BIBLIOGRAPHY BANDIWAN, NEMESIO M. MARCH...
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BANDIWAN, NEMESIO M. MARCH 2012.Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings
Applied with Organic Fertilizers.Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Danilo P. Padua, PhD.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to determine the growth and yield of three potato varieties
using stem cuttings; compare the effect of organic fertilizers on the growth and yield of potato
cuttings;determine the interaction effect between potato varieties and organic fertilizers on the
growth and yield of potato; anddetermine the profitability of potato entries grown with the use of
different organic fertilizers under organic production.
Results of the study showed that Multigreen enhanced the highest plant survival, highest
initial and final plant height and widest canopy cover. It also produced the highest tuber yield
thus, it appears to be the best commercial organic fertilizer for the growth and yield of potato.
Among the three potato varieties, Igorota was the most resistant to late blight incidence
and had the highest total number of marketable tubers and highest yield.
Under organic production in La Trinidad, Igorota applied with Multigreen is the best
combination to obtain high ROCE.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………
i
Abstract………………………………………………………………………….......
i
Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………
ii
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………..
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE……………………………………………………….
3
Effect of Organic Fertilizer on Plant………………………………………….
3
Benguet State University Organic
4
Organic Compost……………………………………………………………..
Advantages of Using Organic Fertilizers
or Compost……………………………………………………………………
4
Evaluation of Potato Varieties Using
Organic Fertilizers…………………………………………………………….
5
The Use of Stem Cuttings…………………………………………………….
6
MATERIALS AND METHODS………………………………………………........
8
Data Gathered…………………………………………………………………
12
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ……………………………………………………
16
Agro-Climatic Data …………………………………………………………..
16
Chemical Analysis of Soil …………………………………………………....
17
Plant Survival…………………………………………………………….........
18
Initial and Final Plant Height………………………………………………….
19
Canopy Cover……………………………………………………………........
20
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
Plant Vigor…………………………………………………………………….
21
Leaf Miner……………………………………………………………………
22
Late Blight…………………………………………………………………….
23
Number of Marketable and Non-marketable
Tubers per Plot………………………………………………………………..
26
Weight of Marketable and Non-marketable
TubersTotal and Computed Yield per Plot……………………………….......
28
Total Yield per Plot…………………………………..………………………
30
Yield per Hectare……………………………………………………………..
31
Return on Cash Expense………………………………………………….......
32
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION………………….......
34
Summary……………………………………………………………………...
34
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………
35
Recommendation……………………………………………………………..
35
LITERATURE CITED………………………………………………………….......
4
36
APPENDICES……………………………………………………………………… 38
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
1
INTRODUCTION
Potato
(Solanumtuberosum) had become the world's most important tuber crop
and it is the fourth most important staple crop after rice, wheat, and maize (Mosley,
2003).
The best quality and largest yield of potatoes are produced under cool climate and
high altitude. In the Philippines, the moderately cool highlands of Benguet, Bukidnon,
Davao del Sur, North Cotabato, Zamboanga City, Misamis Oriental and other highland
areas are favorable for the production of potato in commercial scale (Kinoshita, 1972).
At present, potato production has not reached maximum production. One of the
major constraints in potato production is poor quality of seed tubers which result in low
yield (Pungsayan, 1985).
One of the alternative technologies for commercial potato production is the use of
potato stem cuttings. Planting potato stem cuttings would greatly reduce the cost in
producing, storing, and planting of tubers. Disease transmission in potato seed tubers will
also be minimized (Gayao et al., 1987).
Nowadays, many farmers operate or cultivate their farm through the use of
synthetic chemicals and inorganic fertilizers not realizing the impact of these practices.
Many researches show that the use of synthetic chemicals and fertilizers result in soil
degradation, soil acidity, pollution of soil and water. Due to these impacts, agricultural
researchers are encouraging farmers to bring back the productive capacity of the soil,
soundness of the environment and safer food for human consumption through the use of
organic fertilizers (Granstedet al., 1997).
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
2
The use of organic fertilizers assures the farmers of lower production costs and
ensure vigorous growth of the plant. Organic fertilizer application also helps control soil
born disease, improves soil properties and helps maintain stable soil nutrients (Balaoing,
2006).
The selection of varieties and suitable organic fertilizers would greatly help
farmers to produce desirable yield and increase their profit.
The study was conducted to:
1. determine the growth and yield of three potato varieties using stem cuttings;
2. compare the effect of organic fertilizers on the growth and yield of potato
cuttings;
3. determine the interaction effect between potato varieties and organic fertilizers
on the growth and yield of potato; and
4. determine the profitability of potato varieties applied with organic fertilizers.
The study was conducted at the Balili, La Trinidad, Benguet from November
2011 to February 2012.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Effect of Organic Fertilizer on Plant
When the organic residues are in the process of becoming soil or humus, they
supply some of essential nutrients to plant, to serve as the principal source of nitrates,
organic phosphate, organic sulfates, borates, and chloride, increase the cation exchange
capacity; and make phosphorous and macronutrients more readily available to plants over
a wide pH range. Organic residues release essential nutrients faster by microbial
decomposition when their ration of organic carbon to total nitrogen is now wider than
above 20:1 (Follett, 1991).
Koshino (1990) found that nutrient elements from organic fertilizers are released
slowly which is particularly important in avoiding salt injury, ensuring a continuous
supply of materials for the growing season, and producing product of better quality.
According to Parnes (1986), organic matter is principally a source of nitrogen,
phosphorous and sulfur. Soil organisms require and retain most of the calcium,
magnesium and potassium in decaying residues which are then discarded by the soil
organism during the first stages of decomposition. These nutrients become quickly
available to plants.
The benefits derived from organic fertilizers are: improved soil structure;
enhanced soil balance and nutrient availability; supply micronutrients essential for crop
growth of microorganism that helps control growth of soil-borne diseases and nematodes;
and makes plant healthier and gives higher crop yield.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
4
Benguet State University Organic Compost
Espiritu (1998) reported that BSU-organic compost refers to agricultural and
agro-industrial wastes composted with suitable fungal inocula (Trichoderma sp.) and
enriched with free-living nitrogen fixing bacteria (Azotobacteria sp.). Farm wastes such
as chicken, swine orcattle manure in combination with rice straw, coffee hulls as well as
industrial wastes such as sugarcane bagasse and molasses can be used.
The BSU-organic fertilizers produced under the project are a mixture of
mushroom compost, chicken dung and sunflower. It contains 32.23% organic matter
indicative of high nitrogen content which is one of the most essential nutrients needed by
the crop. The compost raw materials are treated with trichoderma and some strains of
bacteria. Trichoderma is known to protect plant roots against disease caused by fungi
(Laurean, 2009).
Advantages of Using Organic Fertilizers
or Compost
According to HARRDEC (2006) organic matter or compost or humus improves
the soil condition of mineral soils and thus increase soil productivity. Composts store of
nutrients used by the plants and help neutralize acidic soils, thus making them less
susceptible to erosion.
The content of organic fertilizer includes nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium,
magnesium and sulfur. Organic fertilizers aid the plant in absorbing more nutrients
already present in the soil, the soil turns black because of rich humus content. Moisture is
retained longer, preventing the crops from drying up when the soil is rich in organic
matter. It minimizes pollution because the compost was recycled from rotten waste.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
5
Organic fertilizers generally provide many advantages to organic farming, to soil
properties and to crop yields. They improve soil structure, enhance soil balance and
nutrient availability, and supply micronutrients essential for crop growth increase
microorganism population that helps control growth of soil-borne diseases and
nematodes, and makes plant healthier and gives higher crop yield. A direct relationship
between organic matter and the population and distribution of beneficial soil biota is also
noted. The most productive agricultural soil possess good structure, considerable cation
exchange capacity and water retention, and high
population of beneficial microorganism, which are all dependent upon the presence of
organic matter (OTA, 1982).
Organic fertilizer provides some essential elements for proper plant growth. It
assures farmers of lower stable fertilizer cost and reliable local raw materials. The
organic fertilizers could be at least 50% to 60% cheaper than chemical fertilizer and still
effective in increasing the fertility of the soil (Pacsi, 2005).
Evaluation of Potato Varieties Using
Organic Fertilizers
In a study by Pandosen (1980) results show that potato plants not applied with
organic matter were stunted compared to the treated ones which were vigorous thus,
organic matter plays a role similar to that of nitrogen with regard to the growth and yield
of plants. The application of nitrogen produced vigorous plant and helped on the tuber
formation. Apparently, an increase in the absorption of nitrogen by plants was followed
by an increase in leaf area.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
6
Campiwer (1999) found that different mixtures of organic fertilizers significantly
affected the height and weight of the potato plants as well as the weight of extra large
potato tubers. Application and formation of six (6) tons/ha chicken dung, six (6) tons/ha
horse manure, six (6) tons/ha pig manure and six (6) tons/ha fresh sunflower enhanced
taller and total yield of potato per plot. It also improved the physical and chemical
properties of the soil and proved to be the best combination to enhance the growth and
yield of potato.
The Use of Stem Cuttings
Uyenet al. (1985) reported that production of potato by stem cutting is being used
in many countries in order to produce a virus-free tuber. According to Jones (1988) 30%
and 20% of total planting materials respectively use in North American programs and
Europe Programs are stem cuttings.
Furthermore
Montierroet al. (1986) reported that the use of stem cuttings as
planting materials is a very promising tool for low cost potato production. It is one of the
alternative technologies in commercial potato production. Using them instead of tubers
would greatly reduce the cost in producing, storing and transplanting. It also enables the
rapid and timely increase of new cultivars and prevents possible occurrence of diseases in
the clean, healthy planting materials. Zamora et al. (1986) reported that stem cutting yield
more planting material at the shortest possible time than traditional seed piece method.
Investment can be reduced by 60% using a cheaper alternative way of producing clean
planting material like stem cutting (Gayao et al., 1987).
Demonteverde (1992) reported that using rooted cuttings from a certain clone is
an efficient, profitable and low cost method for potato production. According to Kiswa et
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
7
al. (1998) the use of rooted system cuttings as planting material, as an alternative to seed
tubers can reduce the cost of seed by as much as 40% and this method eliminates disease
caused by pathogens. It also breaks contact with non-systemic seed and soil-borne
diseases, although labor is more intensive.
The practical use of rooted stem cuttings seems to be more related to removal of
non-systemic disease and to allow high-quality seed to become available to growers
before the seed becomes infected to a significant degree (Bryan, 1984).
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
8
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of approximately 270 square meters was prepared for planting (Figures
1-2). This was divided into three blocks, which corresponds to three replications. Each
block was subdivided into 18 plots with a dimension of 1mx5m. The experiment was laid
out in Split plot arranged in Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD).
Upon crop establishment, all other practices including hilling-up, spraying,
weeding and watering were equally employed in all the treatments (Figures3-5).
The treatments used were:
MAIN PLOT- ORGANIC FERTILIZER
F0=
Control
F1= Abundant Harvest (10.38-8.34-9.45)
F2= NBEM-21 (2.8-3.95-3.66)
F3= Planergy Granules (6-6-6)
F4= Harvest King (8-8-8)
F5= Multigreen (20-8-15)
SUB PLOT- VARIETY
V1=
Igorota
V2=
Granola
V3=
Raniag
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
9
Figure 1. Overview of the experimental area at Balili, La Trinidad, Benguet
Figure 2. Land preparation of the experimental area at Balili, La Trinidad, Benguet
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
10
Figure 3. Planting of potato stem cuttings at Balili, La Trinidad, Benguet
Figure 4. Hilling up at 20 days after transplanting
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
11
Figure 5. Harvesting of potato tubers applied with organic fertilizers
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
12
The data gathered were the following:
A.Meteorological data. The data on temperature, relative humidity, rainfall and sunshine
duration were obtained fromPhilippine Atmospheric Geophysical and Astronomical
Services Administration(PAGASA) station, Benguet State University, La Trinidad,
Benguet.
B.Initial and Final Soil Analysis. Soil samples were taken from the experimental area
before and right after harvest. The nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, soil pH, and organic
matter content of the soil were analyzed at the Department of Agriculture, Soil
Laboratory, Pacdal, Baguio City.
C. Vegetative Characters
1. Plant survival %. The number of plants that survived was counted 30 days after
planting (DAP) and calculated using the formula:
Number of plant survived
% Plant Survival = x 100
Total Number of plants planted
2. Initial Plant Height. This was taken at 30 DAP using meterstick.
3. Final plant height. This was taken at 45 DAP using meterstick.
4. Canopy cover. This was gathered at 30 and 45 DAP using a wooden frame
which measures 120cm x 6cm.
5. Plant Vigor. This was taken at 30 and 45 DAP based on the rating scale by CIP
(Gonzales et al. (2004).
Scale
Description
Reaction
5
Plants are strong with robust stem and leaves, light Highly
color to dark green in color
Vigorous
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
13
4
Plants are moderately strong with robust stem and Moderately
leaves were light green in color
vigorous
3
Better than less vigorous
Vigorous
2
Plants are weak with few thin leaves and stems Less Vigorous
pale
1
Plants are weak with few stems and leaves very Poor Vigorous
pale
D. Reaction to Leaf miner and Late blight
1. Reaction to leaf miner. The reaction to leaf miner was recorded at 30 and 45
DAP using the following rating scale (CIP, 2001):
Scale
Description
Reaction
5
Leaf infested (1-20%)
Highly resistant
4
Infested (21-40%)
Moderate Resistant
3
Moderately infested (41-60%)
Susceptible
2
Severely infested (61-80%)
Moderately
Susceptible
1
Most serious (81-100%)
Very Susceptible
2.
Reaction to late blight. This was observed at 30 and 45 DAP using the CIP
rating scale by Henfling (1982):
Scale Blight
Description
1
0
No blight to be seen.
0.1-1
Very few plants in large treatments with lesions. Not
more than 2 lesions per 10m of row (30 plants).
2
1.1-3
Up to 10 lesions per plant.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
14
3
3.1-10
Up to 30 small lesions per plant or up to 1 inch each 20
leaflets attacked.
4
10.1-24
Most plants are visibly attacked and leaflets infected.
Very few multiple infections per leaflets.
5
25-49
Nearly every leaflet with lesions.Multiple infections per
leaflets are common.Field looks green, but all plants are
blight.
6
50-74
Every plants blighted and half the area destroyed by
blight. Field look green-flecked and brown; blight is very
obvious.
7 75-90
As previous, but ¾ of each plant blighted. Lower
branches may be over whelming killed off, and the only
green leaves, if any, are at the top of plant. Shape of
plants may be more spindly due to extensive foliage loss.
Field looks neither brown nor green.
8
91-97
Some leaves and most stems are green. Fields looks
brown with some leaves patches.
9 97.1-
Few green leaves, almost all with blight lesions, remain,
99.9
many stem lesions. Plot looks brown.
10
100
All leaves and stem dead.
Description: 1 – Highly resistant; 2 – 3 Resistant; 4 – 5 Moderately resistant;
6 – 7 Moderately susceptible; 8 – 10 Susceptible
E. Yield and Yield Components
1. Number and weight of marketable tubers per plot (kg). All tubers that were of
marketable size, not malformed, free from cuts, cracks and without more than 10%
greening of the total surface was counted and weighed at harvest.
2. Number and weight of non-marketable tubers per plot (kg). This was obtained
by counting and weighing all tubers that were malformed, damaged by pest and diseases
and with more than 10% greening.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
15
3. Total yield / plot (kg). This is the sum of the weight of marketable and non-
marketable tubers.
4. Computed yield (tons/ha). This was computed using the formula:
Total yield per plot
Yield (tons/ha) = x 100
5m²/ 1000m²
F.Return on cash expenses (ROCE). This was computed by dividing thenet profit
over the total cost of production multiplied by 100.
Net
profit
ROCE= ─────────────── x100
Total cost of production
Data Analysis
All quantitative data were analyzed using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for
the Split plot design with three replications. The significance of difference among the
treatment means was tested using the Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) at 5% level
of significance.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
16
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Agro-Climatic Data
Table 1 shows the temperature, relative humidity, amount of rainfall and daily
sunshine duration from November 2011 to February 2012. It was observed that the
temperature ranged from 14oC to 25oC, relative humidity from 84-87%, rainfall amount
from 2.20 to 6.40 mm and daily sunshine duration from 244 to 340 min.
Potato grows best in areas with temperature ranging from 17°C to 22°C and an
average humidity of 86%. The temperature and relative humidity is important because it
affects the growth and development of the plants, however the above average of
temperature 25oC and relative humidity 87% are not suitable to potato production.
Table 1.Agro-Climatic data during the conduct of the study (November 2011
February2012)
DAILY
TEMPERATURE
RELATIVE RAINFALL
SUNSHINE
(oC)
HUMIDITY
AMOUNT
DURATION
MONTH
Min Max
(%)
(mm)
(min)
November
15
24
86
2.20
257
December
14
17
87
6.40
244
January
14
25
84
3.20
340
February
14
22
86
3.40
293
Mean
14
26
86
4.00
284
Source: PAG-ASA Station, BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
17
Chemical Analysis of Soil
pH. The initial pH of the area was acidic (5.58) and according to Chapman and
Carter (1986) potatoes are well suited even in acidic soil pH from 4.5 to 5.5.
Soil Organic Matter. Table 2 shows that there was an increase in the organic
matter content of the soil. The increase is definitely attributableto the application of
organic fertilizers.
Nitrogen. The nitrogen content of the area also increased. Again this is a direct
effect of the organic fertilizers applied.
