bio-n fertilizer application on the growth and yield of sweet corn

BIO-N FERTILIZER APPLICATION ON THE GROWTH AND YIELD

OF SWEET CORN (Zea mays var. rogusa)

LIEZL JANE C. SEGURA

KLEO MARLO R. SIALONGO

A SPECIAL PROJECT PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF CROP SCIENCE UNIT

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, XAVIER UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT

FOR THE COURSE AGRI 124

MARCH 2005

INTRODUCTION

Nitrogen is one of the main nutrients required by plants. Although the atmosphere

is composed of 78% nitrogen, plants cannot readily utilize the gas as a nutrient. It has to

be converted into a form that can be used by the plants. Traditionally, farmers apply

chemical nitrogen like urea and diammonium phosphate to their crops. But sometimes,

chemical fertilizers can do more harm than good. Synthetic fertilizers can make the soil

acidic, degrading its fertility. In the long run, they pollute the soil, air and water table.

Aside from these, most of the chemical fertilizers used in our country, particularly urea,

are imported. With the current peso-dollar exchange and the rising prices of petroleum

products, the prices of synthetic fertilizers are far from being affordable for the common

farmer.

Bio-N is a new supplement to corn. It is a microbial-based fertilizer for corn;

made from a microorganism that has the ability to fix N from the air making it available

for plant growth. Bio-N is a bio-fertilizer technology that can drastically reduce N-

fertilizer input and enhance the yield of sweet corn. The active organisms (bacteria) in

Bio-N were isolated from the roots of talahib (Saccharum spontaneum), a common weed

in our fields. These bacteria can convert the nitrogen (N) gas from the air into ammonia

and fix at an equivalent rate of 40 kg of N per hectare or higher. It complements the use

of chemical fertilizer by 30-50%, an apparent big savings for the farmers. Other results

show that Bio-N inoculation, in the presence of ½ the recommended inorganic fertilizer,

could parallel the yield of fully fertilized corn.

Sweet corn is a member of the Graminae or Grass family. It is similar to field corn in

physical and morphological structure. It differs from the latter only by a recessive gene su

(sugary) which replaces the gene Su (starchy) of field corn. This recessive gene prevents

the conversion of some sugar into starch. Sweet corn (Zea Mays var. rugosa) is believed

to be a mutation of field or dent corn. It was grown by the Indians and first collected and

described by settlers in about 1780. By 1900, over 63 cultivars had been described.

Today, over 2000 cultivars and hybrids are available

Statement of the problem

The main objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of Bio-N fertilizer on sweet

corn. Specifically, it sought to answer the following questions:

What is the effect of Bio-N fertilizer on the growth and yield of sweet corn?

How does the performance of Bio-N fertilizer differ with the complete fertilizer in terms

of growth, yield and cost?

Objective of the Study

The study will be conducted in order to evaluate the effect of Bio-N fertilizer on the

growth and yield of sweet corn. Specifically, the study will be aimed to:

Assess the influence of Bio-N fertilizer on the growth and yield performance of sweet

corn

Compare the effect of bio-N with complete fertilizer in terms of growth, yield and cost.

To provide a cost and return analysis on the efficiency of using bio-N fertilizer

recommendation compared to the standard recommended practice.

Scope and delimitations

This study will be conducted under the environmental condition of Manresa farm and that

any environmental factors will be disregarded.

Definition of terms

Bio-N fertilizer—a microbial-based fertilizer for corn; made from a microorganism that

has the ability to fix N from the air making it available for plant growth.

Complete fertilizer (14-14-14)—a chemically synthesized fertilizer containing 14% N,

14% P, 14% K.

Sweet Corn—a variety of corn that contains the sweetness gene making it two times

sweeter than the field corn and is produced for human consumption as either a fresh or a

processed product.

Sweetness gene—a gene that causes the endosperm of seed that accumulate about two

times more sugar than field corn.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Large yields and good quality are possible only if the soil contains an abundance of

readily available nutrients. Commercial fertilizers alone in some soils are insufficient to

give good results and humus or other organic materials should be supplied. The use of

soil-improving crop ahead of sweet corn is highly desirable.

A study was made on the effect of different rates of nitrogen on the growth of twelve

varieties of sweet corn. The plants were 25 cm apart in the row. All plots received 60 kg

each of Phosphoric acid and potash at planting. The nitrogen was applied in a split

application, half at planting and half four weeks later. The nitrogen rates were 0,30,60,90

and 120 kg per hectare. The results of some of this research are given below:

Table 1. Result of different rates of nitrogen on the growth of 12 varieties of sweet corn.

