AsebeTeferi Zl ^jspedreZeyt . Nazre. W elkite jtaJira A d a m i ...

A s e b e T e f e r ilerX V DDIS ABA®AZl ^ j s p e d r e Z e y t .

N a z r e .

W e l k i t e

j t a J i r al. ZiVtfj

A d a m i T u iu L .AblyatetS

^ A S E L A

angano

D o k o l a

^ K o m b o l c j h a

M ertu»0Maryajl /■egeBw™ |s $ J n Wereliu offfW ork ° •: / 2 . ••

oDimaV I ----------- ^B i c b e n a y

/ V ^F i c h e

K u y u o

Report on Survey and Experiment Carried out in 1982/83^Crop and Pasture Section Publication N0034

Asella, December, 1986

L.Slialtef

g o b a

TABLE OF CONTENTS ’ PAGES*«

List of staff of Crop & Pasture Section iMap of experimental stations in Arsi Region ii

Part I

Experimental stations 1Surveys 3

Part II

Summary 10

Field Trials

Soil fertility trials 22Soil analysis results 27

1• Cereals

111-1 Effect of N & P fertilizers on wheat 30112-1 Seeding rate trial of wheat 32113-1-3 Sowing date trial of wheat J>k

115-1-^ Bread wheat national variety test 37115-5-8 Bread wheat pre-national variety test ^3115-9-12 Bread wheal national observation ^9115-13 Bread wheat yield test $8

115-14 Bread wheat frost observation 60115-15-20 Yield assessment trials on wheat 62115-21-26 3read wheat variety trial 85

115-27-32 Observation of bread wheat lines 87

115-35 & 36 Durum wheat national yield trial 90115-37-42 Bread wheat micro yield trial 99115-43 & 44 Durum wheat national observation 110115-45 Bread wheat regional observation /dry land/ 119115-46 Bread wheat regional variety test/ .. / 122115-47 Bread wheat /Ethiopian dry land nursery/ 124125-1& 2 Food barley pre national yield trial 126125-3-5 Food barley national yield trial 130125-6-8 Malt barley national yield trial 1351^5-1 Tef national yield trial 140145-2 Tef pre-national yield trial 142

2. Pulses

223-1 Date of planting and plant population onhorse bean iMf

225-1 National yield trial on horse bean 1^72 2 5 - 2 Pre-national yield trial on horse bean 1^9

225-3 Advanced nursery on horse bean 1 5 - 1

225- f National variety observation on horse bean 15-3225-5 Frost resistance screening on horse bean 155225-6 Preliminary screening nursery on horse bean 158

2^3-1 Date of planting and plant population onfield peas 161

2^5-1 National yield trial on field peas I6*t2^5-2 Pre-national yield trial on field peas 166

2^5-3 National observation trial on field peas 168

2 5-if Advanced Gcreening nursery on field peas 170

2^5-5a- & 5^ Winter hardness observation on field peas 1732^5-6 Preliminary screening on field peas 176

265-1 & 2 NYT on early and late set of lentils 179

3o Oil crops

315-1-8 Linseed national yield trial 182

3 1 5 - 9 & 10 Linseed pre-national yield trial 193315-11 Linseed frost screening nursery 1973 2 ^ -1 & 2 Sunflower national yield trial 200

325-3 Sunflower pre-national yield trial 20k

333-1 Rape seed sowing date trial. 207

335-1-5,7,8 Rape seed national yield trial 209

335-9-11 Rape seed pre-national yield trial 220

335-12 & 13 Mastard extension yield trial 225

3 3 5-1^ Brassica micro trial 229

335-15 Rape/mastard advanced observation trial 232

375-1-6 Noug national yield trial 235375-7 •Nong pre-national yield trial 2kk

4 . Pasture and Forage Pages

4100-1 Observation of different introducedforage crops 248

4100-2 Observation of different pasture andforage crops 249

4100-3 Observation of lupin as compared to otherfodder legumes 251

4120-1 Natural grassland improvement by oversowing 253

4310-1,4,5,8 Fertilizer trial on rhodes grass 2554311-3 Fertilizer trial on forage oat 2604312-3,8 Seeding rate trial on forage oat 265

*315-1-8 Forage oat variety trial 2684325-9 & 10 Sudan grass variety trial 27743105-1 Columbus grass variety trial 2804390-5 Harvesting stage trial on rhodes grass ^

Seed production 2814411-1 & 2 Fertilizer trial on vicia dasycarpa 283

4412-1 Seeding rate & spacing trial on viciadasycarpa-land 286

4415-1-4 Variety trial on forage vetches 2884512-1 & 2 Seeding rate trial on sudan grass/vicia

mixture 2934611-1 Effect of time and fertilizer application

on fodder beet 296

4810-1,3,5,7,9 Multilocational cooprative trials 297

4820-2,3 Multilocational trial perenials 3024910- .Observation of residual effect of vicia

on wheat yield 305

5 * Horticulture Pages

5 1 5 -1 - 5 * Irish potato NYT 306

5 2 5 - 1 Sweet potato variety trial 316

533-1 Beet root yield observation trial 318

6 1 5 - 1 Plum variety observation trial 3196 0 5 - 1 Green bean variety trial 3216 *4-5-1 Onion variety trial 322

6 5 ^ -1 Cabbage method of planting 323805-1 Black cumin (tuknr azmud) nursery trial 32 -802-1 Coriandor seeding rate trial 326

8 1 5 - 1 Coridander variety trial 327

6. Crop Protection

1 1 6 - 1 & 2 Time and intensity of soil cultivationin wheat 329

1^6-1a & 1b Direct drilling and conventional seed •

bed preparation in tef 33^116-3 & k Direct drilling and conventional cultivation

practice in wheat 339

116-5 Comparison of cultivation practice withgramaxone and round up 3kk

1 1 6 - 6 & 7 Chemical weed control in wheat 3k7

1 1 8 - 1 Control of wheat diseases with fungicides 35**336-1 & 2 Time and intensity as soil cultivation

in rape 356

3 3 6 - 3 & k Direct drilling and conventional seed bedpreparation in rape 361

LIST OF STAFF,_J________

Betru Haile Agronomist, Head of DepartmentAlemu Terefe Agronomist, Head of SectionAmanuel Gorfu Agronomist, Team LeaderShelemew W/Mariam Agronomist,

Daniel Keftasa Agronomist (Forage Crops),Team LeaderDuga Debele Soil Chemist, Team LeaderMelalcu Admasu Crop Protectionist, Team LeaderGashaw Shibabaw Junior Agronomist (Forage Crops)Mekonen Uolde Mariam Research Assistant III (Pulses)Tesfayion Mengesha Laboratory Technician IIIBaleha Yai Research Assistant II (Cereals)Haile Zegeye Research Assistant I (Cereals)Getachew Wondmagegne Research Assistant I (Forage Crops)Zewge Bahru Research Assistant I (Horticulture)Workiye Tilahun Research Assistant I (Crop Protection)Haile-Selassie Yohannes Research Assistant I (Seed quality

Control)

Map of Experimental and Meteorological Stations

S' Jeju / ^

V'

f / o ' £

A

/ } A Hu rut a x '/; ^ *y A i / •<* ^ A o n d § &

> A r Kulumsa 'V

i £> , ,Asella

u' _

x=>Vto \l

p v \o a<=<PQ 'A

\v<<

... ^ y

v/A\ipa\' y A o fo\ ./fl^Ziway

TICHO‘A' Sera

Langano

v W

\ b eko j ^^Gobessa

& X

X-A'.

....y/ /

L

Adminstrative Boundary

~ - - ~ Aworaja Boundary______ All Weather Road

^ ____Dry Weather Road

f ~ Experimental Station

A Meteoralogical Station

-jnr.'pr *rPr,T C '.r? '-TT* 'C

Kulumsa ,(2_,200 m.a.s)

This is the main experimental station where -norethan one half of the trials were conducted,, It is situated on a dark clay soil with [-.00cl permeability and low to medium in available phosphorus contents- It is also the main v'heat station.

Bel oji ,__(2 7.5j0. ia.8<>s)

This the “vair station for barley, highland pulses and rape seeds. Its soil type is heavy class with acidic in pH, Thearea is heavily infested with wild oat.

Asassa ( 2,300 jn»a^s)

In this st ation the soil is rather li*.;ht i.e. a clay loam soil.The available phosphorus content is fair and its also a wheatarea.

Dhera (1,630 moa^s)

At this station the amount of rainfall is low and the soil is rather li;:;ht, sandy loam, while its capacity to retain water is poor. Phosphorus content is rather good as its pH is neutral to alkaline. This is the station where crops are tested for drought tolerance.

Meraro 12,980 m.a.s.)

Here the soffil is heavy clay, susceptible to water-losing.The pH of the* coil is acidic. Thus is the station where crops are tested .for frost tolerance and seeds of some temprate-type vegetables are produced.

:*'0n< ie

Bob:_ (.?-

oheled

' 2,260 .s)

In thus otation the soil is clay with good permeability, low to medium in available phosphorus and slightly acidic in prt.

,'20 iHoaos). noil in this area is heavy clay and su.scepliblc to v/axer-

locrin,; and acidic in pH. It available phosphorus content is

low „

(1 ,7 0 0 ra-:<._c_So)The soil is lonmy to sandy loam with neutral pH. Its available phosphorus is medium to high. Here vegetable crops are

tested under irrigation.