Table 2. Soil analysis before and after planting
ORGANIC
NITRO-
PHOSPHO-
POTAS-
pH
MATTER
GEN
ROUS
SIUM
(%)
(%)
(ppm)
(ppm)
Before planting
5.58
2.0
0.12
120
230
After planting
No fertilizer*
_
_
_
_
_
Abundant
6.0 2.5
0.79
120
365
harvest
NBEM 21
5.56
2.5
0.4
135
306
Planergy
5.96 2.5
0.45
128
324
Granules
Harvest king
6.0 3.0
0.7
135
375
Multi green
6.0
3.0
0.9
145
404
Data analyzed at the Soils Laboratory Department of Agriculture Pacdal, Baguio City
*No data collected
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
18
Phosphorous.The phosphorous content of all organic fertilizer applied were
increased. This contributed to the growth and development of the potato plants during the
early stage.
Potassium. The potassium content on the soil applied with Abundant Harvestafter
soil analysis still remains which may have been caused by the nutrient uptake of the
potato plant.
Plant Survival
Effect of Fertilizer. Significant differences were obtained on the percentage plant
survival of potato applied with organic fertilizers. Potato applied with Multigreen
significantly obtained the highest percentage of 72.22% while potato varieties applied
without any fertilizers obtained 55.88%. The high percentageofplant survival of potato
applied with Multigreen was apparently brought about by the NPK content of the
fertilizer that enhanced the growth and development of the potato plant.
Effect of Potato Variety. The potato varieties significantly differed in terms of
percentage plant survival. Igorota obtained the highest plant survival of 84.67% which
was much greater than both Raniag and Granola.The high percentage of plant survival of
Igorota could be due to its more desirable genetic characteristics.
Interaction
Effect. There was no significant interaction effect between the
fertilizers and varieties on the plant survival of potato, although Igorota applied with
multigreen seem to have higher survival percentage.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
19
Table 3. Plant survival of three potato varieties applied with organic fertilizers
TREATMENT
SURVIVAL(%)
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
55.89d
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
64.67bc
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
61.33cd
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
62.56bc
Harvest king (8-8-8)
68.89ab
Multi green (20-8-15)
72.22a
Variety (V)
Igorota
84.67a
Granola
58.44b
Raniag
49.67c
V x B
ns
CVa(%)
5.93%
CVb(%)
7.73%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Initial and Final Plant Height
Effect of Fertilizer.Table 4 shows the plant height of potato applied with organic
fertilizers.At 30 DAT, all treatments had taller plants than the control. Amongthemselves
however, no variations were noted. Fifteen days later, there was a slight change with
plants applied with Abundant Harvest which are shorter than those applied with
Multigreen.
Effect of Potato Variety. Table 4 shows that Igorota significantly produced the
tallest plants followed by Raniag. Granola had the shortest plants on the initial and final
height. The significant differences on the initial and final plant height of the different
potato varieties could be due to their genetic characteristics.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
20
Table 4.Plant height of three potato varieties at 30 and 45 DAT as affected by
organic fertilizers
PLANT HEIGHT
TREATMENT
INITIAL FINAL
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
10.56b
20.00c
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
12.78ab
21.89bc
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
11.44ab
22.33abc
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
12.00ab
22.00abc
Harvest king (8-8-8)
14.56a
24.44ab
Multi green (20-8-15)
14.78a
24.67a
Variety (V)
Igorota
19.39a
32.50a
Granola
8.11c
16.11b
Raniag
10.56b
19.06b
V x B
ns
ns
CVa(%)
12.06%
8.67%
CVb(%)
10.78%
9.09%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Interaction
Effect. There was no significant interaction effect between the
fertilizers and varieties on the height of potato plants.
Canopy Cover
Effect of Fertilizer. No significant differences were observed among the plants
treated with organic fertilizer. Although, plants applied with Multigreen seem to have the
widest canopy cover while plants with no fertilizer obtained the narrowest canopy cover.
Effect of Variety.Igorota significantly produced the widest canopy cover among
theof potato varieties (8.4) followed by Raniag (5.1) while Granola showed the narrowest
canopy cover of 3.22 at 30 DAT.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
21
Table 5. Canopy cover of three potato varieties at 30 and 45 DAT applied with organic
fertilizers
CANOPY COVER
TREATMENT
30 DAT
45 DAT
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
18.67
26.22
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
22.22
28.89
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
18.89
28.00
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
19.44
25.33
Harvest king (8-8-8)
26.22
31.11
Multi green (20-8-15)
25.78
32.89
Variety (V)
Igorota
32.39a
40.89a
Granola
12.78c
23.11b
Raniag
20.44b
22.22b
V x B
ns
ns
CVa(%)
26.48%
16.57%
CVb(%)
18.28%
16.67%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
At 45 DAT, canopy cover of all the potato varieties consistently increased but
Igorota had much greater canopy cover compared to the other two varieties. This is an
indication that Igorota has better adaptability to local conditions and consequently, better
growth and yield potential over the other varieties.
Interaction
Effect. There was no significant interaction effect between the
fertilizer and varietties on the canopy cover of potato plants.
Plant Vigor
Effect of Fertilizer. At 30 DAT, highly significant differences were recorded on
plant vigor of potato applied with organic fertilizer. However, at 45 DAT differences in
plant vigor were no longer observable. This suggested that most of the nutrients
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
22
contained by the organic fertilizer have been used quite early in the growth of potato
plants.
Effect of Variety. Highly significant differences were recorded on vigor of
different potato varieties. Igorota was observed to be moderately vigorous at 30 DAT but
already vigorous at 45 DAT. In both stage, Granola and Raniag were less vigorous.
Interaction
Effect. There was no significant interaction effect between the
fertilizer and varieties on the plant vigor of potato plants.
Table 6. Plant vigor of three potato varieties at 30 and 45 DAT applied with organic
fertilizers
PLANT VIGOR*
TREATMENT
30 DAT
45 DAT
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
2.89b
2.33
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
3.67a
2.56
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
3.33b
2.44
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
3.33b
2.56
Harvest king (8-8-8)
4.11a
2.89
Multi green (20-8-15)
3.89a
3.00
Variety (V)
Igorota
4.33a
3.89a
Granola
3.22b
2.78b
Raniag
3.06b
2.22b
V x B
ns
ns
CVa(%)
13.23%
18.66%
CVb(%)
16.32%
18.66%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
*Scale: 5 – Highly vigorous, 4 - Moderately vigorous, 3 – Vigorous,
2 - Less vigorous, 1 – Poor vigorous
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
23
Leaf Miner
Effect of Fertilizer. At 30 DAT, results show that all potato plants applied with
organic fertilizer were highly resistant.At 45 DAT, most plants were susceptible to leaf
miner. The increase of leaf miner incidence might be due to continuous rainfall during
the conduct of the study.
Effect of Variety. Results revealed that all potato varieties were highly resistant
to leaf miner at 30 DAT. At 45 DAT, Igorota was moderately resistant but both Granola
and Raniag were susceptible. The resistance of Igorota might be due to genetic
characteristics.
Table 7. Reaction to leaf miner of three potato varietiesat 30 and 45 DAT appliedwith
organic fertilizers
REACTION TOLEAF MINER
TREATMENT
30 DAT 45 DAT
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
Highly resistant Susceptible
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
Highly resistant Susceptible
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
Highly resistant Susceptible
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
Highly resistant Susceptible
Harvest king (8-8-8)
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
Multi green (20-8-15)
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
Variety (V)
Igorota
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
Granola
Highly resistant Susceptible
Raniag
Highly resistant Susceptible
V x B
ns
CVa(%)
7.98
CVb(%)
15.26
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
24
Interaction
Effect. There was no significant interaction effect between the
fertilizer and variety on the leaf miner incidence of potato plants.
Late Blight
Effect of Fertilizer. There was no significant difference observed among the
potato plants applied with organic fertilizers (table 8). Most of the treatments had
consistent trend observed in late blight occurrence. The increase in late blight infection
from 30-45 DAP may be attributed toscattered rainfall and foggy condition which affects
the relative humidity during the conduct of the study.According to Perez (2008), high
Table 8. Reaction to late blight incidence of three potato varieties at 30 and 45 DAT
applied with organic fertilizers
REACTION TO LATE BLIGHT
TREATMENT
30 DAT
45 DAT
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
Resistant
Moderately susceptible
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
Resistant
Moderately resistant
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
Harvest king (8-8-8)
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
Multi green (20-8-15)
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
Variety (V)
Igorota
Highly resistant Resistant
Granola
Highly resistant Moderately susceptible
Raniag
Resistant
Moderately susceptible
V x B
ns
ns
CVa(%)
7.50%
10.18%
CVb(%)
15.01%
11.61%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
25
relativehumidity affects the lateblight incidence because the presence of moisture favors
the occurrence of late blight.
Effect of Variety. Significant differences were observed among potato varieties.
Raniag and Granola was the most affected by late blight at 45 DAT (Figure 6). Igorota
had exhibited the least late blight infection, suggesting that it posseses genetic
characteristics better than two varieties.
Interaction
Effect. No significant interaction was observed between organic
fertilizers and potato varieties.
Figure 6. Late blight incidence at 45 days after transplanting
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
26
Number of Marketable and Non-marketable
Tubers per Plot
Effect of fertilizer.Table 9 shows the number of marketable and non-marketable
tubers of potato applied with organic fertilizers. Potato applied with Multigreen had the
highest marketable tubers. Least number of marketable tubers and high number of non-
marketable tubers are obtained in plants not applied with organic fertilizers.
Effect of variety. Significant differences were observed among the potato entries
in terms of number of marketable tubers. Igorota produced the highest number of both
Table 9.Number of marketable andnon-marketable tubers of three potato varieties
applied with organic fertilizers
NUMBER (PER 5 m²)
TREATMENT
MARKETABLE NON-
MARKETABLE
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
26.89b
72.67ab
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
37.56ab
69.11ab
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
30.00b
75.11a
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
37.67ab
59.11abc
Harvest king (8-8-8)
38.67ab
50.78abc
Multi green (20-8-15)
51.22a
45.56c
Variety (V)
Igorota
53.56a
74.83a
Granola
29.00b
65.72a
Raniag
28.44b
45.61b
V x B
ns
*
CVa(%)
30.68%
20.71%
CVb(%)
25.14%
13.99%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
27
marketable and non-marketable tubers. The lowest number of marketable and non-
marketable tubers were obtained from Raniag and Granola which was affected by late
blight. The varieties that produced the highest number of marketable tubers also had the
widest canopy and were resistant to late blight infection.
Interaction
effect. No significant interaction was observed between the fertilizers
and varieties in terms of number of marketable tubers produced. However, significant
interaction was observed on the number of non-marketable tubers between organic
fertilizersand potato varieties. Figure 7shows that Raniag applied with Multigreen has the
lowest non-marketable tubers followed by Igorot applied with Multigreen and Granola
applied with Multigreen.
100
90
Organic Fertilizers
80
F0- No fertilizer
70
60
F1- Abundant harvest
a
rketable tubers
50
F2- NBEM21
40
30
F3- Planergy granules
b
er of non-m
20
F4- Harvest king
Num
10
0
F5- Multi green
Igorota
Granola
Raniag
Variety
Figrure 7.Interaction effect of potato varieties and organic fertilizers on the number of
non- marketable tuber
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
28
Weight of Marketable and Non-marketable Tubers
Effect of Fertilizer. Table 10 shows the weight of marketable and non-marketable
tubers per plot. Significant differences were obtained in the marketable and non-
marketable tubers of potato. Plants applied with Multigreen significantly produced the
heaviest marketable potato tubers. Plants with no fertilizer produced the heaviest non-
marketable potato tubers.
Table 10.Weight of marketable and non-marketable tubers of three potatovarieties
applied with organic fertilizers
WEIGHT (kg/5m²)
TREATMENT
NON-
MARKETABLE
MARKETABLE
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
0.98 b
0.99c
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
1.48ab
1.49abc
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
1.3ab
1.30bc
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
1.31ab
1.31bc
Harvest king (8-8-8)
4.43ab
1.60ab
Multi green (20-8-15)
1.52 a
1.86a
Variety (V)
Igorota
2.67 a
2.73a
Granola
0.98 b
0.98b
Raniag
0.56 b
0.56b
V x B
ns
*
CVa(%)
14.22%
20.71%
CVb(%)
17.04%
19.29%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
29
Effect of Variety. There were significant differences observed among varieties in
terms of weight of marketable and non-marketable tubers of potato. Igorota had the
heaviest weight of marketable and non-marketable tubers followed by Raniag and the
lowest was obtained from Granola.
The high yield of Igorota variety might be attributed to its genetic characteristics,
including resistance to late blight (Table 10).Earlier results show that potato variety with
high plant survival and widest canopy cover had the highest weight of tubers.
Interaction
Effect. No significant interaction was observed between the fertilizer
and varieties in terms of weight of marketable tubers produced per plot. However, highly
significant interaction was observed on the weight of non-marketable tubers between the
organic fertilizers and varieties. Granola and Raniag had the lowest weight of non-
marketable tubers (Figure 8).
4
Organic Fertilizers
3.5
F0- No fertilizer
3
2.5
²)
F1- Abundant harvest
a
rketable tuber
2
F3- NBEM21
(kg/5m 1.5
F4- NBEM21
1
e
ight of non-m
W
F5- Harvest king
0.5
0
F- 6Multi green
Igorota
Granola
Raniag
Variety
Figure 8. Interaction effect of potato varieties and organic fertilizers on the weight of
non-marketable tuber
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
30
Total Yield per Plot
Effect of Fertilizer. There weresignificant differences on the total yield of potato
varietiesas affected bydifferent fertilizers. Potatoplantsapplied withMultigreen
significantly produced the highest total yield.The result might be due to the high plant
survival obtained as affected by these fertilizers.
Effect
of
Variety. Significant differences were also observed on the total yield of
potato. Igorota significantly produced the highest total yield of potato tubers. During the
conduct of the study, intermittent rains occurred, especially during the younger
vegetativegrowth stage which ultimately affected potato yield.
Table 11. Total plot yield of three potato varieties applied with organicfertilizers
TREATMENT
TOTAL YIELD
(Kg/5m²)
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
1.68b
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
1.96b
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
1.83b
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
1.90b
Harvest king (8-8-8)
2.00b
Multi green (20-8-15)
2.24a
Variety (V)
Igorota
3.57a
Granola
1.38b
Raniag
0.85b
V x B
ns
CVa(%)
14.80%
CVb(%)
17.35%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
31
Interaction Effect. The interaction between organic fertilizer and entries did not
significantly affect the yield of potato.
Computed Yield per Hectare
Effect
of
Fertilizer. It was observed that the potato plants applied with Multigreen
obtained the highest computed yield. This result may be attributed to the high percentage
of plant survival and the NPK content of the organic fertilizer which could be favorable
to potato plant growth.
Effect of Variety. Highly significant differences were observed on the yield of
Table 12.Computed yield of three potato varieties applied with organic fertilizers
COMPUTED YIELD
TREATMENT
(tons/ha)
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
3.38b
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45
3.91a
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
3.66a
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
3.80a
Harvest king (8-8-8)
4.00a
Multi green (20-8-15)
4.48a
Variety (V)
Igorota
7.15a
Granola
2.76b
Raniag
1.71b
V x B
ns
CVa(%)
14.86%
CVb(%)
17.34%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
32
the different potato varieties. Igorota obtained the highest computed yield per hectare.
High yield from this variety might have been brought about by its wide canopy cover,
resistance to late blight, high percentage of plant survival and plant vigor.The low yield
of Raniag and Granola maybe explained by their susceptibility to late blight.
Interaction
effect. There was no significant interaction between the fertilizers and
the entries on the computed yield of potato.
Return on Cash Expenses
Effect of Organic Fertilizers. The return on cash expense of potato applied with
organic fertilizer is presented in Table 13. It was observed that potatoes applied with
Multigreen registeredthe highest ROCE of 138.78% while plants\\ applied with NBEM 21
had the lowestwhich was 61.43% due to low number of tubers that were produced.
Effect of Variety. Profitability of the three potato entries is shown in Table 13.
Igorota obtained high return on cash expense with 184.71% followed by Granola with
48.86% and Raniag with 42.14%. The highest number of tubers fromIgorota variety may
have contributed to high ROCE. The result is definitely due to the better adaptability,
better resistance to late blight and higher yield of Igorota.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
33
Table 13. Return on cash expenses (ROCE) of three potatovarieties applied with organic
fertilizers
COST OF
TOTAL
GROSS
NET
PRODUC-
NUMBER OF INCOME INCOME ROCE
TREATMENT
TION
TUBERS
(Php)
(Php)
(%)
(Php)
(per 15m²)
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
519.75
242
968
447.75
86.15
Abundant harvest
729
338
1352
623
85.46
NBEM-21
669
270
1080
411
61.43
Planergy granules
699
334
1336
637
91.14
Harvest king
779
384
1592
757
97.18
Multi green
789
471
1884
1095
138.78
Variety (V)
Igorota
232.375
168.167
672.67
434.63
184.71
Granola
232.375
88.67
354.67
120.46
48.86
Raniag
232.375
85.33
341.33
107.04
42.14
*Tubers were sold at Php4.00 per tuber.
*Total cost of production includes cost of organic fertilizers, planting materials and labor
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
34
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The study was conducted at Balili, La Trinidad, Benguet from November 2011 to
February 2010. The objectives are to determine the growth and yield of three potato
varieties using stem cuttings; compare the effect of organic fertilizers on the growth and
yield of potato stem cuttings; determine the interaction effect between potato varieties
and organic fertilizers on the growth and yield of potato; and determine the profitability
of potato varieties applied with organic fertilizers.
Findings revealed that potato applied with organic fertilizers did not differ
significantly on plant survival, highest initial and final plant height, canopy cover, plant
vigor, leaf miner and late blight incidence.On yield parameters, significant differences
were noted on the number and weight of non-marketable tubers of potato applied with
organic fertilizers.
The different potato varieties significantly differed on plant characteristics such as
plant survival, height, leaf miner and late blightresistance, canopy cover,number and
weight of marketable tubers, total and computed yield. Igorota was the best performer in
terms of resistance to late blight, highest yield and obtained the highest ROCE.
