• Walang Nahanap Na Mga Resulta

PDF BIBLIOGRAPHY - portal.bsu.edu.ph:8081

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2023

Share "PDF BIBLIOGRAPHY - portal.bsu.edu.ph:8081"

Copied!
56
0
0

Buong text

(1)

SAGAYO, BELEN B. May 2008. Growth and Yield Performance of Five Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Varieties Under Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet Condition.

Benguet State University, La Trinidad, Benguet.

Adviser: Fernando R. Gonzales, Ph.D.

ABSTRACT

The result of the study showed that all the six variety of chickpea grown in Bano- oy, Buguias, Benguet had varying yields due to differences in growth characteristics which affects their growth and yield performance.

On the emergence percentage ICCV 2, ICCV 93952, ICCV 94954 and ICCV 94954 had the highest percentage emergence while ICCV 95332 and ICCV 95334 had lowest percentage emergence. As to days from planting to flowering, ICCV 2 were earliest to produce flower and were also the earliest to reach harvesting stage. In terms of plant height at flowering kabuli type were significantly taller than desi type. On average number of lateral branches ICCV 94954 significantly produced more number of lateral branches over the other varieties evaluated.

As to percentage pod setting, ICCV 94954 and ICCV 95332 had the highest percentage pod setting followed by ICCV 2, ICCV 95334, ICCV 93954 and ICCV 93952 had lowest pod setting. In yield, ICCV 94954 produced higher number of seed per pod, weight of pod produced per plant, yield per plot and yield per hectare. Weight of 1000 seeds and average seed diameter follows a trend where ICCV 95334 had the highest

(2)

the seed diameter, the heavier the weight.

Result of germination test done, ragdoll method had a higher germination percentage than on petri disc.

(3)

Page

Bibliography. . . . . . i

Abstract . . . i

Table of Contents . . . iii

INTRODUCTION . . . 1

REVIEW OF LITERATURE Description of the Crop . . . 3

Nutrition . . . 3

Uses . . . 4

Climatic and Soil Requirement . . . 4

Harvesting . . . 5

Drying and Storage . . . 5

Importance of Selecting Varieties. . . 6

MATERIALS AND METHODS . . . 11

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Emergence Percentage . . . 14

Days from Planting to Flowering . . . 15

Average Height at Flowering . . . 16

Days from Planting to First Harvest . . . 17

Average Number of Lateral Branches at Flowering . . . 18

(4)

Percentage Pod Setting . . . 19

Average Number of Seeds per Pod . . . 20

Average Weight of Pods Produced per Plant . . . 21

Average Yield Per Plant . . . 22

Total Yield per Plot and Total Yield per Hectare . . . 23

Weight of 1,000 seeds . . . 24

Average Seed Diameter . . . 25

Germination Test . . . 26

Varietal Characteristics . . . 28

Pest and Diseases . . . 30

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION . . . 33

LITERATURE CITED . . . 35

APPENDICES . . . 36

(5)

INTRODUCTION

Buguias is a leading vegetable producing municipality with 5,619 hectares devoted for planting potato, cabbage, sweet potato, Chinese cabbage, beans, garden pea, carrot, radish, celery, lettuce and root crop production.

Buguias is located in Northern Benguet bounded on the west of Mankayan and Bakun and on the south by Kabayan and Kibungan. It has an average temperature of 15oC to 17oC and elevation of 1,550 m. above sea level.

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) belongs to the family Fabaceae. It is annual cool season legume or pulse crop or as a green vegetable with the former use being common.

This crop is one of the most important legumes grown in India, ranking fourth among Indian food sources. Chickpea is often used as an alternative protein product and one of the plants with highest amount of protein.

Chickpea is mainly used by human consumption and only a small portion is used as feed. Kabuli type is generally used as whole grains, while desi type is used as whole seed, dehulled split or flour. Chickpea is also known for its herbal medicine and cosmetics.

The plant grows to between 20 cm to 50 cm. tall and has small feathery leaves on both sides of the stem. One seed pod contains two to three seeds. The flowers are white or reddish-blue. Chickpea need subtropical or tropical climate and more than 400 mm annual rain.

Chickpea is relatively drought – tolerant due to its long taproot, which allows it to extract water from greater depths in the soil profile. Chickpea have not been introduce or

(6)

cultivated in the Cordillera’s specially in Benguet even the agroclimatic condition is suitable for its production due to lack of information and no available planting materials.

The introduction of new highbred ICRISAT cultivar of chickpea coupled with the generation of location specific technologies for highland of CAR, chickpea could become a cash earner. More ever, the supply of chickpea in the Philippines depends on importation from chickpea producing countries.

It is then a worth while activity to conduct this study to select those chickpea varieties with good performance on our local condition to enable our farmer to increase their profit and as also an alternative crop and at the same time to provide food for the increasing population of the country.

This study was conducted to introduce and promote chickpea production in Benguet province especially in Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet, to determine the growth and yield of chickpea under Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet and to select chickpea varieties that could be profitably grown under Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet.

The study was conducted at Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet from November 2007 to January 2008.

(7)

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Description of the Plant

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) are multiple branched, spreading growth habit annual ranging from 20 cm to 50 cm. tall. Some chickpea varieties have compound leaves with 8 to 20 leaflets and some have simple leaves, which are pubescent or hairy in appearance. Chickpea leaves exude malic and oxalic acids.

Flower are usually self pollinated which are borne in group of two or three and come in purple, white, or blue in color depending upon the variety. Each flower produce short, pubescent pod which is 3/4 in. to 2 in. long. Each pod contains one or two seeds.