3

SURVEYS

Soil SurvL; • >

In 198l about 1 1 5 0 soil samples were collected from Chilalo and Arba- Gugu rajas of Arssi- Out of those, 5^0 samples^were analysed for pH nand pho-phorus contents, and b j samples were analysed for textural content3. Other analysis, such as permiability and nitrogen contents were conducted on few of the samples mentioned above. (table 30-3c)

Nutrition Ari^lysis

Nltrieii: contents of 263 forage and food crops samples were analysed in the nutrition laboratory this year (1982). The analysis were protein, moisture, Ash, fat and dry matter oon4- .

Meteorological Survey

The annual rainfall recorded Gt. different climatic zones of Arssi was higher than average during 1 9 8 2. Except at Asassa, precipitation started late June and extended to early November. At Asassa the rainfall stopped at the middle of September.

In the whol 1 region, rainfall distribution was fair during the growing season (June - September), but high amount of rainfall was recorded during the month of October. The extension of rain-fall up to the month of November (time of barest) had an adverse effect on the yield of cro; s ,

\

The mean naximum and minimum teperature recorded were average. Due to the high rainfall during the month of October, frost incidence which v;hs most frequently occuring during this month was shifted to December ' his v/as happend in the Wabe Shebele Zone of Arssi (Asassa area). Even distribution of rain-fall was also observed during the small ra: n j season. (Feb - Hay) (Table 1a - le)

Tabe 1a I \

-1 r-r_L--'recipitation, Evaporation and houro of Sunshine

(fKulumsa)

Month , Air TemprgI ature ( <Max J Min

January ! 23.9 : 7 . 7

February 24.5 j 9.4March 2 6 . 3 9,9April 24.7 ! 10.8I'ay 24.9 11.5J une = 25-7 1 0 . 2

July 22.4 1 0 . 0

..ugust | 20.8 1 0 . 3

September I21 .5 9-5

Cct ober ! 21.1 9.7November I 21.8 9.0December 2 2 . 9 7.9f

. - ....................I ....

v nn -1 Q UI!i

(■ Pr e c i pit at i on (Mh j >i j------------Evaporation■HoureuDf‘T°t a l i N o • of (mm) Sunshine

(mm) iRainy days4. ------------- i-------------------------------------------------------------j--------------------

29 A ! 4 206 218i

czQ -z jj 13 13C 151

2 3 . 3 : j 5 291 : 23 9

9 5 . 1 j 9 191 ' 176

1 0 7 , 7 ; 9 2 4 8 218

7 0 . 5 j 9 207 230

1 4 2 . 1 II

17 149 160

1 6 7 . 2 ;I

19 126 91

9 6 . 9 16 116I 9 5

8 ^ . 3 | 11 ‘ 189 1731 4 . 7 ! 3 174 1 65

3 6 . 4 I 4 183 ! 178

Table 1b'i h r oure, Precipitation, Evaporation and Ro rr,_c: sunshine

( Bekoji)

rMon:

.

Air Temperature (°C) Precipitati on(MM" IEvaporation; Hours of. I(mm) j Sunshine!lMax. Fan.

.

Total(mm)

No. of Rainy dayt

January 19.7 7.4 44.4 11 199 219February h'NOOJ 8.3 62.9 10 162 163

March 2 0 . 9 8.5 65. ? 9 259 229April 1 8 . 2 8.3 110.6 23 132 131May 1 8 . 4 8 . 1 199.4 16 149 172June 1 8 . 3 6.1 171.8 19 110 1^7July 1 6 . 1 6,v 202.5' 26 60 50August 1 6 . 1 6.9 1 6 8 . 7 26 58 _

September 1 8 . 0 5.9 32.5 11 1 1 6 98October 1 8 . 2 6.5 74.0 15 126 143November 1 8 . 4 6.0 58.3 9 115 167December 1 9 . 3 5.5 9.3 7 148 205

* : not rocore Annual sum 1 1 4 9 4 182

Table 1c

Temperature and Precipitation (Asassa)

Air Temperature (°C) Pr«ci ;ita';i Tots.i (mm)

onMonth

Max, Min.... .. . _ \

No. of 3ainy daye

J anuary 2*f.2 4 .8 i 8.0 k

February 23.7 7 .7 7 5 .5 ; 9March 23.9 5 a ::31.2 | 4April 22.3 9 .1 3 7.6 10May . 23.^ 8 .9 '6.9 9June 2k A 9 .1 33.7 9July 2 1 . 10 .*+ CO • -O 12

August 20.6 9.7 123.0 20

September 22.6 7.2 2 0 ,6 5October 2 3 .0 6 .1 27.0 9November 23.5 5 A 1^.3 3December 2^.1 3.9 '■ 0 .3 3

Annual Sum I C'9r' «3 97

T«*ble 1dTemperature and Precipitatian (As ell')

Monthi<

Air Temperature ( C) Precii

Max Min. Tct&lf

January 21 .0 5 . 3 ! £2.1

! February 20.6 6 .5 81 .8

March 22 .5 6 .6/ 75-6

April 20 .8

-3-0

OO 9 // f -1

May 21 .7 9 .7 129.2

June 21 .3 9 .0 '137.6

July 17-9 9 A 1 6 8 , 0

August 1 7 . 0 9.** 391.3

September 17.6 8 .3 2 ^ <>

October 19.2 6 .9 00

November 1 8 . 6 6 .0 ^9*9

December 20 .7 8 ,2 17- 3

Annual Sum

No., of Rainy ____ days _

317 1 '

15 12 17 29 31 29 1 s 11- 8

1L :0,_ i!..1

206

»

Temperature and precipitation (Gobessa)

Table 1e

f Month----- q

Air temperature ( C)I Precipitation

.................. Mi n Total (mm) No. of rainy days-

•I January 2 2 . 2 7.3

OJ•oOJ

____________________________

7

j February 2 2 . 7 7 . * 9 3 . 0 11jI Karch 2 3 . 5 7 .^ 9 2 . 9 10

! April•

21 . 2 8.2 1 9 5 . 2 21

- -nay 21.3 8 . 2 1 9 5 . 2 17

June 2 2 . 3

CO•VO 8 2 . 6 15

| July 21 . 0 4 . 7 185.6 26

j August 2 0 . 6 4.3 1 3 2 . 3 24

j September

COoOJ 3.8 6 9 . 4 21

! October 1 9 . 3 3 . 4 1 7 3 . 3 16I

November •OOJ I 3.3 1 5 5 . 8 12

I^pcember 2 0 . 4 3.Q 90.1 10i.............................................. ~Annual sum 1425« 7 18 9 _ J

Table 1f

onth

Temperaturc and precipitation (Kofelcp

Air temperature ( C)_ Max .

Precipitation

jTotal (mm)

January 23.1 1 2 . 0 85 -6

February 2 1 .4 1 2 . 6 11.7

,;arch

OJOJOJ 1 3 . 2 124.9

April 1 9 . 9 14.9 123.8

Hay 2 0 . 1 13.0 9 2 . 8

June 1-8.9 1 1 . 2 138.9

July 2 2 . 8 11.3 198.3

August 17.6 12.4 ! 2 5 7 . 0

September 18.7 1 2 . 2 156.3

October 1 9 . 2 13.6 143.2

T'Jovember 2 0 . 2 1 2 . 2 108.5

inn ATr.ber 20.4 12.7 20.3------- — Annual sum <461.3

Mo. of Rainy days 12

313 18

12

16

23 25 22

14 12

__7177

7Table 1g

Teypc-rature and precipitation (Robe)

Lonth Air ternperature (°C) PrecipitationKax. Min. Total (mm) j No. of Rainy days

January 25. k 6.9 0 . 0 J 0

February 25-1 7.1 55- ® f c 9Larch 23.4 6 . 2 9 0 . 1 n 7April 21 .0 • 9.1 113.3 13May 2 2 . 8 9.2 155.0 12

dune 21 .9 6 . 9 9 2 . 0 19July 20.9 8.8 1 0 5 . 8 21August 20.8 p 0 0.0 1 2 8 . 1 18

Se; teinber 20.7 7.6 48.2 17October 20.1 7.2 93.8 l4Noveinber 22.2 5.2 37.^ 6December 21.6 k .9 l4.1 4

; j Annual sum 933*5 130

Table 1hTemper ature a n dprecip t tat ion (Abomsa)

Konth Air temperature PrecipitationMax. Min. Total (mm) No. of Rainy days

January - - - -

February 28.3 11.7 150.9 8March 2 9 . 0 15.5 100.0 3April 29.2 15.7 5 1 . 0 3May 29.4 17.0 164.2 10

June 3 2 . 1 17.0 8.6 2

July 32.0 17.2 228.6 14August 31.0 17.6 79.3 6September 31.0 17.0 6 7 . 8 9October 31.0 1 6 . 8 169.9 11November 31.1 1 6 .1 5 2 . 0 7December 31.1 1 6 . 8 114.0 8

Annual sum ! 9 8 0 . 5 ;_________ Si

= not recorded

Table liTemperature and precipitation (Ogolcho)

Wo nth, o .Air temperature { C)

------ -— — -------- —— ------------- — vPrecipitation

Max. Min, Total (mm) No. of Rainy days

January 28.5 11.0 0.0 0

February - - -March 29.8 13.8 39.6 8

April 2 8 . 6 14 . 7 i 53.3 7

May 29*4 14.9 $9.0 7

June 29.2 14.4 2 6 . 7 4

July 2 6 . 1 14 .;; 175.4- 14

August 24.6 14.8 1 2 6 . 9 12

Sej-'t ember 25.9 13.4 60.4 16

October 26 .3 12.5 4 3 . 2 12

November 26.7 12.2 1 8 . 7 2

Leeember 27.4 10.9 2.6 1V-— --------- ---------------

Annual sum 6 0 5 . 8 84 .

