few stems and Poor vigor
leaves; very pale.
2
Plants are weak with few thin stems Less vigorous
and leaves; pale
3
Better than less vigorous
Vigorous
4
Plants are moderately strong with Moderately
robust stems and leaves; leaves are vigorous
light green in color.
5
Plants are strong with robust stems Highly vigorous
and leaves; Leaves are light to dark
green in color.
c. Initial height (cm). This was measured using five random sample plants per
plot, ten days after planting.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
11
d. Final height (cm). This was measured using five random sample plants used in
getting the initial height 15 days before harvesting. Plants were measured from the base
up to the tip of the tallest shoot.
e. Canopy cover. This was gathered at 45, 60 and 75 days using a wooden frame
measuring 120 cm x 6 cm and having equally sized grids of 12 cm x 6 cm. Having the
grid over the foliage of two representatives previously marked plants, grids covered with
effective leaves were counted.
4. Maturity
a. Number of days from planting to emergence. This was recorded by counting
the days starting from planting the stem cuttings to emergence.
b. Number of days from emergence to harvesting. This was recorded by counting
the number of days from emergence to harvesting (Figure 2).
5. Yield Component
a. Number of marketable and weight of marketable tubers. All tubers of
marketable quality were counted and weighed at harvest and were classified into XL,
large, medium and marble sizes.
b. Number and weight of non- marketable tubers. This was obtained by counting
and weighing all tubers with malformedations, damaged by pest and diseases and had
more than 10% greening.
c. Total yield per plot (kg). This is the sum of the marketable and non-marketable
tubers that were counted and weighed.
d. Computed yield (tons/ha). Yield was computed using the formula:
Yield (t/ha) =
Total marketable yield/plot x 10,000m2
10m2 x 1000
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
12
6. Pest and Disease Incidence
a. Leaf miner. The reaction was recorded at 30 and 40 DAP using the following
rating scale (CIP, 2001):
Scale
Description
Remarks
1
Less than 20% of plants per Highly
resistant
plot is infested
2
21-40% of the plants per plot Moderately
resistant
infested
3
41-60% of the plants per plot Susceptible
infested
4
61-80% of the plants per plot
Moderately
Infested
susceptible
5
81-100% of the plants per plot
Very
susceptible
infested
b. Late blight. This was gathered at 30, 45, 60 DAP using the CIP scale
(Henfling, 1987).
Blight (%) CIP
Scale
Description
1
1
No blight to be seen
01-1
1
Very few plants in larger plots with a lesion. Not
more than 2 lesions per 10m or row (+ 30
plants).
1.1-2
2
Up to 10 small lesions per plants
3.1-10
3
Up to 30 small lesions per plant, or up to 1 in
each 20 leaflets attacked.
10.1-24
4
Most plants are visibly attacked and 1 in 3
leaflets infected. Few multiple infections per
leaflet.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
13
Blight (%)
CIP Scale
Description
25-49
5
Nearly every leaflet with lesions. Multiple
infections per leaflet are common. Filed plot
looks green, but all plants in plot are blighted.
50-74
6
Every plant blighted and half the leaf area
destroyed by blight. Plots look green- flecked
and brown; blight is very obvious.
75-90
7
As previous, but ¾ of each plant blighted. Lower
branches may be overwhelmingly killed off, and
the only green leaves, if any, are spindly due to
extensive foliage loss. Plot looks neither brown
nor green.
91-97
8
Some leaves and stems are green, Plot looks
brown with some green patches.
97.1-99.9
9
Few green leaves, almost all with blight lesions,
remain. Many stem lesions. Plot looks brown.
100
9
All leaves and stems dead.
Remarks: 1 – highly resistant; 2-3 resistant; 4-5 moderately resistant; 6-7
moderately susceptible; 8-9 susceptible.
7. Other Data
a. Return on cash expenses. This was computed using the formula:
ROCE = Gross income – production cost x 100
Production cost
Analysis of Data
All quantitative data were analyzed through the analysis of variance (ANOVA)
for Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. Significance of
differences among the treatment means was tested using the Duncan’s Multiple Range
Test (DMRT).
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
14
T0-Control (no fertilizer)
T1-0.60 kg (T-14)
T2-vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
T3- vitazyme + 0.30 kg
T4- Nitromax + 0.60 kg
T5- Nitromax + 0.30 kg
(T-14)
(T-14)
(T-14)
T6- Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
T7-Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Figure 2. Potato Plants at 90 days before harvesting
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
15
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Meteorological Data During the Study Period
Table 1 shows the air temperature, relative humidity, rainfall and total sunshine
duration during the study period. Maximum daytime air temperature ranged from 23.5 to
19.2oC while the minimum air temperature ranged from 10.1 to 11.6oC with an air
temperature mean of 15.86oC. Relative humidity was 73.66% and rainfall amount is 1.6
mm. Total sunshine duration in minute ranged from 381.4 to 377.00 with a mean of 375.
Potato grows best in areas with temperatures ranging from 17oC to 22oC with a
mean of 19oC and average relative humidity of 86% (NPRCRTC, n.d.). The temperature
that prevailed during the study period somehow depressed the potato growth especially
during the months of December and January.