The seed is spherical in shape, wrinkled and with pointed beak. The seed color is yellow to dark brown. The root system are well develop, has a strong tap root with numerous lateral branches that spread out in all direction in the upper layer of the soil.

Nutrition

Chickpea are good source of Zinc, folate and protein. They are also very high in dietary fiber and thus are a healthy food source of carbohydrates for person with insulin.

They are low in fat, and most of the fat content is polysaturated.

According to International Crop Research Institute for the Semi- Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), on an average, chickpea seed contains 23% protein, 64% carbohydrates, 47%

starch, 5% fat, 6% crude fiber, 6% soluble sugar and 3% ash. They also report that chickpea has high mineral content of Phosphorus (340 mg/100g), Calcium (190 mg/100g), Magnesium (140 mg/100g), Iron (7 mg/100g) and Zinc (3mg /100g).

(8)

Uses

Mature chickpeas can be cooked and eaten in salads, cooked in stews and ground into flour. Unripe chickpeas are often picked of the pod and eaten as a raw snack in many parts of India, and the plant are eaten there as a green vegetable in salad. In Chile, a cooked chickpea milk (4:1) mixture was food for feeding infants. Gram husk and green or dried stems and leaves are used for stock feed. Whole seeds may be milled directly for feed. Acids exudates from leaves can be applied medicinally or used as vinegar.

Medicinal application includes use for aphrodisiac, dyspepsia, flatulence, snake bite, sun stroke and warts. Acids also used to lower blood cholesterol levels (Duke, 1981).

In addition, among the food legumes, chickpea is the most hypocholeteremic agent; germinated chickpea was reported to be effective in controlling cholesterol level in rats (Geervani, 1991).

Climate and Soil Requirement

Chickpea need a sub-tropical or tropical climate and are generally drought tolerant with moderate rainfall of 400 mm. per annum. Chickpea thrive under good condition with daytime temperature between 21oC to 29oC and night temperature near 20oC.

Chickpea does best on fertile sandy loam soils with good internal drainage. Good drainage is necessary because even short period of flooded or water logged fields reduce growth and increase susceptibility to root rot and stem rots. The pH requirement is 8.5 and below.

(9)

Harvesting

Chickpea can be harvested direct or swathed prior to combining depending upon uniformity of maturity and weed problems. About 1 week of good drying weather is required in the swath.

Chickpea can be swathed when the plants are yellowing and the pods are their mature color. This should be done when the plants are slightly damp to facilitate forming the swath without yield loss. When the vines, pods and seeds in the windrow are dry enough (seed moisture about 13%) the swath can be combined. Seed color is important (buyers prefer a yellowish-cream color) so greenish and brown seeds are generally unacceptable. Slight bleaching does occur in the swath. About 1% immature color seed is allowed before deductions is implemented.

Adjust the combine screen size, cylinder speed, concave clearance and air flow carefully to maintain a quality seed with little physical damage or excessive trash.

Drying and Storage

Moisture content should be around 10 to 12% to prevent insect and or disease outbreaks in storage. Because of their relatively large seed size, chickpea can be dried slightly with ambient temperature air flow through thin layers in a regular storage bin.

Storage system should be carefully fumigated before storing chickpea and all storage areas should be monitored regularly to identify potential problems early.

(10)

Importance of Selecting Varieties

Selection of the variety to be planted is one of the most important decisions the commercial vegetable grower must make each season. Considering the yield performance, the variety has the potential to produce crop at least equivalent to those already grown. It must also perform well under a range of environmental conditions usually encountered on individual farm, posses excellent resistant against pest, diseases and harvested product have the quality characteristics desired by the packers, shippers, wholesalers, retailer, and consumer which include size, shape, flavor and nutritional quality (Lorenz and Maynard, 1986). Currently large seeded, lighter colored seed types of chickpea are preferred for soup and salad bar uses (Doll et al., 1990).

Lorenz and Maynard (1986) mentioned the importance of good seed of the right variety of strain suitable for the locality should not be overlooked. Some variety produce extremely well under one set of condition but became worthless in another condition.

Knott (1989) supported this when he stated that certain variety of crop do well in one district and be worthless in another condition. This is also noted by Edmund et al (1957) that varieties of the same kind are adoptable and thus, profitable and other variety are non-adoptable and this relatively unprofitable in some region.

In addition, Villareal (1969) explained that the planting good seeds is essential to the success on the growing vegetable. Planting vegetable variety except the best variety adapted to the environment in which it will grow unnecessary limit the potential for the high yield and profits even before the first seed is planted. Also Work and Carew (1955) stated that having varietal evaluation is important to observe the performance character

(11)

such as yield, earliness, vigor, maturity and keeping quality because different variety have wide range of differences in plant size and yielding performance.

Furthermore, Bautista et al (1983), pointed that plant species/ varieties has a set of genetic make-up and it is termed genotype. It determines the yield potentials, relative susceptibility to unfavorable environment, earliness and regularity of bearing, length of productive life and size and shape of the plant at maturity. Wolfe and Kipps (1953) also stated that before maximum yield can be attained a variety must be adapted to the selection in which it is grown.

(12)

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The materials used in the study wee the six chickpea varieties, farm tools, measuring material, weighing scale, identifying pegs, fertilizer, fungicide and insecticides.

The study was conducted at Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet having an average temperature of 15oC to 17oC and an elevation of 1,550 meter above sea level.

Six varieties of chickpea from ICRISAT were introduced and evaluated at Bano- oy, Buguias, Benguet promising varieties adapted to Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet condition were selected.

The experiment was laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with our replication. The treatments were as follows.