= not recorded

Table 1jTemperature and precipitation (L'h^ra)

; ] onth Air tetimerature ( C) Precipitation

Min. Total (mm) No. of Rainy days

January 25.9 13.8 1.5 2

February 26.7 15.1 67.5 6

March - 1 6 . 0 8.7 2

April 29.3 15.9 20.8 3

May 29.3 16.3 143.6 8

June 31.4 1 6 . 2 84.5 4

July 30.7 15.4 157.3 10

August 31.5 19.1 1 8 8 . 5 9

September 3 1 . 0 15.0 100.1 12

October 30.5 14.6 162.0 14

November 28.7 14.8 —

rif?r.f>niber 29.3 14 .9 48.6 5

Annual sum 947.1 .

= not recorded

Table 1kTemperature and Precipitation (Gunna)

Air Temperature(%)____ Precipitation______Max. -iHin tTot-tiKmm) jNo.of Rainy Days

January1 20.1 10.5 24.5 ->February 20.4 10.8 40.1 5

j March 1 9 . 6 9.4 134.9 10

; April 19.4 9.0 2 8 . 1 13

! I* ay 21.6 5.4 45.7 11

J June - -j J uly 21 .0 6.4 163.5 19

August 1 8 . 8 9.0 176.7 15September 1 9 . 0 9.8 107.9 17October 1 8 . 8 7.4 1 06 . 8 10November 1 7 . 8 6.9 74.8 15

December 1 8 . 1 5.9 44 .3 10

Annual Sum ;. 9 4 7 . 3 128

Not recorded

Table 11

Temperature and Precipitation (Arboye)

MonthAir T 7p*mature( °cj> i

Max. Min i’otal (mm) 'Jotof Rainy Days!

January 22 .5 1 1 . 1 | 110,9 8

'February 2 a . 6 11.7 i 176.5 6

'larch 24 .0 1 2 . 8 60 .3 7

April 24 .0 13.9 121.5 6 iMay 25 .4 14.0 ! 1 9 0 . 8 9

J une 2 6 . 1 1 3 . 6 ; 2 9 . 63

J uly 23 .5 1 3 . 2 9 4 . 9 10’

August 21 . 9 1 2 . 8 ; 259.5 14

S ept ember 22.4 1 3 . 1 1 1 0 3 . 2i10

October 20.7 1 1 . 7 i 1 1 5 . 9 7

November 19.9 12.0 88.4 5

December 19.5 11 .2 257.1 —

Annual Sum j 1 6 0 8 . 6

not recorded

10

SUMMARY

Field CroT s

X Cereals

a) Wheat

Variety trials and observations of bread wheat and durum wheat were carried out at different ecologies* The materials were screened for yield potential, disease resistance, tolerance to drought and frost in areas with moisture stress and higher altitudes respectively and for other relevant agronomic qualities.

The following varieties of bread v/heat showed outstanding performance e

In the sowing date trials of wheat as in the previous years most varieties tested did oest when planted in the third week of June and in the middle of July at Bekoji and Robe respectively*

At Asassa there was a fair response to fertilizer* Yield of tall varieties like K6290-Bulk and 6295-4-A wa s t±xjincri t d oon sly < leo ±\?r\ ne d when planted without fertilizer,, At Bekoji and Robe most varieties tested manifested that need for fertilizer is unquat.ionabl^.

At Kulumsa, where the land has been fertilized with inorganic fertilizers for over a decade, the differences in yields obtained with and without the application of fertilizers were not significant for some improved varieties. Enkoy, K6290 Bulk and Romany BC still remain commercial varieties for the 1983/84 cropping season* A new bread wheat variety, K6295~4A has been • released for production,,

Mean Yield Across 4 Locations

Veery 15 Veery 17 Enkoy

58n6 qt/ha

Veery 11

5 6 .2 "

48*3 !!45.4 "

b) Barley

Regarding barley, food and malt types were tested at medium and highland stations in the region. Of the eight barley trials conducted during the test period 5 were food types while the rest 3 trials were malt barleys.

Among the food barleys EH163/53-17H-1-1, EH16 3 ^ - 1 0 7 - ^ and a local selection designated AUDU-12-60B were the best yielders. Yield as high as 77 qt/ha was obtained from the first variety in one of the trials conducted at Bekoji.

Out of the malt barley varieties tested the following lines showed outstanding performance at all the testing stations.

EH 99/F3-D-6-14-3-3LI EH 99/F3-D-4-12H-1-1L

Eli 99/F3-D-5-'l3H-2-2L

Further testing and basic seed production of these and other promising ones will continue.

c) Maize

Only two variety trials were planted at Gondie 8c Robe. The trial at Gondie was discarded because two of the varieties totally failed to germinate due to long storage of the seeds.

The observation at Kobe consisted of three composite varieties. However, the performance of maize at this site was not that impressive. Maize trials could not be tested at the actual maize sites during the 1982 growing season as planting materials were not obtained from the national coordinating station. Alemaya composite and Katumani composite are the only commercial trari c !;i pk still existing for the mid-high- Irmd fand for areas with short rains respectively.

d) Tef

Three trials were conducted on tef at Kulumsa. From among the varieties tested no variety v/as found to be significantly better than the commercial variety j)Z-01-35*+« In the method of seed bed preparation which had been running for three years it was observed that packing tef bed is very essential.

12

e) Sorghum

Sorghum trials have been running Tor several years in highly ' moisture stress areas of the region at Chefe Jila, Ogelcho and Arba Gugu by Extension agronomy incoilaboration with the Ethiopian Sorghum Improvement Project. Research work on this crop in these areas will be given more emphasis as of the 19&3 cropping season since growing of other food crops under rain fed condition is of le#ss s u c c s p s .

II Pulses:

Only 3 highland pulse crops namely, horsebeans, fieldpeas and. lentils were planted at different locations, and evaluated for yield potential, disease resistance, seed quality and general agronomic characteristics.

a) Horsebeans

Varieties <f>f horsebeans from different sources were tested at Gondie, Kulumsa, Bekoji and Mex,aro. The important dieseases on horsebeans such as chocolated spot and rust were observed as common on most varieties.

Yield-wise, new varieties performed well; out of which variety coll.5/77 gave the top yield (57 qt/ha) in the pre-national yield trial at Gondie. Variety NEB 207x7^ TA7^“^2C did best with a yield of ^8 qt/ha, while, the improved Check Kuse 2»27o53 gave only 29 qt/ha in the National Yield Trial at the same locationo

In the trial conducted at Meraro, no line has been found tolerant to low temperature. Hence, more genotypes will have to be included in the future test.

To maintain uniformity of seeds of horsebean isolation program has been started at Bekoji since three years and some selections for seed size, colour and shape have been made during the 19^2

season.

13

k) Field-peas:

Varieties of fieldpeas from both introdiced and indigenous genotypes were tested at Bekoji and Meraro. Low moisture as well as low temperature affected growth of the crop particularly at Meraro. As the result of unfavourable weather conditions less pod and seed set/plant were observed. The nev; variety TP/Nur/7 scored the top yield, kS qt/ha. at Bekoji.

c) LentilsTwo sets, early and late types of lentil varieties were planted at Kulumsa in 1982. Growing conditions were impressive, thus, ecouraging yields (were obtained from late .-'nd introduced varieties. Highest yield (38 qt/ha) ever recorded for lentils at Kulumsa was obtained from the late type, variety R~186.

3?he improved variety, NS^ 358 which is under basic seed multiplication ranked first and second in the early and late sets respectively v/ith yields of 30 qt/ha. in both trials.

H I Oil Crops

Similar to the pulse crops, trials with oil crops were conducted at medium and highland stations, namely Kulumsa, Asassa, Bekoji and. Kobe. All the national yield trials concerning oil crops v/ere planted with and without fertilizers.

a) Rapeseed:

Nine improved varieties were tested at the above mentioned sites of which target, the already established rape-seed variety was included as a chech. Three varieties, Target, Tower 5el^ and Vanarda did well without the application of fertilizer at Kulumsa v/ith a mean yield of 23 qt/ha and 25 qt/ha in order.

Except at Kulumsa much higher seed yields were obtained from the fertilizer plots at the other three locations (Bekoji, Asassa, Ft Robe). Especially there was a clear marked difference between the fertilizer and unfertilized plots at Bekoji even at the vegetation growth.

14

if .

s'

b) Linseed: ^From the 15 varieties tested in the national yield trials at different locations, Cl2605 and C H 652 showed good performance particularly at Bekoji yielding 18.3 qt/ha and 17»9 qt/ha« respectively.

Application of fertilizer didn't show almost any effect on the yield of linseed* At Kulumsa severe 'lodging v/as recorded in the fertilized plots which resulted in lower yields than the unfertilized ones for most varieties« Regarding disease there were moderate incidences of powdery mildew and wilt at most locations.

/

c) Noug

Noug trials were conducted at Kudium&a, Asassa and Robe with and without fertilizers as was the case for other oil crops*

There was no significant yield difference between varieties at all the testing sites* At Kulumsa the unfertilized plots gave slightly higher yields* Fertlizer induced luxurious vegetative growth and consequently heavy loding which finally resulted in low yields.