Table 1. Meteorological data during the study period (November, 2011 – January, 2012)
AIR TEMPERATURE
RELATIVE RAINFALL SUNSHINE
MONTH
(OC)
HUMIDITY AMOUNT
DURATION
MIN MAX MEAN (%) (mm) (min)
November 15.2 23.5 19.35
76
2.5
381.40
December
11.6
19.2
15.4 72 2.3 377.00
January 10.1 15.6 12.85
73
0
366.60
MEAN 12.3 19.43 15.86 73.66
1.6
375
Source: Sayangan, Atok, Benguet (LGU- PAG-ASA)
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
16
Soil Chemical Properties
Soil chemical properties of the farm before planting is shown in Table 2. It was
observed that the soil pH is slightly acidic. The average soil pH for potato production
should range from 5.6 to 6.5 with high organic matter (NPRCRTC n.d.).
Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium were observed to be low, since the organic
matter is also low. Parnes (1986) stated that organic matter is the principal source of
nitrogen, phosphorus and sulfur nutrients which organisms require. A typical agricultural
soil may contain 1.5% organic matter in the top 15 cm of the soil surface.The greater the
amounts of organic matter in the soil the better are the physical properties of the soil
(Alam et al., 20010).
Nitrogen is needed for vegetative growth. However, application of high amount of
nitrogen may prolong the maturity of the crop. Total nitrogen content of the top 25cm of
most soils ranges from 0.03 to 0.4%. About 0.95 % or more of total nitrogen in the soil in
organic forms (e.g. Proteins, amino acids, amino sugar and other complex N compounds),
may not be available directly to growing plants.
Phosphorus contributed to the early development of the crop and early
tuberization. It may increase the number of tuber production per plant. Although organic
Table 2. Chemical properties of the soil before planting and after harvest
pH OM(%) N(%) P(ppm)
K(ppm)
Before
planting 6.68 3.0 0.15 81 310
After harvest
6.0
3.5
0.19
98
315
Analyzed by: Department of Agriculture, Regional Field Unit 1, San Fernando City, La
Union
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
17
source of phosphorus are slowly available, they are very important since organic
phosphorus may account for up to 90% of the total soil phosphorous. Organic phosphorus
can be supplied to the soil by the addition of manure, municipal waste and the
accumulation of microbial and plant residues.
Potassium increases the dry matter content and helps prevent black spot damage
and blue discoloration after cooking. It also improves the storage quality of potato.
Potassium is regarded as one of the most important nutrients for plant because it plays an
important role in water transportation, photosynthesis and other metabolic activities
throughout the plant growth and development (Motavalli, 2005).
Number of Days from Planting to
Emergence and Harvesting
Table 3 shows the number of days from planting to emergence and to harvesting
of potato as affected by the treatments. Statistical analysis shows highly significant
differences among treatments. It showsthat Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14) garnered the
Table 3. Number of days from planting to emergence and harvesting of potato applied
with soil enhancer
DAYS TO
TREATMENT
EMERGENCE HARVESTING
Control (no fertilizer)
14.00a
76.00e
0.60 kg (T-14)
14.00a
76.00e
Vitazyme + 0.60kg(T-14)
10.00de
80.00ab
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
10.00e
80.00a
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
11.00cd
79.00bc
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
11.00c
79.00c
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
13.00b
77.00d
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
12.00b
78.00d
CV (%)
4.64
0.71
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
18
earliest days from planting to emergence (10.00), while control plants emerged the latest
(14.00 days) and harvested the latest (73.00 days). Plants under the different treatments
emerged and harvested at the same time.
Plant Survival
The percentage plant survival at 30 days after planting (DAP) varied
statistically.Table 2 shows that plants applied with Vitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 and
Vitazyme +0.30 kg T-14 obtained the highest percentage survival but not significantly
different with the other treatments. The results reveal that the soil enhancers used did not
affect the plant survival.
Plant Vigor
Plant vigor of potato applied with soil enhancer is shown in table 5. Plant vigor
was evaluated based on the stand of plants. It was observed that most of the treatments
were moderately vigorous while others were less vigorous.
Table 4. Plant survival of potato at 30 DAP of potato tubers applied with soil Enhancer
TREATMENT
PLANT SURVIVAL (%)
Control (no fertilizer)
95.73
0.60 kg (T-14)
96.93
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
100.00
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
100.00
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
97.30
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
96.97
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
92.43
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
98.47
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
19
Plant Height at 30 and 90 DAP
Plant height of potato plants at 30 and 90 DAP of the different treatment is
presented in Table 6. At 30 DAP, plants applied with Vitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 and
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg T-14 significantly registered the tallest plants with heights of 6.48
cm and 6.15 cm, respectively, but comparable with the other treatments. Control (no
fertilizers) plants were the shortest (4.60 cm).
Table 5. Plant vigor at 30, 45 and 60 days after planting (DAP) of potato applied with
soil enhancers.