Characteristics Nitrogen Application HSD at

0 30 60 90 120 5% point

Plant Height at harvest(cm) 137.0 148.8 158.3 165.9 174.9 1.07

Weight of stover per plot(kg) 6.42 8.07 9.50 10.86 12.24 0.22

Ear length (cm) 11.1 12.9 14.0 15.1 15.9 1.00

Ear Circumference (cm) 11.0 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 0.76

Yield of green corn/plot (kg) 3.73 4.92 5.64 6.41 7.51 0.17

Tip-fill rating(scale of 1-9) 4.7 5.3 5.7 6.1 6.4 0.01

Ear length was increased by each increment of nitrogen as was plant height, weight

of stover and yield of green corn. Ear circumference was increased only by 30 kg of

nitrogen per hectare compared to none. The filling out of the ears was improved by each

increase in nitrogen. There was no significant effect of the increments of nitrogen on the

eating quality.

The nitrogen and copper concentrations in the sweet corn plant were found to

decrease with age but that of phosphorus, calcium, magnesium and manganese increased

as the plants got older. The potassium concentration increased with age until the peak of

the vegetative stage and then declined.

It was observed that the average number of rows of kernels per ear was

determined before the plants were 20 cm high under the conditions of these experiments.

Nitrogen applications of 55 or 110 kg of nitrogen per hectare at planting were effective

during early growth in giving a progressive increase in the number of rows of kernels per

ear as compared to the number of rows on ears produced with no supplemental nitrogen.

This was on a sandy soil containing an extremely low level of nitrogen. Adequate

available nitrogen is necessary during internode elongation and during fruiting as this will

increase the number of ears and their individual weight.

Besides its influence on yield the fertilizer application affects also the quality of

the ears. Tests conducted on a very fine sandy loam soil showed that shriveling of the

kernels at the tip of the ear just prior to market maturity was related to a nitrogen stress in

the plant during ear development. The ovules had been pollinated but did not fill out.

Shriveling was reduced significantly when the corn was side dressed with at the tassel

stage with ammonium sulfate, as compared to an application made when the plants were

30 cm high. This effect was especially apparent when a relatively low quantity of

nitrogen was used and when sweet corn was planted at 20 cm spacing in the row

compared to 40, 60, or 80 cm. The three wider spacing had little shrivel that did not differ

significantly between them.

Since most soils in the tropics are deficient in nitrogen, an application of 60 to 90

kilograms of nitrogen per hectare is considered desirable. A split application of nitrogen

is usually recommended during the wet season. One half is applied at planting and the

other half when the plants are in the ear initiation stage. Some soils should receive

phosphorus and potassium also depending on the level of these in soil. (Gaudiel et.al,

1960)

Two years ago (2002), Queensland-based company, Nutri-Tech Solutions P/L (NTS),

released a revolutionary microbial inoculum designed to fix nitrogen from the

atmosphere. Gimmicks come and go, and there have been some embarrassing failures

amongst competing products in recent years, but Nutri-Life Bio-N has proven a runaway

success in horticulture and broadacre. In fact, sales of the product have quadrupled in the

last six months alone. Nutri-Life Bio-N is now exported to several Asian locations and,

just recently a New Zealand distributor reported a soon-to-be completed trial where half

of a corn crop was grown with Nutri-Life Bio-N and the other half with urea. At this

point, the Bio-N crop is one meter taller and has produced two fully developed cobs per

plant, compared to a single cob on the urea plot. The amazing feature of this trial was the

fact that there was a mistake with the application rates. The trial should have involved 1

liter of Bio-N per hectare (at a cost of $33 (Inc GST) per hectare), compared to 200 kg of

urea (at a cost of around $88 (Inc GST) per hectare). Instead, there was just 200 ml of

Bio-N applied (costing just $6), vs. 200 kg of urea. This may not be a typical result and

may have been a reflection of ideal microbial conditions (due to good rainfall), but it does

highlight the potential of this biological nitrogen source.

The viticulture industry in South Australia and Victoria has embraced this natural

alternative, with repeated claims that this form of nitrogen is better suited to wine-grape

production than commercial nitrogen. Small-crop growers and orchardists have also

discovered the benefits of natural nitrogen, with many reports of quality produce and

reduced pest pressure (www. http://www.upd.edu.ph/biotech/indus/bion.htm).

In the Philippines, A Joint Venture BIO-N Project, an output of both UPLB-BIOTECH

and TLRC that agreed and worked together in order to assist the national government to

attain food security.

Both parties complement their resources together in order to accelerate the development,

production and mass commercialization of BIO-N.

The National Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology (BIOTECH) of UPLB

through Dr. Mercedes U. Garcia developed BIO-N - a bio-fertilizer technology that can

drastically reduce N-fertilizer input and enhance yield of rice and corn. The active

organisms (bacteria) in BIO-N were isolated from the roots of talahib (Saccharum

spontaneum) (http://www.tlrc.gov.ph/bio_n.html).