Desi Type Kabuli Type

T1- ICCV 93952 T4- ICCV 2 T2- ICCV 93954 T5- ICCV 95332 T3- ICCV 94954 T6- ICCV 95334

An area of 500 square meters that is previously planted with cabbage was prepared for the study. The area was divided into four blocks. Each treatment was planted in two plots measuring 1m x10m. Two furrows was made within the plot at 30 cm. apart where 1/ 2 kg. of inorganic fertilizer (14 - 14 -14) and 1 kerosene can of chicken dung were applied evenly and mixed with the soil before planting the seed singly at a distance of 30 cm between rows and 10 cm between hills. There were 20 sample plants per treatment / replicate selected randomly.

(13)

All other cultural practices like irrigation, weeding, insect and disease control was employed to ensure good growth and yield of the crop.

The data gathered were:

A. Vegetative Growth

1. Emergence Percentage (%). This was recorded 15 days after sowing the seeds using the formula;

Emergence Percentage (%) = Number of Seed Germinated x 100 Number of Seed Sown

2. Days from planting to flowering. This was taken at flowering stage. This was gathered by counting the number of days from planting to flowering.

3. Average height at flowering (cm). This was taken at flowering stage (first flower). The height of the plants in every sample was gathered from planting to flowering stage.

4. Days from planting to first harvest. This was noted on the first harvest of seeds. This was gathered by counting the number of days from planting to first harvest.

5. Average number of lateral branches at flowering. This was taken at flowering (first flowers). This was gathered by counting the lateral branches at flowering. This was computed as follows:

Ave. No. of Lateral Branches = No. of Lateral Branches of Samples Plants at Flowering Sample Plant

6. Total number of harvests. This was the total number of harvesting done for one cropping season.

7. Percentage pod setting. This was taken using the formula:

(14)

Percentage (%) Pod Setting = Number of Pods per Plant x 100 Number of Flowers Produced per Plant

8. Average number of seeds per pod. This was computed using the formula:

Average number of seeds per pod = Number of Seeds Produced per Plant Number of Pods per Plant

9. Average weight of pods produced per plant. This was computed as follows:

Average Weight of Pods = Total Weight of Pods Produced by Sample Plants Produced per Plant Number of Sample Plants

10. Average yield per plant (g). This was taken by using the formula:

Average Yield per Plant (g) = Total Yield of Sample Plants Number of Samples

11. Total yield per plot (kg). This was the total yield of the experimental plot (20 sq. m.)

12. Total yield per hectare (t/ha). This was the total yield of experimental plot (20 sq.m) (500).

13. Weight of 1000 seeds (g). This was taken by weighing 1000 seeds.

14. Average seed diameter. This was taken by measuring the seed diameter using verner caliper.

15. Germination test. This was conducted one month from seed storage using petri dish and the ragdoll method. This was computed using the formula;

Emergence Percentage (%) = Number of Seed Germinated x 100 Number of Seed Sown

16. Varietal Characterization

a. Leaf. The shape, color and other leaf characteristics was recorded.

(15)

b. Flower/ pod. The color of flower and pod was recorded at flowering and at first harvesting stage.

c. Seed. The color shape and size was recorded at harvest.

17. Incidence of Pest and Diseases

a. Insect pest. Insects that infest the plant during the cropping season was noted and identified during the vegetative and reproductive stages of plant growth.

b. Diseases. Plant diseases observed during the cropping season was recorded and the causal organism was identified including the degree of infestation.

18. Meteorological Data a. Temperature (OC)

19. Documentation. This was taken through pictures.

(16)

Figure 1. Flowering stage

Figure 2. Flowering stage of kabuli type Figure 3. Flowering stage of desi type

(17)

Figure 4. Overview of the experiment

Figure 5. Planting chickpea at Bano-oy, Buguias

(18)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Emergence Percentage

Table 1 shows highly differences among the different varieties of chickpea in terms of emergence percentage. The highest emergence percentage was obtained from ICCV2, ICCV 93952, ICCV 94954 which had comparable means ranging from 86.25 to 98.25% ICCV 5332 and ICCV 95334 had the lowest percentage emergence.

These results confirmed the statement of Edmund et. al. (1957) that emergence is essentially a quickening of growth of embryo and the same explained that varieties and strains differ in adaptability for any given region.

Table 1. Percentage field emergence (%)

VARIETY MEAN

(%) Desi Type

ICCV 93952 93.75a

ICCV 93954 86.25a

ICCV 94954 90.25a

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 98.25a

ICCV 95332 66.00b

ICCV 95334 51.25b

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

(19)

Days from Planting to Flowering

Table 2 shows that among the six cultivars ICCV 2 attained flowering the earliest but were comparable with ICCV 95332 while ICCV 93952 were the latest to flower.

Differences on the days to flowering could be attributed to varietal characteristics of the plant were kabuli type are generally early maturing while desi type are late maturing varieties.

These results agrees that varietal evaluation is important to observe the performance character such as yield, earliness, vigor, maturity and keeping quality because different variety have wide range performance (Work and Carew, 1955). These results also confirm well to the statement of Bautista et. al., (1989) that each plant or variety has different genetic make-up that affects the earliness of bearing and regularity of flowering.

Table 2. Days from planting to flowering

VARIETY MEAN

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 64.25a

ICCV 93954 60.90b

ICCV 94954 61.04b

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 46.60d

ICCV 95332 49.64cd

ICCV 95334 51.31c

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

(20)

Average Height at Flowering

Significant differences were obtained on the average height at flowering stage. As shown in Table 3, ICCV 95334 was the tallest among the varieties with a mean of 42.81 cm., while ICCV 94954 is the shortest with a mean of 34.41 cm. Generally, Kabuli type varieties were taller than Desi type at flowering stage.