TREATMENT
PLANT VIGOR
30 DAP
45 DAP
60 DAP
Control(no fertilizer)
Less vigorous
Less vigorous
Less
Vigorous
0.60 kg (T-14)
Less vigorous
Vigorous
Vigorous
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
Moderately
Moderately
Moderately
Vigorous
Vigorous
Vigorous
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Moderately
Vigorous Vigorous
Vigorous
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Moderately
Moderately
Moderately
Vigorous
Vigorous
Vigorous
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Vigorous
Vigorous
Vigorous
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Vigorous
Vigorous
Moderately
Vigorous
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T‐14)
Moderately
Moderately
Moderately
Vigorous
vigorous
Vigorous
Means followed by the same letter are no significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
20
Table 6. Height of potato plants at 30 and 90 DAP applied with soil enhancer
TREATMENT
PLANT HEIGHT (cm)
30DAP 90DAP
Control (no fertilizer)
4.60b
14.07d
0.60 kg (T-14)
5.65d
17.40c
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
6.48a
26.00a
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
6.15b
24.40a
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
5.93c
20.13b
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.90c
19.80b
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.78cd
21.60b
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
5.47e 20.80b
CV (%)
1.78
5.11
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Canopy Cover at 30, 45 and 60 Days after Planting
Table 7 shows the canopy cover of the potato plants at 3 stages. At 30 DAP,plants
applied with Vitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 exhibited the widest canopy of 4.19 followed by
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg T-14 with the mean of 4.14, while un fertilized plants had the
narrowest canopy cover of 4.61.
At 45 DAP, canopy cover of all treatments increased with Plants applied
withVitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 and 0.30 kg T-14 again having the widest canopy cover of
6.05. This was followed by plants applied withNitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14) with a mean of
5.853 while unfertilized plants had the narrowest canopy of 4.61.
At 60 DAP, plants applied withVitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 still had the significantly
widest canopy cover with 9.53.Unfertilized plants (Control) were observed to have
narrow canopy cover of 6.98.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
21
The two treatments w/ Vitazyme had more than 30% canopy cover than the
control at both 45 and 60 DAP. Those applied w/ Nitromax or Dolomite had 22% with
less canopy cover than the other treatments. Obviously, Vitazyme possesses materials
that can enhance potato vegetative growth. To a lesser extent, both Nitromax and
Dolomite exhibited the same trait. It was observed that all the treatments with high
canopy covers were resistant to late blight infection.
Number and Weight of Marketable Tubers
The average number and weight of marketable tubers is shown in Table 8.
Statistical analysis showed significant differences among treatments. Plants applied with
Vitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 had increased its number and weight of marketable tubers by
32-38% and unfertilized plants(control)had 22% with less number and weight of
marketable tubers than the other treatments. This result indicates that Vitazyme has
contents that can enhance tuber production, while both Nitromax and Dolomite has the
same effect.
Table 7. Canopy cover of potato tubers using soil enhancer
CANOPY COVER
TREATMENT
30 DAP
45 DAP
60 DAP
Control(no fertilizer)
3.513d
4.607d
6.980d
0.60 kg (T-14)
3.767c
5.467c
7.547c
vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
4.193ab
6.047a
9.533a
vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4.143b
6.047a
9.107a
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
4.107b
5.853ab
8.487b
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4.067b
5.713abc
8.297b
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4.047b
5.720abc
8.320b
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
4.133b
5.660abc
8.167b
CV (%)
3.65
3.35
3.70
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
22
The results reveal that the soil enhancers used did affect the number and
weight of tubers. Basically, number and weight of tubers is controlled or influenced by
environmental factors.However, there are also other factors that affect the number and
weight of tubers such as pest, diseases, nutrient and water availability which should be
taken into account.
Number and Weight of Non Marketable Tubers
Table 9 shows the average number and weight of non-marketable tubers.
Statistical analysis showed no significant variations in terms of the number of tubers but
highly significant differences among treatments were observed in terms of the
weight.Unfertilized plants (Control) had more number of tubers (69.67) and weight (1.57
kg) and plants applied with Dolomite + 0.60 kg T-14 had the least number of tubers
(44.33) but had weighed more than a kilo.
Table 8. Number and weight of marketable tubers applied with soil enhancer
MARKETABLE TUBERS
TREATMENT
NUMBER
WEIGHT
(per plot/ 5m2)
(kg/5m2)
Control(no fertilizer)
56.67c
2.50f
0.60 kg (T-14)
67.67bc
3.23ef
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
69.00bc
6.60a
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
87.67a
6.23ab
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
81.33ab
5.33bc
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
80.67ab
5.60ab
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
67.00bc
4.17de
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
80.33ab 4.50cd
CV% 11.31
12.07
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
23
This result validates the findings that the soil enhancers used really affect the number and
weight of tubers.
Total Yield per Plot and Computed
Yield per Hectare
The yield per plot and computed yield per hectare as affected by the different
treatments are shown in Table 10 and Figure 3. The results show that plants fertilized
with the combination of Vitazyme + 0.60 kg T-14 fertilizer had the highest yield of 7.23
kg per plot and 14.48 tons/ha. This was followed by the plants fertilized with Vitazyme +
80-80-80kg/ha T-14, and Nitromax + 0.60kg T-14 with means of 6.57 per plot and 13.73
tons/ha. There were highly significant differences observed among the treatments.