BIO-N can be considered as a "breakthrough technology" that promises very significant

impact on the country's rice and corn farmers in terms of increasing farm productivity

and income (Garcia, 2004).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Time and Place of the Study

The study was conducted at the St. Ignatius Allotment Garden of the Peri-Urban

Vegetable Project (PuVep), Manresa Research Station, Upper Balulang, Cagayan de Oro

City. The study started on December 3, 2004 and was terminated on February 23, 2005.

Experimental Materials

The seeds were acquired from the Crop Science Unit of XU-College of Agriculture. The

Bio-N seed inoculant/fertilizer was bought from the Department of Agriculture-Regional

Soils Testing Laboratory (RSTL). The fertilizer and insecticides that were used in the

conduct of the study was provided by PuVep.

Experimental Design and Treatments

The study was laid out using Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with

four replications. The following are the treatments:

Table 2. Treatments and their Treatment Codes

Treatment Treatment Code

Treatment 1 : SOP-PuVep T1

Treatment 2: SOP + Bio-N T2

Treatment 3: Organic Fertilizer T3

Treatment 4: Organic Fertilizer +

Bio-N

T4

Cultural Practices and Management of the Area

Land Preparation

Land preparation was done by plowing the area once with a carabao-drawn plow and then

it was harrowed.

Lay-outing and Staking

In lay-outing the area, measuring tape was used in determining the area needed in this

experiment. There were four beds or replication with three treatments applied in each

bed. Each bed has a dimension of 20 m length x 1.3 m width x 0.5 m height. Each bed

was then divided into four sub-plots corresponding to the treatments in each block. Each

sub-plot has a dimension of 1.4 m width and 5 m length. Walking space between beds is

0.5 m. Therefore, the total area that will be used in this study is 114 square meters. (See

Appendix A).

Formation of Plots

After the lay-outing and staking, planting beds were formed in the area with a dimension

of 1.4 m width and 20 m in length. Each bed corresponds to a particular replication.

Sowing of Seeds

Seeds were sown directly into the soil at 2 seeds per hill with a distance of 20 cm within

rows and 70 cm between rows. A furrow was made first in each plot, after that fertilizers

were applied basally, based on the treatment. Seeds were sown at a depth of 3 cm-4 cm.

A small amount of soil was placed after the fertilizer to prevent the fertilizer burn of the

seedling. After that the seed was placed and covered with ample amount of soil.

Fertilizer Application

The fertilizer that was applied in the experimental plots was based on the

treatment. During the plating period the following treatments were followed:

T1=Standard Operating Procedure of PuVep (Table 2), T2= SOP-PuVep + Bio-N (seeds

were inoculated first), T3=Organic fertilizer (100-150 g chicken dung only), and T4=

Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N. During side-dressing, the following treatments were applied:

T1=SOP-PuVep (urea + muriate of potash), T2= SOP (urea + muriate of potash),

T3=organic fertilizer (chicken dung) and T4=organic fertilizer (chicken dung).

Table 3. PuVep Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for sweet corn

Amount of Fertilizer (grams/seedling)

Fertilization Schedule

Chicken Dung/ compost

DAP (18-46-00) Urea M. Potash

Basal Application 187.2/100 6.25 5

Side Dress (3 WAP) 5

WAP-Weeks after planting DAP-Diammonium Phosphate

Bio-N technology

In using the BIO-N technology the following procedure was applied: First, the

corn seeds were placed in a container and moistened with a small amount of water. Next,

the Bio-N fertilizer/inoculant was added. After that, the moistened seeds and the Bio-N

were mixed thoroughly until every seed is evenly coated with the Bio-N

fertilizer/inoculant. The seeds were planted immediately after inoculation since exposure

to sunlight can kill the microorganisms in the Bio-N. Exposure to sunlight should be

avoided.

Irrigation and Drainage

Immediately after planting of the seeds, the beds were watered with an ample

amount of water for the seeds to germinate. After that, watering was done daily early in

the morning. After a month, a drip irrigation was installed with the help of PuVep. The

barrels were filled with water every afternoon and then the drip irrigation system was

turned on next day.

Pest and Diseases Management

To prevent these insect pests, tolerant and treated seeds were used and

TrichoCards (Trichogramma spp.) were used as a biological control. The useof

insecticides and fungicides was the last resort used.

Harvesting and Handling

The sweet corn plants were harvested 75 days after sowing. The harvesting was

done when majority of the corn ears had silks that had dried back completely. At this

time, ears were fully developed and the kernels were still milky and soft. Harvesting was

done early in the morning when it is still cool. Harvested ears were then marketed

immediately after harvest, as sweetness of the corn gradually reduces and disappears 48

hours after harvest.

Data Gathering Procedure

Maturity

The days from sowing up to harvesting was recorded.