The observed differences among the chickpea varieties further indicate their differential adaptability to local conditions as well as their inherent height potential.

Furthermore, kabuli type are generally taller thank desi type.

Table 3. Average height at flowering (cm)

VARIETY MEAN

(cm) Desi Type

ICCV 93952 36.38b

ICCV 93954 35.61b

ICCV 94954 34.41b

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 38.71ab

ICCV 95332 38.77ab

ICCV 95334 42.81a

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

(21)

Days from Planting to First Harvest

As presented in Table 4, ICCV 2 were the earliest to mature and reach harvesting stage, which differed significantly from the other cultivars. The differences in the days of planting to first harvest seem to be directly related to the days from planting to flowering, where it follows the same trend that the first to produce flowers were also the first of have pod harvest. Bautista et.al. (1983) mentioned that each variety contains a set of genetic make-up which determines earliness of bearing and maturity.

Table 4. Number of days from planting to first harvest

VARIETY MEAN

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 128.50a

ICCV 93954 123.75a

ICCV 94954 113.00b

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 94.75d

ICCV 95332 103.50c

ICCV 95334 104.50c

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

(22)

Average Number of Lateral Branches at Flowering

There were significant differences on the average number of lateral branches at flowering as presented in Table 5. It was observed that ICCV 94954 variety produced higher number lateral branches. Followed by ICCV 94954, ICCV 95334, ICCV 2 and ICCV 93954 varieties had the lesser number of lateral branches produced.

Total Number of Harvest

Table 6 shows highly significant differences on the total number of harvest as affected by the different varieties evaluated. Result shows that ICCV 94954 had more number of harvest followed by ICCV 95332, ICCV 95334, ICCV 2 and ICCV 93954 while ICCV 93952 had the lowest number of harvest.

Table 5. Average number of lateral branches at flowering

VARIETY MEAN

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 3.13bc

ICCV 93954 3.00c

ICCV 94954 3.73a

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 3.28bc

ICCV 95332 3.43ab

ICCV 95334 3.38bc

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

(23)

Table 6. Total number of harvest

VARIETY MEAN

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 2.50c

ICCV 93954 3.00bc

ICCV 94954 4.00a

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 3.50ab

ICCV 95332 4.00a

ICCV 95334 3.50ab

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

As Bautista et al., (1983) pointed that plant species or variety has a set of genetic make-up which determines the length of productive life. Thus, lower number of harvest greatly affects the yield.

Percentage Pod Setting

Table 7 shows highly significant differences on percentage pod setting. ICCV 94954 and ICCV 95332 had the highest percentage pod setting followed by ICCV 2, ICCV 95334 and ICCV 93954. ICCV 93952 had the lowest pod setting. This result may be due to the differential responses of this cultivar to the existing environment of the locality. Cloudy weather that prevails in the locality may have affected the pod settings of chickpea.

(24)

Table 7. Percentage pod setting (%)

VARIETY MEAN

(%) Desi Type

ICCV 93952 54.64b

ICCV 93954 62.99a

ICCV 94954 67.39a

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 66.10a

ICCV 95332 67.62a

ICCV 95334 64.27a

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

This result may be attributed to their varietal characteristics whereas desi type which was small seeded usually produced two to three seeds per pod. While large seeded kabuli type consist only one seed per pod.

Average Number of Seeds per Pod

In terms of seed count per pod ICCV 94954 had the highest number of seeds per pod, it was closely followed by ICCV 93954, ICCV 93952, ICCV 2, ICCV 95332 and ICCV 95334 had the lesser number of seeds per pods.

This result may be attributed to their varietal characteristics which kabuli type are usually one seeded while desi type consists of 2 or 3 seeds per pod.

(25)

Table 8. Average number of seeds per pod

VARIETY MEAN

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 1.27b

ICCV 93954 1.24b

ICCV 94954 1.67a

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 1.22b

ICCV 95332 1.23b

ICCV 95334 1.13b

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

Average Weight of Pod Produced per Plant

The highest number of pod produce per plant was recorded from ICCV 94954 and ICCV 95332 followed by ICCV 95334, ICCV 2 and ICCV 93954. ICCV 93952 had the lightest weight of pod produced. As it was observed that Kabuli type had bigger pod size which might have attributed to its heavy weight. On the other hand, Desi type had smaller pod size.

(26)

Table 9. Average weight of pod produced per plant (g)

VARIETY MEAN

(g) Desi Type

ICCV 93952 20.98c

ICCV 93954 21.94bc

ICCV 94954 28.69a

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 24.29b

ICCV 95332 28.26a

ICCV 95334 24.69b

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

Average Yield per Plant

As shown in Table 10 entries which produced highest yield per plant is recorded from ICCV 94954 which did not markedly differ from ICCV 95332. Followed by ICCV 2, ICCV 93954, ICCV 9533. ICCV 93952 had the lowest yield per plant.

Decrease in yield per plant was due to occurrence of pod borer and rodents wherein they usually infest the matured pods before harvesting.

(27)

Table 10. Average yield per plant (g)

VARIETY MEAN

(g) Desi Type

ICCV 93952 18.13c

ICCV 93954 19.78bc

ICCV 94954 25.95a

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 21.54b

ICCV 95332 24.75a

ICCV 95334 18.69bc

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

Total Yield per Plot and Total Yield per Hectare

The trend in yield per plot is consistent with the total yield per hectare where ICCV 94954 had the highest computed yield. Followed by ICCV 95332, ICCV 95334, ICCV 2 and ICCV 93952 had the lowest yield (Table 11). The lowest yield of these varieties is due to excessive rainfall which leads to the development of sclerotinia stem rot which had greatly damage the crop, especially ICCV 939532 and ICCV 93954 and due to occurrence of pod borer and rodents.

(28)

Table 11. Total yield per plot and total yield per hectare (kg)

VARIETY TOTAL YIELD PER PLOT

(kg)

TOTAL YIELD PER HECTARE

(kg/ha) Desi Type

ICCV 93952 0.94e 421.25e

ICCV 93954 1.14d 571.25d

ICCV 94954 1.87a 935.00a

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 1.33c 663.75c

ICCV 95332 1.66b 829.25b

ICCV 95334 1.36c 678.75c

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

The result clearly supports the statement of Edmund and Andrews (1957) that varieties differ in productivity as expression of the hereditary genes influenced by the environment. The variety best adapted to the environment reflects the high yield potential according to Villareal (1969). Furthermore, Wolfe and Kipps (1953) stated that before maximum yield can be obtained a variety must be adapted to the section in which it is grown.

Weight of 1,000 Seeds (g)

The weight of 1000 seeds is shown in Table 12. Among the six varieties evaluated, it was observed that ICCV 95334 had the heaviest weight of 1000 seeds with a mean of 352.03 g. While ICCV 2 had the lightest weight having a mean of 219.25 g.

(29)

Table 12. Weight of 1,000 seeds (g)

VARIETY MEAN

(g) Desi Type

ICCV 93952 277.75d

ICCV 93954 230.85d

ICCV 94954 244.25c

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 219.25e

ICCV 95332 335.75b

ICCV 95334 352.03a

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

Differences in weight of 1000 seeds are attributed to the differences in varietal characteristics such as their sizes. Thus, Kabuli type had bigger seed size which contributed to its weight while desi type has smaller seed size.

Average Seed Diameter

The widest seed diameter was significantly measured from ICCV 95334 and ICCV 95332 with a mean of 0.84 and 0.82 followed by ICCV 94954, ICCV 93954. The smallest seed was measured from ICCV 2 and ICCV 93952 having the same mean of 0.66 cm.

(30)

Table 13. Average seed diameter (cm)

VARIETY MEAN

(cm) Desi Type

ICCV 93952 0.66b

ICCV 93954 0.68b

ICCV 94954 0.69b

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 0.66b

ICCV 95332 0.82a

ICCV 95334 0.84a

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

Result shows that seed diameter is directly related to the size and weight of a seed. The differences in seed diameter reflect the varietal characteristics and genetic make-up (Bautista et. al., 1983).

Germination Test

Seeds used in the germination test were harvested on their mature stage wherein their pod color was yellow but some pods with green color were harvested. Just after harvesting pods were put under the sun. After one week seeds were removed from the pods and seeds were put in net bag then air dried for two weeks on shaded area.

Ragdoll method. As shown in Table 14, there is highly significant differences in germination test done in ragdoll method. ICCV 2 had the highest percentage emergence

(31)

followed by ICCV 94954, ICCV 95334, ICCV 95332 and ICCV 93954 while ICCV 93952 lowest percentage emergence. However, result shows that all varieties of chickpea could survive under Buguias condition.

Petri disc. Result shows that ICCV 2 had the highest germination percentage petri disc while ICCV 93952 had least percentage emergence.

Low percentage germination maybe due to some factor such as high moisture content as seeds. However, difference in the germination test done in ragdoll method and Petri disc is that in ragdoll method, the whole seeds were completely wrapped with moist cheese cloth providing sufficient moisture to be used by the seed during germination while in petri disc, only one side of the seed absorbs water resulting to lower germination.

Table 14. Germination test

VARIETY

MEAN

Ragdoll Method Petri disc Method Desi Type

ICCV 93952 49.50d 18.00b

ICCV 93954 51.25d 26.00b

ICCV 94954 72.75b 42.25a

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 86.75a 45.00a

ICCV 95332 62.75c 27.25b

ICCV 95334 63.00c 19.25b

Means with a common letter are not significantly different at 5% by DMRT

(32)

Varietal Characteristics

Leaf characteristics. In Table 15, desi type have small rounded leaflet and has green leaf color while kabuli type have oblong leaflets and had a light green leaf.

Flower characteristics. Table 16 shows that flower of desi type are violet while kabuli type is white. All pods of chickpea cultivars are yellow at harvesting stage.

Seed characteristics. Table 17 shows that desi type has brown seed color, angular in shape and are small to medium in size, while kabuli type had cream seed color, owl’s head shape and are big to medium in size.

Table 15. Leaf characteristics

VARIETY LEAF SHAPE LEAF COLOR

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 small rounded green

ICCV 93954 small rounded green

ICCV 94954 small rounded green

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 Oblong leaflets light green

ICCV 95332 Oblong leaflets light green

ICCV 95334 Oblong leaflets light green

(33)

Table 16. Flower characteristics of the different varieties of chickpea

VARIETY FLOWER COLOR COLOR OF POD AT 1st

HARVESTING STAGE Desi Type

ICCV 93952 violet yellow

ICCV 93954 violet yellow

ICCV 94954 violet yellow

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 white yellow

ICCV 95332 white yellow

ICCV 95334 white yellow

Table 17. Seed characteristics of the different varieties of chickpea

VARIETY SEED COLOR SEED SHAPE SEED SIZE

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 brown angular small

ICCV 93954 brown angular small

ICCV 94954 brown angular medium

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 Cream/ivory white Owl’s head Medium

ICCV 95332 Cream/ivory white Owl’ head Big

ICCV 95334 Cream/ivory white Owl’s head Big

(34)

Pest and Diseases

Table 16 shows that all the varieties evaluated were infested by cutworm during the vegetative stage. Pod borer were observed during the reproductive stage of the crop.