Table 9. Number and weight of non marketable tubers applied with soil enhancers
NON- MARKETABLE
NUMBER OF TUBERS
WEIGHT OF TUBER
TREATMENT
(per plot/ 5m2)
(kg/5m2)
Control(no fertilizer)
69.67
1.57
0.60 kg (T-14)
71.67
1.40
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
55.33
0.90
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg(T-14)
54.00
0.63
Nitromax + 0.60 kg(T-14)
63.67
1.03
Nitromax + 0.30 kg(T-14)
60.33
0.97
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
49.00
1.13
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
44.33
1.20
CV% 8.48
15.73
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
24
Table 10. Total yield per plot and computed yield tons per hectare of potato tubers
applied with soil enhancer
COMPUTED YIELD
TREATMENT
Total yield (kg/5m2) t/ha
Control (no fertilizer)
4.07e
8.13e
0.60 kg (T-14)
4.63de
9.27de
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
7.23a
14.47a
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
7.13a
14.27a
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
6.57abc
13.73abc
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
6.37ab
12.13ab
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.30cd
10.60cd
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
5.70bcd 11.40bcd
CV (%)
1.78
5.11
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Late Blight Occurrence
Table 11 shows the late blight infection at 30, 45 and 60 DAP of the eight
treatments. Most of the treatments had shown consistent trend in relation to late blight
occurrence. Plants applied with Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14) were consistently resistant to
late blight infection at 30, 45 and 60 DAP. Most of the treatments were observed to be
moderately resistant and resistant except for plants applied with vitazyme + 0.60kg T-14,
Nitromax + 0.60kg T-14, Dolomite + 0.60kg T-14, and control which were observed to
be moderately resistant.
Increase of late blight infection from 30 to 60 DAP could be due to the
scattered rain showers during the period.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
25
T0-Control(no fertilizer)
T1-0.60 kg (T-14)
T2- Vitazyme + 0.60kg
(T-14)
T3- Vitazyme + 0.30 kg
T4- Nitromax + 0.30 kg
T5- Nitromax + 0.30 kg
(T-14)
(T-14)
(T-14)
T6- Dolomite + 0.30 kg T7- Dolomite + 0.60 kg
(T-14)
(T-14)
Figure 3. Harvested potato tubers at 90 days after planting
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
26
Leaf Miner incidence
Visual rating for leaf miner incidence was done at 30 to 45 DAP. It was
observed that most of the treatments were highly resistant at 30 and 45 DAP except for
control (no fertilizer), 0.60 kgT-14 and Dolomite + 0.60kg T-14 which is moderately
resistant (Table 12).
Low leaf miner incidence could be due to the crop diversity practiced in the
study area.
Table 11. Late blight infection of potato plants applied with soil enhancer
TREATMENT
LATE BLIGHT
30 DAP
45 DAP
60 DAP
Control(no fertilizer)
Moderately
Moderately
Moderately
Resistant
Resistant
Resistant
0.60 kg (T-14)
Resistant Resistant Resistant
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
Highly
Resistant Resistant
Resistant
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Resistant Resistant
Moderately
Resistant
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Highly
Moderately
Moderately
Resistant
Resistant
Resistant
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Resistant Moderately
Moderately
Resistant
Resistant
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Resistant
Moderately
Moderately
Resistant
Resistant
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Highly
Resistant Resistant
Resistant
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
27
Table 12. Leaf miner incidence of potato plants applied with soil enhancers
LEAF MINER
TREATMENT
30 DAP
45 DAP
Control (no fertilizer)
Moderately Resistant
Moderately Resistant
0.60 kg (T-14)
Moderately Resistant
Moderately Resistant
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
Highly Resistant
Highly Resistant
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Highly Resistant
Highly Resistant
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Highly Resistant
Highly Resistant
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Highly Resistant
Highly Resistant
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
Highly Resistant
Highly Resistant
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
Moderately Resistant
Moderately Resistant
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance, DMRT
Return on Cash Expense
Table 13 shows the cost and return analysis on potato production using
different soil enhancers. Computation shows that plants applied with Vitazyme + 0.60kg
T-14 had the highest computed ROCE fallowed by Vitazyme + 0.30kg T-14.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
Table 13.Return on Cash Expenses (ROCE) of potato applied with soil enhancer
SOIL ENHANCER TREATMENT
PARTICULARS Control(no
0.60 kg
vitazyme +
vitazyme + Nitromax + Nitromax + Dolomite + Dolomite +
fertilizer)
Farmers
0.60kg
0.30 kg
0.60 kg
0.30 kg
0.30 kg
0.60 kg
Practice
Farmers
Farmers
Farmers
Farmers
Farmers
Farmers
Practice
Practice
Practice
Practice
Practice
Practice
Marketable
2.50
3.23
6.60
6.23
5.33
2.50
2.50
2.50
tubers
Expenses
Fertilizer
14.50
14.50
7.50
14.50
7.50
7.50
14.50
Chemicals
56.00
56.00
56.00
56.00
56.00
56.00
56.00
56.00
Labors
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
Soil enhancer
83.00
83.00
83.00
83.00
60.00
60.00
Total expenses
156.00
170.50
253.50
196.50
247.50
246.50
223.50
230.50
Gross sales
975.00
126.10
257.40
243.10
208.00
168.00
162.50
175.50
Net income
-58.00
-44.90
39.00
46.60
37.00
25.00
24.00
23.00
ROCE
-6.50
-8.70
18.70
17.60
11.50
11.90
11.50
14.90
*The harvested tubers were sold at Php 13 per kilogram.
27
25
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The study was conducted at Sayangan, Paoay, Atok Benguet from November
2011 to January 2012. The objectives of the study were to determine the growth and yield
performance of potato seed tubers as affected by soil enhancers; identify the best soil
enhancers for potato production; and compare the profitability of potato
productionapplied with soil enhancers through return on cash expenditures (ROCE).