The interaction of potato varieties applied with organic fertilizers was significant
in the number and weight of marketable tubers.Igorota applied with Multigreen was the
best combination in terms of high yield and high ROCE under organic potato production.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
35
Conclusion
Among the entries, Igorotawas the best potato variety in terms of plant survival,
height, leaf miner and late blightresistance, canopy cover,number and weight of
marketable tubers, total and computed yield.Multigreenappears to be the best commercial
organic fertilizer for the growth and yield of potato.
Igorota applied with Multigreenwas the best combination in terms of yield and
ROCE for tuber production.
Recommendation
Based on the results of the study, entry Igorota could be recommended for organic
production under La Trinidad, Benguet condition due to its high yield and resistance to
late blight incidence.
Due to higher ROCE, Multigreen is recommended as an organic fertilizer for
potato production using stem cuttings.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
36
LITERATURE CITED
BALAOING, J.G. 2006.Performance of Potato Cultivars as Influenced by Lime and
Organic Fertilizers Application. Ph.D. Thesis. Benguet State University, La
Trinidad Benguet. P.2.
BRYAN, T.B. 1984. Methods of rapid multiplication for seed production innovative
method of propagating potatoes. Report of the XVII planting conference held in
International Center, Lima, Peru on December 10-14. Pp.259-260.
CAMPIWER, R.B. 1999. Growth and yield response of potato (Solanumtuberosum) to
different mixtures of organic fertilizers and liming. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad
Benguet.
Pp.44-45.
CENTRO INTERNATIONAL DE LA PAPA (CIP).2001.Facts sheet.International
Potato Center (CIP).
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE-BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY. 2003.
Mychorrhiza and chicken manure: An alternative to inorganic fertilizer
application on potato. Guisad, Baguio City.Pp.1-2.
ESPIRITU, B. 1998. Bio-organic Fertilizer: Waste Utilization Through Beneficial
Microorganism. National Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology.UP
Los
Baňos, Laguna.
DEMONTEVERDE, V. E. 1992. Rapid multiplication technique for potato: Potential
use in potato production seed system of SAPRAD system in transition held in
Baguio City Philippines on June 1-6.
FOLLET, E. L. 1991. Fertilizer and Soil Amendments. USA: McGraw hill Publishing
Inc.
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 cutting. BSU Graduate School Research Journal 1:79-91.
GONZALES, I. C., O. BADOL, D. K. SIMONGO, T.D. MASANGKAY, A. T.
BOTANGEN and F. S. BALOG-AS.2004. Potato clone IP84004.7: A variety
release in the Philippine highlands. BSU research journal, La Trinidad Benguet.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
37
GRANSTED, A. and KJELLENBERG, L.1997. Long-Term Field Experiment in
Sweden: Effects of Organic and Inorganic on Soil Fertility and Crop Quality. In
Proceedings of an International Conference in Boston, Tuffs University,
Agricultural Production and Nutrition.
HIGHLAND AGRICULTURE AND RESOURCES RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT
AND
CONSORTIUM
(HARRDEC).
2006. Highlands Express. P.9
HENFLING, J. W. 1987. Technical info bulletin 4: Late blight of potato. CIP, Peru.
KONSHINO, S. O. 1990. The use of Organic and Chemical in Japan.Food and
CFertilizer
Technology
Center.extension Bull. Pp.13-14.
LAUREAN, C. 2009.Shamag (volume XII number 8).P 6.
MONTIERRO, C.G and VANDER ZAAG P. 1986. Response of diverse set of potato
cultivars grow from cuttings to an isothermic environment of the Philippines. The
potato in Southeast Asia and the Pacific region.CIP region VIII working papers.
P.
48
MOSLEY, A.R. The Potato Plant.Potandon Produce L.L.C. Retrieve February 2012
from
http://www.Potandon.Com?ss Potatoes Plant.htm.
OTA.1982. Towards a more sustainable agriculture. AVI Publishing Company, Inc.
Westport,
Connecticut.
P.117.
PANDOSEN, M. D. 1980. Effect of different rate of N-K and organic fertilizers on the
yield of iron potato. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp.116-117.
ZAMORA, A.B., MALLION, K. and R.C. BARBA. 1986. Rapid multiplication
technique of potato third international symposium of
potato production for
South East
Asia and the Pacific Region. Bandying Indonesia.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
38
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Plant survival (%) of three potato varieties applied with organic
fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
78
75
83
236
78.67
V2
47
41
44
132
44.00
V3
50
41
44
135
45.00
Sub-total 175
167
171
503
55.89
F1
V1
81
83
89
253
84.33
V2
56
58
63
177
59.00
V3
47
58
47
152
50.67
Sub-total 184
199
139
582
64.67
F2
V1
75
80
86
241
80.33
V2
61
50
56
167
55.67
V3
50
47
47
144
48.00
Sub-total 186
177
138
552
61.33
F3
V1
81
83
86
250
83.33
V2
63
56
50
169
56.33
V3
44
50
50
144
48.00
Sub-total 128
189
186
563
62.56
F4
V1
86
89
94
269
89.67
V2
72
61
63
144
65.33
V3
52
56
47
155
51.67
Sub-total 210
206
204
620
68.89
F5
V1
97
89
89
275
91.67
V2
72
72
67
211
70.33
V3
52
56
56
164
54.67
Sub-total 221
187
212
650
72.22
Total 1164
1145
1161
3418
1156.67
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
39
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
78.67 84.33 80.33 83.33 89.67 91.67 508.00 84.67
GRANOLA
44.00 59.00 55.67 56.33 65.33 70.33 350.66 58.44
RANIAG
45.00 50.67 48.00 48.00 51.67 54.67 298.01 49.67
TOTAL
167.67 194.00 184.00 187.66 206.67 216.67 1156.67
MEAN
55.89 64.67 61.33 62.55 68.89 72.22
64.26
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
11.593
5.796
Factor A
5
1498.815
299.763
20.63**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
145.296
14.530
Factor B
2
11937.926
5968.963 266.38**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
294.963
29.496
1.31ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
537.778
22.407
TOTAL 53
14426.370
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 5.93%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 7.37%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
40
Appendix Table 2. Initial plant height (cm)of three potato varieties applied with
organic
fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
14
17
16
47
15.67
V2
5
7
7
19
6.33
V3
7
11
11
29
9.67
Sub-total 26
35
34 95
10.56
F1
V1
20
19
20
59
19.67
V2
9
9
7
25
8.33
V3
10
11
10
31
10.33
Sub-total 39
39
37
115
12.78
F2
V1
14
19
19
52
17.33
V2
7
6
8
21
7.00
V3
9
10
11
30
10.00
Sub-total 30
35
28
103
11.44
F3
V1
17
20
19
56
18.67
V2
6
7
10
23
7.67
V3
9
10
12
29
9.67
Sub-total 32
37
41
108
12.00
F4
V1
23
24
20
67
22.33
V2
7
12
10
29
9.67
V3
12
13
10
35
11.67
Sub-total 42
49
40
131
14.56
F5
V1
23
20
25
68
22.67
V2
8
11
10
29
9.67
V3
12
10
14
36
12.00
Sub-total 43
31
49
133
14.78
Total 212
236
239
685
228.35
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
41
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
15.67 19.67 17.33 18.67 22.33 22.67 116.34 19.39
GRANOLA
6.33 8.33 7
7.67 9.67 9.67 48.67 8.11
RANIAG
9.67 10.33 10
9.67 11.67
12 63.34 10.56
TOTAL
31.67 38.33 34.33 36.01 43.67 44.34 228.35
MEAN
10.56 12.78 11.44 12.00 14.56 14.78
12.69
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
28.259
14.130
Factor A
5
129.870
25.974
5.54*
3.33
5.64
Error
10
46.852
4.685
Factor B
2
1267.148
633.574
338.74**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
28.630
1.863
1.53
2.26
3.17
Error
24
44.889
1.870
TOTAL 53
* =
Significant Coefficient of variation = 17.06%
**=
Highly
significant
Coefficient of variation = 10.78%
ns = Not significant
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
42
Appendix Table 3. Finalplant height (cm)of three potato varieties applied with
organic
fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
28
31
28
87
29.00
V2
14
15
14
43
14.33
V3
14
18
18
50
16.67
Sub-total 56
64
60
180
20.00
F1
V1
29
34
30
93
31.00
V2
17
13
13
43
14.33
V3
18
22
21
61
20.33
Sub-total 64
69
64
197
21.89
F2
V1
34
34
31
99
33.00
V2
17
16
14
47
15.67
V3
17
19
19
55
18.33
Sub-total 68
69
64
201
22.33
F3
V1
30
37
29
96
32.00
V2
19
15
14
48
16.00
V3
19
19
16
54
18.00
Sub-total 68
71
59
198
22.00
F4
V1
34
34
35
103
34.33
V2
19
17
17
53
17.67
V3
20
24
20
64
21.33
Sub-total 73
75
72
220
24.44
F5
V1
36
38
33
107
35.67
V2
22
17
17
56
18.67
V3
22
20
17
59
19.67
Sub-total 80
75
67
222
24.67
Total 409
423
386
1218
406
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
43
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
29 31 33 32 34.33 35.67
195.00
32.50
GRANOLA
14.33 14.33 15.67
16 17.67 18.67 96.67 16.11
RANIAG
16.67 20.33 18.33
18 21.33 19.67 114.33 19.06
TOTAL
60.00 65.66 67.00 66.00 73.33 74.01 406.00
MEAN
20.00 21.89 22.33 22.00 24.44 24.67
22.56
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
38.778
19.389
Factor A
5
138.222
27.644
7.21**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
38.333
3.833
Factor B
2
2748.111
1374.056
326.86**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
37.000
3.700
0.88ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
100.889
4.204
TOTAL 53
3101.333
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 8.67%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 9.09%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
44
Appendix Table 4. Canopy cover 30 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic
fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
24
28
28
80
26.67
V2
8
12
12
32
10.67
V3
16
20
20
56
18.67
Sub-total 48
60
60
168
18.67
F1
V1
36
32
36
104
34.67
V2
12
16
12
40
13.30
V3
20
20
16
56
18.67
Sub-total 68
68
64
200
22.22
F2
V1
24
32
32
88
29.33
V2
12
6
12
30
10.00
V3
16
16
20
52
17.33
Sub-total 52
54
44
170
18.89
F3
V1
7
36
32
75
25.00
V2
8
12
16
36
12.00
V3
16
24
24
64
21.33
Sub-total 31
72
72
175
19.44
F4
V1
36
44
36
11
38.67
V2
12
20
16
48
16.00
V3
24
28
20
72
24.00
Sub-total 72
92
72
236
26.22
F5
V1
36
36
48
120
40.00
V2
16
16
12
44
14.00
V3
20
24
24
68
22.00
Sub-total 72
76
84
232
25.78
Total 343
422
416
1076
392.31
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
45
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
26.67 34.67 29.33
25 38.67
40 194.34 32.39
GRANOLA
10.67 13.3 10
12
16 14 75.97 12.66
RANIAG
18.67 18.67 17.33 21.33 24
22 122.00 20.33
TOTAL
56.01 66.64 56.66 58.33 78.67 76.00 392.31
MEAN
18.67 22.21 18.89 19.44 26.22 25.33
21.80
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
214.926
107.463
Factor A
5
534.315
106.863
3.18ns
3.33
5.64
Error
10
335.519
33.552
Factor B
2
3516.259
1758.130
110.01**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
247.519
24.752
1.54ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
383.556
15.981
TOTAL 53
5232.093
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 26.48%
**=
Highly
significant
Coefficient of variation = 18.28%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
46
Appendix Table 5. Canopy cover 45 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic
fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
36
32
36
104
34.67
V2
16
24
24
64
21.33
V3
20
28
20
68
22.67
Sub-total 72
84
80
236
26.22
F1
V1
44
44
44
132
44.00
V2
24
28
20
72
24.00
V3
20
20
16
56
18.67
Sub-total 88
92
80
260
28.89
F2
V1
32
48
40
120
40.00
V2
28
16
24
68
22.67
V3
16
20
28
64
21.33
Sub-total 76
84
92
252
58.00
F3
V1
32
40
40
112
37.33
V2
12
16
24
52
17.33
V3
20
20
24
64
21.33
Sub-total 64
76
88
228
25.33
F4
V1
40
44
44
128
42.67
V2
28
32
20
80
26.67
V3
28
48
16
72
24.00
96
104
80
280
31.11
F5
V1
44
44
54
140
46.67
V2
24
32
24
80
26.67
V3
28
28
20
76
25.33
Sub-total 96
104
96 29
32.89
Total 492
564
518
1552
517.34
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
47
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
34.67 44 40 37.33 42.67 46.67 245.34 40.89
GRANOLA
21.33 24 22.67 17.33 26.67 26.67 138.67 23.11
RANIAG
22.67 18.67 21.33 21.33 24 25.33 133.33 22.22
TOTAL
78.67 86.67 84.00 75.99 93.34 98.67 517.34
MEAN
26.22 28.89 28.00 25.33 31.11 32.89
28.74
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES
SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
24.33
12.167
Factor A
2
1258.78
629.389
2832.25**
6.94
18.00
Error
4
0.889
0.222
Factor B
5
127.500
25.500
8.80**
2.53
3.70
AB
10
28.556
2.856
0.98ns
2.26
2.98
Error
30
86.778
2.893
TOTAL 53
1526.833
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 16.57%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 16.67%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
48
Appendix Table 6. Plant vigor 30 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic
fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
4
4
3
11
3.67
V2
2
3
3
8
2.67
V3
2
2
3
7
2.33
Sub-total 8
7
9 26
2.89
F1
V1
5
4
4
13
4.33
V2
3
4
3
10
3.33
V3
3
3
4
10
3.33
Sub-total 11
11
11 33 3.67
F2
V1
4
4
5
13
4.33
V2
3
3
3
9
3.00
V3
3
2
3
8
2.67
Sub-total 11
9
11 30 3.33
F3
V1
4
3
5
12
4.33
V2
3
3
3
9
3.00
V3
3
3
3
9
2.67
Sub-total 10
9
11 30 3.33
F4
V1
5
5
5
15
5.00
V2
3
4
4
11
3.67
V3
3
4
4
11
3.67
Sub-total 11
13
13 37 4.11
F5
V1
5
5
4
14
4.67
V2
4
3
4
11
3.67
V3
3
4
3
10
3.33
Sub-total 12
12
11 35 3.89
Total 62
63
66
191
63.67
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
49
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
3.67 4.33 4.33 4.33 5 4.67 26.33 4.39
GRANOLA
2.67 3.33 3
3 3.67 3.67 19.34 3.22
RANIAG
2.33 3.33 2.67 2.67 3.67 3.33 18.00 3.00
TOTAL
8.67 10.99 10.00 10.00 12.34 11.67 63.67
MEAN
2.89 3.66 3.33 3.33 4.11 3.89
3.54
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.481
0.241
Factor A
5
8.759
1.752
8.02**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
2.185
0.219
Factor B
2
17.370
8.685
26.05**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
0.630
0.063
0.19ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
8.000
0.333
TOTAL 53
37.426
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 13.23%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 16.32%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
50
Appendix Table 7. Plant vigor 45 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
3
3
3
9
3.00
V2
2
2
2
6
2.00
V3
2
2
2
6
2.00
Sub-total 7
7
7 21
2.33
F1
V1
4
3
3
10
3.33
V2
2
2
3
7
2.33
V3
2
2
2
6
2.00
Sub-total 7
7
8 23
2.56
F2
V1
3
3
3
9
3.00
V2
2
2
3
7
2.33
V3
2
2
2
6
2.00
Sub-total 7
7
8 22
2.44
F3
V1
3
3
4
10
3.33
V2
2
2
2
6
2.00
V3
2
3
2
7
2.33
Sub-total 7
8
8 23
2.55
F4
V1
3
4
4
11
3.67
V2
2
3
3
8
2.67
V3
2
2
3
7
2.33
Sub-total 11
9
10 26 2.89
F5
V1
4
5
3
12
4.00
V2
3
2
2
7
2.33
V3
2
3
3
8
2.67
Sub-total 9
10
8 27
3.00
Total 45
48
49
142
47.32
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
51
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
3 3.33 3 3.33 3.67 4 20.33 3.39
GRANOLA
2 2.33 2.33 2 2.67
2.33 13.66 2.28
RANIAG
2 2 2 2.33
2.33
2.67
13.33 2.22
TOTAL
7.00 7.66 7.33 7.66 8.67 9.00 47.32
MEAN
2.33 2.55 2.44 2.55 2.89 3.00
2.63
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.481
0.241
Factor A
5
3.037
0.607
2.52ns
3.33
5.64
Error
10
2.407
0.241
Factor B
2
15.593
7.796
32.38**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
1.296
0.130
0.53ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
5.778
0.241
TOTAL 53