Collar rot, chickpea stunt and sclerotinia stem rot were the diseases observed during the cropping season (Table 17). Greater damage on the crop, this is due to excessive rainfall. The occurrence of sclerotinia stem rot greatly affects the crop specially the desi type ICCV 93952 and ICCV 94954 which had excessive vegetative growth, collar root rot was observe to kabuli type and chickpea stunt are usually observed from desi type.

Table 18. Insect pest observed during the conduct of the study

INSECT PEST STAGE THEY ATTACKED

Cutworm (Agrotis ipsilon) Vegetative stage Pod Borer (Helicoverpa armigera) Reproductive stage

Table 19. Diseases observed during the conduct of the study

DISEASE CAUSAL ORGANISM DEGREE OF

INFESTATION

VARIETIES INFECTED Collar rot Sclerotium isolfsii sacc Slight ICCV2, ICCV

95332, and ICCV 95334

Sclerotinia stem rot Sclerotium sclerotiorum Severe ICCV 93952 and ICCV 94954

Chickpea stunt Bean (pea) leaf roll virus Slight ICCV 93952, ICCV 93954, and ICCV 94954

(35)

Figure 6. Correlation and regression analysis between seed yield and 1000-seed weight (a) and seed sized (b)

(36)

Meteorological Data

17

13

11

14

16

24 23 23

25

27

20

16

14

19 18

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30

December January February March April Months

Degrees Celcius

7:00 1:00 7:00

Figure 7. Temperature during the conduct of the study

(37)

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Summary

The study was conducted to introduce and promote chickpea production in Benguet specifically at Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet and to determine the growth and yield of chickpea under Buguias condition and to identify chickpea varieties that could be profitably grown under Buguias condition. The study was conducted at Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet from November to April 2008.

Result showed that different chickpea varieties significantly vary on emergence percentage were ICCV 2, ICCV 93952, ICCV 94954 and ICCV 93954 had higher percentage emergence while the lowest emergence was observed from ICCV 95332 and ICCV 95334. In days from planting to flowering, ICCV 2 were earliest to produce flower while Desi type varieties were the latest. As to the number of days to first harvest ICCV 2 matures earlier over the other varieties evaluated. Thus, varieties that produced flower earlier were the first to attain harvestable stage.

As to the number of lateral branches at flowering ICCV 94954 produced more number of lateral branches while ICCV 93954 produced the least number of branches.

ICCV 94954 had produced more number of seeds per pod with a mean of 1.67 compared to other varieties which had lesser seeds per pod. As to weight of pod produced per plant, ICCV 94954 and ICCV 2 had the highest weight of pod while ICCV 93952 had the lowest pod weight per plant. As to yield per plant, yield per plot and yield per hectare ICCV 94954 significantly out yielded all the varieties evaluated.

(38)

The result of germination test done in ragdoll method and petri disc wherein ICCV2 had the highest percentage germination while ICCV 93952 had the lowest germination percentage.

Conclusion

Based on the results presented and discussed, all the six varieties of chickpea were adapted under Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet however ICCV 94954, a desi type variety and ICCV 95334 a kabuli type had higher yield potential among the six cultivars evaluated.

Recommendation

With this observation, it is recommended that ICCV 94954 for the desi type and ICCV 95332 for the kabuli type are to be chosen to be planted by farmers in Bano-oy, Buguias, Benguet. It is also recommended that further evaluation be done on other part of Buguias to verify this finding.

(39)

LITERATURE CITED

ANONYMOUS, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. December 4, 2007 from http. // en.

Wikipedia../org./ wiki / chickpea.

BAUTISTA, O. K., H. V. VALMAYOR, D. C. TABORA Jr. and R. R. C. ESPINO.

1983. Introduction to Tropical Horticulture. College of Agriculture, UPLB.

College, Laguna. Pp. 66-67.

DOLL, J.D., HARDMAN, L. L., KAMINSKI, A.R., OELKE, E.A., OPLINGER, E. S.

and SCHUTE, E.E. 1990. Alternative Field Crops Manual. University of Wisconsin - Extension, Cooperative Extension University of Minnesota; Center of

Alternative Plant and Animal Products and the Minnesota Extension Service.

November 17, 1997 from http://www.hort. Purdue. Edu / new crop / afcm / chickpea.Htm /.

DUKE, J.A. 1981. Handbook of legumes of world economic importance. Plenum Press, New York. p. 52-57.

EDMUND, J. R. and F. S. ANDREWS. 1957. Fundamentals of Horticulture. Mc. Graw Hill Book Company, New York. Pp. 68-70.

GEERVANI, P. 1991. Utilization of chickpea in India and scope for novel and alternative uses. Pp. 47-54.

KNOTT, J. E. 1989. Vegetable Production Guide. Los Banos Laguna .UPLB College of Agriculture .Pp. 168 – 181.

LORENZ, O. A. and D. N. MAYNARD. Knott’s Handbook for Vegetable Grower New York John Wiley and Sons, lac. Pp. 25 – 30.

VILLAREAL, R. L. 1969. Seed Vegetable Training Manual. College of Laguna;

University of Philippine, College of Agriculture. Pp 46 -47.

WOLFE, T. K. and J. M. KIPPS. 1953. Production of Field Crops. Mc. Graw Hill Book Company., Inc. New York. Pp. 378.