Significant differences were observed in the growth and yield performance of
potato applied with soil enhancers. Plants applied withVitazyme + 0.60kg T-14 and
Vitazyme + 0.30kg T-14 had the highest percentage plant survival. Some of the
treatments were rated moderately vigorous, others were vigorous and control was rated
less vigorous as with farmers practice but not significantly different with the other
treatments. Applied ofVitazyme + 0.60kg T-14 produced the tallest plants and control
was recorded to be the shortest plant. At 30, 45 and 60 DAP, plants applied
withVitazyme + 0.60kg T-14 produced the tallest plants and control was recorded to be
the shortest plant. At 30, 45 and 60 DAP, plants applied with Vitazyme + 0.60kg T-14
had greater canopy cover than the other treatments. All the treatments consistently
exhibited high resistances to leaf miner at 30 DAP to 45 DAP except with the control (no
fertilizer). Plants applied with T-14 alone and Dolomite + 0.60kg T-14 was recorded to
be moderately resistant to leaf miner. Application of Vitazyme + 0.60kg T-14 produced
themostnumber and heaviest tubers.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
26
Conclusion
Based on the results, plants applied withVitazyme + 0.60kg T-14 performed
the best in terms of its growth, survival, vigorousness, and canopy cover at 30 DAP, 45
DAP, and 60DAP. The plants also produced the highest and heaviest tubers and had the
highest yield.
Vitazyme was the best soil enhancer out of the three soil enhancers that were
used in the study.
On the return on cash expenses, all the soil enhancers had positive income but
quite low ranging only from 11.5% (Nitromax + 0.60kg T-14) to 18.7% (Vitazyme +
0.60kg T-14). The effect of the soil enhancers could be better appreciated during the
succeeding planting seasons.
Recommendation
Application ofVitazyme + 0.60kg T-14 is recommended since it performed
the best in terms of plant growth, survival, vigor, and canopy cover at 30 DAP, 45 DAP,
and 60 DAP.
The study shows that there is profitability of potato tubers applied with soil
enhancers.
Further studies using soil enhancers in other farms and planting months are
recommended to verify the results. Since some of the soil enhancers are new, the
potential of soil enhancers is highly beneficial for the soil and for potato production.
These soil enhancers are also recommended for organic production.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
27
LITERATURE CITED
AGRICULTURAL BIOTECH INCORPORATED. 2000.Benefits of Using Soil
Enhancer. Retrieved June 10, 2011 from
http://www.agbioinc.com/How_Vitazyme_Works.html.
ALAM, S.M. and M.A. KHAN. 2001. Organic Matter. Retrieved March 24, 2007 from
htt://www.pakistaneconomist.com/issue 28/iqe6.htm.
AQUINO M.U. 2009 Potato Seed System, Bureau of Agricultural Research. Retrieved
June 10, 2011 from http://maidon.pcarrd.dost.gov.ph/regional
consortia/harrdec/accomplishments.htm.
AYANGDAN, N.S 1998 Indexing of virus infection in Benguet State University and
farmers. Potato cultivars using stem cuttings. BS Thesis. Benguet State
University, La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 4-5.
BA-A, O.L. 2002. Potato production using rooted stem cuttings and see tubers of tree
varieties in Abiang, Atok, Benguet. BS.Thesis.Benguet State University, La
Trinidad, Benguet. Pp. 25-26.
BOKASHI, Z. 2011. Soil Enhancer, “The totally natural way to reduce, reuse and recycle
organic waste. Retrieved June 10, 2011 from http://www.zingbokashi.co.nz/soil-
enhance.htm.
BRYAN, J.E. 1984. Methods of Rapid Multiplication Techniques for Potato
Propagation.Innovative methods for propagating potatoes. Report of XVIII
planning conference held in Peru, on 10-14th of December Pp. 259-260.
International Potato Center (CIP) 2001. Fact sheets. International potato center (CIP).
FINGH, B. 2008. Crop Results on Potato Using Vitazyme, Vital Earth Resources 706
East Broad way, Gale water, Texas 75647. Retrieved June 10, 2011 from
http://www.plantdesigns.com/vitazyme/whatisit.asp.
FISHER, R.W. 2011. Crop Results on Potato Using Nitromax, and It’s Benefits.
Retrieved January 20, 2011 from http://agraconew.com/nitromax.htm.
FLICKR, Q. 2010 Using Dolomite in Organic Gardens. Retrieved October 01,2011 from
http://site.cleanairgardening.com/info/the-dirt-on-dolomite-using-dolomite in
organic gardens.html.
GAYAO, B.T., A. BOTANGEN, P. DALANG, E. SANO, M. WALLACE, and V.
MACARIO. 1987. Cost and return analysis of on farm potato production using
stem cuttings: Benguet State University Graduate school Res. J.L: 79-91.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
28
HENFLING, J.W. 1987. Technical Information Bulletin 4: Late Blight of Potato. CIP,
Peru.
INTERNATIONAL POTATO CENTER (CIP). 2001. Plant Breeding for Durable
Resistance to Pest and Disease. Retrieved July 20, 2011 from
Online:http://www.growseed.org/potato-breedibg.html.
KHATRI, B.B. 1995. Management studies on seed production using different planting
material. Ms Thesis (Pub.). Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Pp. 3.
MOTAVALLI, P. 2005. Nutrient News.Retrieved March 24, 2007 from
http://www.missouri.edu/-umcsnrsoil and http://www.pub05/nl2005rex/htm.
NISPEROS, Z.C., E.D. BASOL and N. TORRES. 1984. Evaluation of potato (solanum
sp.) cultivars for yield and resistance to phytophthorainfestance in the Philippine
highlands. The potato in ASIA and the pacific region research. Research result
presented in a series of working paper. CIP VII 1-84.
