Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Response of snap beans to Peter Special (20-30-10) / by Victor R. Romilla.

By:

Romilla, Victor R [author]

Material type: Text

TextLanguage: English Publication details: Indang, Cavite, 1981. Cavite State University- Main Campus,Description: 31 pages : illustrations ; 28 cmContent type:

text

Media type:

unmediated

Carrier type:

volume

Subject(s):

DDC classification:

635.652 R66 1981

Online resources:

Click here to view thesis abstract and table of contents

Production credits:

College of Agriculture, Food, Environment and Natural Resources (CAFENR)

Abstract: The study "Response of snap Beans to Peter Special (20-30-10)" was conducted to determine the effect of Peter Special on the growth and yield of snap beans (var. bush) and also to evaluate the effectiveness of Peter Special as a flower inducer. This was conducted at the experimental field of the Don Severino Agricultural College, Indang, Cavite from December, 1980 to February, 1981. A total land area of 64 square meters was divided into four blocks to represent the replications. Each replication was divided into four sub-plots for treatments. Peter Special (20-30-10) was sprayed on the plants 25 days after sowing. The different concentrations used were: one, two and three tablespoonful Peter Special per gallon of water. Plants from Treatment 4 (3 tablespoonful Peter Special per gallon of water) gave the highest percentage of fruit set, highest average number and heaviest pods in the experiment and also highest computed yield per hectare. Likewise, plants in Treatment 1 (control) gave the lowest percentage of fruit set, lowest average number of pods, lightest pods among treatments aria lowest computed yield per hectare.

Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)

Holdings ( 1 )
Title notes ( 5 )

Holdings
Item type	Current library	Collection	Call number	Materials specified	URL	Status	Notes	Date due	Barcode
Theses / Manuscripts	Ladislao N. Diwa Memorial Library Theses Section	Non-fiction	635.652 R66 1981 (Browse shelf(Opens below))		Link to resource	Room use only	SP-614		00007013

Browsing Ladislao N. Diwa Memorial Library shelves, Shelving location: Theses Section, Collection: Non-fiction Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)

Previous	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	Next
Previous	635.652 R61 1993 Effects of planting date and planting density on the seed quality of pigeon pea /	635.652 R61 2016 Bean-ni-bini : production, processing and marketing of soybean (Glycine max) /	635.652 R65 1991 Effects of moisture stress at different growth stages on the performance of soybeans /	635.652 R66 1981 Response of snap beans to Peter Special (20-30-10) /	635.652 Sa3 1978 Priming mature mungo pods /	635.652 T14 1981 The Efficiency of the different placements of ipil-ipil leaves on the growth and yield of bush sitao /	635.652 T26 1981 Response of bush sitao to different animal manures /	Next

Special Problem (BSA--Agronomy) Don Severino Agricultural College

Includes bibliographical references.

College of Agriculture, Food, Environment and Natural Resources (CAFENR)

The study "Response of snap Beans to Peter Special (20-30-10)" was conducted to determine the effect of Peter Special on the growth and yield of snap beans (var. bush) and also to evaluate the effectiveness of Peter Special as a flower inducer.
This was conducted at the experimental field of the Don Severino Agricultural College, Indang, Cavite from December, 1980 to February, 1981. A total land area of 64 square meters was divided into four blocks to represent the replications. Each replication was divided into four sub-plots for treatments. Peter Special (20-30-10) was sprayed on the plants 25 days after sowing.
The different concentrations used were: one, two and three tablespoonful Peter Special per gallon of water. Plants from Treatment 4 (3 tablespoonful Peter Special per gallon of water) gave the highest percentage of fruit set, highest average number and heaviest pods in the experiment and also highest computed yield per hectare.
Likewise, plants in Treatment 1 (control) gave the lowest percentage of fruit set, lowest average number of pods, lightest pods among treatments aria lowest computed yield per hectare.

Submitted to the University Library 10-01-1981 SP-614