Of the varieties tested Sandafa, IAR/Gu/166 and IAR/Gu/26 were found to be better than others at Robe under fertilizer . condition with yields of 11 qt/ha each. The highest yield obtained without the application of fertilizer was 9*5 qt/ha at same station.

d) Sunflower:” ftThis crop was tested only at two stations, Kulumsa and Asassa. Outstanding varieties were Sunhi501A Argentario and Amiata giving a mean yield, of J>0 qt/ha, 27 qt/ha and 26 qt/ha respectively at Kulumsa.

t1

15

IV Horticultural Crops '

a) Irish Potato---- -- - %

Trials on this crop have been running at different sites inorder to find out clones that are resistant to late blight and also having high yielding capacity*

Among the varieties tested the following; were the best Irish potato varieties.

A1 - 264 ~ 50*4 ton/haA1 - 253 = 42„2 VA1 - 563 = 52oO "A1 - 148 = 41.6 »

Most of these varieties proved to be best performing for several years and are waiting for the decision of the National Variety Release Committee for release,

b) Root Crops

Besides running trials and observations on Cabbage, Carrot and Beetroot seed production studies on these temperate type crops have already been going on at the highlands of Bekoji and Meraro. From the preliminary studies it was noticed that Bekoji has been found to be suitable for carrot seed production, v/hile cabbage & beet root seeds can successfully be produced at Meraro* Planting dates on these crops have also been carried out at the respective test sites inorder to escape frost incidences during seed production. Seeds of each crop produced at these sites were planted in trials at different cites with the imported seeds of the same varieties and thus comparable data were obtained regarding yield, germination and general agronomic properties.

c) Other- Vegetable CropsVariety trials 0; observations were conducted on various vegetable crops such as tomato, onion, sweet potato and green beans*

d) Spices:

Observation trials have also been, conducted on loyally collected spices such as coriandcr, Fenugreek, Tikur Azmud, and Netch Azmud.

e) ?riut Trees

Three highland fruits, peach, plum and apple have been studied at Kulurasa and Bekoji since their establishment (over five years). At Kulumsa except for some peach varieties the adaptability of others doesnot seem satisfactory. ' ven though the performance of these crops appear to be better under Bekoji condition fruits were stolen most of the time at this station.. Therefore, it was difficult to get yield data at Bekoji.

A variety trial of Banana was planted at Golbe (near lake Zewai) during the year.

Crop Protection

1) V/eed Control

Two chemical weed control trials were conducted at Asassa and Robe.

At Asassa due to low infestation of weeds action of the products did not show yield increase while best results were obtained at Robe from the applications of Terbutryne (pre-emergence), Chlorotolurm (pre-emergence), '.itomp 330-^ Illoxan + loxynil and Lontrel 416.

Moreover the application of Terbutryne in various wheat trials at Kulurasa ani Robe had fully controlled annual broad-leaf and grass weeds.

At Robe over 100/<; yield increase was recorded due to Terbutryne in Jheat.

2) Minimum Tillage

16

Minimum tillage trials h. .ve been running on wheat, Rape-seed and tef since three years at Tulumsa and Asassa.

y17

In wheat ploughing twice i<,e« rir.ht after the snail rains and early June & harrowing twice i.e. when weeds are about 10 cm tall and prior to planting was found to be best yielder ,(4o qt/ha).

In wheat yields obtained from minimum and zero tillage in 1982 were also better than those of the previous years. The trend was also the same with Rape seed 8c Tef* Results obtained from these trials showed great differences from season to season due to erratic rainfall and other associated factors.

Application of high rates of fertilizer on direct drilling and conventional seed beds didnot show significant yield increase.

Generally, the recommendation of minimum and zero tillage methods demand proper drilling machine which is not available in the country at present..

3) Insect Control

To prevent or minimize damage caused by insects pherr.ione and light traps have been running to predict the outbreak of Army worm in the region, and results have been reported periodically to the concerned body in Ministry of Agriculture.

Infestation of aphids in field-peas were controlled using Skatin, Pogor and other insecticides.

In general there wasn’t any outbreak of injurious pest in the region.during the growing period.

k) Desease ControlAlthough the magnitude of yield losses due to plant diseases has not been adequately assessed in Arsi, the losses are recognised as being substantial„ Thus, trials were carried out at Etheya with broad spectrum systemic fungicide against rusts, septoria and mildev/s in wheat, 4s the season was not conducive for most diseases to develop there was no significant yield increase between treated and untreated plots.

1*

5) Pyrethrum

Studies on the adaptability of different pyrethrura (insecticidalherb) lines which was started at Bekoji years ago was alsocarried out during the year. As to the previous years linetHo., 59 and No. 75 produced high dry matter yield,, The best clones were distributed to farmers around Bekoji.

Seed Quality Control

1) Labo rato ry Analyses

During the reporting period the following seed quality tests were conducted on various crop types in the laboratory.

germination test seed purity analysis 1000 seed wt. & test weight moisture test

Sources of the working samples & number o 7 samples worked for each discipline were as indicated below.

Name of organization/ descipline

Number of samples analysed

- — -

ARDTJ - Seed Production Farms 10 37

5195 2167

- Crop & Pasture Research Seeds- Extension Demonstration Trials

State Farms 112

Farmers’ Seed 33*+

2) Maize Program

Various inbred lines of maize were planted for maintenance purpose.

A mixture of local maize types was planted with the objective to form a composite.

I z>

Pastures and Forage Crops

1 Observation ‘TrialsAt Kulumsa Hudf-. x st 6 (grass), Jems? long K and Efordia E81

(legumes) showed good performance. At "sasa o-t, vicia and oat/ vicia mixtures produced hi/iver yields than other forage crops,

2 Natural Gras si -»nd

There vj- s little success of improving natural grasslands by overs curing nt Dhera, Only Macropt illium •■tropurpuroum r.nd .Jemal on/; Medics germinated, '11 other legumes -nd grasses did not germinate --=t -1 1 ,

3 Cultivated Forage'*' P’asture Grasses

Gets

At lulumsa herbage yield of 13*9 for dm/ha (27? increase over 0 level) w-s obtained with the application of 69/69 N/P Oj-. while there w.;'S no notable seed yield increase with different levels of fertilizers.

At Robe highest herbage yield w-s obtained at fertilizer levelof 46/69 ft/p 0r. J

't Bel oji the highest herbage :ed yields were recorded :t 23/69 end 69/69 N/P Cj- levels respectively from seeding rate trial on o-'-its at Bekoji. Yield increase from 9*44 - 12.94 for dm/h. wore recorded as the seeding rate w-*s raised from 5G-200 kg/h?; Mnong seven o-t varieties no single variety has been consistently superior to others. Generally, high yields were obtained ?.t Kulumsa hwere - s low yields were obtained nt Dher? may be dure to moistvtre stress*

Sundan - rass

In the seeding r-'te tri^l of F'-ud:n grrrss/vici-* mixtures conducted at Kulumsa "nd Dh ra higher dry matter yields we re obtained when Sue1 «u grass was planted alone at higher seeding rates. No m-rked yield increase w-s obtained due to higher seeding rates

20

of vicia but the proportion of vilia. in the greer. matter was high which means the crude protein content of the herbage will be expectedly improved*

From six Budan grass varieties tested -t Kulumsa nd Dher^5 on an 'ver-i e the check variety (£t tion check from ARDU stock) was found to be superior to all others.

Columbus GrassFrom four columbus grass varieties tested at ?ulurnsa IAR 935 produced higher herbpge yield than others.

Rhodes CrassGenerally high herba..;e nd seed yields were obt ained from . fertilized alots ~s comp-red to unfertilized plots. The response to nitrogen w*s higher th \i. to phosphorous but overall yields v.ere higher when both fertilizers were applied. Higher seed yields were obtained when nitrogen was topdressed in the middle of July md seeds were h rvested three weeks after initial full heading st^ge.

4 Jvult ivated _?ora"e Legumes Vicia

•t l<uliimsv. the response of seed yields of viciD dasycerpa to fertilizer levels w^s low nd inconsist ant. Generally,higher yields were obtained when phosphorus was used but the trend was not clear. t Bel-oji the response of herbage yield of vici-' to increasing levels of phosphorus was extremely high.On the other hand low response to increasing levels of nitrogen was observed.

The response of vicia to different seeding rates and row spacings was found low and insignificant, high potential of vetch seed productivity (30 qt/ha) was observed from the experiment conducted -t Kulumsa,

J'rom five vetch species bested, at four experiment stations, no consistently superior one was found except that icia s?tiva was consistently inferior to others. Generally, low productivity of vetches -t J)hera w?s observed.

On an attempt to assess the value of vicia d^syc^rpa as arotation crop, it was found out that whe^t planted with 100 kg/hBAP fertilizer produced nearly ecrual yield with wheat following vicia T.nd planted without ?ny fertilizer.

Fodder Beet

In the trial with the time of fertilizer application on fodder "beet conducted st Kulumsa there w?s no response neither to different periods of application nor to fertilizer level.

Multi1 ocrational Tri--lsFrom the perennial species xyegrass, lhalaris tuburosaf'lcdUm perenne -=nd cocksfoot were outstanding at Rohe and Bekoji. Rhodes grass w. s the best yielder -’t Kulumsa. All annualsproduced high yields from which oats -nd sorghums were outstanding in highland .nd lowland stations respectively.

FIELD TRIALS [oil Fertility Triads

22

In 1982 fertilize* trials w'ere conducted at Kulumsa, Asassa, Robe, ..eraro, Etheya and Gonde to observe the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus nutrients on the yields of different crops.

At Kulumsa, trial with and with out fertilizer (1** and 0 kg/ha LAP fertilizer) started last year were repeated. The field which were fertilized in 1981 were splitted into two (fertilized and unfertilized) . The field wi.ich was unfertilized in 1981 was also planted with no fertilization this year.