PARNES, R. 1986. Organic and inorganic fertilizers.Wood Ends Agricultural
institute.Pp. 213, 219.
SANO, E.O. and O.K BAUTISTA 1982. Integrated storage studies on potatoes in the
Philippines. Northern Philippines Root Crop Research and Training
Center.Benguet State University. La Trinidad, Benguet. Pp 1-2.
TACIO, H.D. 2011. Potato Production reports by Sun. Star Publishing, Inc. Retrieved
June 10, 2011 from http://www.sunstar.com.ph/davao/theres-more-potato-french-
fries-chips.
VANDER, Z., P.B. SUSANA, V. RSCOBAR and A.L. DEMAGANTE. 1988. The status
and potential of true potato seeds and rooted cuttings as viable potato planting
materials in isohy-pothermic environment. Proceeding of the workshop on the
tropical agronomy potato in cunning china on June 12-15, Pp.88.
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
29
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Meteorological data during the study period
AIR
TEMPERATURE
RELATIVE
RAINFALL
SUNSHINE
HUMIDITY (%) AMOUNT(mm) DURATION(cm)
MONTH MIN MAX
November
1st Week
14.7 22.8
80
10.4
262.2
2nd Week
15.6 23.7
75
0
426.8
3rd Week
14.3 23.8
75
0
457.7
4th Week
15.8
24.5
86
0.7
307.7
MEAN 15.2 23.5
80
2.5
381.4
December
1st Week
15.0 24.7
75
4.4
371.1
2nd Week
15.3 24.3
79
5.1
375.4
3rd Week
15.6 23.8
75
0.5
480.0
4th Week
16.1
23.8
81
0
420.0
MEAN 15.6 24.2
78
2.4
387.0
January
1st Week
15.1
24.3 78
0.1 447.4
2nd Week
14.5
24.5 73
0
266.5
3rd Week
14.1 23.7
80
0
315.4
4th Week
13.2
24.0
80
0
440.5
MEAN 13.9 23.9
77
0.03
386.6
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
30
Appendix Table 2. Plant survival
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
89.9
99.9
97.4
95.733
0.60 kg (T-14)
100 95.4 95.4
96.933
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
100 100 100
100.000
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
100
100
100
100.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
95.4
96.5
100
97.300
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
90.9
100
100
96.967
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
90.9
91.9
94.5
92.433
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
100
100
95.4
98.467
TOTAL 109.5
111.9
111.8
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 21.663
10.832
Treatment 7 126.856
18.122
1.88ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
134.370
9.598
Total
23
282.889
Ns= not Significant Coefficient of Variance = 3.19%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
31
Appendix Table 3. Plant vigor at 30 days after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
2
3
2
2.333
0.60 kg (T-14)
2 2 3
2.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
4 3 4
3.667
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4 4 3
3.667
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
3 4 4
3.667
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4 3 3
3.333
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3
4
3
3.333
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
4
3
4
3.667
TOTAL 3.71
7.71
3.71
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.000 0.000
Treatment 7 7.167
1.024
2.68ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
5.333
0.381
Total
23
12.500
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variance = 18.99%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
32
Appendix Table 4. Plant vigor at 45 days after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
2
2
3
2.333
0.60 kg (T-14)
3 3 3
3.000
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
4 3 4
3.667
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3 4 3
3.333
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
3 4 4
3.000
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3 3 4
2.667
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3
3
3
3.000
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
3
4
4
3.667
TOTAL 3.42
3.71
4
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.333 0.167
Treatment 7 4.500
0.643
1.80ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
5.000
0.357
Total
23
9.833
ns= not significant Coefficient of Variance = 19.38 %
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
33
Appendix Table 5. Plant vigor at 60 days after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
3 2 2
2.333
0.60 kg (T-14)
3 4 3
3.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
4 4 4
4.000
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3 3 4
3.333
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
4 4 3
3.667
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3 4 3
3.333
Dolomite + 0.30 kg(T-14)
3
4
4
3.667
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
3
4
4
3.667
TOTAL 3.71
4.14
3.85
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.583 0.292
Treatment 7 5.167
0.738
2.53ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.083
0.292
Total
23
9.833
ns= not Significant Coefficient of Variance = 15.81 %
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
34
Appendix Table 6. Initial height
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
4.56
4.6
4.64
4.600
0.60 kg (T-14)
5.64 5.74 5.58
5.653
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
6.38 6.64 6.42
6.480
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
6.22 6.04 6.2
6.153
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
6.04 5.92 5.82
5.157
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.82 5.88 6
5.900
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.82
5.84
5.68
5.780
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
5.46
5.38
5.56
5.467
TOTAL 6.56
6.57
6.55
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.001 0.001
Treatment
7
6.486
0.927
88.75**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
0.416
0.010
Total
23
6.634
**= Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 1.78 %
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
35
Appendix Table 7. Final height (cm)
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
14 13.8
14.4
14.067
0.60 kg (T-14)
17.2 18.2
16.8
17.400
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
25.4 27
25.6
26.000
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg(T-14)
23.8 24
25.4
24.400
Nitromax + 0.60 kg(T-14)
20 21.2
19.2
20.133
Nitromax + 0.30 kg(T-14)
19.6 21
18.8
19.800
Dolomite + 0.30 kg(T-14)
21.4
23.8
19.6
21.600
Dolomite + 0.60 kg(T-14)
21.4
22.6
22.6
20.800
TOTAL 23.25
24.51
23.2
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 11.590
5.795
Treatment
7
295.132
42.162
38.27**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
15.423
1.102
Total
23
322.145
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 5.11%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
36
Appendix Table 8. Canopy cover at 45 days after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
3.5 3.54
3.5
3.513
0.60 kg (T-14)
3.68 3.78
3.84
3.767
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
4.48 4.38
4.38
4.413
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4.28 3.88
4.42
4.193
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
3.98 4.18
4.16
4.107
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
4.28 3.94
3.98
4.067
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
3.92
3.98
4.24 4.047
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
4.18
3.94
4.28
4.133
TOTAL 3.43
4.51
32.8
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.088 0.044
Treatment
7
1.584
0.226
10.48**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
0.302
0.022
Total
23
1.974
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 3.65%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