Plant height

A tape measure was used to measure the distance (in cm) from the base of the plant at the

soil level up to the uppermost part of the plant. Ten (10) plants were randomly chosen as

samples. Measurement in is centimeters.

Ear height

A tape measure was used to measure the distance (in cm) from the base of the plant at the

soil level to the uppermost ear-bearing node of the plant. Ten plants were randomly

chosen as samples. Measurement is in centimeters.

Pest and Disease Rating

A scale rating of 1-5 was used. The rating was a follows: 1=highly resistant,

2=moderately resistant, 3=fairly resistant, 4=moderately susceptible and 5=highly

susceptible.

Number of Plants Harvested per Treatment

The number of plants harvested per treatment were counted and recorded.

Number of Ears Harvested per Plot

The number of ears harvested per treatment was counted and recorded.

Yield per Plant

An ear/ears harvested from one plant was weighed and recorded as yield per plant. Five

(5) random plants were chosen as samples. Measurement is in grams.

Yield per Plot/Treatment

The total number of ears harvested was weighed and then recorded. Measurement is in

kilograms.

Cost and Return Analysis

A cost and return analysis was made in which the total cost of producing the

sweet corn per treatment and the return, based on prevailing market prices, were

computed.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Plant Height

The Average plant height of sweet corn as influenced by Bio-N fertilizer

application is shown in Table 1.

Result showed that average plant height was not significantly affected by the different

fertilizer. Among the treatments, Organic + Bio-N with an average of 173.88cm has a

comparatively higher plant height followed by Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) of

PuVep + Bio-N with 172.35cm, SOP-PuVep (Control) with 167.13, and 140.58 cm of the

Organic Fertilizer treatment as the least compared to the rest of the treatments.

Table 4. Mean comparison using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) of the average plant height of sweet corn applied with the following treatments: T1—SOP-PuVep, T2—SOP +Bio-N, T3—Organic Fertilizer, and T4- Organic + Bio-N

Treatment Treatment Mean*

T4

T2

T1

T3

173.88a

172.35ab

167.13ab

140.58c

*Means with the same letter is not significantly different with each other

Average Yield per Plant

The Average Yield per Plant of sweet corn as influenced by Bio-N fertilizer


Result showed that average yield per plant was significantly affected by the different

fertilizer at both 5% and 1% levels. Among the treatments, SOP + Bio-N with 208.75 g

has a comparatively higher yield followed by SOP-PuVep with 208.59 g, 210.13 g for

Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N and Organic Fertilizer treatment as the least with a yield of

only 191.13 g.

Table 5. Mean comparison using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) of the yield per plant of sweet corn applied with the following treatments: T1—SOP-PuVep, T2—SOP +Bio-N, T3—Organic Fertilizer, and T4- Organic + Bio-N


T4

T2

T1

T3

210.77a

208.75ab

208.59ab

191.13c


Yield per Plot

The Average Yield per Plot of sweet corn as influenced by Bio-N fertilizer


Result showed that average yield per plot was significantly affected by the different

fertilizer. Among the treatments, SOP-PuVep has a comparatively higher yield of 6.43

kg followed by 6.06 kg for Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N , 5.60 kg for SOP + Bio-N, and

2.99 kg for Organic Fertilizer treatment as the least.

Table 6. Mean comparison using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) of the yield per treatment of sweet corn applied with the following treatments: T1—SOP-PuVep, T2—SOP +Bio-N, T3—Organic Fertilizer, and T4- Organic + Bio-N


T1

T4

T2

T3

6.43a

6.06ab

5.60ab

2.99c


Ear Height

The Average Ear Height of sweet corn as influenced by Bio-N fertilizer


Result showed that average ear height was not significantly affected by the

different fertilizer. Among the treatments, SOP + Bio-N with 57.18 cm are comparatively

higher followed by 55.84 cm for SOP-PuVep, 52.73 cm for Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N

and 52.39 cm for Organic Fertilizer.

Pest and Disease Rating

The Average Pest and Disease Rating of sweet corn as influenced by Bio-N

fertilizer application is shown in Table 1.

Result showed that average pest and disease rating was not significantly affected

by the different fertilizer. The following ratings were obtained from the experiment for

the pest and disease rating: 2.88 for Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N, 2.43 for SOP-PuVep,

2.35 for SOP + Bio-N, and 2.20 for the Organic Fertilizer treatment. For the whole study,

the variety used had an over-all pest and disease rating of 2.46, which means that this

variety is fairly to moderately resistant to pest and disease. Insect pest that were found in

the study area includes corn borer (Ostrinia furnacalis), cutworm (Spodoptera

frugiperda) and armyworms (Spodoptera frugiperda). A disease that was diagnosed in

the study area is corn rust caused by Puccinia maydis.

Ears Harvested per Plot

The average number of ears harvested per plot of sweet corn as influenced by

Bio-N fertilizer application is shown in Table 1.

Result showed that average ear harvested per treatment height was not

significantly affected by the different fertilizer. Among the treatments, 31.25 for SOP-

PuVep has a comparatively higher number of ears harvested followed by Organic

Fertilizer + Bio-N with a mean of 29.5, 27.50 for SOP + Bio-N and 19.75 for Organic

Fertilizer.

Treatment Average Plant Height (cm)

Average Pest and Disease Rating

Average Ear Height (cm)

T1 (SOP- PuVep)

167.13 2.43 55.84

T2 (SOP + Bio-N)

172.35 2.35 57.18

T3 (Organic Fertilizer)

140.58 2.20 52.39

T4 (Organic Fertilizer +

Bio-N)

173.88 2.88 52.73

F-test 3.86 3.86 3.86 cv 7.53% 14.43% 13.49%

Treatment Number of Ears Harvested Per

Plot

Number of Plants Harvested per Plant

Yield per plant

(g)

Yield Per Plot

(kg)

Yield Per Hectare (ton/ha)

T1 (SOP-

PuVep)

31.25 32.0 208.59 6.43 2.297

T2 (SOP + Bio-

N)

27.5 28.25 208.75 5.60 2.00


19.75 19.75 191.13 2.99 1.067

T4 (Organic

Fertilizer + Bio-N)

29.50 30.25 210.77 6.06 2.118

F-test 3.86 3.86 3.86 3.86 3.86

cv 24.29 % 37.92 % 2.78% 16.54 % 16.04 %

Mean Comparison (Duncan’s Multiple Range Test) PLANT HEIGHT


T4

T2

T1

T3

173.88a

172.35ab

167.13ab

140.58c


2 (EMS) (2) 151.44 Sd = r = = 8.70 4

p rp (0.05)

2

3

4

3.20

3.34

3.41

Computation for the Shortest Significant Ranges/SSR

P Rp = (rp)(Sd) 21/2

2 19.69

3 20.55

4 20.95

Mean Comparison

Means Compared D Rp Decision Notation

T4 T2

T1

T3

1.53

6.75

33.3

19.69

20.55

20.98

ns

ns

*

a

a

T2 T1

T3

5.22

26.55

19.69

20.55

ns

*

b

T1 T3 26.55 19.69 * c

Yield Per Plant


T4

T2

T1

T3

210.77a

208.75ab

208.59ab

191.13c


2 (EMS) (2) 32.52 Sd = r = = 4.03 4

p rp (0.05)

2

3

4

3.20

3.34

3.41


P Rp = (rp)(Sd) 21/2

2 9.12

3 9.52

4 9.72

Mean Comparison


T4 T2

T1

T3

2.02

2.18

19.64

9.12

9.52

9.72

ns

ns

*

a

a

T2 T1

T3

0.16

17.62

9.12

9.52

ns

*

b

T1 T3 17.46 9.12 * c

Yield per Treatment


T1

T4

T2

T3

6.43a

6.06ab

5.60ab

2.99c


2 (EMS) (2) 0.76 Sd = r = = 0.62 4

p rp (0.05)

2

3

4

3.20

3.34

3.41


P Rp = (rp)(Sd) 21/2

2 1.40

3 1.46

4 1.49

Mean Comparison


T1 T4

T2

T3

0.37

0.83

2.61

1.40

1.46

1.49

ns

ns

*

a

a

T4 T2

T3

0.46

3.07

1.40

1.46

ns

*

b

T2 T3 2.61 1.40 * c

APPENDICES

Appendix 1A. Layout of the Area 7.20 m

20m

5 m

0.5 m

Block 1 Block 2 Block 3 Block 4

Location: St. Ignatius Allotment Garden, PuVep

Total Area= 112 m2

Area per Block= 26 m2

Walking Space= (0.5 m) (20 m) (4) = 40

T3R1

T1R1

T4R1

T2R1

T3R1

T1R1

T4R1

T2R1

T3R1

T1R1

T4R1

T2R1

T3R1

T1R1

T4R1

T2R1

Appendix 1B. Lay-out of Each Treatment

1.3 m

3.3 m

Hills per Treatment= 50 x 2 = 100 Distance between Rows = 70 cm

No. of Hills in a Block= 400 Distance within Rows = 20 cm

Distance between Rows and Edge = 30 cm

30 cm

70 cm

20 cm 70 cm

30 cm

Table 1a. Raw Data for Plant Height of sweet corn applied with : T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (in centimeters)

Replication/Block Treatment

I II III IV T1

(SOP- PuVep)

154 163 140 154 165 151 164 162 153 167

171 174 170 165 189 156 166 163 163 155

175 164 177 174 186 189 184 478 181 183

154 174 157 170 176 169 165 162 161 161

Average

T2 (SOP + Bio-N)