There is no significant difference betv/een fertilized and unfertilized fields for one year, but fields with two years v/ith out fertilizer showec low yield. (Table 2a)

Trials with tae residual effect of phosphorus and nitroren were conducted at Kulumsa, hsassa, Robe and Meraro with uniform field plan.

The field plan of these trials is as follows.

Y e ar Application of nutrients (f^0 or ^2 kg/ha)|

1982 0

;23 23 kG 69

198 3 0 n 23 0 01 9 8*+ 0 23 23 kG 0

.

bum 0 kG 69 92 69Treatments a I

b c d e

At Kulumsa and Asassa. there were no significant differencesbetv/een the different levels of P-.G,- Applied but as the rate2 jof P Oj- increases there is also an increase in yield of wheat and this was also true for the application of different levels of nitrogen (Table 2b)

23

In general application of nitrogen showed higher yield than application of phosphorus for this year at Kulumsa, while it is the reverse at -Asassa. *

At Kobe the response of wheat to phosphorus application was high while that of nitrogen was low.(table 2b)

Trial with residual effect of phosphorus was also conductod at Meraro using Barley variety EH^ 3^L. The result of the trial indicate that incrpaa&imnthhei&tfei pfrbophbetm increases the yield.(tc'.ble 2d)

At Etheya and Gonde trials with the comparison of different fertilizers s'uch as DAF, T.S.F. and urea, all at the levels of 50 kg/ha and 100 kg/h * were experimented. Here high yield was recorded for 100kcr. are- 7ha at Etheya using mamba wheat variety (table 2e). At Gonde, the croy.} used was teff (Dz.354> and there was no effect of fertilizers on the yield of teff. (table 2f)

Trials with micronutrients (boron and copper) were also conducted at -ulurnsa at five levels of nutrient applications. The micronutricnts are used with and with out fertilizer DAP to observe if the amount of ricronutrient reaction with D.-vP can inprove the yields of wheat.

The result of the trial showed that, there is a significant difference between the different levels of boron and copper used and also there is a significant difference between the application of micro- nutrient with fertilizer DAF 0100 kg.'ha) and with out DAF (table 2g -".nd Ph)

Table 2a v

Yi'-lds of wheat in fertilizer Observation Trial (Kulumsa)

FertilizedField

Unfertilized Field for one Year

Unfertilized Field for two Years

2640 kg/ha 2560 kg/ha.... - — ...

2120 kg/ha

Fi-:ld Area

Grass « 900x10 = 0.9 haNet = 900x8 = 0.72 "

Variety = Bulk (wheat) Fertilizer DAP (100 kg/ha)

Yields of Wheat in JFrials with ths_ Residual Effect of Phosphorus at Kulumsa, Asassa and Robe

TreatmentYields, Kg/ha.

Kulumsa Asassa Robe

Check 2035 1253 1001

23 kg?205/ha 2481 1715 150423 " if 2443 1719 159046 »» f| 2630 1810 1836

69 " » ' ' 2668 1305 1955

Plot SizeGrass 20x10 « 200m^Wet 5*5 = 20m2

Table 2c

/ Yields of Wheat in Trials with the Hate of \ S Nitrogen Application at Kulumsa, Asassa & Robe

Yields, Kg/haTreatment Kulumsa Asassa | Robe

Check 1747 1414I| 1178

23 kg N/ha 2475 1594 ; 1236

23 " M 2539 1561 124546 “ " 259r- 1619 124769 " " 2800

•1643 1367

Plot size

Grass: 20x10 = 200 m2Net 5x4 = 20

25

Yields of Barely in Trials with the Residual Effect of XyS Phosphorus at Meraro

Table 2d

;------------------------ j—Treatment i Yields, kg/ha

Check ] 2015

23 kg P205/ha ; 269223 11 M ” j 2712 *1+6 ” tl u S 3108

»» ir it 3025Plot Size

20*10 = 200m 5x4 ~ 20m^

Yields of wheat in Trials with different Fer-

tilizers at Etheya

Treatment Yields, kg/haCheck 164150 kg DAP/ha 232950 «' urea/ha 2109

50 " T.S.P/ha 2218

100 » DAP/ha 2823

100 " urea/ha 2128

100 " T.3.P/ha 2392----- - — --------- ^

Plot Size Fertiliser N P K

Grosar= 20x10; = 200m^Net = 5x4 = 2 Ora DAP = 18:46:0

Urea * A 6s 0:0 T.S.P.0= 46:0

GrassNet

Table 2g

Yields of vheat in Trials with the rate of T3oron Application at Kulumsa

TreatmentYields, k^/ha >

With 100kg DAP/ha With out DAP Difference . 1

Check 2107 1^33 5840.5 kg 3/ha 2128 1505 6231 .0 51 2188 1b02 585

1 .5 2338 167 6 662

2 . 0 0 » 2579 1951 628

C.V % = 6.94 C.V %= 1 0 . 9 0

Flot SizeGross 2x5 - 10Net 1.6x5 = 8 rn

Yields of .Vheat in Trials with th,; Rate of Copper Application at Kulumsa

Treatment Yields, kg/haWith 100kg DAP/ha ■:'ith out DAP Difference

Check 2075 1433 6400.05 kg Cu/ha 2 1 9 2 1628 564O . i r »t 11 2299 1826 4730.15 " " 2272 1892 380

0OJ•

0

i

2434 1954 480

C.V.# = 1 2 . 8 9 C .V .% = 14.60

Plot SizeGross 2x5 = 10itkNet 1.6x5 = 8m

27

Table 53-

Soil Phosphorus Analysis at Different Sites 1982

Name of Sam;ling No.of Samples in different Phosphorus 8c RangesTotal

.

Area " .PPm 0*10

P.PPm11-2C

■ P.ppm ; 21-*k)

P . ppm *♦1 - 8 0

; P.ppm \ 8 1 - 1 2 0 i

t . ppm 1 2 1 - 2 5 0

Asassa 17 1b9 i 169Kulumsa

• 25 ^ 2 I{ 65

Robe 3 k3 151

2{ I l 61

Asella .16 I ; I

i i 23Sheled 25 27 $ j 50Lole 'I 5 1 1 ! 6

Mertti 1 15 1 1i 18

Je ju 15 1 1; j 1 16

Gun a 1 13 2 i 16

Aseko 13 1 3 ! 19

Bekoji 52 1! 52

Meraro

_

^5 1 1 1 ; ! I! i

-S. I

I ^5i11

------- ---------- - 1 .......... *

28

pH Test at Different Sites 1982

Table 3b

Name of Sampling No. of Samples in different pH Ranges f TotalArea 5.5 5 .6-6 .0 6 ,1-6 .5 6 .6-7.3 7 .4-7.8 7.9-8.4 8 .5

I !I - i• j ! j

Asassa 5 168 16 j 189 |Kulurasa 25 26 8 6 j 1 65 :Robe 61 61 |Asella 18 5 23 |Sheled 9 35 6 5° 'Lole 5 1

JI 6 iMerti 1 1 1 15 18 !'Jeju 1 2 12 1 16 jGuna 15 1 16 jAseko 18 1 1 9 jBekoji 51 1 52 !jMeraro 10 5

.' . . . . . J

15 I

i

23

Texture Analysis Results 1982

V''

Table 5c

Name of Sampling Area Depth (cm)

Texture Content I•ClassesIi%■ Sand% \ % '

Silt j Clay

Robe Topsoil 15.1 36.3 48.6 ClayDhera M 25.8 57.* 16 .8 oilt loam

H 39*1 38.7 22.2 Loam» 32.5 44*3 ■ 23.2 mM. 31. ** 47.1 ■21,5 nM 31.5 41.8 2 6 .7 11

>1 37*4 38.5 24.1 TlAsella rt ■ 9-6 13-2 7 6 .1 Clay

it 10 .1 13.1 7 6 .8 M

30

1. CEREALS

111— 1 Effect of N c. P fertilizers on wheat (Robe)

The objective of this experiment is to find out the optimum levels of K & P required for wheat on heavy clay soil of Robe. Sources of the fertilizers were urea (4-6/aK) and Triple super phosphate (46^ P 0 C) for nitrogen and phosphorus respectively.5To find out the optimum combinations of the two elements (N & P) a factorial experiment with five levels of :T L P^0 from 0-9? kg/ha at an interval of 23 kg/ha was conducted.,

During the test period there were big differences in vegetative development between plots with different levels of !•: & Plotswith higher levels of both N & ^2^5 were laxuarious in growth. Precipitation was high during the growing period thus yields were affected by water logging. Days to heading were slightly shortened with the increasing levels of Po0_. The highest a,nd economic grain

5yield was obtained with the application of 92/69 i' P O kg/ha. Therewere significant yield increases with the increasing levels of bothN & P«0C upto the rate of 69 kg/ha. 5

31

111— 1 Different lev_elg IT & P appl ication on wheat (Robe)

p2°5 kg/h{

023

466 9J2.NMean

Yield in kg/he, at 87*5% DMII kg/ha 7------- r* —

0 23

1030

1740

1530

1480

1730

[ 840

! 1820

{ 2160

' 2690

2490

L - b l I ^ 2.

p2°5mean

2100

1502

I 28302300

2000 2320

12702390

3030

3520

3630

2T68

1000

2510

30403790

3750

2818

1012

2112

2518

2856_22J.O.