37
Appendix Table 9. Canopy cover at 60 days after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
4.7 4.54 4.58
4.607
0.60 kg(T-14)
5 5.6 5.8
5.467
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
6 6.1 6.04
6.047
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
6.2 6.04 5.9
6.047
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
5.84 5.9 5.82
5.853
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.7 5.64 5.8
5.713
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.64
5.8
5.72
5.720
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
5.88
5.74
5.44
5.660
TOTAL 44.96
6.48
6.44
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.014 0.007
Treatment
7
4.459
0.637
17.83**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
0.500
0.036
Total
23
1.974
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 3.35%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
38
Appendix Table 10. Canopy cover at 75 days after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
7.08 6.88 6.98
6.980
0.60 kg (T-14)
7.74 7.52 7.38
7.547
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
10.02 9.54 9.04
9.533
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
9 9.38
8.94
9.107
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
8.84 8.14 8.48
8.487
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
8.34 8.38 8.18
8.297
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
7.8
8.84
8.32
8.320
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
8.34
8.08
8.08
8.167
TOTAL 9.59
9.53
9.34
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.215 0.108
Treatment
7
13.604
1.943
20.60**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
1.320
0.094
Total
23
15.140
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 3.70%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
39
Appendix Table 11. Number of days from planting to harvesting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
76 77 76
76.333
0.60 kg (T-14)
77 76 76
76.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
80 80 79
79.667
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
80 80 80
80.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
79 80 78
79.000
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
78 79 79
78.667
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
78
77
77
77.333
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
78
78
77
77.667
TOTAL 89.42
89.57
88.85
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 1.750 0.875
Treatment
7
42.625
6.089
20.06**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.250
0.304
Total
23
48.625
** = highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 0.71 %
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
40
Appendix Table 12. Number of days from planting to emergence
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
MEAN
I II
III
Control(no fertilizer)
14
13
14
13.667
0.60 kg (T-14)
13
14
14
13.667
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
10 10 11
10.333
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
10 10 10
10.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
11 10 12
11.000
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
12 11 11
11.333
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
12
13
13
12.667
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
12
12
13
12.333
TOTAL
13.42 13.28 14
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
Replication 2 1.750
0.875
Treatment
7
42.625
6.089
20.06**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.250
0.304
Total
23
48.625
** = highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 4.64 %
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
41
Appendix Table 13. Number of days from planting to harvesting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
76 77 76
76.333
0.60 kg (T-14)
77 76 76
76.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
80 80 79
79.667
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
80 80 80
80.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
79 80 78
79.000
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
78 79 79
78.667
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
78
77
77
77.333
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
78
78
77
77.667
TOTAL 89.42
89.57
88.85
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 1.750 0.875
Treatment
7
42.625
6.089
20.06**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.250
0.304
Total
23
48.625
** = highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 0.71 %
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
42
Appendix Table 14. Number of marketable tubers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
68 46 56
14.067
0.60 kg (T-14)
73 62 68
17.400
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
81 68 58
26.000
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
94 83 86
24.400
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
88 91 65
20.133
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
92 67 83
19.800
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
85
64
52
21.600
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
85
71
85
20.800
TOTAL 95.14
78.85
79
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 1073.583
536.792
Treatment
7
2217.958
316.851
4.55**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
974.417
69.601
Total
23
4265.958
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.31%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
43
Appendix Table 15. Weight of marketable tubers (kg)
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
3.2
3
1.3
2.500
0.60 kg (T-14)
4.5 3.2 2
3.233
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
8.3 7 4.5
6.600
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
7.2 6 5.5
6.233
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
7 4.5
4.5
5.333
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
7.2 4.6 5
5.600
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
5.8
4
2.7
4.167
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
6.2
4.3
3
4.500
TOTAL 7.05
5.22
4.07
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 27.761
13.880
Treatment
7
43.343
6.192
18.66**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.646
0.332
Total
23
75.750
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 12.07%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
44
Appendix Table 16. Number of non-marketable tubers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
63 82 64
69.667
0.60 kg (T-14)
33 79 103
71.667
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
59 59 48
55.333
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
79 38 45
54.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
66 68 57
63.667
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
53 49 79
60.333
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
70
40
37
49.000
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
62
44
27
44.333
TOTAL 69.28
65.57
65.71
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 54.250
27.125
Treatment 7
1948.000
278.286
0.69ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
5625.750
401.839
Total
23
7628.000
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.31%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
45
Appendix Table 17. Weight of non-marketable tubers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
1.5 1.2 2
1.567
0.60 kg (T-14)
1.4 1.4 1.4
1.400
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
0.7 0.6 0.6
0.633
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