28.593
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 18.68%
**= Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 18.66%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
52
Appendix Table 8. Leaf miner 45 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
3
3
4
10
3.33
V2
3
3
2
8
2.67
V3
2
3
3
8
2.67
Sub-total 8
9
9 26
2.89
F1
V1
4
3
4
11
3.67
V2
4
3
3
10
3.33
V3
3
3
3
9
3.00
Sub-total 11
9
10 30 3.33
F2
V1
4
3
3
10
3.33
V2
2
3
3
8
2.67
V3
3
3
3
9
3.00
Sub-total 9
9
9 27
3.00
F3
V1
3
4
4
11
3.67
V2
3
3
3
9
3.00
V3
3
3
3
9
3.00
Sub-total 9
10
10
29
3.22
F4
V1
4
5
4
13
4.33
V2
5
4
4
13
4.33
V3
4
3
3
11
3.33
13
12
11
36
4.00
F5
V1
5
4
4
13
4.33
V2
4
4
4
12
4.00
V3
4
3
4
11
3.67
Sub-total 13
11
12 36 4.00
Total 63
60
61
185
61.33
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
53
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
3.33 3.67 3.33 3.67 4.33 4.33 22.66 3.78
GRANOLA
2.67 3.33 2.67
3 4.33 4 20.00 3.33
RANIAG
2.67 3 3
3 3.33
3.67 18.67 3.11
TOTAL
8.67 10.00 9.00 9.67 11.99 12.00 61.33
MEAN
2.89 3.33 3.00 3.22 4.00 4.00
3.41
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.259
0.130
Factor A
5
10.593
2.119
9.69**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
2.185
0.219
Factor B
2
4.148
2.074
8.00**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
1.630
0.163
0.62ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
6.222
0.259
TOTAL 53
25.037
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 13.73%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 14.94%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
54
Appendix Table 9. Late blight 30 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
1
1
1
3
1.00
V2
1
2
2
5
1.67
V3
2
2
2
6
2.00
Sub-total 4
5
5 14
1.56
F1
V1
1
1
1
3
1.00
V2
1
2
1
4
1.33
V3
1
1
1
3
1.00
Sub-total 3
4
3 10
1.11
F2
V1
1
1
1
3
1.00
V2
2
2
1
5
1.67
V3
1
3
2
6
2.00
Sub-total 3
6
4 14
1.56
F3
V1
1
1
1
3
1.00
V2
1
1
1
3
1.00
V3
1
1
2
4
1.33
Sub-total 3
6
4 10
1.11
F4
V1
1
1
1
3
1.00
V2
1
1
1
3
1.00
V3
1
2
2
5
1.67
3
4
4
11
1.22
F5
V1
1
1
1
3
1.00
V2
1
2
1
4
1.33
V3
2
1
1
4
1.33
Sub-total 4
4
3 11
1.22
Total 21
26
23
70
23.33
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
55
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
1 1 1 1 1 3 8.00 1.33
GRANOLA
1.67 1.33 1.67
1
1 4 10.67 1.78
RANIAG
2 1 2 1.33
1.67
4 12.00 2.00
TOTAL
4.67 3.33 4.67 3.33 3.67 11.00 30.67
MEAN
1.56 1.11 1.56 1.11 1.22 3.67
1.70
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.704
0.352
Factor A
5
1.926
0.385
2.97ns
3.33
5.64
Error
10
1.296
0.130
Factor B
2
2.815
1.407
7.23*
4.10
7.56
AB
10
1.852
0.185
0.95ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
4.667
0.194
TOTAL 53
13.259
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 7.50%
*=
Significant
Coefficient of variation = 15.01%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
56
Appendix Table 10. Late blight 45 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
3
2
3
8
2.67
V2
6
7
7
20
6.67
V3
7
8
7
22
7.33
Sub-total 16
17
17 50 5.56
F1
V1
3
2
3
8
2.67
V2
6
6
7
19
6.33
V3
6
7
7
20
6.67
Sub-total 15
15
17 47 5.22
F2
V1
4
3
2
9
3.00
V2
6
7
7
20
6.67
V3
7
6
7
20
6.67
Sub-total 17
16
16 49 5.44
F3
V1
2
3
3
8
2.67
V2
7
6
6
19
6.33
V3
7
7
7
21
7.00
Sub-total 16
16
16 48 3.33
F4
V1
3
3
2
8
2.67
V2
6
6
6
18
6.00
V3
6
7
7
20
6.67
15
16
15
46
5.11
F5
V1
2
3
2
7
2.33
V2
5
6
5
16
5.33
V3
7
7
6
20
6.67
Sub-total 14
16
13 43 4.78
Total 93
96
94
283
94.35
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
57
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
2.67 2.67 3
2.67 2.67 2.33 16.01 2.67
GRANOLA
6.67 6.33 6.67 6.33 6 5.33 37.33 6.22
RANIAG
7.33 6.67 6.67
7 6.67 6.67 41.01 6.84
TOTAL
16.67 15.67 16.34 16.00 15.34 14.33 94.35
MEAN
5.56 5.22 5.45 5.33 5.11 4.78
5.24
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.259
0.130
Factor A
5
3.426
0.685
2.40ns
3.33
5.64
Error
10
2.852
0.285
246.05**
Factor B
2
182.259
91.130
0.59ns
4.10
7.56
AB
10
2.185
0.219
2.26
3.17
Error
24
8.889
0.370
TOTAL 53
199.870
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 10.18%
**= Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 11.61%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
58
Appendix Table 11. Number of marketable tubers per plotof three potato varieties
applied with organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
38
42
36
116
38.67
V2
16
20
14
50
16.67
V3
24
20
32
76
25.33
Sub-total 78
82
82
242
26.89
F1
V1
48
59
59
166
55.33
V2
28
36
24
88
29.33
V3
28
36
20
84
28.00
Sub-total 104
131
103
338
37.56
F2
V1
54
46
42
142
47.33
V2
24
20
20
64
21.33
V3
28
20
16
64
21.33
Sub-total 106
86
78 270
30.00
F3
V1
58
50
55
163
54.33
V2
32
40
20
92
30.67
V3
20
32
32
84
28.00
Sub-total 110
122
107
339
33.67
F4
V1
78
70
58
156
52.00
V2
40
24
32
96
32.00
V3
40
32
24
96
32.00
158
126
114
348
38.67
F5
V1
76
64
81
221
73.67
V2
48
56
38
132
44.00
V3
36
28
44
108
36.00
Sub-total 160
148
163
461
51.22
Total 716
695
647
1998
665.99
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
59
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
38.67 55.33 47.33 54.33 52 73.67 321.33 53.56
GRANOLA
16.67 29.33 21.33 30.67 32
44 174.00 29.00
RANIAG
25.33 28 21.33 28 32 36 170.66 28.44
TOTAL
80.67 112.66 89.99 113.00 116.00 153.67 665.99
MEAN
26.89 37.55 30.00 37.67 38.67 51.22
37.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
210.111
105.056
Factor A
5
3213.333
642.667
4.98*
3.33
5.64
Error
10
1289.222
128.922
Factor B
2
7403.111
3701.556
42.79**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
534.222
53.422
0.61ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
2076.000
86.500
TOTAL 53
14726.000
* = Significant
Coefficient of variation = 30.68%
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 25.14%
ns = Not significant
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
60
Appendix Table 12. Number of non-marketable tubers per plotof three potato varieties
applied with organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
102
85
89
276
92.00
V2
92
76
72
240
80.00
V3
48
54
36
138
46.00
Sub-total 242
215
197
654
72.67
F1
V1
94
92
76
262
87.33
V2
98
58
80
236
78.67
V3
40
34
50
124
41.33
Sub-total 232
184
206
622
69.11
F2
V1
78
90
88
256
85.33
V2
68
86
90
244
81.33
V3
46
62
68
176
58.67
Sub-total 192
238
249
676
75.11
F3
V1
85
72
79
236
78.67
V2
54
48
58
160
53.33
V3
56
38
42
136
45.33
Sub-total 195
158
179
532
59.11
F4
V1
63
55
59
177
59.00
V2
50
62
37
149
49.67
V3
38
49
44
131
43.67
151
166
140
457
50.78
F5
V1
54
39
47
140
46.67
V2
38
64
52
154
51.33
V3
36
44
36
116
38.67
Sub-total 128
147
135
410
45.56
Total 1140
1108
1103
3351
1117
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
61
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
92 87.33 85.33 85.33 59 46.67 455.66 75.94
GRANOLA
80 78.67 81.33 81.33 49.67 51.33 422.33 70.39
RANIAG
46 41.33 58.67 58.67 43.67 38.67 287.01 47.84
TOTAL
218.00 207.33 225.33 225.33 152.34 136.67 1165.00
MEAN
72.67 69.11 75.11 75.11 50.78 45.56
64.72
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
44.778
22.389
Factor A
5
6668.389
1333.678
8.06**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
1653.000
165.300
Factor B
2
8048.444
4024.222
53.37**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
2614.667
261.267
3.47*
2.26
3.17
Error
24
1809.556
75.398
TOTAL 53
20838.833
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 20.71%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 13.98%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
62
Appendix Table 13. Weight of marketable tubers per plotof three potato varieties
applied with organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
2.40
2.20
1.50
6.1
2.03
V2
0.40
0.60
0.40
1.4
0.46
V3
0.60
0.40
0.40
1.4
0.46
Sub-total 3.40
3.20
2.30 8.9 0.98
F1
V1
2.70
2.70
3.00
8.4
2.8
V2
1.00
1.20
0.80
3
1
V3
0.80
0.80
0.40
2
0.67
Sub-total 4.50
4.70
4.20
13.4 1.48
F2
V1
2.80
2.40
2.50
7.7
2.57
V2
1.00
0.80
0.60
2.4
0.8
V3
0.60
0.60
0.40
1.6
0.53
Sub-total 4.40
3.80
3.50
11.7 1.3
F3
V1
2.50
2.25
2.00
6.75
2.25
V2
1.20
1.60
0.60
3.4
1.13
V3
0.40
0.60
0.60
1.6
0.53
Sub-total 4.10
4.45
3.20
11.75
1.31
F4
V1
3.40
3.20
3.00
9.6
3.2
V2
1.40
0.80
0.80
3
1
V3
0.70
0.60
0.40
1.7
0.57
4.50
4.60
4.20
13.3
4.43
F5
V1
3.25
3.00
4.28
10.53
3.51
V2
1.60
1.60
1.20
4.4
1.47
V3
0.60
0.40
0.80
1.8
0.6
Sub-total 4.45
4.00
5.28
13.73
1.52
Total 27.35
25.75
23.68
76.78
25.58
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
63
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
2.03 2.8 2.57 2.25 3.2 3.51 16.36 2.73
GRANOLA
0.46 1 0.8 1.13 1 1.47 5.86 0.98
RANIAG
0.46 0.67 0.53 0.53 0.57 0.6 3.36 0.56
TOTAL
2.95 4.47 3.90 3.91 4.77 5.58 25.58
MEAN
0.98 1.49 1.30 1.30 1.59 1.86
1.42
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
44.778
22.389
Factor A
5
15112.611
3022.522
38.81**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
778.778
77.878
Factor B
2
398.111
199.056
1.78ns
4.10
7.56
AB
10
1820.778
182.078
1.62ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
2683.778
111.824
TOTAL 53
20838.833
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 14.22%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 17.04%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
64
Appendix Table 14. Weight of non-marketable tubers per plotof three potato varieties
applied with organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
1.20
1.00
1.50
6.10
2.03
V2
0.70
0.50
0.50
1.40
0.47
V3
0.20
0.30
0.30
1.40
0.47
Sub-total 2.10
1.80
2.30
8.90 0.99
F1
V1
0.80
0.50
0.50
8.40
2.80
V2
0.50
0.40
0.70
3.00
1.00
V3
0.30
0.20
0.30
2.00
0.67
Sub-total 1.60
1.10
1.50
13.40
1.49
F2
V1
0.75
0.80
0.90
7.70
2.57
V2
0.40
0.30
0.70
2.40
0.80
V3
0.20
0.30
0.30
1.60
0.53
Sub-total 1.35
1.40
1.90
11.70
1.30
F3
V1
0.90
1.00
0.75
6.75
2.25
V2
0.30
0.40
0.30
3.40
1.13
V3
0.40
0.30
0.30
1.60
0.53
Sub-total 1.60
1.70
1.35
11.75
1.31
F4
V1
0.50
0.65
0.50
9.60
3.20
V2
0.20
0.40
0.30
3.10
1.20
V3
0.30
0.30
0.30
1.70
1.03
1.00
1.35
1.10
14.40
1.60
F5
V1
0.50
0.50
0.75
10.53
3.51
V2
0.30
0.20
0.20
4.40
1.47
V3
0.30
0.20
0.20
1.80
0.60
Sub-total 1.10
1.20
1.15
16.73
1.86
Total 8.75
8.25
9.3
76.88
26.26
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
65
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
2.03 2.8 2.57 2.25 3.2 3.51 16.36 2.73
GRANOLA
0.47 1 0.8 1.13 1.2 1.47 6.07 1.01
RANIAG
0.47 0.67 0.53 0.53 1.03 0.6 3.83 0.64
TOTAL
2.97 4.47 3.90 3.91 5.43 5.58 26.26
MEAN
0.99 1.49 1.30 1.30 1.81 1.86
1.46
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.355
0.178
Factor A
5
3.987
0.797
9.12**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
0.874
0.087
Factor B
2
47.443
23.721
314.62**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
2.490
0.249
3.30*
2.26
3.17
Error
24
1.810
0.075
TOTAL 53
56.959
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 20.71%
* =
Significant Coefficient of variation = 19.29%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
66
Appendix Table 15. Total yield per plotof three potato varieties applied with
organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
3.60
3.20
3.00
9.80
3.27
V2
1.10
1.10
0.90
3.10
1.03
V3
0.80
0.70
0.70
2.20
0.73
Sub-total 5.50
4.00
4.60
15.10
1.68
F1
V1
3.50
3.20
3.50
10.20
3.40
V2
1.50
1.60
1.50
4.60
1.53
V3
1.10
1.00
0.70
2.80
0.93
Sub-total 6.10
5.80
5.70
17.60
1.96
F2
V1
3.55
3.20
3.40
10.15
3.38
V2
1.40
1.10
1.30
3.80
1.27
V3
0.80
0.90
0.80
2.50
0.83
Sub-total 5.75
5.20
5.50
16.45
1.83
F3
V1
3.40
3.25
3.75
10.40
3.47
V2
1.50
2.00
0.60
4.10
1.37
V3
0.80
0.90
0.90
2.60
0.87
Sub-total 5.70
6.25
4.25
17.10
1.90
F4
V1
4.30
3.70
3.50
11.50
3.83
V2
1.60
1.20
1.10
3.90
1.30
V3
1.00
0.90
0.70
2.60
0.87
6.90
5.80
5.30
18.00
2.00
F5
V1
3.75
3.50
5.03
12.28
4.09
V2
1.90
2.00
1.40
5.30
1.76
V3
0.90
0.70
1.00
2.60
0.87
Sub-total 6.55
6.20
7.43
20.00
2.24
Total 36.5
34.15
33.78
104.43
34.8
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
67
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
3.27 3.4 3.38 3.47 3.83 4.09 21.44 3.57
GRANOLA
1.03 1.53 1.27 1.37 1.3 1.76 8.26 1.38
RANIAG
0.73 0.93 0.83 0.87 0.87 0.87 5.10 0.85
TOTAL
5.03 5.86 5.48 5.71 6.00 6.72 34.80
MEAN
1.68 1.95 1.83 1.90 2.00 2.24
1.93
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.242
0.121
Factor A
5
0.601
0.320
3.89*
3.33
5.64
Error
10
0.823
0.082
Factor B
2
75.129
37.565
333.60**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
0.930
0.093
0.82ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
2.702
0.113
TOTAL 53
81.427
* = Significant
Coefficient of variation = 14.80%
** =
Highly
significant Coefficient of variation = 17.35%
ns = Not significant
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
68
Appendix Table 16. Computed yield (ton/ha)of three potato varieties applied with
organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
7.20
6.40
6.00
19.60
6.53
V2
2.20
2.20
1.80
6.20
2.07
V3
1.60
1.40
1.40
4.58
1.27
Sub-total 11.00
10.00
9.20
30.38 3.38
F1
V1
7.00
6.40
7.00
20.40
6.80
V2
3.00
3.20
3.00
9.20
3.07
V3
2.20
2.00
1.40
5.60
1.87
Sub-total 12.20
11.60
11.40
35.38 3.91
F2
V1
7.10
6.40
6.80
20.30
6.76
V2
2.80
2.20
2.60
7.60
2.53
V3
1.60
1.80
1.60
5.00
1.67
Sub-total 11.50
10.40
11.00
32.90 3.66
F3
V1
6.80
6.50
7.50
20.80
6.93
V2
3.00
4.00
1.20
8.20
2.73
V3
1.60
1.80
1.80
5.20
1.73
Sub-total 11.40
12.30
10.50
34.20 3.80
F4
V1
8.60
7.40
7.00
23.00
7.67
V2
3.20
2.40
2.20
7.80
2.60
V3
2.00
1.80
1.40
5.20
1.73
Sub-total 13.80
11.60
10.60
36.00 4.00
F5
V1
7.50
7.00
10.06
24.56
8.19
V2
3.80
4.00
2.80
10.60
3.53
V3
1.80
1.40
2.00
5.20
1.73
Sub-total 13.10
12.40
14.86
40.36 4.48
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
69
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
6.53 6.8 6.76 6.93 7.67 8.19 42.88 7.15
GRANOLA
2.07 3.07 2.53 2.73 2.6 3.53 16.53 2.76
RANIAG
1.27 1.87 1.67 1.73 1.73 1.73 10.00 1.67
TOTAL
9.87 11.74 10.96 11.39 12.00 13.45 69.41
MEAN
3.29 3.91 3.65 3.80 4.00 4.48
3.86
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.924
0.471
Factor A
5
6.223
1.245
3.75*
3.33
5.64
Error
10
3.315
0.331
332.72**
Factor B
2
299.725
149.863
0.84ns
4.10
7.56
AB
10
3.828
0.383
2.26
3.17
Error
24
10.810
0.450
TOTAL 53
* = Significant
Coefficient of variation = 14.86%
** = Highlysignificant
Coefficient of variation = 17.34%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
BANDIWAN, NEMESIO M. MARCH 2012.Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings
Applied with Organic Fertilizers.Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Adviser: Danilo P. Padua, PhD.
ABSTRACT
The study was conducted to determine the growth and yield of three potato varieties
using stem cuttings; compare the effect of organic fertilizers on the growth and yield of potato
cuttings;determine the interaction effect between potato varieties and organic fertilizers on the
growth and yield of potato; anddetermine the profitability of potato entries grown with the use of
different organic fertilizers under organic production.
Results of the study showed that Multigreen enhanced the highest plant survival, highest
initial and final plant height and widest canopy cover. It also produced the highest tuber yield
thus, it appears to be the best commercial organic fertilizer for the growth and yield of potato.