WORK, P. and CAREW. 1955. Vegetable Production and Marketing. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York. P. 28.

(40)

APPENDICES

APPENDIX TABLE 1. Percentage field emergence (%)

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 99 90 95 91 375 93.75a

ICCV 93954 96 79 88 82 345 86.25a

ICCV 94954 90 83 98 90 361 90.25a

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 99 99 96 99 393 98.25a

ICCV 95332 41 78 72 73 264 66.00b

ICCV 95334 28 59 71 53 205 51.25b

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 377.458 125.819

Factor A 5 6733.208 1346.642 11.53* 2.90 4.56

Error 15 1752.292 116.819

Total 23 8862.958

(41)

APPENDIX TABLE 2. Days from planting to flowering

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 63.9 65.8 60.8 66.5 257 64.250

ICCV 93954 60.1 60.6 58.8 64.1 243.60 60.900

ICCV 94954 58.4 58.4 61.55 65.8 224.15 61.038

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 47.15 45.8 47.4 46.05 186.40 46.400

ICCV 95332 49.25 50.7 50.65 47.95 198.55 49.638 ICCV 95334 50.55 52.25 51.60 50.85 205.25 51.312

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 14.059 4.686

Factor A 5 1069.639 213.928 48.28** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 66.462 4.431

Total 23 1150.160

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 3.78%

(42)

APPENDIX TABLE 3. Average height at flowering (cm)

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 33.66 38.45 35.05 38.36 145.52 36.380 ICCV 93954 32.54 33.98 34.35 41.58 142.45 35.613 ICCV 94954 32.95 32.18 33.78 38.78 137.62 34.405 Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 36.93 36.95 41.35 39.59 154.82 38.705

ICCV 95332 34.38 34.98 40.74 44.96 155.06 38.765 ICCV 95334 42.75 44.10 44.25 40.13 171.23 42.807

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 101.177 33.726

Factor A 5 180.601 36.120 4.44* 2.90 4.56

Error 15 122.075 8.138

Total 23 403.854

*- Significant Coefficient of Variation: 7.55%

(43)

APPENDIX TABLE 4. Number of days from planting to first harvest

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 130 132 126 126 514 128.50

ICCV 93954 121 126 125 123 495 123.75

ICCV 94954 112 110 114 116 452 113.00

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 95 92 94 98 379 94.75

ICCV 95332 100 102 104 108 414 103.50

ICCV 95334 105 103 110 100 418 104.50

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 11.333 3.778

Factor A 5 3338.833 667.767 63.73** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 157.167 10.478

Total 23 3507.333

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 2.91%

(44)

APPENDIX TABLE 5. Average number of lateral branches at flowering

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 3.25 3.00 3.25 3 12.50 3.125

ICCV 93954 3.05 2.95 3.05 2.95 12.00 3.00

ICCV 94954 3.90 3.55 3.90 3.55 14.90 3.725

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 3.3 3.25 3.3 3.25 13.10 3.275

ICCV 95332 3.0 3.85 3.0 3.85 13.70 3.425

ICCV 95334 3.5 3.25 3.5 3.25 13.50 3.75

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 0.004 0.001

Factor A 5 1.282 0.256 3.93* 2.90 4.56

Error 15 0.979 0.065

Total 23 2.265

*- Significant Coefficient of Variation: 7.69%

(45)

APPENDIX TABLE 6. Total number of harvest

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 3 3 2 2 10 2.50

ICCV 93954 3 4 2 3 12 3.00

ICCV 94954 4 4 4 4 16 4.00

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 3 4 3 4 14 3.50

ICCV 95332 4 4 4 4 16 4.00

ICCV 95334 3 4 4 3 14 3.50

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 1.500 0.500

Factor A 5 6.833 1.367 5.86** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 3.500 0.233

Total 23 11.833

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 14.14%

(46)

APPENDIX TABLE 7. Percentage pod setting (%)

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 54.86 50.7 51.62 61.37 218.55 54.637 ICCV 93954 62.59 60.49 60.32 68.56 251.96 62.990

ICCV 94954 67.8 65.3 67.42 69.07 269.59 67.398

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 62.4 70.72 65.61 65.67 264.40 66.100

ICCV 95332 66.89 62.29 69.01 72.28 270.47 67.618 ICCV 95334 63.72 64.66 63.92 64.76 257.06 64.265

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 79.448 26.483

Factor A 5 470.488 94.098 10.75** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 131.326 8.755

Total 23 681.262

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 4.64%

(47)

APPENDIX TABLE 8. Average number of seeds per pod

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 1.11 1.0 1.31 1.27 4.69 1.27

ICCV 93954 1.08 1.02 1.75 1.11 4.96 1.24

ICCV 94954 1.01 1.3 1.07 1.28 6.67 1.667

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 1.48 1.03 1.26 1.27 5.04 1.22

ICCV 95332 1.22 1.48 1.35 1.37 5.42 1.23

ICCV 95334 1.29 1.2 1.01 1.05 4.55 1.13

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 0.265 0.088

Factor A 5 0.899 0.180 1.15** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 2.351 0.157

Total 23 3.514

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 24.90%

(48)

APPENDIX TABLE 9. Average weight of pods produce per plant

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 22.5 20.6 20.7 20.1 83.90 20.975

ICCV 93954 21.7 24.75 20.15 21.15 87.75 21.938

ICCV 94954 31.45 28.4 28.15 26.75 114.75 28.688 Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 24.95 26.4 20.1 25.7 97.15 24.288