0.8 0.7 1.2
0.900
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
1.2 0.7 1.2
1.033
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
1 0.7
1.2
0.967
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
1
1
1.4
1.133
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
1
1
1.6
1.200
TOTAL 1.2
1.04
1.51
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.691 0.345
Treatment
7
1.796
0.257
8.50**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
0.427
0.030
Total
23
2910
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.31%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
46
Appendix Table 18. Total yield per plot
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
4.7 4.2 3.3
4.067
0.60 kg (T-14)
5.9 4.6 3.4
4.633
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
9 7.6 5.1
7.233
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
8 6.7 6.7
7.133
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
8.2 5.2 5.7
6.367
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
8.2 5.3 6.2
6.567
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
6.8
5
4.1
5.300
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
7.2
5.3
4.6
5.700
TOTAL 8.28
6.27
5.58
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 24.128
12.064
Treatment
7
27.965
3.995
9.46**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
5.912
0.422
Total
23
58.005
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.06%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
47
Appendix Table 19. Computed yield tons/ha
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III
MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
9,400 8,400 6,600
8.133
0.60 kg (T-14)
11,800 9,200 6,800
9.267
Vitazyme + 0.60kg (T-14)
18,000 15,200 10,200
14.467
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg (T-14)
16,000 13,400 13,400
14.267
Nitromax + 0.60 kg (T-14)
16,400 10,400 11,400
12.733
Nitromax + 0.30 kg (T-14)
16,400 10,600 12,400
13.133
Dolomite + 0.30 kg (T-14)
13,600
10,000
8,200 10.600
Dolomite + 0.60 kg (T-14)
14,400
10,600
9,200
11.400
TOTAL 16,571
12,542
11,171
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 96.510
48.225
Treatment
7
111.860
15.980
9.46**
3.39 4.78
Error 14
23.650
1.680
Total
23
232.02
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.06%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
48
Appendix Table 20. Leaf miner infestation 30 day after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
MEAN
I II III
Control(no fertilizer)
1.58 1.22 1.58
1.667
0.60 kg (T-14)
1.22 1.58 1.58
1.667
Vitazyme + 0.60kg( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.22
1.000
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.22
1.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.22
1.000
Nitromax + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.58 1.22
1.333
Dolomite + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.22
1.22
1.000
Dolomite + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.58
1.58
1.667
TOTAL 1.44
1.54
1.54
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.333 0.167
Treatment 7 2.292
0.327
1.96ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
2.333
0.167
Total
23
4.958
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.09%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
49
Appendix Table 21. Leaf miner infestation 40 day after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
1.58 1.22 1.58
1.667
0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.58 1.58
1.667
Vitazyme + 0.60kg( T-14)
1.58 1.22 1.22
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.22
1.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.58
1.333
Nitromax + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.58 1.22
1.333
Dolomite + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.22
1.22 1.333
Dolomite + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.58
1.22
1.667
TOTAL 1.49
1.54
1.54
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.583 0.292
Treatment 7 1.167
0.167
0.57ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.083
0.292
Total
23
5.833
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 11.31%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
50
Appendix Table 22. Late blight infestation 30 day after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
1.22 1.58 1.58
1.667
0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.58
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.22 1.22
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.22
1.000
Nitromax + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.58 1.22
1.333
Nitromax + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.22
1.000
Dolomite + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.58
1.22
1.333
Dolomite + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.22
1.22
1.000
TOTAL 1.44
1.54
1.49
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.250 0.125
Treatment 7 1.167
0.167
0.76ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
3.083
0.220
Total
23
4.500
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 12.90%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
51
Appendix Table 23. Late blight infestation 40 day after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
III MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
1.22 1.58
1.58
1.667
0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22
1.58
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.22
1.22
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.22
1.22
1.333
Nitromax + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.58
1.58
1.667
Nitromax + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.58
1.22
1.667
Dolomite + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.58
1.58
1.58 2.000
Dolomite + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.58
1.22
1.333
TOTAL 1.6
1.65
1.6
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF
COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.083 0.042
Treatment 7 1.292
0.185
0.56ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.583
0.327
Total
23
5.958
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 14.56%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
52
Appendix Table 24. Late blight infestation 60 day after planting
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II III MEAN
Control(no fertilizer)
1.22 1.58 1.58
1.667
0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.22 1.58
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.60kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.22 1.22
1.333
Vitazyme + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.58 1.22
1.667
Nitromax + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22 1.58 1.58
1.667
Nitromax + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.58 1.58 1.22
1.667
Dolomite + 0.30 kg ( T-14)
1.58
1.58
1.22
1.667
Dolomite + 0.60 kg ( T-14)
1.22
1.58
1.22
1.333
TOTAL 1.6
1.70
1.54
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE
DEGREE
SUM OF
MEAN OF COMPUTED TABULAR F
OF
OF
SQUARES SQUARES
F
0.05 0.01
VARIANCE FREEDOM
Replication 2 0.583 0.292
Treatment 7 0.625
0.089
0.26ns
3.39 4.78
Error 14
4.750
0.339
Total
23
5.958
**=Highly significant Coefficient of Variance = 14.82%
Growth and Yield of Potato (Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under
Paoay, Atok, Benguet condition /Michael Jordan V. Fianza.l 2012
Document Outline
- Growth and Yield of Potato(Solanumtuberosum L.) applied with soil enhancers under Paoay, Atok, Benguetcondition
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES