last final thesis of umer

Recommendations

Info

Harvest Index (HI %)The harvest index (HI) is the ratio of grain yield to total aboveground biomass and it indicates theability of the crop to allocate biomass (assimilates) into the formed reproductive parts. Harvestindex (HI) was highly significantly (p<0.01) affected by planting density but not by cowpeavarieties, cropping system as well as their interaction (Appendix Table 3).Table 9.Effects of cowpea densities, varieties and cropping system on number of ears per plant(NEPP), Thousand kernel weight (TKW (g)), Dry above ground biomass (B (kgha -1 )), Harvestindex (HI (%) of sole and intercropped maize.Treatments NEPP TKW (g) BM (kg/ha) HI (%)Cowpea plantdensity50% 1.667 b 207.5 b 8537 b 38.47 a75% 1.422 a 175.4 a 6341 ab 40.33 ab100% 1.343 a 162.2 a 4643 a 47.86 bLSD(P<0.05) 0.1609 23.37 3050 19.18Cowpea veritiesKenketi 1.533 a 185.1 a 6446 a 41.90 aBlack eye bean 1.444 a 176.3 a 5375 a 46.69 aBole 1.444 a 183.8 a 7700 a 44.08 aLSD(P<0.05) NS NS NS NSCV% 10.73 12.68 13.68 14.92Cropping systemSole maize 1.73 a 209.8 a 11682 a 46.68 aIntercropped1.47 b 181.7 a 6507 b 44.22 amaizeLSD(P<0.05) 0.25 NS 4654 NSCV% 13.53 16.85 15.2 2.80NS = non-significant, CV (%) = coefficient of variation in %, LSD = least significant differenceat 5% level of significance , Means in column and followed by the same letters are not significantlydifferent at 5% level of significance according to LSD test.45
The highest HI (47.86%) was recorded from maize intercropped with 100% cowpea density wherethe lowest HI (38.47%) was recorded from maize intercropped with 50% cowpea density (Table9). The reduction of HI% at 50% population density might be due to less grain yield and high drybiomass of maize at 50% population density of cowpea. This result agrees with the finding ofSaleem et al. (2015) on maize-mung bean intercropping. High harvest index indicates the presenceof good partitioning of dry matter to grain yield.4.3. Effect of intercropping of maize with different population density andvarieties of cowpea on yield and yield components of cowpea crop4.3.1. Cowpea PhenologyDays 50% to FloweringDays to flowering was highly significantly (p<0.01) affected by cowpea varieties while croppingsystem, planting density as well as interaction effect was not significant (Appendix Table 4). Thisresult contradicted with Smith et al. (2001) who reported that days to flowering of pigeon peadecreases with increasing pigeon pea population when intercropped with maize.Although days to flowering was not significantly affected due to cropping system, there was adelay in one day in intercropped treatments compared to sole cowpea. This could probably be dueto shading effect of maize which reduces effective heat unit accumulation, resulting in longerrequired growth period. Similarly, Muoneke et al. (2007) and Mpangane et al. (2004) did not findany significant differences in terms of days to 50% flowering of soybean intercropped with maizeand maize-cowpea intercropping, respectively. Hardley et al. (1983) stated that flowering isdependent on both genotype and environment.46
Page 1 and 2:
MEKELLE UNIVERSITYCoDANRYield and E
Page 3 and 4:
ABSTRACTA field experiment was cond
Page 5 and 6:
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHThe author, Omar
Page 7 and 8: TABLE OF CONTENTSDECLARATION.......
Page 9 and 10: 4.1.2 Soil analysis after Harvestin
Page 11 and 12: LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1.Ethio-maize
Page 13 and 14: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMSA
Page 15 and 16: Cowpea is tolerant to a wide range
Page 17 and 18: 1.3.2 Specific objectives1. To eval
Page 19 and 20: around the world are planted under
Page 21 and 22: 2.3. Maize Production in EthiopiaEt
Page 23 and 24: Food products, like corn meal, corn
Page 25 and 26: 2.6. Origin, Distribution and World
Page 27 and 28: 2.8. Importance of IntercroppingCer
Page 29 and 30: (Rusinamhodzi et al., 2012). Simila
Page 31 and 32: Photo synthetically active radiatio
Page 33 and 34: usually reduces weed occurrence (Zu
Page 35 and 36: Ayisi, 2005). Higher plant densitie
Page 37 and 38: The Somali Regional State has a bim
Page 39 and 40: maize. The treatments combinations
Page 41 and 42: using a spectrophotometer (Olsen et
Page 43 and 44: For cowpeaNumber of pods per plant:
Page 45 and 46: Net benefit (NB): was calculated by
Page 47 and 48: Moreover, the pH value was 7.71, wh
Page 49 and 50: 2002). In addition to that, the dif
Page 51 and 52: allows sole crops to extend its veg
Page 53 and 54: cowpea increased, the height of the
Page 55 and 56: of ears per plant in intercropped m
Page 57: variety. This result was in conform
Page 61 and 62: Table 10.Effects of densities and v
Page 63 and 64: Table 11.Interaction effect of the
Page 65 and 66: Table 12.Effects of component densi
Page 67 and 68: Significantly higher number of pods
Page 69 and 70: density of cowpea to 50%. This decr
Page 71 and 72: Harvest Index (%)Harvest index of c
Page 73 and 74: Tauro et al. (2013) showed that whe
Page 75 and 76: The highest net benefit (69,264.81
Page 77 and 78: varieties and planting density of c
Page 79 and 80: Altieri, M.A., Glaser, D.L. & Schmi
Page 81 and 82: Chemeda F, 1996, Effect of bean and
Page 83 and 84: Demessew Mengesha,2002. Effect of p
Page 85 and 86: Florentine, S.K. & Fox, J.E.D., 200
Page 87 and 88: IPS (Industrial Project Service), 2
Page 89 and 90: Li L, Sun JH, Zhang FS, Li XL, Yang
Page 91 and 92: Africa and Australia. Eds: Whitebre
Page 93 and 94: Raji, J.A. (2007). Intercropping so
Page 95 and 96: Sisay, T., (2004).Effect of plantin
Page 97 and 98: USDA, 2016. United States Departmen
Page 99 and 100: APPENDIXESAppendix Table 1.Mean squ
Page 101 and 102: Appendix Table 5.Mean square values
Page 103 and 104: Experimental Photos90
Page 105: 92
show all

last final thesis of umer

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?