+S.EL, S.Do %

L.S.D.C.V.Plot size,m Sowing date Seeding rate, kg/ha 150

Between N means

1I9kg/ha 330 «

5481 6.5^6.8

17/7

Between P^Or means N x P^O^ Interact ion

229 kg/ha 330 "

548 "

266 kg/ha564 »»111 "

32

112-1/82 Seeding rate jj i al_ of wheat^ (Kulwnsa)

In 1982/83 a new entry ET12 D4L-7-L was tested along with onkoy,1(6 290-l:ulk and 76295-4/, with come seeding rates used last year, Ku75- 1 v 64 & Ko399-3 which were -tested in this experiment last year were discarded due to suscreptibility to yellow rust,

Enkoy & ET12 D4 L7L responded well to higher seeding rates, VJhile the tall varieties Ko290-bulk a.nd I 6295^*4A gave economic j ield a lower seeding rate (100 kg/ha).

In generalj these were signifcant yield differences among the seeding rates and there was an. interaction in the experiment.

1

Seeding rate of wheat (Kulumaa)

rnrnSeeding __Yield in kg/ha at 87.5$ DM Seeding

;rate j! rate 1 ___ ... Varieties1 kg/ha J

lEnkoy j K6290-Bulk-- - — — . V ^

!K6 295-4A [sT12D4-L-7-L mean Jj 75 3080 1 3110 3000i 2940 3033 j1 100 3300 3200 3410 3030 3235

125 3230 3230 3450 2960 3218j 150 3430 3230 3250 3220 3283 j

175 13580 3130 3430 3100 3310200 3480

___ j

3370

.........

3460 jA fc . > J, . m -

2970 3320 j

Variety ;

1

* * *•

j

. . ... ... , ---------

mean 335 0 3212 3333 ;c—

°

I

Varaetoes Seeding rates Variety x s<S.B. + 102 kg/ha + 65kg/ha —

C.V 1 5 .4 r/ CO -

L.S.D. % NS 186 kg/ha 418 k{I 1 0 O • :J » \j; NS

CO'vj-CsJ it 576

Plot size, ?,2M 6.0

Fert., kg/ia 100 DAP + 50 ureaSowing date 1/7/82

rate

This year (1982) the testing was done only at Kulumsa, Bekoji & Robe* Diksie was left out becouse the trial work at this site was totally moved to Robe since these areas have similar climatic and soil conditions. At all the testing locations 72ri?D4L7k & Kavkuzx kal—" 6 replaced ku ku75- 11—64 k639^—3 as these lines were aeverely hit by yellow rustlast year.

At Kulumsa there were no remarkable differences between the plantings of 16 June 29 June & 12 July* Never-theless top yields were recorded for the first sowing date (June 16) for all varieties.

As last year, at Bekoji the best sowing date was 25 J u n e (2nd date) with a mean yield of 64 qt/ha# At Robe significantly highest yields were obtained in the second sowing date (13 July) for all varieties*

113-1—3/82 Sowing date trial of wheat Bekoji, Kulumsa &, Robe

Sowing date of wheat (Eeko.ji)

----------

Sowingdate-'

--------- -Yield, kg/ha at 87,5# DM Date

Varieties mean

Enkoy K6295-4A ET12. D4 L-7-LKav.kazkal^Bt

11 June £080 6040 5260 4740 553525 June 5890 6730 6420 6570 6403S July 5370 5370 7000 6240 599523 July 4140 L4770 4940 4600 .4613Variety

| mean 5370 — —

5728 5910 | 5538___________ I

S.E.C.V.L.S.D 5^

i« y}.

Sowing dates + 122 kg/ha

9-4 f

379 kg/ha 508 »»

Varieties 202 kg/ha1 4 .4 iNSNS

Sowing date x Variety

1261 kg/ha1747 "

Plot size, m^ 6,8Fertilizer, kg/ha = 150 DAPSeedimg rate, kg/ha= 150

Sowing date of wheat (Kulumsa)

Sowing Varieties Sowingdate Enkoy E6295-4A ET12 D4-L-7—L Kav, kaz

Xkal-Bb

datemean

15 June 3350 2980 2930 3120 309529 June 3000 2950 2860 2900 2928

12 July 3120 2850 2900 2840 2928

27 ” 2360 2300 2370.... .. ..... ..1890 2230

Variety s *31 meani. ___ 2958L .. 2770 2765 2688

L...... « - - i

Sowing dates Varieties Sowing date x vaz

S.E. + 72 kg/ ha + 81 kg/ha —C.V 1 1.7 i 13.2 %L*S.D# % 207 kg/ha N S NS

1$. 278plot si2e,.m =Fertilizer, kg/lia = Seeding rate, kg/ha =

NS6,0100 DAP + 50 urea 150

ITS

37

115-1-4/82 . Bread wheat national variety test ( Asassat MeraroKulumsa. & Robe)

This trial consisted of eighteen varieties, of which, two commericial varietyf Bnkoy & Romany Be as standard checks and a local variety were included for comparison.

’There was a fair distribution of rainfall at all testing locations except at Asa.ssa during iho growth period# In generalf disease incidences were not serious at all locations.

As regards yield, siginficant differences were obtained between varieties at each testing site. The highest location mean of 6 1 .7 qt/ha was obtained at Meraro, while the lowest mean yield (33*9^) was recorded at Asassa which was mainly attributed to low /moisture during the grain filling period.

A yield record of 93.1 qt/ha 'Was ©btained from VEERY at Meraro.This variety was the top yialder across locations as well.

r

38

115- 1 - 4 Bread wheat national variety test -rrovE at four locat ions yield kg/h a at 8 7«5% MD

j Code r ---- • *Variety Locations I— Variety Rank

1Ij . . *. S 3. S S cl T'ulumsa Robe Meraro1mean

| 01 7C-An x INi/V-B Han 2800 4050 5580 6540 4743 9| 02j (VEERY 11) FYZ-Busho

'S'x kal-BB CM33027— 4?--5y-0M 3900 4190 5380 4700 4543 11

03 K6 106-9 3330 4340 5590 6740 5000 504 K av—K azxK al—Bb 3590 3450 5600 7790 5108 405 ETI3»A -2-L-3L 3050 400c 5230 4100 4095 1506 Aurova x Kal-Bb 3490 3830 5930 4230 4370 1307 LTIDD-I—1K-1H—4H-3H 2810 3440 4440 4990 3920 16

08

j

Bob white "S,TCFj33203-K-9 m- 3y-1 rn—2y-DI‘ 37 iC 2400 5680 6050 4458 12

09 Eob v/hite "S?lCK33203-C-9?1-2y-50015-500Y-0M 3030 3575 3880 6160 4161 14

10 GA110-CIKDD x K7Z- S x (sun bird 4 ) 3450 3960 4480 6530 4605 10

11 Bob white “S” (Bob white) GM33203-K-9&- 19Y-3K— 3Y-0K 4290 3350

! 1 5100 6 730 4868 7

12 Bob whites t?S1, CM 33203-K-9? ;-9 Y-4M-4Y-0K 3380 3710 5870 6660 4905 6

13 VEERY "3" (Veery 13) CM33027-F-1M—9Y—OK 3600 3950 5630 7760 5235 3

14

Ii

Veery ,TS’5 (Veery 1 5) CM33027-P-15I^-500Y- OM-CPTZUOY 4000 4140 ! 6030 > 9310 5870 1

15 Veery HS,! (Veery 1 7) CH33027-F-15K-500Y- ’ 1 ?<S-DY—OPIPZ-O Y

I

3550 2890

’

| 6980 9060

i I5620 2

16 i "inkoy 3840 ! 4130 j 5160 6190 I 4830 817 Homany Be 2600 3540 j 4060 3660 3458 1718 Local check 2640 2130 L iz ia .~ 3880 L2322______ 18

Location mean 3392 3615 r] 5129 6171 i 4577C.V I 19 0^ 12.1# 11.7"/ 1

!LSD 51 !925kg/ha ! 6l8kg/ha \ 557 kg/ha 1 1024 kg/ ha

1■»xdf f 70 clA l l-P 825k£/hr_i I27fe/ha. 136 5kg/ha

2Plot size harvestedfm Fert ilis er, kg/ha Seeding rate,kg/ha Sowing date

2.0150LAP 150 12 Jun*,

2.01CODAP 150 2 July

2.0150J3AP150

15 July

2.0150DAP15024 June

39

iwo3

tr* —1 f 1 trJ 1 4 1—■ c * w0 Ci 0 h3 ON 00 1 _1 o '<\)V-*

Otel O s! r O

ON 5;

0 M P H* if 1VO

&H-

t3* ?ttj

c+ ro c+a*

R-s CD V

OJ

CD

f

Y1

;Xl1

W tr*

>—?<H-l -i^.

Q |r>

i—1 4M oO 4

9>

it-<!

% 'f

MD VO 03 ■•>

oo

JE

oo

Iop!

R-OO

sra

H w>x> 3r~-

f

h<r i<!

*

IW

k !

HS

CO

Wocr1

P'H-c+(0

02

s s so -0 §^ 1-cjUI Ui

Ldoo'

H*c+(0

Ui

4H-(Dcf«<J

■=3

OO

v o v o v o v o v o v o v o v o v o o vo o o Stand 4>CO VO VO VO — —j —-j VO VO O '00 O O /0

—a co os voC O -fs . I\> -A 0 0 CO OO QP c o CO CO CX> - Jo ^ j on on oo oo vo —q —j ■ —a vo

Oj L a o J O J - f ^ o j o J O J - P ^ O J - ^ - ^ - P ^ o J O J r o o J O J -j.-O-q'OI 00 -J UI ro VO O UI (V) VD VQ 4i. V/1 VO

UI C O —0 Co On VO 0 0 - ~ 3 - J ^ (7\ 0\ IN) UI On —j 00 ON —j

Days to

Heading

.Da$s too

Maturity

Septoria(0-9)

F-f>> v_n ui t-a (v> ro ->• rotg g g f S g ^ Q g ^ o o o u i O f ^ o o Sft"** >*~l )■ J*'’' 1— iLvj i£i |;{C/2 03 m m m m m ui r.o m m cq

\

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

z± Oo ^ uj yi sO K Er CO

O W M O O O O f O O O O W O O - O O O-£>OUi

9 | @ 9O O O O ^ o o o - o . o N v j i ^ o o R o o-- -- coUi

;-£*■ oj

ui m pq mUJ

L a O U l

Leaf (w j,.