Among the three potato varieties, Igorota was the most resistant to late blight incidence
and had the highest total number of marketable tubers and highest yield.
Under organic production in La Trinidad, Igorota applied with Multigreen is the best
combination to obtain high ROCE.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………
i
Abstract………………………………………………………………………….......
i
Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………
ii
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………..
1
REVIEW OF LITERATURE……………………………………………………….
3
Effect of Organic Fertilizer on Plant………………………………………….
3
Benguet State University Organic
4
Organic Compost……………………………………………………………..
Advantages of Using Organic Fertilizers
or Compost……………………………………………………………………
4
Evaluation of Potato Varieties Using
Organic Fertilizers…………………………………………………………….
5
The Use of Stem Cuttings…………………………………………………….
6
MATERIALS AND METHODS………………………………………………........
8
Data Gathered…………………………………………………………………
12
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ……………………………………………………
16
Agro-Climatic Data …………………………………………………………..
16
Chemical Analysis of Soil …………………………………………………....
17
Plant Survival…………………………………………………………….........
18
Initial and Final Plant Height………………………………………………….
19
Canopy Cover……………………………………………………………........
20
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
Plant Vigor…………………………………………………………………….
21
Leaf Miner……………………………………………………………………
22
Late Blight…………………………………………………………………….
23
Number of Marketable and Non-marketable
Tubers per Plot………………………………………………………………..
26
Weight of Marketable and Non-marketable
TubersTotal and Computed Yield per Plot……………………………….......
28
Total Yield per Plot…………………………………..………………………
30
Yield per Hectare……………………………………………………………..
31
Return on Cash Expense………………………………………………….......
32
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION………………….......
34
Summary……………………………………………………………………...
34
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………
35
Recommendation……………………………………………………………..
35
LITERATURE CITED………………………………………………………….......
4
36
APPENDICES……………………………………………………………………… 38
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
1
INTRODUCTION
Potato
(Solanumtuberosum) had become the world's most important tuber crop
and it is the fourth most important staple crop after rice, wheat, and maize (Mosley,
2003).
The best quality and largest yield of potatoes are produced under cool climate and
high altitude. In the Philippines, the moderately cool highlands of Benguet, Bukidnon,
Davao del Sur, North Cotabato, Zamboanga City, Misamis Oriental and other highland
areas are favorable for the production of potato in commercial scale (Kinoshita, 1972).
At present, potato production has not reached maximum production. One of the
major constraints in potato production is poor quality of seed tubers which result in low
yield (Pungsayan, 1985).
One of the alternative technologies for commercial potato production is the use of
potato stem cuttings. Planting potato stem cuttings would greatly reduce the cost in
producing, storing, and planting of tubers. Disease transmission in potato seed tubers will
also be minimized (Gayao et al., 1987).
Nowadays, many farmers operate or cultivate their farm through the use of
synthetic chemicals and inorganic fertilizers not realizing the impact of these practices.
Many researches show that the use of synthetic chemicals and fertilizers result in soil
degradation, soil acidity, pollution of soil and water. Due to these impacts, agricultural
researchers are encouraging farmers to bring back the productive capacity of the soil,
soundness of the environment and safer food for human consumption through the use of
organic fertilizers (Granstedet al., 1997).
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
2
The use of organic fertilizers assures the farmers of lower production costs and
ensure vigorous growth of the plant. Organic fertilizer application also helps control soil
born disease, improves soil properties and helps maintain stable soil nutrients (Balaoing,
2006).
The selection of varieties and suitable organic fertilizers would greatly help
farmers to produce desirable yield and increase their profit.
The study was conducted to:
1. determine the growth and yield of three potato varieties using stem cuttings;
2. compare the effect of organic fertilizers on the growth and yield of potato
cuttings;
3. determine the interaction effect between potato varieties and organic fertilizers
on the growth and yield of potato; and
4. determine the profitability of potato varieties applied with organic fertilizers.
The study was conducted at the Balili, La Trinidad, Benguet from November
2011 to February 2012.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
3
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Effect of Organic Fertilizer on Plant
When the organic residues are in the process of becoming soil or humus, they
supply some of essential nutrients to plant, to serve as the principal source of nitrates,
organic phosphate, organic sulfates, borates, and chloride, increase the cation exchange
capacity; and make phosphorous and macronutrients more readily available to plants over
a wide pH range. Organic residues release essential nutrients faster by microbial
decomposition when their ration of organic carbon to total nitrogen is now wider than
above 20:1 (Follett, 1991).
Koshino (1990) found that nutrient elements from organic fertilizers are released
slowly which is particularly important in avoiding salt injury, ensuring a continuous
supply of materials for the growing season, and producing product of better quality.
According to Parnes (1986), organic matter is principally a source of nitrogen,
phosphorous and sulfur. Soil organisms require and retain most of the calcium,
magnesium and potassium in decaying residues which are then discarded by the soil
organism during the first stages of decomposition. These nutrients become quickly
available to plants.
The benefits derived from organic fertilizers are: improved soil structure;
enhanced soil balance and nutrient availability; supply micronutrients essential for crop
growth of microorganism that helps control growth of soil-borne diseases and nematodes;
and makes plant healthier and gives higher crop yield.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
4
Benguet State University Organic Compost
Espiritu (1998) reported that BSU-organic compost refers to agricultural and
agro-industrial wastes composted with suitable fungal inocula (Trichoderma sp.) and
enriched with free-living nitrogen fixing bacteria (Azotobacteria sp.). Farm wastes such
as chicken, swine orcattle manure in combination with rice straw, coffee hulls as well as
industrial wastes such as sugarcane bagasse and molasses can be used.
The BSU-organic fertilizers produced under the project are a mixture of
mushroom compost, chicken dung and sunflower. It contains 32.23% organic matter
indicative of high nitrogen content which is one of the most essential nutrients needed by
the crop. The compost raw materials are treated with trichoderma and some strains of
bacteria. Trichoderma is known to protect plant roots against disease caused by fungi
(Laurean, 2009).
Advantages of Using Organic Fertilizers
or Compost
According to HARRDEC (2006) organic matter or compost or humus improves
the soil condition of mineral soils and thus increase soil productivity. Composts store of
nutrients used by the plants and help neutralize acidic soils, thus making them less
susceptible to erosion.
The content of organic fertilizer includes nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium,
magnesium and sulfur. Organic fertilizers aid the plant in absorbing more nutrients
already present in the soil, the soil turns black because of rich humus content. Moisture is
retained longer, preventing the crops from drying up when the soil is rich in organic
matter. It minimizes pollution because the compost was recycled from rotten waste.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
5
Organic fertilizers generally provide many advantages to organic farming, to soil
properties and to crop yields. They improve soil structure, enhance soil balance and
nutrient availability, and supply micronutrients essential for crop growth increase
microorganism population that helps control growth of soil-borne diseases and
nematodes, and makes plant healthier and gives higher crop yield. A direct relationship
between organic matter and the population and distribution of beneficial soil biota is also
noted. The most productive agricultural soil possess good structure, considerable cation
exchange capacity and water retention, and high
population of beneficial microorganism, which are all dependent upon the presence of
organic matter (OTA, 1982).
Organic fertilizer provides some essential elements for proper plant growth. It
assures farmers of lower stable fertilizer cost and reliable local raw materials. The
organic fertilizers could be at least 50% to 60% cheaper than chemical fertilizer and still
effective in increasing the fertility of the soil (Pacsi, 2005).
Evaluation of Potato Varieties Using
Organic Fertilizers
In a study by Pandosen (1980) results show that potato plants not applied with
organic matter were stunted compared to the treated ones which were vigorous thus,
organic matter plays a role similar to that of nitrogen with regard to the growth and yield
of plants. The application of nitrogen produced vigorous plant and helped on the tuber
formation. Apparently, an increase in the absorption of nitrogen by plants was followed
by an increase in leaf area.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
6
Campiwer (1999) found that different mixtures of organic fertilizers significantly
affected the height and weight of the potato plants as well as the weight of extra large
potato tubers. Application and formation of six (6) tons/ha chicken dung, six (6) tons/ha
horse manure, six (6) tons/ha pig manure and six (6) tons/ha fresh sunflower enhanced
taller and total yield of potato per plot. It also improved the physical and chemical
properties of the soil and proved to be the best combination to enhance the growth and
yield of potato.
The Use of Stem Cuttings
Uyenet al. (1985) reported that production of potato by stem cutting is being used
in many countries in order to produce a virus-free tuber. According to Jones (1988) 30%
and 20% of total planting materials respectively use in North American programs and
Europe Programs are stem cuttings.
Furthermore
Montierroet al. (1986) reported that the use of stem cuttings as
planting materials is a very promising tool for low cost potato production. It is one of the
alternative technologies in commercial potato production. Using them instead of tubers
would greatly reduce the cost in producing, storing and transplanting. It also enables the
rapid and timely increase of new cultivars and prevents possible occurrence of diseases in
the clean, healthy planting materials. Zamora et al. (1986) reported that stem cutting yield
more planting material at the shortest possible time than traditional seed piece method.
Investment can be reduced by 60% using a cheaper alternative way of producing clean
planting material like stem cutting (Gayao et al., 1987).
Demonteverde (1992) reported that using rooted cuttings from a certain clone is
an efficient, profitable and low cost method for potato production. According to Kiswa et
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
7
al. (1998) the use of rooted system cuttings as planting material, as an alternative to seed
tubers can reduce the cost of seed by as much as 40% and this method eliminates disease
caused by pathogens. It also breaks contact with non-systemic seed and soil-borne
diseases, although labor is more intensive.
The practical use of rooted stem cuttings seems to be more related to removal of
non-systemic disease and to allow high-quality seed to become available to growers
before the seed becomes infected to a significant degree (Bryan, 1984).
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
8
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An area of approximately 270 square meters was prepared for planting (Figures
1-2). This was divided into three blocks, which corresponds to three replications. Each
block was subdivided into 18 plots with a dimension of 1mx5m. The experiment was laid
out in Split plot arranged in Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD).
Upon crop establishment, all other practices including hilling-up, spraying,
weeding and watering were equally employed in all the treatments (Figures3-5).
The treatments used were:
MAIN PLOT- ORGANIC FERTILIZER
F0=
Control
F1= Abundant Harvest (10.38-8.34-9.45)
F2= NBEM-21 (2.8-3.95-3.66)
F3= Planergy Granules (6-6-6)
F4= Harvest King (8-8-8)
F5= Multigreen (20-8-15)
SUB PLOT- VARIETY
V1=
Igorota
V2=
Granola
V3=
Raniag
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
9
Figure 1. Overview of the experimental area at Balili, La Trinidad, Benguet
Figure 2. Land preparation of the experimental area at Balili, La Trinidad, Benguet
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
10
Figure 3. Planting of potato stem cuttings at Balili, La Trinidad, Benguet
Figure 4. Hilling up at 20 days after transplanting
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
11
Figure 5. Harvesting of potato tubers applied with organic fertilizers
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
12
The data gathered were the following:
A.Meteorological data. The data on temperature, relative humidity, rainfall and sunshine
duration were obtained fromPhilippine Atmospheric Geophysical and Astronomical
Services Administration(PAGASA) station, Benguet State University, La Trinidad,
Benguet.
B.Initial and Final Soil Analysis. Soil samples were taken from the experimental area
before and right after harvest. The nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, soil pH, and organic
matter content of the soil were analyzed at the Department of Agriculture, Soil
Laboratory, Pacdal, Baguio City.
C. Vegetative Characters
1. Plant survival %. The number of plants that survived was counted 30 days after
planting (DAP) and calculated using the formula:
Number of plant survived
% Plant Survival = x 100
Total Number of plants planted
2. Initial Plant Height. This was taken at 30 DAP using meterstick.
3. Final plant height. This was taken at 45 DAP using meterstick.
4. Canopy cover. This was gathered at 30 and 45 DAP using a wooden frame
which measures 120cm x 6cm.
5. Plant Vigor. This was taken at 30 and 45 DAP based on the rating scale by CIP
(Gonzales et al. (2004).
Scale
Description
Reaction
5
Plants are strong with robust stem and leaves, light Highly
color to dark green in color
Vigorous
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
13
4
Plants are moderately strong with robust stem and Moderately
leaves were light green in color
vigorous
3
Better than less vigorous
Vigorous
2
Plants are weak with few thin leaves and stems Less Vigorous
pale
1
Plants are weak with few stems and leaves very Poor Vigorous
pale
D. Reaction to Leaf miner and Late blight
1. Reaction to leaf miner. The reaction to leaf miner was recorded at 30 and 45
DAP using the following rating scale (CIP, 2001):
Scale
Description
Reaction
5
Leaf infested (1-20%)
Highly resistant
4
Infested (21-40%)
Moderate Resistant
3
Moderately infested (41-60%)
Susceptible
2
Severely infested (61-80%)
Moderately
Susceptible
1
Most serious (81-100%)
Very Susceptible
2.
Reaction to late blight. This was observed at 30 and 45 DAP using the CIP
rating scale by Henfling (1982):
Scale Blight
Description
1
0
No blight to be seen.
0.1-1
Very few plants in large treatments with lesions. Not
more than 2 lesions per 10m of row (30 plants).
2
1.1-3
Up to 10 lesions per plant.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
14
3
3.1-10
Up to 30 small lesions per plant or up to 1 inch each 20
leaflets attacked.
4
10.1-24
Most plants are visibly attacked and leaflets infected.
Very few multiple infections per leaflets.
5
25-49
Nearly every leaflet with lesions.Multiple infections per
leaflets are common.Field looks green, but all plants are
blight.
6
50-74
Every plants blighted and half the area destroyed by
blight. Field look green-flecked and brown; blight is very
obvious.
7 75-90
As previous, but ¾ of each plant blighted. Lower
branches may be over whelming killed off, and the only
green leaves, if any, are at the top of plant. Shape of
plants may be more spindly due to extensive foliage loss.
Field looks neither brown nor green.
8
91-97
Some leaves and most stems are green. Fields looks
brown with some leaves patches.
9 97.1-
Few green leaves, almost all with blight lesions, remain,
99.9
many stem lesions. Plot looks brown.
10
100
All leaves and stem dead.
Description: 1 – Highly resistant; 2 – 3 Resistant; 4 – 5 Moderately resistant;
6 – 7 Moderately susceptible; 8 – 10 Susceptible
E. Yield and Yield Components
1. Number and weight of marketable tubers per plot (kg). All tubers that were of
marketable size, not malformed, free from cuts, cracks and without more than 10%
greening of the total surface was counted and weighed at harvest.
2. Number and weight of non-marketable tubers per plot (kg). This was obtained
by counting and weighing all tubers that were malformed, damaged by pest and diseases
and with more than 10% greening.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
15
3. Total yield / plot (kg). This is the sum of the weight of marketable and non-
marketable tubers.
4. Computed yield (tons/ha). This was computed using the formula:
Total yield per plot
Yield (tons/ha) = x 100
5m²/ 1000m²
F.Return on cash expenses (ROCE). This was computed by dividing thenet profit
over the total cost of production multiplied by 100.
Net
profit
ROCE= ─────────────── x100
Total cost of production
Data Analysis
All quantitative data were analyzed using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for
the Split plot design with three replications. The significance of difference among the
treatment means was tested using the Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) at 5% level
of significance.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
16
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Agro-Climatic Data
Table 1 shows the temperature, relative humidity, amount of rainfall and daily
sunshine duration from November 2011 to February 2012. It was observed that the
temperature ranged from 14oC to 25oC, relative humidity from 84-87%, rainfall amount
from 2.20 to 6.40 mm and daily sunshine duration from 244 to 340 min.
Potato grows best in areas with temperature ranging from 17°C to 22°C and an
average humidity of 86%. The temperature and relative humidity is important because it
affects the growth and development of the plants, however the above average of
temperature 25oC and relative humidity 87% are not suitable to potato production.
Table 1.Agro-Climatic data during the conduct of the study (November 2011
February2012)
DAILY
TEMPERATURE
RELATIVE RAINFALL
SUNSHINE
(oC)
HUMIDITY
AMOUNT
DURATION
MONTH
Min Max
(%)
(mm)
(min)
November
15
24
86
2.20
257
December
14
17
87
6.40
244
January
14
25
84
3.20
340
February
14
22
86
3.40
293
Mean
14
26
86
4.00
284
Source: PAG-ASA Station, BSU, La Trinidad, Benguet
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
17
Chemical Analysis of Soil
pH. The initial pH of the area was acidic (5.58) and according to Chapman and
Carter (1986) potatoes are well suited even in acidic soil pH from 4.5 to 5.5.
Soil Organic Matter. Table 2 shows that there was an increase in the organic
matter content of the soil. The increase is definitely attributableto the application of
organic fertilizers.
Nitrogen. The nitrogen content of the area also increased. Again this is a direct
effect of the organic fertilizers applied.
Table 2. Soil analysis before and after planting
ORGANIC
NITRO-
PHOSPHO-
POTAS-
pH
MATTER
GEN
ROUS
SIUM
(%)
(%)
(ppm)
(ppm)
Before planting
5.58
2.0
0.12
120
230
After planting
No fertilizer*
_
_
_
_
_
Abundant
6.0 2.5
0.79
120
365
harvest
NBEM 21
5.56
2.5
0.4
135
306
Planergy
5.96 2.5
0.45
128
324
Granules
Harvest king
6.0 3.0
0.7
135
375
Multi green
6.0
3.0
0.9
145
404
Data analyzed at the Soils Laboratory Department of Agriculture Pacdal, Baguio City
*No data collected
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
18
Phosphorous.The phosphorous content of all organic fertilizer applied were
increased. This contributed to the growth and development of the potato plants during the
early stage.
Potassium. The potassium content on the soil applied with Abundant Harvestafter
soil analysis still remains which may have been caused by the nutrient uptake of the
potato plant.