ICCV 95332 31.05 28.0 26.0 28.0 113.03 28.262

ICCV 95334 22.06 25.05 23.75 28.2 98.76 24.690

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 24.956 8.319

Factor A 5 200.802 40.160 9.99** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 60.254 4.017

Total 23 286.012

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 8.08%

(49)

APPENDIX TABLE 10. Average yield per plant (g)

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 20.4 18.5 16.3 17.3 72.50 18.125

ICCV 93954 19.0 21.6 17.5 21.35 79.10 19.775

ICCV 94954 28.65 26.1 25.45 23.6 103.80 25.950

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 2.05 21.3 22.65 20.15 86.15 21.537

ICCV 95332 27.8 24.75 21.85 24.6 99.00 24.750

ICCV 95334 18.95 17.25 16.7 22.35 74.75 18.688

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 25.039 8.346

Factor A 5 210.551 42.110 11.78** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 53.630 3.575

Total 23 289.220

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 8.81%

(50)

APPENDIX TABLE 11. Total yield per plot (kg)

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 0.94 1.06 0.86 0.91 3.77 0.942

ICCV 93954 1.03 1.23 1.18 1.13 4.57 1.142

ICCV 94954 1.95 1.79 1.86 1.88 7.48 1.870

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 1.21 1.57 1.21 1.32 5.31 1.328

ICCV 95332 1.68 1.79 1.54 1.62 6.63 1.657

ICCV 95334 1.18 1.41 1.23 1.61 5.43 1.357

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 0.101 0.034

Factor A 5 2.273 0.455 35.90** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 0.190 0.013

Total 23 2.563

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 8.14%

(51)

APPENDIX TABLE 12. Total yield per hectare

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 470 530 430 455 1885 471.25

ICCV 93954 515 615 590 565 2285 571.25

ICCV 94954 975 895 930 940 3740 935.00

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 605 785 605 660 2655 663.25

ICCV 95332 840 895 775 810 3317 829.25

ICCV 95334 590 705 615 805 2715 678.75

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F 0.05 0.01 Replication 3 25346.125 8448.708

Factor A 5 568680.208 113736.042 35.87** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 47565.625 3171.042

Total 23 641591.958

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 8.14%

(52)

APPENDIX TABLE 13. Seed quality

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 234 226 223 228 911.00 227.750

ICCV 93954 225 234 233 231 923.40 230.850

ICCV 94954 236 238 259 244 977.00 244.250

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 218 220 220 219 877.00 219.50

ICCV 95332 336 337 334 336 1343.00 335.750

ICCV 95334 348 352 356 352 1408.10 252.025

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE TABULATED F 0.05 0.01

Replication 3 66.941 22.314

Factor A 5 70361.949 14072.390 511.75** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 412.476 27.498

Total 23 70841.367

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 1.95%

(53)

APPENDIX TABLE 14. Average seed diameter (cm)

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 2.64 0.660

ICCV 93954 0.65 0.69 0.68 0.68 2.70 0.675

ICCV 94954 0.63 0.74 0.74 0.68 2.79 0.698

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 0.65 0.65 0.68 0.66 2.64 0.660

ICCV 95332 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.80 3.26 0.815

ICCV 95334 0.84 0.86 0.86 0.86 3.36 0.840

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

SOURCE OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE TABULATED F 0.05 0.01

Replication 3 0.003 0.001

Factor A 5 0.132 0.026 39.52** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 0.010 0.001

Total 23 0.145

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 3.57%

(54)

APPENDIX TABLE 15. Germination test (ragdoll method)

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 48 51 50 50 198 49.50

ICCV 93954 53 51 50 51 205 51.25

ICCV 94954 76 66 76 73 291 72.75

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 92 80 88 87 347 86.75

ICCV 95332 68 56 64 63 251 62.75

ICCV 95334 72 61 54 62 252 63.00

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SOURCE

OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 157.667 52.556

Factor A 5 3875.333 775.067 50.04** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 232.333 15.489

Total 23 4265.333

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 6.12%

(55)

APPENDIX TABLE 16. Germination test (petri dish method)

VARIETY REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN

I II III IV

Desi Type

ICCV 93952 21 18 15 18 72 18.00

ICCV 93954 27 31 27 28 104 26.00

ICCV 94954 68 30 29 42 169 42.25

Kabuli Type

ICCV 2 41 35 59 45 180 45.00

ICCV 95332 24 31 27 27 109 27.25

ICCV 95334 21 18 15 18 77 19.25

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SOURCE

OF VARIANCE

DEGREES OF FREEDOM

SUM OF SQUARES

MEAN SQUARE

F VALUE

TABULATED F

0.05 0.01

Replication 3 129.458 43.153

Factor A 5 2629.375 525.875 6.42** 2.90 4.56

Error 15 1228.792 81.919

Total 23 3987.625

**- Highly significant Coefficient of Variation: 30.55%

(56)

Figure 8. Location of the study

Pigura

Figure 2. Flowering stage of kabuli type          Figure 3. Flowering stage of desi type
Table 1 shows highly differences among the different varieties of chickpea in  terms of emergence percentage
Table 2 shows that among the six cultivars ICCV 2 attained flowering the earliest  but were comparable with ICCV 95332  while ICCV 93952 were the latest to flower
Table 3. Average height at flowering (cm)
+7

Mga Sanggunian

NAUUGNAY NA DOKUMENTO

Data Gathered The data gathered includes the following: a crops planted and area devoted to each crop, b dominant cropping patterns in CATTUBO, c perception of farmers about crop

Application of vermicomposts lowered the bulk density of the soil but increases the pH, organic matter and nitrogen content of the soil; and 3.Vermicomposts application can lower