Ear

Leat rust

Stem Rust

o o o o rv> M M M O O

j Shattering

i

• ■ ■ lN H A ■■ A Ml ^(SO o o GO —q O o CO CO VO 03 VD OO VO O 00 CO VO S R«-io.V,+O u> covji co vn ui ui U) oo ui co vji ui ui o vji ui j “■QlgriX cm*

oj oj oj oj oj oj oj oj oj oj oj oj oj oj oj oj oj-p* •* oj ro —k o CfN oj — ro Oj v.n —*

OJ V/l Oj L>j O O O J O J C O V J l O U l Co CO OJ CO Oj Co oo

Oju i 1000-seed

Weight gm*

—J —J —'1 O0 —-1 —-J —J co —4 Ca) —5 —-1 —J C' —-3 —O —3 CO IC ) V.I1 V£) O —J —0 CO -V VO o VO CO O VO U l VO

VO Q o u t tV) ro c a o\ oj? \ HI—WeightON — t

t kg

Ui

i

i ?&H-CQ(0»CQCOCO

R°!ochtr0)4

oao3 H* O

P>P)«+■

\&;S,

>bd4 fo 55a Pi

& o p> e+

JUc+-H*OP

w14Ih-I CD I cf <*

: < o , wc+

40

tr)o3953bdo

MElO

O _k£»»-* r

o4

*rSi>

8ro M

H- t t’T1CD Oj P)c+*

»i A HIg

<<DCDH

D3

t*'v-3_iO??i—1w

Is

ojw

w W & l Q — 3 bd bd W < «r*a 1 X?

CO? o' &

ON CDCO

<5N

CDCD

o _V O O 4 4S' &

<<? &

ON1 H «<!

H* H- o H H* H- VO Xc+ c+ pi c+ c+ c /i CD 0 3<D a>&

M CD CD 1—13 3 o H- s 5 wTJX W o 0 3 DQ o'

H

X<N

Tta

3&

<{o>(p4c+cn

* l

H’CD<rt-

O O VO O O VO VO VO O VO O VO VO O V O V D V O V DO O V O O O V O V O V O O 00 O OJ VO O ON CO CO VO Stand %VO OD VO VO Qp vo vo o vo o O VO VO o o O O VOo-» vo on vo vo oj vji o ro —i o -P* c ^ o o r o o —

o\ -J ui vn ON o\ On OJ Ul On

Days to HeadingSeptoria(0-9)

o o o o o o o o o o o o

OJ ~O vo ro i-3 IV)s o o o w o r a o

fl05 o o o o o

O Jo o o o

O V D O O O vo _*■ CO vo —i vo ^ vo oVJl O O OJ O 00 Co OJ Oj OJ OJ O) O Ul Vn o Co o

U L J - ^ ^ U i O J ^ U U J U l W ^ O J W ^ -fi^Ji. 4 4 ' oj v_n 4 O On vji ro Co co oo Co vo ro ON .p** * * * » • » • * • • * « « • • » * VJI CO OJ OJ OJ VJI OJ O O J O D U t O ' J l O J ' J i U l O U t

CO ^ 03 ^ro v o -j . roUl ^ VD VO j « • * • c

o o o o v j t co 4 oo vn o ^ oj oj

OOCOCOCSCOCOCOCO“ o j r o r o —* o r o ~ iLu (O U1 ^

Height cm.

1 0 0 0 - s e e d

W e ig h t gm .

HI—Height kg.

Y 1ro

I

115-3 Summary of diseases & other agronomic data, of Bread wheat national variety test (Kulumsa)

Variety

j K6106-9i Veery nSft j Veery i;S”3 Snkoy

I 7C-0N x Iniar-B-maJi

ET13-A-2L-3Lil GA110-Cuckoo x Kvz Veery «SMAurora x Kal-Bb Bob white "S"Bob white nSTf Romany Be

| Fvz x Kal-Bb

\ LT100- C-1H— 1H-4A - 3E *j Bob white ”St{ | Veery ”SMBob white f}St! Local check

K2

co — 3 gnui .fi* oj iv> O vo oo-o onv/i 4 s» oj r o

f w < < < t o w Q to too o tL CD CD CD o o W o oo 3 ? i CD CD CD c r 1 o ' M o' a 1Vi Oj o 4 4 4 M

■§ S . << *< <0s -

& ? JS«Q

toZ'l • * z* H- H- O H- H>

tJ* U 3i 0 1 U I ci- c-(- £ r)* cl-CD O T 3 0 CD O CD CDOX

0 ~ > . C/3ooft*

i n <a

'<

oo&CD

4H'CDH-<4

— cp -j ro-j^-j^-joooaoprocximaooCO Oj o \ on r o 0 0 0 0 ^ * 0 •£* v o - i u i O s iii . v n o o \ 4 ^

,—3 CTs CO-O VO —J -~-3 COM3 —0 CO 03 00 CE> —-3 - 0 \ ^ C O -i _v O - i C\ w O ^ O M 'J - i > M M

Stand f0

Doys to Heading

! Days to r Maturity

vn Vn On -<] vn vn vn oo-£> —i S e p t o r i a

(.0-9)->• v_n i-aO O 4 4 4 vn00 *0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 o r a co m m 3 w

w

•-3 (-3 K3 t-3 —* —*4 ^ 4 4 Oj O3 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 4 O 3 O 3 un O O O M W & rfi m

m

-jk Oj O —*■V J l O O O O O O O O O V n O O ' O Q O O

L e a f

Rust,

il/lj ©m Rust.

wH*1 WCDfiWCDm

Ear ThIt

'. POist £•—1t Leaf &

ON O -ife ui 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 O O O O O O

3 m 3»<S»- — -------- „jK__ ______I L e a f

pii

i* 3\ x nSet-

O W j o MD O VD VO 00 OO VO VO j j VD O O O Oj Oj CD Oj Oj Oj Oj oj co O oo oj O 00 coV/i O 03

rv)0J0J4^0J-|i»Lo0J0Jr00J0J-P^0J0JUI-JUJMVOOMD^j -j OVM- VO Colo e t « •« » • • « 6 • i « o f to j v n oovji c o c o o j v j i o j v j n o j u i o o j oo

ii e ig h t

o r a .

1 0 0 0 - s e e dOj Oj Oj 4-o u lo H e i g h t g m ,

- .yO N — J —J C O ~ J C O 0 3 C O O O C O 0 0 0 0 C O 0 3 — ^ C O — J 0 3 " T T 1 — V ^ s i

VOONCO- VD—k —.i U -j O (\) O l\) O • O-' 0\ o• « . » • » • » • • « . . . o • ® • fo VJ1 ON-f UlM'sOUlOMO-^O-i VJ1 ON ON j

43

115-5-8 Bread wheat pre-national variety test (Asass, Meraro, Kulumsa & Rohe

In these sets of test eighteen new lines and two commercial varieties of "bread wheat as checks namely, enkoy and Romany Be were included.

Except at Asassa the distribution and -amount of rainfall were quite normal during the growing season. Disease incidence specially yellow rust was not as sever as in the previ ous year. Most varieties in this test showed fair resistance to the tnree rust diseases at the different testing sites.

Over all locations Boh white 28, Bobwhite 30 E'T 620-B-1H-3H-2H and Bobwhite 27 were outstanding performers both in yield and resistance to leaf, yellow and stem rusts. Location mean yields as high as 55«8 qt/ha, 51*8 qt/ha., 51*3 qt/ha and 50*9 qt/ha. were obtained from the above mentioned varieties inorder.

On the average high grain yields were obtained at I-ieraro while the lowest location mean was obtained at Asassa which could be explained as due to shortage of rain towards grain filling stage.

115-5-8 Ere ad wheat pre-national variety i.est_^jeield in kff/ha at 87*5% DM*

! I'

Codi VarietyLocations

1 Boh white 8

2 !it 1 0

•

f 3 11 1 1 2

f 4 *

\ l

t 5 !

1 113

1 2 1 8

1 6 !

ti 2 6

1 7l :» 27

8 ' 1 1B 2 8

9 '

;* 29

; 1 0 |1 1 30

I 1 1 tt 36

| 1 2 1 ;6 4

| 13 : T-TAL=V6 6 9 7

14151 6

171 8

1920

1 1-34/78=H72 11-34/78=H74 ET 602-E—6ll-1L—4H ET620-B-1H*3H-2H ET 6 24-D-1H—2H-1H EnkoyRomany Be _ hocation Mean Location Rank____C.V 1 ___________

I Asassa f I_____

Kulumsat f• 3270 j 5200

i 3440 5470I 2350 48OOf 3380 | 4420

[ 3760 r 5430| 3160 • j 5270j 3070 j 5370f 3510 j 5830| 2920 5067j 2660 5150i 3520 5130t 3120 4930; 3370 1 5050

j 3580 5230| 2720 i 4270i 3370 j 4700J 2840 5320I 2560 2820

j 3360 5050

1.2360 _ __ ,4770___j 3 1 1 6 _ L J2§4—

-

*' LSD %

I _ _ 1 _ _ _ J lPlot size, m Fertilizer, kg/ha Seeding rate, kg/ha Sowing date

Rohe

5070450047506 6 2 0

53705330

6 0 5 0

587051505 8 0 0

4 8 0 0

53005950503033205770

627049005 0 2 0

.3300

.£?i!