157.3

144 167 152 176 188 161 174 172 173 188

167.2

165 167 168 180 167 189 167 178 193 178

209.1

176 163 164 165 176 161 183 186 165 174

164.9

181 167 153 157 158 177 191 174 178 193

Average


169.50

123 135 76

154 120 132 124 127 107 100

175.2

161 139 140 136 135 171 156 147 151 165

171.3

167 162 154 132 144 163 146 132 137 159

172.9

165 145 18

138 108 161 153 147 138 115

Average

T4 (Organic

Fertilizer + Bio-N)

119.8

174 172 184 168 175 165 185 191 194

150.1

182 173 165 186 170 192 178 181 177 188

149.6

168 184 202 193 184 176 183 185 171 177

142.8

162 174 182 170 168 176 187 164 180 169

Average 160.8 179.2 182.2 173.2

Table 1b. Average plant height of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (in centimeters).

Replication/Blocks Treatment I II III IV

Treatment Total

Treatment Mean

T1 (SOP- PuVep)

157.3 167.2 179.1 164.9 668.5 167.13

T2 (SOP + Bio-N)

171.7 175.2 171.2 171.3 689.4 172.35


119.8 150.1 149.6 142.8 562.3 140.58

T4 (Organic Fertilizer

+ Bio-N)

160.8 179.2 182.2 173.2 695.5 173.88

Block Total 609.6 179.2 682.2 652.2

Grand Total 2, 615.7 Grand Mean 163.48 Table 1c. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on average plant height of sweet corn applied with : T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N)

Ft Sv d.f. SS MS Fc

5% 1% Replication Treatment Exp’l Error TOTAL

3 3 9 15

770.77 2, 898.63 1, 362.96 5, 032.36

256.92 966.21 151.44

1.70ns 6.38*

3.86 3.86

6.99 6.99

ns=non significant cv= 7.53% *= significant at 5% level

Table 2a. Raw Data for ear height of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (in centimeters)

Replication/Block Treatment I II III IV

T1 (SOP- PuVep)

31 45.5 46 33 54 43 42 54 47 51

64 66 63 67 64 53 59 63 39 38

63 60 73 59 68 72 71 53 72 50

55 58 45 66 68 61 48 66 56 47

Average 44.65 57.6 64.1 57

T2 (SOP + Bio-N)

55 58 49 53 53 44 67 45 58 67

50 42 64 60 63 55 58 66 58 69

63 53 54 56 65 54 67 60 56 60

48 55 45 48 47 53 76 53 62 78

Average 54.9 58.8 58.8 56.5


29 17 25 33 31 28 22 24 31

23.5

62 63 64 48 58 59 70 68 69 68

59 67 59 74 69 51 57 66 52 69

45 50 53 58 57 58 73 64 42 60

Average 26.35 62.9 62.3 58.0

T4 (Organic

Fertilizer + Bio-N)

41 37 39 36 36 41 36 37 32 44

62 65 65 66 41 49 38 60 62 47

62 58 62 62 68 63 68 67 58 64

48 59 45 60 40 62 61 52 69 41

Average 37.9 55.5 63.8 53.7

Table 2b. Average ear height of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (in centimeters)


Treatment Total

Treatment Mean

T1 (SOP- PuVep)

44.65 57.6 64.1 57.0 223.35 55.84

T2 (SOP + Bio-N)

54.9 58.5 58.8 56.5 228.7 57.18


26.35 62.9 62.3 58.0 209.9 52.39


+ Bio-N)

37.9 55.5 63.8 53.7 210.9 52.73

Block Total 163.8 234.5 249.0 225.20

Grand Total 872.50 Grand Mean 54.53 Table 2c. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on average ear height of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (in centimeters)

Ft Sv d.f. SS MS Fc


3 3 9 15

990.30 66.21

486.93 1, 543.44

330.1 22.07 54.10

6.10* 0.41ns

3.86 3.86

6.99 6.99

*= significant at 5% level cv= 13.49% ns= non significant

Table 3a. Raw data for pest and disease rating of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (1= highly resistant, 2= moderately resistant, 3= fairly resistant, 4=moderately susceptible, 5= highly susceptible)

Replication/Block Treatment I II III IV

T1 (SOP- PuVep)

2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

2 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3

Average 2.1 2.1 3.0 2.5

T2 (SOP + Bio-N)

3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 3

3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2

2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2

3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3

Average 2.6 2.3 2.2 2.3


3 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2

3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 3

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Average 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.0

T4 (Organic

Fertilizer + Bio-N)

3 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2

3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 2

3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3

3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2

Average 2.2 3.4 3.2 2.7

Table 3b. Average pest and disease rating of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (in centimeters)


Treatment Total

Treatment Mean

T1 (SOP- PuVep)

2.1 2.1 3.0 2.5 9.70 2.43

T2 (SOP + Bio-N)

2.6 2.3 2.2 2.3 9.40 2.35


2.0 2.3 2.5 2.0 8.80 2.20


+ Bio-N)

2.2 3.4 3.2 2.7 11.50 2.88

Block Total 8.9 10.1 10.9 9.50

Grand Total 39.4 Grand Mean 2.46 1=highly resistant, 2=moderately resistant, 3=fairly resistant, 4=moderately susceptible and 5=highly susceptible.

