You are on page 1of 5

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Height of Pechay

Table 1 shows that pechay treated with Organic IMO5 yielded the highest mean in

terms of height (26.3), followed by pechay treated with Inorganic (24.33) and the lowest was

yielded by pechay that received no treatment at all. The results reveal that at α = 0.05, there

are no significant differences on the mean height of pechay with no treatment, treated by

IMO5 and those treated by Inorganic Fertilizer (computed F = 2.19 < tab. F = 3.29). The

height of the pechay did not differ when treatment (Organic, Inorganic Fertilizer) were given

as well as when treatment was controlled. The hypothesis stating that there are no significant

differences in the mean height of pechay after treatment is accepted.


Table 1. Height of Pechay After 42 Days of Treatment

Treatment Replication Treatment


I II III IV Mean

A (Control -) 15.76 23.82 24.05 19.18 20.70

B (Inorganic) 26.83 26.30 20.79 23.41 24.33

C (Organic IMO5) 24.96 28.53 31.57 20.12 26.30

Sources of Degrees of Sum of Squares Mean Computed Tab. F


Variation Freedom Square F .05 .01

Replication 3 55.903 18.6342 1.91ns 3.29 5.42

Treatment 3 64.344 21.4481 2.19ns 3.29 5.42

Expt’l error 9 87.998 9.7775

Total 15 208.245

cv = 13.15%

Weight of Pechay

The data show that pechay treated with Organic IMO5 yielded the highest mean for

weight (64.60) and pechay which received no treatment (Control -) produced the lowest

mean in terms of weight (Table 2). The Analysis of Variance for Randomized Complete

Block Design (ANOVA for RCBD) reveals that at α = 0.05, there are significant differences

on the mean weight of pechay when given the treatments (computed value of F=3.74 is

greater than tabular value of F=3.29 ). Furthermore, Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT)

reveals that there is significant difference between the mean weight of pechay treated with

Organic IMO5 and pechay treated with Inorganic fertilizer (xC-xB > Rp). Differences
among weights of pechay treated with Organic IMO5 and mean weight of pechay that

received no treatment at all was also significant. Organic IMO5, applied to pechay had the

best yield in terms of weight. The hypothesis that there are no significant differences in the

mean weight of pechay when treated is rejected.

Table 2. Weight of Pechay After 42 Days of Treatment

Treatment Replication Treatment


I II III IV Mean

A (Control -) 33.50 44.14 36.98 21.85 34.12 b

B (Inorganic) 41.56 67.14 36.29 37.02 45.50 b

C (Organic IMO5) 39.88 85.85 96.21 36.48 64.61 a

Sources of Degrees of Sum of Squares Mean Computed Tab. F


Variation Freedom Square F .05 .01

Replication 3 2227.710 742.5701 4.35 3.29 5.42

Treatment 3 1189.682 632.8939 3.74* 3.29 5.42

Expt’l error 9 1524.922 169.4358

Total 15 5651.314

cv = 13.15%
*
significant at α = 0.05, 5 percent level of significance
Number of Pechay Leaves

The same number of leaves (9) were produced by the pechay under both treatments

(Organic, Inorganic) as well as the control (no treatment)(Table 3). At 5% margin of error,

there are no significant differences in the mean number of pechay leaves when treated with

organic and inorganic fertilizer (computed value of F = 2.86 less than the tabular value of F

= 3.29). This implies that IMO5 and Inorganic fertilizer did not affect the yielded number of

pechay leaves. The hypothesis that there are no significant differences in the mean number

of pechay leaves after treatment is accepted.

Table 3 shows the Number of Pechay Leaves after 42 days of treatment

Treatment Replication Treatment


I II III IV Mean

A (Control -) 8.91 7.58 8.82 8.05 9.06

B (Inorganic) 8.46 8.67 10.35 9.17 9.16

C (Organic IMO5) 8.64 9.71 9.96 7.81 9.03

Sources of Degrees of Sum of Squares Mean Computed Tab. F


Variation Freedom Square F .05 .01

Replication 3 3.594 1.1981 3.54 3.29 5.42

Treatment 3 2.906 0.9685 2.86 3.29 5.42

Expt’l error 9 3.044 0.3382

Total 15 9.544

cv = 13.15%
ns
not significant at α = 0.05, 5 percent level of significance
Width of Pechay Leaves

The results indicates that Organic IMO5 and Inorganic fertilizer did not affect the

width of pechay leaves. The hypothesis that there are no significant difference in the mean

width of pechay leaves after treatment is accepted. The data show that the pechay treated

with Organic IMO5 yielded the highest mean in terms of width (11.84) while the pechay

fertilized with Inorganic and pechay without treatment yielded almost the same mean width.

(9.74, 9.43). At α = 0.05, there are no significant differences in the mean width of pechay

leaves when given treatment (computed F=2.86 < tab. F=3.29)

Table 4. Width of Pechay Leaves After 42 Days of Treatment

Treatment Replication Treatment


I II III IV Mean
cm
A (Control -) 8.73 11.63 9.71 7.66 9.43

B (Inorganic) 9.41 11.22 8.82 8.85 9.58

C (Organic IMO5) 10.08 12.21 17.05 7.64 11.75

Sources of Degrees of Sum of Squares Mean Computed Tab. F


Variation Freedom Square F .05 .01

Replication 3 30.622 10.2073 3.09ns 3.29 5.42

Treatment 3 13.436 4.4786 1.36ns 3.29 5.42

Expt’l error 9 29.731 3.3034

Total 15 73.788

cv = 13.15%
not significant at α = 0.05, 5 percent level of significance
ns

You might also like