Plant Survival
Effect of Fertilizer. Significant differences were obtained on the percentage plant
survival of potato applied with organic fertilizers. Potato applied with Multigreen
significantly obtained the highest percentage of 72.22% while potato varieties applied
without any fertilizers obtained 55.88%. The high percentageofplant survival of potato
applied with Multigreen was apparently brought about by the NPK content of the
fertilizer that enhanced the growth and development of the potato plant.
Effect of Potato Variety. The potato varieties significantly differed in terms of
percentage plant survival. Igorota obtained the highest plant survival of 84.67% which
was much greater than both Raniag and Granola.The high percentage of plant survival of
Igorota could be due to its more desirable genetic characteristics.
Interaction
Effect. There was no significant interaction effect between the
fertilizers and varieties on the plant survival of potato, although Igorota applied with
multigreen seem to have higher survival percentage.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
19
Table 3. Plant survival of three potato varieties applied with organic fertilizers
TREATMENT
SURVIVAL(%)
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
55.89d
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
64.67bc
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
61.33cd
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
62.56bc
Harvest king (8-8-8)
68.89ab
Multi green (20-8-15)
72.22a
Variety (V)
Igorota
84.67a
Granola
58.44b
Raniag
49.67c
V x B
ns
CVa(%)
5.93%
CVb(%)
7.73%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Initial and Final Plant Height
Effect of Fertilizer.Table 4 shows the plant height of potato applied with organic
fertilizers.At 30 DAT, all treatments had taller plants than the control. Amongthemselves
however, no variations were noted. Fifteen days later, there was a slight change with
plants applied with Abundant Harvest which are shorter than those applied with
Multigreen.
Effect of Potato Variety. Table 4 shows that Igorota significantly produced the
tallest plants followed by Raniag. Granola had the shortest plants on the initial and final
height. The significant differences on the initial and final plant height of the different
potato varieties could be due to their genetic characteristics.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
20
Table 4.Plant height of three potato varieties at 30 and 45 DAT as affected by
organic fertilizers
PLANT HEIGHT
TREATMENT
INITIAL FINAL
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
10.56b
20.00c
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
12.78ab
21.89bc
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
11.44ab
22.33abc
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
12.00ab
22.00abc
Harvest king (8-8-8)
14.56a
24.44ab
Multi green (20-8-15)
14.78a
24.67a
Variety (V)
Igorota
19.39a
32.50a
Granola
8.11c
16.11b
Raniag
10.56b
19.06b
V x B
ns
ns
CVa(%)
12.06%
8.67%
CVb(%)
10.78%
9.09%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Interaction
Effect. There was no significant interaction effect between the
fertilizers and varieties on the height of potato plants.
Canopy Cover
Effect of Fertilizer. No significant differences were observed among the plants
treated with organic fertilizer. Although, plants applied with Multigreen seem to have the
widest canopy cover while plants with no fertilizer obtained the narrowest canopy cover.
Effect of Variety.Igorota significantly produced the widest canopy cover among
theof potato varieties (8.4) followed by Raniag (5.1) while Granola showed the narrowest
canopy cover of 3.22 at 30 DAT.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
21
Table 5. Canopy cover of three potato varieties at 30 and 45 DAT applied with organic
fertilizers
CANOPY COVER
TREATMENT
30 DAT
45 DAT
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
18.67
26.22
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
22.22
28.89
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
18.89
28.00
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
19.44
25.33
Harvest king (8-8-8)
26.22
31.11
Multi green (20-8-15)
25.78
32.89
Variety (V)
Igorota
32.39a
40.89a
Granola
12.78c
23.11b
Raniag
20.44b
22.22b
V x B
ns
ns
CVa(%)
26.48%
16.57%
CVb(%)
18.28%
16.67%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
At 45 DAT, canopy cover of all the potato varieties consistently increased but
Igorota had much greater canopy cover compared to the other two varieties. This is an
indication that Igorota has better adaptability to local conditions and consequently, better
growth and yield potential over the other varieties.
Interaction
Effect. There was no significant interaction effect between the
fertilizer and varietties on the canopy cover of potato plants.
Plant Vigor
Effect of Fertilizer. At 30 DAT, highly significant differences were recorded on
plant vigor of potato applied with organic fertilizer. However, at 45 DAT differences in
plant vigor were no longer observable. This suggested that most of the nutrients
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
22
contained by the organic fertilizer have been used quite early in the growth of potato
plants.
Effect of Variety. Highly significant differences were recorded on vigor of
different potato varieties. Igorota was observed to be moderately vigorous at 30 DAT but
already vigorous at 45 DAT. In both stage, Granola and Raniag were less vigorous.
Interaction
Effect. There was no significant interaction effect between the
fertilizer and varieties on the plant vigor of potato plants.
Table 6. Plant vigor of three potato varieties at 30 and 45 DAT applied with organic
fertilizers
PLANT VIGOR*
TREATMENT
30 DAT
45 DAT
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
2.89b
2.33
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
3.67a
2.56
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
3.33b
2.44
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
3.33b
2.56
Harvest king (8-8-8)
4.11a
2.89
Multi green (20-8-15)
3.89a
3.00
Variety (V)
Igorota
4.33a
3.89a
Granola
3.22b
2.78b
Raniag
3.06b
2.22b
V x B
ns
ns
CVa(%)
13.23%
18.66%
CVb(%)
16.32%
18.66%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
*Scale: 5 – Highly vigorous, 4 - Moderately vigorous, 3 – Vigorous,
2 - Less vigorous, 1 – Poor vigorous
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
23
Leaf Miner
Effect of Fertilizer. At 30 DAT, results show that all potato plants applied with
organic fertilizer were highly resistant.At 45 DAT, most plants were susceptible to leaf
miner. The increase of leaf miner incidence might be due to continuous rainfall during
the conduct of the study.
Effect of Variety. Results revealed that all potato varieties were highly resistant
to leaf miner at 30 DAT. At 45 DAT, Igorota was moderately resistant but both Granola
and Raniag were susceptible. The resistance of Igorota might be due to genetic
characteristics.
Table 7. Reaction to leaf miner of three potato varietiesat 30 and 45 DAT appliedwith
organic fertilizers
REACTION TOLEAF MINER
TREATMENT
30 DAT 45 DAT
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
Highly resistant Susceptible
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
Highly resistant Susceptible
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
Highly resistant Susceptible
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
Highly resistant Susceptible
Harvest king (8-8-8)
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
Multi green (20-8-15)
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
Variety (V)
Igorota
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
Granola
Highly resistant Susceptible
Raniag
Highly resistant Susceptible
V x B
ns
CVa(%)
7.98
CVb(%)
15.26
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
24
Interaction
Effect. There was no significant interaction effect between the
fertilizer and variety on the leaf miner incidence of potato plants.
Late Blight
Effect of Fertilizer. There was no significant difference observed among the
potato plants applied with organic fertilizers (table 8). Most of the treatments had
consistent trend observed in late blight occurrence. The increase in late blight infection
from 30-45 DAP may be attributed toscattered rainfall and foggy condition which affects
the relative humidity during the conduct of the study.According to Perez (2008), high
Table 8. Reaction to late blight incidence of three potato varieties at 30 and 45 DAT
applied with organic fertilizers
REACTION TO LATE BLIGHT
TREATMENT
30 DAT
45 DAT
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
Resistant
Moderately susceptible
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
Resistant
Moderately resistant
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
Harvest king (8-8-8)
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
Multi green (20-8-15)
Highly resistant Moderately resistant
Variety (V)
Igorota
Highly resistant Resistant
Granola
Highly resistant Moderately susceptible
Raniag
Resistant
Moderately susceptible
V x B
ns
ns
CVa(%)
7.50%
10.18%
CVb(%)
15.01%
11.61%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
25
relativehumidity affects the lateblight incidence because the presence of moisture favors
the occurrence of late blight.
Effect of Variety. Significant differences were observed among potato varieties.
Raniag and Granola was the most affected by late blight at 45 DAT (Figure 6). Igorota
had exhibited the least late blight infection, suggesting that it posseses genetic
characteristics better than two varieties.
Interaction
Effect. No significant interaction was observed between organic
fertilizers and potato varieties.
Figure 6. Late blight incidence at 45 days after transplanting
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
26
Number of Marketable and Non-marketable
Tubers per Plot
Effect of fertilizer.Table 9 shows the number of marketable and non-marketable
tubers of potato applied with organic fertilizers. Potato applied with Multigreen had the
highest marketable tubers. Least number of marketable tubers and high number of non-
marketable tubers are obtained in plants not applied with organic fertilizers.
Effect of variety. Significant differences were observed among the potato entries
in terms of number of marketable tubers. Igorota produced the highest number of both
Table 9.Number of marketable andnon-marketable tubers of three potato varieties
applied with organic fertilizers
NUMBER (PER 5 m²)
TREATMENT
MARKETABLE NON-
MARKETABLE
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
26.89b
72.67ab
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
37.56ab
69.11ab
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
30.00b
75.11a
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
37.67ab
59.11abc
Harvest king (8-8-8)
38.67ab
50.78abc
Multi green (20-8-15)
51.22a
45.56c
Variety (V)
Igorota
53.56a
74.83a
Granola
29.00b
65.72a
Raniag
28.44b
45.61b
V x B
ns
*
CVa(%)
30.68%
20.71%
CVb(%)
25.14%
13.99%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
27
marketable and non-marketable tubers. The lowest number of marketable and non-
marketable tubers were obtained from Raniag and Granola which was affected by late
blight. The varieties that produced the highest number of marketable tubers also had the
widest canopy and were resistant to late blight infection.
Interaction
effect. No significant interaction was observed between the fertilizers
and varieties in terms of number of marketable tubers produced. However, significant
interaction was observed on the number of non-marketable tubers between organic
fertilizersand potato varieties. Figure 7shows that Raniag applied with Multigreen has the
lowest non-marketable tubers followed by Igorot applied with Multigreen and Granola
applied with Multigreen.
100
90
Organic Fertilizers
80
F0- No fertilizer
70
60
F1- Abundant harvest
a
rketable tubers
50
F2- NBEM21
40
30
F3- Planergy granules
b
er of non-m
20
F4- Harvest king
Num
10
0
F5- Multi green
Igorota
Granola
Raniag
Variety
Figrure 7.Interaction effect of potato varieties and organic fertilizers on the number of
non- marketable tuber
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
28
Weight of Marketable and Non-marketable Tubers
Effect of Fertilizer. Table 10 shows the weight of marketable and non-marketable
tubers per plot. Significant differences were obtained in the marketable and non-
marketable tubers of potato. Plants applied with Multigreen significantly produced the
heaviest marketable potato tubers. Plants with no fertilizer produced the heaviest non-
marketable potato tubers.
Table 10.Weight of marketable and non-marketable tubers of three potatovarieties
applied with organic fertilizers
WEIGHT (kg/5m²)
TREATMENT
NON-
MARKETABLE
MARKETABLE
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
0.98 b
0.99c
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
1.48ab
1.49abc
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
1.3ab
1.30bc
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
1.31ab
1.31bc
Harvest king (8-8-8)
4.43ab
1.60ab
Multi green (20-8-15)
1.52 a
1.86a
Variety (V)
Igorota
2.67 a
2.73a
Granola
0.98 b
0.98b
Raniag
0.56 b
0.56b
V x B
ns
*
CVa(%)
14.22%
20.71%
CVb(%)
17.04%
19.29%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
29
Effect of Variety. There were significant differences observed among varieties in
terms of weight of marketable and non-marketable tubers of potato. Igorota had the
heaviest weight of marketable and non-marketable tubers followed by Raniag and the
lowest was obtained from Granola.
The high yield of Igorota variety might be attributed to its genetic characteristics,
including resistance to late blight (Table 10).Earlier results show that potato variety with
high plant survival and widest canopy cover had the highest weight of tubers.
Interaction
Effect. No significant interaction was observed between the fertilizer
and varieties in terms of weight of marketable tubers produced per plot. However, highly
significant interaction was observed on the weight of non-marketable tubers between the
organic fertilizers and varieties. Granola and Raniag had the lowest weight of non-
marketable tubers (Figure 8).
4
Organic Fertilizers
3.5
F0- No fertilizer
3
2.5
²)
F1- Abundant harvest
a
rketable tuber
2
F3- NBEM21
(kg/5m 1.5
F4- NBEM21
1
e
ight of non-m
W
F5- Harvest king
0.5
0
F- 6Multi green
Igorota
Granola
Raniag
Variety
Figure 8. Interaction effect of potato varieties and organic fertilizers on the weight of
non-marketable tuber
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
30
Total Yield per Plot
Effect of Fertilizer. There weresignificant differences on the total yield of potato
varietiesas affected bydifferent fertilizers. Potatoplantsapplied withMultigreen
significantly produced the highest total yield.The result might be due to the high plant
survival obtained as affected by these fertilizers.
Effect
of
Variety. Significant differences were also observed on the total yield of
potato. Igorota significantly produced the highest total yield of potato tubers. During the
conduct of the study, intermittent rains occurred, especially during the younger
vegetativegrowth stage which ultimately affected potato yield.
Table 11. Total plot yield of three potato varieties applied with organicfertilizers
TREATMENT
TOTAL YIELD
(Kg/5m²)
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
1.68b
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45)
1.96b
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
1.83b
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
1.90b
Harvest king (8-8-8)
2.00b
Multi green (20-8-15)
2.24a
Variety (V)
Igorota
3.57a
Granola
1.38b
Raniag
0.85b
V x B
ns
CVa(%)
14.80%
CVb(%)
17.35%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
31
Interaction Effect. The interaction between organic fertilizer and entries did not
significantly affect the yield of potato.
Computed Yield per Hectare
Effect
of
Fertilizer. It was observed that the potato plants applied with Multigreen
obtained the highest computed yield. This result may be attributed to the high percentage
of plant survival and the NPK content of the organic fertilizer which could be favorable
to potato plant growth.
Effect of Variety. Highly significant differences were observed on the yield of
Table 12.Computed yield of three potato varieties applied with organic fertilizers
COMPUTED YIELD
TREATMENT
(tons/ha)
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
3.38b
Abundant harvest (10:38-8.34-9.45
3.91a
NBEM21 (28-3.95-3.66)
3.66a
Planergy granules (6-6-6)
3.80a
Harvest king (8-8-8)
4.00a
Multi green (20-8-15)
4.48a
Variety (V)
Igorota
7.15a
Granola
2.76b
Raniag
1.71b
V x B
ns
CVa(%)
14.86%
CVb(%)
17.34%
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of significance
DMRT
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
32
the different potato varieties. Igorota obtained the highest computed yield per hectare.
High yield from this variety might have been brought about by its wide canopy cover,
resistance to late blight, high percentage of plant survival and plant vigor.The low yield
of Raniag and Granola maybe explained by their susceptibility to late blight.
Interaction
effect. There was no significant interaction between the fertilizers and
the entries on the computed yield of potato.
Return on Cash Expenses
Effect of Organic Fertilizers. The return on cash expense of potato applied with
organic fertilizer is presented in Table 13. It was observed that potatoes applied with
Multigreen registeredthe highest ROCE of 138.78% while plants\\ applied with NBEM 21
had the lowestwhich was 61.43% due to low number of tubers that were produced.
Effect of Variety. Profitability of the three potato entries is shown in Table 13.
Igorota obtained high return on cash expense with 184.71% followed by Granola with
48.86% and Raniag with 42.14%. The highest number of tubers fromIgorota variety may
have contributed to high ROCE. The result is definitely due to the better adaptability,
better resistance to late blight and higher yield of Igorota.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
33
Table 13. Return on cash expenses (ROCE) of three potatovarieties applied with organic
fertilizers
COST OF
TOTAL
GROSS
NET
PRODUC-
NUMBER OF INCOME INCOME ROCE
TREATMENT
TION
TUBERS
(Php)
(Php)
(%)
(Php)
(per 15m²)
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer (Control)
519.75
242
968
447.75
86.15
Abundant harvest
729
338
1352
623
85.46
NBEM-21
669
270
1080
411
61.43
Planergy granules
699
334
1336
637
91.14
Harvest king
779
384
1592
757
97.18
Multi green
789
471
1884
1095
138.78
Variety (V)
Igorota
232.375
168.167
672.67
434.63
184.71
Granola
232.375
88.67
354.67
120.46
48.86
Raniag
232.375
85.33
341.33
107.04
42.14
*Tubers were sold at Php4.00 per tuber.
*Total cost of production includes cost of organic fertilizers, planting materials and labor
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
34
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary
The study was conducted at Balili, La Trinidad, Benguet from November 2011 to
February 2010. The objectives are to determine the growth and yield of three potato
varieties using stem cuttings; compare the effect of organic fertilizers on the growth and
yield of potato stem cuttings; determine the interaction effect between potato varieties
and organic fertilizers on the growth and yield of potato; and determine the profitability
of potato varieties applied with organic fertilizers.
Findings revealed that potato applied with organic fertilizers did not differ
significantly on plant survival, highest initial and final plant height, canopy cover, plant
vigor, leaf miner and late blight incidence.On yield parameters, significant differences
were noted on the number and weight of non-marketable tubers of potato applied with
organic fertilizers.
The different potato varieties significantly differed on plant characteristics such as
plant survival, height, leaf miner and late blightresistance, canopy cover,number and
weight of marketable tubers, total and computed yield. Igorota was the best performer in
terms of resistance to late blight, highest yield and obtained the highest ROCE.
The interaction of potato varieties applied with organic fertilizers was significant
in the number and weight of marketable tubers.Igorota applied with Multigreen was the
best combination in terms of high yield and high ROCE under organic potato production.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
35
Conclusion
Among the entries, Igorotawas the best potato variety in terms of plant survival,
height, leaf miner and late blightresistance, canopy cover,number and weight of
marketable tubers, total and computed yield.Multigreenappears to be the best commercial
organic fertilizer for the growth and yield of potato.