Table 3c. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on the average pest and disease rating of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N

Ft sv d.f. SS MS Fc


3 3 9 15

0.55 1.015 1.135 2.70

0.18 0.34 0.126

1.43ns

2.70ns 3.86 3.86

6.99 6.99

ns = non significant cv = 14.43 %

Table 4a. Average number of ears harvested per plot of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (in number of pieces)


Treatment Total

Treatment Mean

T1 (SOP- PuVep)

34 24 36 31 125 31.25

T2 (SOP + Bio-N)

23 31 28 28 110 27.5


11 24 27 17 79 19.75


+ Bio-N)

14 27 38 39 118 29.50

Block Total 82 106 129 115

Grand Total 432.0 Grand Mean 27.0 Table 4b. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on average number of ears per plot of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N

Ft Sv d.f. SS MS Fc


3 3 9 15

292.50 308.50 387.0 988.0

97.50 102.83 43.0

2.27ns 2..39ns

3.86 3.86

6.99 6.99


Table 5a. Average number of plants harvested per plot of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (in number of pieces)


Treatment Total

Treatment Mean

T1 (SOP- PuVep)

34 24 38 32 128 32.0

T2 (SOP + Bio-N)

25 32 28 28 113 28.25


11 24 27 17 79 19.75


+ Bio-N)

14 29 39 39 121

Block Total 84 109 132 116

Grand Total 441 Grand Mean 27.56 Table 5b. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on average number of plants harvested per plot of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N

Ft Sv d.f. SS MS Fc


3 3 9 15

299.19 253.69 983.06

1, 635.94

99.73 117.90 109.23

0.91ns

1.08ns 3.86 3.86

6.99 6.99


Table 6a. Raw Data for yield per plant of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (in g)

Replication/Block Treatment

I II III IV

T1 (SOP- PuVep)

198.50

215.20

210.50

209.60

191.70

262.50

225.70

230.00

188.60

197.50

199.0

216.0

205.60

185.70

250.55

189.50

192.30

227.50

179.90

195.50

Average 205.10 220.86 211.47 196.94

T2 (SOP + Bio-N)

173.90

189.10

218.60

230.50

198.40

195.30

218.40

225.70

185.10

236.10

194.50

198.20

214.70

250.60

225.60

213.10

198.20

208.00

214.10

190.50

Average 202.10 212.0 216.72 204.18


185.30

189.70

179.00

195.40

178.50

193.60

189.90

210.30

195.70

198.20

198.60

179.90

210.10

198.0

186.40

180.60

193.30

197.70

183.90

178.50

Average 185.58 197.54 194.58 186.80

T4 (Organic

Fertilizer + Bio-N)

221.10

215.40

189.10

225.10

189.90

183.70

197.50

217.60

230.50

192.30

210.50

225.10

229.85

226.00

198.90

196.70

199.10

232.00

209.50

215.30

Average 210.16 204.32 218.07 210.52

Table 6b. Mean yield per plant of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (in g)

Replication/Blocks Treatment

I II III IV

Treatment Total

Treatment Mean

T1 (SOP- PuVep)

205.10 220.86 211.47 196.94 834.37 208.59

T2 (SOP + Bio-N)

202.10 212.0 216.72 204.18 835.00 208.75


185.58 197.54 194.58 186.80 764.50 191.13


+ Bio-N)

210.16 204.32 218.07 210.52 843.07 210.77

Block Total 802.94 834.72 840.84 Grand Total 3276.94

Grand Mean 204.81 Table 6c. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on mean yield per plant of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (in centimeters)

Ft sv d.f. SS MS Fc

5% 1%

Replication Treatment Exp’l Error TOTAL

3 3 9 15

351.12 1, 010.40

292.69 1, 654.21

117.04 336.8 32.52

3.59ns

10.36** 3.86 3.86

6.99 6.99

** = highly significant at 1% and 5 % levels cv = 2.78 % ns = non significant

Table 7a. Average yield per plot of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N (in ton/ha)

Replication/Blocks

Treatment

I II III IV

Treatment Total

Treatment Mean

T1 (SOP- PuVep)

2.054 2.250 2.786 2.098 9.188 2.297

T2 (SOP + Bio-N)

1.429 2.464 1.786 2.321 8.00 2.00


0.839 1.250 1.179 1.00 4.268 1.067


+ Bio-N)

1.464 2.123 2.500 2.384 8.471 2.118

Block Total 5.786 8.087 8.251 7.803 Grand Total 29.927

Grand Mean 1.87 Table 7b. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) of yield per hectare of sweet corn applied with: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic

Fertilizer + Bio-N (in centimeters) ** = highly significant at 1 % & 5 % level cv = 16.04 % ns= non significant

Ft sv d.f. SS MS Fc

5% 1%

Replication

Treatment

Exp’l Error

TOTAL

3

3

9

15

0.98

3.62

0.80

5.4

0.33

1.21

0.09

0.37ns

13.44**

3.86

3.86

6.99

6.99

Cost and Return Analysis Table 8a. Total cost per hectare of producing sweet corn T1—Standard Operating Procedure (PuVep)

Item Quantity Price Per

Unit

Amount

Inputs: Chicken Dung Diammonium Phosphate (18-46-0) Muriate of Potash (0-0-60) Urea (46-0-0) Insecticide TrichoCards Sweet Corn Seeds

206 sacks 343.75 kg 275.0 kg 275.0 kg 500 mL

100 pieces 20 kg

P50.00/sack 750.00/sack 340.00/sack 630.00/sack 450.00/bottle

1.00/card 1, 200.00/kg

P10, 300.00 5, 250.00 2, 040.00 3, 750.00 450.00 100.00

24, 000.00 Operations: Plowing (2x) Harrowing (2x) Planting Hilling-up Placement of TrichoCards Insecticide Application Weeding (2x) Transportation and Hauling

1 MAD 1 MAD 2 MAD 1 MAD 1 MAD 1 MAD 2 MAD

P120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 500.00

P240.00 240.00 240.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 480.00 500.00

TOTAL COST P47, 950.00 Table 8b. Total cost of per hectare of producing sweet corn under T2—Standard Operating Procedure (PuVep) + Bio-N


Unit

Amount

Inputs: Chicken Dung Diammonium Phosphate (18-46-0) Muriate of Potash (0-0-60) Urea (46-0-0) Insecticide TrichoCards Bio-N Fertilizer Sweet Corn Seeds

206 sacks 343.75 kg 275.0 kg 275.0 kg 500 mL

100 pieces 1 pack 20 kg

P50.00/sack 750.00/sack 340.00/sack 630.00/sack 450.00/bottle

1.00/card 60.00/pack

1, 200.00/kg

P10, 300.00 5, 250.00 2, 040.00 3, 750.00 450.00 100.00 60.00



P120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 500.00

P240.00 240.00 240.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 480.00 500.00

TOTAL COST P48, 010.00

Table 8c. Total cost per hectare of producing sweet corn under T3: Organic Fertilizer (Chicken Dung)


Unit

Amount

Inputs: Chicken Dung Insecticide TrichoCards Sweet Corn Seeds

206 sacks 500 mL

100 pieces 20 kg

P50.00/sack 450.00/bottle

1.00/card 1, 200.00/kg

P10, 300.00 450.00 100.00



P120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 500.00

P240.00 240.00 240.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 480.00 500.00

TOTAL COST P36, 910.00 Table 8d. Total cost per hectare of producing sweet corn under T4: Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N


Unit

Amount

Inputs: Chicken Dung Insecticide TrichoCards Bio-N Fertilizer Sweet Corn Seeds

206 sacks 500 mL

100 pieces 1 pack 20 kg

P50.00/sack 450.00/bottle

1.00/card 60.00/pack

1, 200.00/kg

P10, 300.00 450.00 100.00 60.00



P120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 500.00

P240.00 240.00 240.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 480.00 500.00

TOTAL COST P36, 970.00

Table 8e. Cost and return analysis of sweet corn production under the following treatments: T1= SOP-PuVep; T2= SOP + Bio-N; T3= Organic Fertilizer (Chicken dung); and T4= Organic Fertilizer + Bio-N

Treatment Total Cost (per ha)

Mean Yield/ Treatment

(per ha)

Market Price

Total Revenue (in Php)

Net Income/Return

(in Php) T1

T2 T3 T4

47, 950.00 48, 010.00 36, 910.00 36, 970.00

2.297 2.0

1.067 2.118

P30 P30 P30 P30

P68, 910.00 60, 000.00 32, 010.00 63, 540.00

P20, 960.00 11, 990.00 -4, 900.00 63, 540.00

bio-n fertilizer application on the growth and yield of sweet corn

Documents

bion fertilizer application

varieties of sweet corn

bion inoculation

dent corn

fertilized corn

biofertilizer technology

nitrogen n gas

complete fertilizer