Igorota applied with Multigreenwas the best combination in terms of yield and
ROCE for tuber production.
Recommendation
Based on the results of the study, entry Igorota could be recommended for organic
production under La Trinidad, Benguet condition due to its high yield and resistance to
late blight incidence.
Due to higher ROCE, Multigreen is recommended as an organic fertilizer for
potato production using stem cuttings.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
36
LITERATURE CITED
BALAOING, J.G. 2006.Performance of Potato Cultivars as Influenced by Lime and
Organic Fertilizers Application. Ph.D. Thesis. Benguet State University, La
Trinidad Benguet. P.2.
BRYAN, T.B. 1984. Methods of rapid multiplication for seed production innovative
method of propagating potatoes. Report of the XVII planting conference held in
International Center, Lima, Peru on December 10-14. Pp.259-260.
CAMPIWER, R.B. 1999. Growth and yield response of potato (Solanumtuberosum) to
different mixtures of organic fertilizers and liming. BS Thesis. BSU, La Trinidad
Benguet.
Pp.44-45.
CENTRO INTERNATIONAL DE LA PAPA (CIP).2001.Facts sheet.International
Potato Center (CIP).
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE-BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY. 2003.
Mychorrhiza and chicken manure: An alternative to inorganic fertilizer
application on potato. Guisad, Baguio City.Pp.1-2.
ESPIRITU, B. 1998. Bio-organic Fertilizer: Waste Utilization Through Beneficial
Microorganism. National Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology.UP
Los
Baňos, Laguna.
DEMONTEVERDE, V. E. 1992. Rapid multiplication technique for potato: Potential
use in potato production seed system of SAPRAD system in transition held in
Baguio City Philippines on June 1-6.
FOLLET, E. L. 1991. Fertilizer and Soil Amendments. USA: McGraw hill Publishing
Inc.
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 cutting. BSU Graduate School Research Journal 1:79-91.
GONZALES, I. C., O. BADOL, D. K. SIMONGO, T.D. MASANGKAY, A. T.
BOTANGEN and F. S. BALOG-AS.2004. Potato clone IP84004.7: A variety
release in the Philippine highlands. BSU research journal, La Trinidad Benguet.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
37
GRANSTED, A. and KJELLENBERG, L.1997. Long-Term Field Experiment in
Sweden: Effects of Organic and Inorganic on Soil Fertility and Crop Quality. In
Proceedings of an International Conference in Boston, Tuffs University,
Agricultural Production and Nutrition.
HIGHLAND AGRICULTURE AND RESOURCES RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT
AND
CONSORTIUM
(HARRDEC).
2006. Highlands Express. P.9
HENFLING, J. W. 1987. Technical info bulletin 4: Late blight of potato. CIP, Peru.
KONSHINO, S. O. 1990. The use of Organic and Chemical in Japan.Food and
CFertilizer
Technology
Center.extension Bull. Pp.13-14.
LAUREAN, C. 2009.Shamag (volume XII number 8).P 6.
MONTIERRO, C.G and VANDER ZAAG P. 1986. Response of diverse set of potato
cultivars grow from cuttings to an isothermic environment of the Philippines. The
potato in Southeast Asia and the Pacific region.CIP region VIII working papers.
P.
48
MOSLEY, A.R. The Potato Plant.Potandon Produce L.L.C. Retrieve February 2012
from
http://www.Potandon.Com?ss Potatoes Plant.htm.
OTA.1982. Towards a more sustainable agriculture. AVI Publishing Company, Inc.
Westport,
Connecticut.
P.117.
PANDOSEN, M. D. 1980. Effect of different rate of N-K and organic fertilizers on the
yield of iron potato. BSU, La Trinidad Benguet. Pp.116-117.
ZAMORA, A.B., MALLION, K. and R.C. BARBA. 1986. Rapid multiplication
technique of potato third international symposium of
potato production for
South East
Asia and the Pacific Region. Bandying Indonesia.
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
38
APPENDICES
Appendix Table 1. Plant survival (%) of three potato varieties applied with organic
fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
78
75
83
236
78.67
V2
47
41
44
132
44.00
V3
50
41
44
135
45.00
Sub-total 175
167
171
503
55.89
F1
V1
81
83
89
253
84.33
V2
56
58
63
177
59.00
V3
47
58
47
152
50.67
Sub-total 184
199
139
582
64.67
F2
V1
75
80
86
241
80.33
V2
61
50
56
167
55.67
V3
50
47
47
144
48.00
Sub-total 186
177
138
552
61.33
F3
V1
81
83
86
250
83.33
V2
63
56
50
169
56.33
V3
44
50
50
144
48.00
Sub-total 128
189
186
563
62.56
F4
V1
86
89
94
269
89.67
V2
72
61
63
144
65.33
V3
52
56
47
155
51.67
Sub-total 210
206
204
620
68.89
F5
V1
97
89
89
275
91.67
V2
72
72
67
211
70.33
V3
52
56
56
164
54.67
Sub-total 221
187
212
650
72.22
Total 1164
1145
1161
3418
1156.67
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
39
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
78.67 84.33 80.33 83.33 89.67 91.67 508.00 84.67
GRANOLA
44.00 59.00 55.67 56.33 65.33 70.33 350.66 58.44
RANIAG
45.00 50.67 48.00 48.00 51.67 54.67 298.01 49.67
TOTAL
167.67 194.00 184.00 187.66 206.67 216.67 1156.67
MEAN
55.89 64.67 61.33 62.55 68.89 72.22
64.26
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
11.593
5.796
Factor A
5
1498.815
299.763
20.63**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
145.296
14.530
Factor B
2
11937.926
5968.963 266.38**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
294.963
29.496
1.31ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
537.778
22.407
TOTAL 53
14426.370
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 5.93%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 7.37%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
40
Appendix Table 2. Initial plant height (cm)of three potato varieties applied with
organic
fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
14
17
16
47
15.67
V2
5
7
7
19
6.33
V3
7
11
11
29
9.67
Sub-total 26
35
34 95
10.56
F1
V1
20
19
20
59
19.67
V2
9
9
7
25
8.33
V3
10
11
10
31
10.33
Sub-total 39
39
37
115
12.78
F2
V1
14
19
19
52
17.33
V2
7
6
8
21
7.00
V3
9
10
11
30
10.00
Sub-total 30
35
28
103
11.44
F3
V1
17
20
19
56
18.67
V2
6
7
10
23
7.67
V3
9
10
12
29
9.67
Sub-total 32
37
41
108
12.00
F4
V1
23
24
20
67
22.33
V2
7
12
10
29
9.67
V3
12
13
10
35
11.67
Sub-total 42
49
40
131
14.56
F5
V1
23
20
25
68
22.67
V2
8
11
10
29
9.67
V3
12
10
14
36
12.00
Sub-total 43
31
49
133
14.78
Total 212
236
239
685
228.35
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
41
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
15.67 19.67 17.33 18.67 22.33 22.67 116.34 19.39
GRANOLA
6.33 8.33 7
7.67 9.67 9.67 48.67 8.11
RANIAG
9.67 10.33 10
9.67 11.67
12 63.34 10.56
TOTAL
31.67 38.33 34.33 36.01 43.67 44.34 228.35
MEAN
10.56 12.78 11.44 12.00 14.56 14.78
12.69
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
28.259
14.130
Factor A
5
129.870
25.974
5.54*
3.33
5.64
Error
10
46.852
4.685
Factor B
2
1267.148
633.574
338.74**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
28.630
1.863
1.53
2.26
3.17
Error
24
44.889
1.870
TOTAL 53
* =
Significant Coefficient of variation = 17.06%
**=
Highly
significant
Coefficient of variation = 10.78%
ns = Not significant
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
42
Appendix Table 3. Finalplant height (cm)of three potato varieties applied with
organic
fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
28
31
28
87
29.00
V2
14
15
14
43
14.33
V3
14
18
18
50
16.67
Sub-total 56
64
60
180
20.00
F1
V1
29
34
30
93
31.00
V2
17
13
13
43
14.33
V3
18
22
21
61
20.33
Sub-total 64
69
64
197
21.89
F2
V1
34
34
31
99
33.00
V2
17
16
14
47
15.67
V3
17
19
19
55
18.33
Sub-total 68
69
64
201
22.33
F3
V1
30
37
29
96
32.00
V2
19
15
14
48
16.00
V3
19
19
16
54
18.00
Sub-total 68
71
59
198
22.00
F4
V1
34
34
35
103
34.33
V2
19
17
17
53
17.67
V3
20
24
20
64
21.33
Sub-total 73
75
72
220
24.44
F5
V1
36
38
33
107
35.67
V2
22
17
17
56
18.67
V3
22
20
17
59
19.67
Sub-total 80
75
67
222
24.67
Total 409
423
386
1218
406
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
43
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
29 31 33 32 34.33 35.67
195.00
32.50
GRANOLA
14.33 14.33 15.67
16 17.67 18.67 96.67 16.11
RANIAG
16.67 20.33 18.33
18 21.33 19.67 114.33 19.06
TOTAL
60.00 65.66 67.00 66.00 73.33 74.01 406.00
MEAN
20.00 21.89 22.33 22.00 24.44 24.67
22.56
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
38.778
19.389
Factor A
5
138.222
27.644
7.21**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
38.333
3.833
Factor B
2
2748.111
1374.056
326.86**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
37.000
3.700
0.88ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
100.889
4.204
TOTAL 53
3101.333
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 8.67%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 9.09%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
44
Appendix Table 4. Canopy cover 30 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic
fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
24
28
28
80
26.67
V2
8
12
12
32
10.67
V3
16
20
20
56
18.67
Sub-total 48
60
60
168
18.67
F1
V1
36
32
36
104
34.67
V2
12
16
12
40
13.30
V3
20
20
16
56
18.67
Sub-total 68
68
64
200
22.22
F2
V1
24
32
32
88
29.33
V2
12
6
12
30
10.00
V3
16
16
20
52
17.33
Sub-total 52
54
44
170
18.89
F3
V1
7
36
32
75
25.00
V2
8
12
16
36
12.00
V3
16
24
24
64
21.33
Sub-total 31
72
72
175
19.44
F4
V1
36
44
36
11
38.67
V2
12
20
16
48
16.00
V3
24
28
20
72
24.00
Sub-total 72
92
72
236
26.22
F5
V1
36
36
48
120
40.00
V2
16
16
12
44
14.00
V3
20
24
24
68
22.00
Sub-total 72
76
84
232
25.78
Total 343
422
416
1076
392.31
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
45
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
26.67 34.67 29.33
25 38.67
40 194.34 32.39
GRANOLA
10.67 13.3 10
12
16 14 75.97 12.66
RANIAG
18.67 18.67 17.33 21.33 24
22 122.00 20.33
TOTAL
56.01 66.64 56.66 58.33 78.67 76.00 392.31
MEAN
18.67 22.21 18.89 19.44 26.22 25.33
21.80
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
214.926
107.463
Factor A
5
534.315
106.863
3.18ns
3.33
5.64
Error
10
335.519
33.552
Factor B
2
3516.259
1758.130
110.01**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
247.519
24.752
1.54ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
383.556
15.981
TOTAL 53
5232.093
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 26.48%
**=
Highly
significant
Coefficient of variation = 18.28%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
46
Appendix Table 5. Canopy cover 45 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic
fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
36
32
36
104
34.67
V2
16
24
24
64
21.33
V3
20
28
20
68
22.67
Sub-total 72
84
80
236
26.22
F1
V1
44
44
44
132
44.00
V2
24
28
20
72
24.00
V3
20
20
16
56
18.67
Sub-total 88
92
80
260
28.89
F2
V1
32
48
40
120
40.00
V2
28
16
24
68
22.67
V3
16
20
28
64
21.33
Sub-total 76
84
92
252
58.00
F3
V1
32
40
40
112
37.33
V2
12
16
24
52
17.33
V3
20
20
24
64
21.33
Sub-total 64
76
88
228
25.33
F4
V1
40
44
44
128
42.67
V2
28
32
20
80
26.67
V3
28
48
16
72
24.00
96
104
80
280
31.11
F5
V1
44
44
54
140
46.67
V2
24
32
24
80
26.67
V3
28
28
20
76
25.33
Sub-total 96
104
96 29
32.89
Total 492
564
518
1552
517.34
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
47
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
34.67 44 40 37.33 42.67 46.67 245.34 40.89
GRANOLA
21.33 24 22.67 17.33 26.67 26.67 138.67 23.11
RANIAG
22.67 18.67 21.33 21.33 24 25.33 133.33 22.22
TOTAL
78.67 86.67 84.00 75.99 93.34 98.67 517.34
MEAN
26.22 28.89 28.00 25.33 31.11 32.89
28.74
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES
SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
24.33
12.167
Factor A
2
1258.78
629.389
2832.25**
6.94
18.00
Error
4
0.889
0.222
Factor B
5
127.500
25.500
8.80**
2.53
3.70
AB
10
28.556
2.856
0.98ns
2.26
2.98
Error
30
86.778
2.893
TOTAL 53
1526.833
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 16.57%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 16.67%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
48
Appendix Table 6. Plant vigor 30 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic
fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
4
4
3
11
3.67
V2
2
3
3
8
2.67
V3
2
2
3
7
2.33
Sub-total 8
7
9 26
2.89
F1
V1
5
4
4
13
4.33
V2
3
4
3
10
3.33
V3
3
3
4
10
3.33
Sub-total 11
11
11 33 3.67
F2
V1
4
4
5
13
4.33
V2
3
3
3
9
3.00
V3
3
2
3
8
2.67
Sub-total 11
9
11 30 3.33
F3
V1
4
3
5
12
4.33
V2
3
3
3
9
3.00
V3
3
3
3
9
2.67
Sub-total 10
9
11 30 3.33
F4
V1
5
5
5
15
5.00
V2
3
4
4
11
3.67
V3
3
4
4
11
3.67
Sub-total 11
13
13 37 4.11
F5
V1
5
5
4
14
4.67
V2
4
3
4
11
3.67
V3
3
4
3
10
3.33
Sub-total 12
12
11 35 3.89
Total 62
63
66
191
63.67
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
49
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
3.67 4.33 4.33 4.33 5 4.67 26.33 4.39
GRANOLA
2.67 3.33 3
3 3.67 3.67 19.34 3.22
RANIAG
2.33 3.33 2.67 2.67 3.67 3.33 18.00 3.00
TOTAL
8.67 10.99 10.00 10.00 12.34 11.67 63.67
MEAN
2.89 3.66 3.33 3.33 4.11 3.89
3.54
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.481
0.241
Factor A
5
8.759
1.752
8.02**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
2.185
0.219
Factor B
2
17.370
8.685
26.05**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
0.630
0.063
0.19ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
8.000
0.333
TOTAL 53
37.426
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 13.23%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 16.32%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
50
Appendix Table 7. Plant vigor 45 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
3
3
3
9
3.00
V2
2
2
2
6
2.00
V3
2
2
2
6
2.00
Sub-total 7
7
7 21
2.33
F1
V1
4
3
3
10
3.33
V2
2
2
3
7
2.33
V3
2
2
2
6
2.00
Sub-total 7
7
8 23
2.56
F2
V1
3
3
3
9
3.00
V2
2
2
3
7
2.33
V3
2
2
2
6
2.00
Sub-total 7
7
8 22
2.44
F3
V1
3
3
4
10
3.33
V2
2
2
2
6
2.00
V3
2
3
2
7
2.33
Sub-total 7
8
8 23
2.55
F4
V1
3
4
4
11
3.67
V2
2
3
3
8
2.67
V3
2
2
3
7
2.33
Sub-total 11
9
10 26 2.89
F5
V1
4
5
3
12
4.00
V2
3
2
2
7
2.33
V3
2
3
3
8
2.67
Sub-total 9
10
8 27
3.00
Total 45
48
49
142
47.32
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
51
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
3 3.33 3 3.33 3.67 4 20.33 3.39
GRANOLA
2 2.33 2.33 2 2.67
2.33 13.66 2.28
RANIAG
2 2 2 2.33
2.33
2.67
13.33 2.22
TOTAL
7.00 7.66 7.33 7.66 8.67 9.00 47.32
MEAN
2.33 2.55 2.44 2.55 2.89 3.00
2.63
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.481
0.241
Factor A
5
3.037
0.607
2.52ns
3.33
5.64
Error
10
2.407
0.241
Factor B
2
15.593
7.796
32.38**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
1.296
0.130
0.53ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
5.778
0.241
TOTAL 53
28.593
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 18.68%
**= Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 18.66%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
52
Appendix Table 8. Leaf miner 45 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
3
3
4
10
3.33
V2
3
3
2
8
2.67
V3
2
3
3
8
2.67
Sub-total 8
9
9 26
2.89
F1
V1
4
3
4
11
3.67
V2
4
3
3
10
3.33
V3
3
3
3
9
3.00
Sub-total 11
9
10 30 3.33
F2
V1
4
3
3
10
3.33
V2
2
3
3
8
2.67
V3
3
3
3
9
3.00
Sub-total 9
9
9 27
3.00
F3
V1
3
4
4
11
3.67
V2
3
3
3
9
3.00
V3
3
3
3
9
3.00
Sub-total 9
10
10
29
3.22
F4
V1
4
5
4
13
4.33
V2
5
4
4
13
4.33
V3
4
3
3
11
3.33
13
12
11
36
4.00
F5
V1
5
4
4
13
4.33
V2
4
4
4
12
4.00
V3
4
3
4
11
3.67
Sub-total 13
11
12 36 4.00
Total 63
60
61
185
61.33
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
53
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
3.33 3.67 3.33 3.67 4.33 4.33 22.66 3.78
GRANOLA
2.67 3.33 2.67
3 4.33 4 20.00 3.33
RANIAG
2.67 3 3
3 3.33
3.67 18.67 3.11
TOTAL
8.67 10.00 9.00 9.67 11.99 12.00 61.33
MEAN
2.89 3.33 3.00 3.22 4.00 4.00
3.41
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.259
0.130
Factor A
5
10.593
2.119
9.69**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
2.185
0.219
Factor B
2
4.148
2.074
8.00**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
1.630
0.163
0.62ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
6.222
0.259
TOTAL 53
25.037
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 13.73%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 14.94%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
54
Appendix Table 9. Late blight 30 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
1
1
1
3
1.00
V2
1
2
2
5
1.67
V3
2
2
2
6
2.00
Sub-total 4
5
5 14
1.56
F1
V1
1
1
1
3
1.00
V2
1
2
1
4
1.33
V3
1
1
1
3
1.00
Sub-total 3
4
3 10
1.11
F2
V1
1
1
1
3
1.00
V2
2
2
1
5
1.67
V3
1
3
2
6
2.00
Sub-total 3
6
4 14
1.56
F3
V1
1
1
1
3
1.00
V2
1
1
1
3
1.00
V3
1
1
2
4
1.33
Sub-total 3
6
4 10
1.11
F4
V1
1
1
1
3
1.00
V2
1
1
1
3
1.00
V3
1
2
2
5
1.67
3
4
4
11
1.22
F5
V1
1
1
1
3
1.00
V2
1
2
1
4
1.33
V3
2
1
1
4
1.33
Sub-total 4
4
3 11
1.22
Total 21
26
23
70
23.33
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
55
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
1 1 1 1 1 3 8.00 1.33
GRANOLA
1.67 1.33 1.67
1
1 4 10.67 1.78
RANIAG
2 1 2 1.33
1.67
4 12.00 2.00
TOTAL
4.67 3.33 4.67 3.33 3.67 11.00 30.67
MEAN
1.56 1.11 1.56 1.11 1.22 3.67
1.70
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.704
0.352
Factor A
5
1.926
0.385
2.97ns
3.33
5.64
Error
10
1.296
0.130
Factor B
2
2.815
1.407
7.23*
4.10
7.56
AB
10
1.852
0.185
0.95ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
4.667
0.194
TOTAL 53
13.259
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 7.50%
*=
Significant
Coefficient of variation = 15.01%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
56
Appendix Table 10. Late blight 45 DAPof three potato varieties applied with
organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
3
2
3
8
2.67
V2
6
7
7
20
6.67
V3
7
8
7
22
7.33
Sub-total 16
17
17 50 5.56
F1
V1
3
2
3
8
2.67
V2
6
6
7
19
6.33
V3
6
7
7
20
6.67
Sub-total 15
15
17 47 5.22
F2
V1
4
3
2
9
3.00
V2
6
7
7
20
6.67
V3
7
6
7
20
6.67
Sub-total 17
16
16 49 5.44
F3
V1
2
3
3
8
2.67
V2
7
6
6
19
6.33
V3
7
7
7
21
7.00
Sub-total 16
16
16 48 3.33
F4
V1
3
3
2
8
2.67
V2
6
6
6
18
6.00
V3
6
7
7
20
6.67
15
16
15
46
5.11
F5
V1
2
3
2
7
2.33
V2
5
6
5
16
5.33
V3
7
7
6
20
6.67
Sub-total 14
16
13 43 4.78
Total 93
96
94
283
94.35
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
57
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
2.67 2.67 3
2.67 2.67 2.33 16.01 2.67
GRANOLA
6.67 6.33 6.67 6.33 6 5.33 37.33 6.22
RANIAG
7.33 6.67 6.67
7 6.67 6.67 41.01 6.84
TOTAL
16.67 15.67 16.34 16.00 15.34 14.33 94.35
MEAN
5.56 5.22 5.45 5.33 5.11 4.78
5.24
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.259
0.130
Factor A
5
3.426
0.685
2.40ns
3.33
5.64
Error
10
2.852
0.285
246.05**
Factor B
2
182.259
91.130
0.59ns
4.10
7.56
AB
10
2.185
0.219
2.26
3.17
Error
24
8.889
0.370
TOTAL 53
199.870
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 10.18%
**= Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 11.61%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
58
Appendix Table 11. Number of marketable tubers per plotof three potato varieties
applied with organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
38
42
36
116
38.67
V2
16
20
14
50
16.67
V3
24
20
32
76
25.33
Sub-total 78
82
82
242
26.89
F1
V1
48
59
59
166
55.33
V2
28
36
24
88
29.33
V3
28
36
20
84
28.00
Sub-total 104
131
103
338
37.56
F2
V1
54
46
42
142
47.33
V2
24
20
20
64
21.33
V3
28
20
16
64
21.33
Sub-total 106
86
78 270
30.00
F3
V1
58
50
55
163
54.33
V2
32
40
20
92
30.67
V3
20
32
32
84
28.00
Sub-total 110
122
107
339
33.67
F4
V1
78
70
58
156
52.00
V2
40
24
32
96
32.00
V3
40
32
24
96
32.00
158
126
114
348
38.67
F5
V1
76
64
81
221
73.67
V2
48
56
38
132
44.00
V3
36
28
44
108
36.00
Sub-total 160
148
163
461
51.22
Total 716
695
647
1998
665.99
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
59
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
38.67 55.33 47.33 54.33 52 73.67 321.33 53.56
GRANOLA
16.67 29.33 21.33 30.67 32
44 174.00 29.00
RANIAG
25.33 28 21.33 28 32 36 170.66 28.44
TOTAL
80.67 112.66 89.99 113.00 116.00 153.67 665.99
MEAN
26.89 37.55 30.00 37.67 38.67 51.22
37.00
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
210.111
105.056
Factor A
5
3213.333
642.667
4.98*
3.33
5.64
Error
10
1289.222
128.922
Factor B
2
7403.111
3701.556
42.79**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
534.222
53.422
0.61ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
2076.000
86.500
TOTAL 53
14726.000
* = Significant
Coefficient of variation = 30.68%
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 25.14%
ns = Not significant
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
60
Appendix Table 12. Number of non-marketable tubers per plotof three potato varieties
applied with organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
102
85
89
276
92.00
V2
92
76
72
240
80.00
V3
48
54
36
138
46.00
Sub-total 242
215
197
654
72.67
F1
V1
94
92
76
262
87.33
V2
98
58
80
236
78.67
V3
40
34
50
124
41.33
Sub-total 232
184
206
622
69.11
F2
V1
78
90
88
256
85.33
V2
68
86
90
244
81.33
V3
46
62
68
176
58.67
Sub-total 192
238
249
676
75.11
F3
V1
85
72
79
236
78.67
V2
54
48
58
160
53.33
V3
56
38
42
136
45.33
Sub-total 195
158
179
532
59.11
F4
V1
63
55
59
177
59.00
V2
50
62
37
149
49.67
V3
38
49
44
131
43.67
151
166
140
457
50.78
F5
V1
54
39
47
140
46.67
V2
38
64
52
154
51.33
V3
36
44
36
116
38.67
Sub-total 128
147
135
410
45.56
Total 1140
1108
1103
3351
1117
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
61
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
92 87.33 85.33 85.33 59 46.67 455.66 75.94
GRANOLA
80 78.67 81.33 81.33 49.67 51.33 422.33 70.39
RANIAG
46 41.33 58.67 58.67 43.67 38.67 287.01 47.84
TOTAL
218.00 207.33 225.33 225.33 152.34 136.67 1165.00
MEAN
72.67 69.11 75.11 75.11 50.78 45.56
64.72
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
44.778
22.389
Factor A
5
6668.389
1333.678
8.06**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
1653.000
165.300
Factor B
2
8048.444
4024.222
53.37**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
2614.667
261.267
3.47*
2.26
3.17
Error
24
1809.556
75.398
TOTAL 53
20838.833
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 20.71%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 13.98%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
62
Appendix Table 13. Weight of marketable tubers per plotof three potato varieties
applied with organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
2.40
2.20
1.50
6.1
2.03
V2
0.40
0.60
0.40
1.4
0.46
V3
0.60
0.40
0.40
1.4
0.46
Sub-total 3.40
3.20
2.30 8.9 0.98
F1
V1
2.70
2.70
3.00
8.4
2.8
V2
1.00
1.20
0.80
3
1
V3
0.80
0.80
0.40
2
0.67
Sub-total 4.50
4.70
4.20
13.4 1.48
F2
V1
2.80
2.40
2.50
7.7
2.57
V2
1.00
0.80
0.60
2.4
0.8
V3
0.60
0.60
0.40
1.6
0.53
Sub-total 4.40
3.80
3.50
11.7 1.3
F3
V1
2.50
2.25
2.00
6.75
2.25
V2
1.20
1.60
0.60
3.4
1.13
V3
0.40
0.60
0.60
1.6
0.53
Sub-total 4.10
4.45
3.20
11.75
1.31
F4
V1
3.40
3.20
3.00
9.6
3.2
V2
1.40
0.80
0.80
3
1
V3
0.70
0.60
0.40
1.7
0.57
4.50
4.60
4.20
13.3
4.43
F5
V1
3.25
3.00
4.28
10.53
3.51
V2
1.60
1.60
1.20
4.4
1.47
V3
0.60
0.40
0.80
1.8
0.6
Sub-total 4.45
4.00
5.28
13.73
1.52
Total 27.35
25.75
23.68
76.78
25.58
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
63
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
2.03 2.8 2.57 2.25 3.2 3.51 16.36 2.73
GRANOLA
0.46 1 0.8 1.13 1 1.47 5.86 0.98
RANIAG
0.46 0.67 0.53 0.53 0.57 0.6 3.36 0.56
TOTAL
2.95 4.47 3.90 3.91 4.77 5.58 25.58
MEAN
0.98 1.49 1.30 1.30 1.59 1.86
1.42
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
44.778
22.389
Factor A
5
15112.611
3022.522
38.81**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
778.778
77.878
Factor B
2
398.111
199.056
1.78ns
4.10
7.56
AB
10
1820.778
182.078
1.62ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
2683.778
111.824
TOTAL 53
20838.833
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 14.22%
ns = Not significant
Coefficient of variation = 17.04%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
64
Appendix Table 14. Weight of non-marketable tubers per plotof three potato varieties
applied with organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
1.20
1.00
1.50
6.10
2.03
V2
0.70
0.50
0.50
1.40
0.47
V3
0.20
0.30
0.30
1.40
0.47
Sub-total 2.10
1.80
2.30
8.90 0.99
F1
V1
0.80
0.50
0.50
8.40
2.80
V2
0.50
0.40
0.70
3.00
1.00
V3
0.30
0.20
0.30
2.00
0.67
Sub-total 1.60
1.10
1.50
13.40
1.49
F2
V1
0.75
0.80
0.90
7.70
2.57
V2
0.40
0.30
0.70
2.40
0.80
V3
0.20
0.30
0.30
1.60
0.53
Sub-total 1.35
1.40
1.90
11.70
1.30
F3
V1
0.90
1.00
0.75
6.75
2.25
V2
0.30
0.40
0.30
3.40
1.13
V3
0.40
0.30
0.30
1.60
0.53
Sub-total 1.60
1.70
1.35
11.75
1.31
F4
V1
0.50
0.65
0.50
9.60
3.20
V2
0.20
0.40
0.30
3.10
1.20
V3
0.30
0.30
0.30
1.70
1.03
1.00
1.35
1.10
14.40
1.60
F5
V1
0.50
0.50
0.75
10.53
3.51
V2
0.30
0.20
0.20
4.40
1.47
V3
0.30
0.20
0.20
1.80
0.60
Sub-total 1.10
1.20
1.15
16.73
1.86
Total 8.75
8.25
9.3
76.88
26.26
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
65
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
2.03 2.8 2.57 2.25 3.2 3.51 16.36 2.73
GRANOLA
0.47 1 0.8 1.13 1.2 1.47 6.07 1.01
RANIAG
0.47 0.67 0.53 0.53 1.03 0.6 3.83 0.64
TOTAL
2.97 4.47 3.90 3.91 5.43 5.58 26.26
MEAN
0.99 1.49 1.30 1.30 1.81 1.86
1.46
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.355
0.178
Factor A
5
3.987
0.797
9.12**
3.33
5.64
Error
10
0.874
0.087
Factor B
2
47.443
23.721
314.62**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
2.490
0.249
3.30*
2.26
3.17
Error
24
1.810
0.075
TOTAL 53
56.959
** = Highly significant
Coefficient of variation = 20.71%
* =
Significant Coefficient of variation = 19.29%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
66
Appendix Table 15. Total yield per plotof three potato varieties applied with
organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
3.60
3.20
3.00
9.80
3.27
V2
1.10
1.10
0.90
3.10
1.03
V3
0.80
0.70
0.70
2.20
0.73
Sub-total 5.50
4.00
4.60
15.10
1.68
F1
V1
3.50
3.20
3.50
10.20
3.40
V2
1.50
1.60
1.50
4.60
1.53
V3
1.10
1.00
0.70
2.80
0.93
Sub-total 6.10
5.80
5.70
17.60
1.96
F2
V1
3.55
3.20
3.40
10.15
3.38
V2
1.40
1.10
1.30
3.80
1.27
V3
0.80
0.90
0.80
2.50
0.83
Sub-total 5.75
5.20
5.50
16.45
1.83
F3
V1
3.40
3.25
3.75
10.40
3.47
V2
1.50
2.00
0.60
4.10
1.37
V3
0.80
0.90
0.90
2.60
0.87
Sub-total 5.70
6.25
4.25
17.10
1.90
F4
V1
4.30
3.70
3.50
11.50
3.83
V2
1.60
1.20
1.10
3.90
1.30
V3
1.00
0.90
0.70
2.60
0.87
6.90
5.80
5.30
18.00
2.00
F5
V1
3.75
3.50
5.03
12.28
4.09
V2
1.90
2.00
1.40
5.30
1.76
V3
0.90
0.70
1.00
2.60
0.87
Sub-total 6.55
6.20
7.43
20.00
2.24
Total 36.5
34.15
33.78
104.43
34.8
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
67
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
3.27 3.4 3.38 3.47 3.83 4.09 21.44 3.57
GRANOLA
1.03 1.53 1.27 1.37 1.3 1.76 8.26 1.38
RANIAG
0.73 0.93 0.83 0.87 0.87 0.87 5.10 0.85
TOTAL
5.03 5.86 5.48 5.71 6.00 6.72 34.80
MEAN
1.68 1.95 1.83 1.90 2.00 2.24
1.93
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.242
0.121
Factor A
5
0.601
0.320
3.89*
3.33
5.64
Error
10
0.823
0.082
Factor B
2
75.129
37.565
333.60**
4.10
7.56
AB
10
0.930
0.093
0.82ns
2.26
3.17
Error
24
2.702
0.113
TOTAL 53
81.427
* = Significant
Coefficient of variation = 14.80%
** =
Highly
significant Coefficient of variation = 17.35%
ns = Not significant
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
68
Appendix Table 16. Computed yield (ton/ha)of three potato varieties applied with
organic fertilizers
REPLICATION
TREATMENT
I II
TOTAL
III
MEAN
F0
V1
7.20
6.40
6.00
19.60
6.53
V2
2.20
2.20
1.80
6.20
2.07
V3
1.60
1.40
1.40
4.58
1.27
Sub-total 11.00
10.00
9.20
30.38 3.38
F1
V1
7.00
6.40
7.00
20.40
6.80
V2
3.00
3.20
3.00
9.20
3.07
V3
2.20
2.00
1.40
5.60
1.87
Sub-total 12.20
11.60
11.40
35.38 3.91
F2
V1
7.10
6.40
6.80
20.30
6.76
V2
2.80
2.20
2.60
7.60
2.53
V3
1.60
1.80
1.60
5.00
1.67
Sub-total 11.50
10.40
11.00
32.90 3.66
F3
V1
6.80
6.50
7.50
20.80
6.93
V2
3.00
4.00
1.20
8.20
2.73
V3
1.60
1.80
1.80
5.20
1.73
Sub-total 11.40
12.30
10.50
34.20 3.80
F4
V1
8.60
7.40
7.00
23.00
7.67
V2
3.20
2.40
2.20
7.80
2.60
V3
2.00
1.80
1.40
5.20
1.73
Sub-total 13.80
11.60
10.60
36.00 4.00
F5
V1
7.50
7.00
10.06
24.56
8.19
V2
3.80
4.00
2.80
10.60
3.53
V3
1.80
1.40
2.00
5.20
1.73
Sub-total 13.10
12.40
14.86
40.36 4.48
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
69
TWO-WAY TABLE
ORGANIC FERTILIZER
TREATMENT
TOTAL MEAN
F0 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
P03
6.53 6.8 6.76 6.93 7.67 8.19 42.88 7.15
GRANOLA
2.07 3.07 2.53 2.73 2.6 3.53 16.53 2.76
RANIAG
1.27 1.87 1.67 1.73 1.73 1.73 10.00 1.67
TOTAL
9.87 11.74 10.96 11.39 12.00 13.45 69.41
MEAN
3.29 3.91 3.65 3.80 4.00 4.48
3.86
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
SOURCE OF DEGREES OF
SUM OF
MEAN
F
TABULAR F
VARIANCE
FREEDOM
SQUARES SQUARE
VALUE
.05 .01
Replication
2
0.924
0.471
Factor A
5
6.223
1.245
3.75*
3.33
5.64
Error
10
3.315
0.331
332.72**
Factor B
2
299.725
149.863
0.84ns
4.10
7.56
AB
10
3.828
0.383
2.26
3.17
Error
24
10.810
0.450
TOTAL 53
* = Significant
Coefficient of variation = 14.86%
** = Highlysignificant
Coefficient of variation = 17.34%
Growth and Yield of Potato Stem Cuttings Applied with
Organic Fertilizers /Nemesio M. Bandiwan. 2012
Document Outline
- Growth and Yield of Potato Stem CuttingsApplied with Organic Fertilizers
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- MATERIALS AND METHODS
- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
- SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
- LITERATURE CITED
- APPENDICES