Meraro

— — r

— — -! 6190 i 4933 j 12 ] tI 6070 j 4870 j

1 5 I

i 5790 I 4423 |1 7 I

| 2930 : 5088 j 6 || 5570 5033 s i

6250 ] 5015 10

5870 5090 ’4 \

1720 55831 I

6940 5019y

97120 5183 2

; 6180 4908 13 !

0

00 —VO 4883 14 ji 5900 , 5068

>

5

i 6380 50557 1’ 4190 3625 19 |

4720 4640 16 |6110 5135 34930 3803 18

645O 4970 11

2^6j0_

, , 5843 . . .

_ 3348 20 . ,

* ~ ~ . J! 1

------------ Lh - V — * * *

2,0

1 0 0 D AP ( 1 8 / 4 6 )

1 5 0

1 July

9 0 1 kg/ha

120_ " j

2.0

150 DAP 150 16 July

" j i ______ L .. |

2 . 0

150 DAP 150 23 June

45

roO

o

bdo

vo 03

K3ro-NI?

roD3!

—3 C\hrl hrl-d HON CArO OV rtrf Cj— OnWIOo 1T P-l1ror2

1\J4

vovo

£

•&» o j ro —u

_T o—\ o c-i Kj HOJ !&• -C t->-£* M 5* oII M- 1— j «-+* oCO O^ CD £CA oVO - pr-J 03 ooW

ctq

— ■— ■---- — —vo VO vo vovo vo — j Co— ■— - —

CO — J ooON -> CO vo

o VO GO —-J On v n OJ ro -*■

"tc? te T be! M tdo c o O oCT* o ' CT* o '

£ sj - s!t r ►5"

11 r; ~ H- H- H- H - H-c*~ c4- *+ c+ c+CD cc CD O CD

■z=

= r. C l CO 03 CO O J

coop*CD

<CD4H-Oc+C,J

VO

O J OJ OJ -£=» 0>J Oo Oo Oo OJro co oj —] ro —>> -£» ro

vji

co

w- '*—■ *— ~—f— —~~ r

VO ? VO

vovo

vovo

VOCO

voCA VO

vc00

voON

vovo Stand <fj

t

8 co —0oo

oo co —JCO

—J —3

COOo

—J

_I

IDays to Iie?ding

. _ I

rv>vo

rv>VO

—i OjO

_\rovo

OO —J

_ooo

130 ooVJI

roVO j

Days to Days to

Maturityliaturity

f oo L ■£» Oj Oj O-' Oj Oj Oo Oo Oo—* —3 Co —j —j — ro ro!T~r;I -! w

Co o o v n o Co co o vn co

CO —J C O —J-J CO co co O CO — VO VO o Oj« » 0 0 0 4 > 4 oO O O J O O - ^ - f ^ V n

CO CO cp CO C~ CD CO CO O) CO CO * Height cm*rv> co o o ro —j d vji u t |

CO OJ oj oj oj CO Oj Oj Oj Oj r 100 - Seedo -»• ro ro cn ^ O oj co o '* • • • » . . « « . . rco vn oj oj vji vn oj oo oj vji oo F Weight gm*

I 111- weig! kg.

—4fth t

ro oj 4 o\ oj vji

Vj iIVJI

bdI <T> IP jP*!§■ fc CDIpr<r"

2 p; C+M-o3 P<

£p4H-CDc+;' c+-CDMIH-P*

0303CO03£p

Oj 4 Cs

W M M fcdO S (-3 m3i b p?* fl) O

t P. S

n

wO

►3O n O n

ro ro ? ? p >jcf w

—a _». OnipQJ -* f « S W!w

—k __i. f-3 W QT T

•i-3 oo' &OJ OJ {& i-1-> r s* T—J —a t-» om on OJ C+ l-iON a> bvo-J -a oc3 oHW

>* IO VO 00 —J O ' U ) ^ W M- a j

*~* 1 g,r*

=5 3 3 5 2 H*c+*

3 03

V O O V O V Q O O O V O V O V O VO O VO VO O O O VO CO VO

VO OO VD ND VO VO VO V O V O OO 0 0 ON QO -•> O J 0 0 W M - i

vovo o vo o vo o o vo vo j Stand atvovo o vo o vo o o vo vo r seedlingVO VO VO VO VD M 3 VD VO VO NOu> ro u> -P* m po U 1 o j ro jOJ

U (N) -* -Vo o o o o o o o o o oUi Ui CQ gm

o o o o o o o o o o

o o n r o go o o o o oUi

o o o o o o o o o o

Days to Heading

Leaf rust

Stem rust

Ui 1-3 OJ Coui j-3 _k -ps»O S3 O O O O O w o o o o s ui r" m si i w ui u> ui uj ui

Ulo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o . o o o

- f ^ t - U O J O O —3 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o

ro o -»> O f\3 ro O O vo voO OO ^ Ut Oi UI Ui Oo U) Oj

Shattering

8 « 8 n n § 8 Height om.

lax

O OP*■ M*5nH-8-

o j Oj O J ON Co £

CO Ul UI-fs*O O J O j Oj o j U i o j O j ON oj o j o j u i o j o j O j o j Oj o j Oj O j OjpV —*3 ro oo oo On O VO VO -j 00 CD voO O o o o j o j O j o o j u i CO O UI UI O UI

1000-seed4

cv>*UIOo 03 —J O UI « •

Oo

oo oo ro ro

oo oo oo oo M Oj ^ m CoO 00 00 00 00 —3— oj ro voin> -Fs> ui oj On o oj ui vo ro ro —j

oo j Hl-4/eight ro I

- I

115-6 Bread

wheat -pre-national

variety test

(’Meraro)

115-7 Bread wheat pre-national variety test (Kulumsa)

Code Variety

1 Bob white "S«2 h ;? rt

3 n j; tf

4 r tr ?t

5?? it n

6 ?« »i ?•

7 , n t t k

3 !? J! tf

9 J? 15

10 it ?) «

11 Gallo-cuckoo x Kvz12 Bob white ,JS"13 T-M=W369714 11-34/7815

11-34/7815 ; ET602-S-6K-. 1H-4H17 ;

ET6 20-B-1H- 3H- 2His :

ET624-B-1E-2K-1H19 ; Enkoy20 Romany Be

115-f Breqd_whea,t pre-n?ti onal variety t est (Robe)

ccCode J Variety

T

£05

co

Diseases

I oI +=> pj

i cq <r<|! ^ toi (6J pi w:

>>-p• H

CQ p

& -s« S3

<6•H ,h CT>S<ACD

CO

-PCO

2fH<H03CD►-3

Yellow rust■pw

ea)-pco

ch03CD

I

1----- —

; 1 B o b w h i t e S'1, 8 3i -------1 7 4 r 146 j 4

! 0°

j 0\ 0

~~ i J

r 2tt !t t. J 8 5 !

j7 7 I 1 4 9 4

; 5

0 0 \ 01

j■ 0 31

3 v, ?; f: S 8 7 t

tj 75 1 5 0 0

J0

J; 0 0

i

}

4 tt VS u 8 7i

i 75 1 4 9 4 1 0 0 0 0J

5 I J» It !! 82 tj| 7 5 1 5 0 5 0 0 0 0

I ^

|!! »i ;t 8 3 } 7 5 148 3 0 0 0 0

i 7 Tt tt ?? 88 i 7 5 , 1 4 8 3 0 0 0 0I 8 " " 90

1j 7 5 I 149 4 : 0 0

i 0 5

I 9tt jv • n

! 85 j 76 1484 I

0 0 i 0 0*

i 1° n 85 i

i 76 3 1 5 3 3 ! j0 0 0 0

i 11l , G a l l o - c u c k o o x K v z 8 3 j

1I

86 1 5 6 , 3 \ 0 0 0 0•J 1 2 | B o b w h i t e ;,S n 8 5 7 5 148 ! 4 I 0

0 I 0 I0

t -jo I

I jT - T A I = W 3 6 9 7 9 2 j1 7 4 1 4 7 | 3 j 50M S 0

I0 0

j 14 1 1 - 3 4 / 7 8 9 51! 7 3 147 4 I

55n s0

0 0

J 15 1 1 - 3 4 / 7 8 9 2 i1 7 5 1 4 6 | 4 I 00

j

3 o m s J 0

\ K 1 E T 6 0 2 - E - 6 H - 1 K - 4 H 8 711 73 150 i 4 ! 0 1 0 M S 2511s 15

j i 7 | E T 6 2 0 - B - 1 H - 3 H - 2 H 8 3 I 6 3 1 5 9 j 3 \ 0 0 0 011

18 j E T 6 2 4 - 0 — 11I- 2 H - 1H 821

j56 3

7 3 I

1 5 7 | 3 ! 3 0 S ! T R M S 0 04»j

| 19 | E N k o y • 9 2i

3 1 4 5 j5 j

4 3

60s : 0 i0 ;

0 3

I 2 0 j1

R o m a n y B e j 87 11 1 1

1146 |° !

5011s i 0Jj

bO •H 0 ta

95 j 88 !

88

93 100 90 88

80

93

9 3 , 105

TjCD

CD

CQ

6Oo

eCOD-prCjto• H

CD

5b• H

CD3:I

+3

ttO

36.535.5 36 9035.3 36.837.337.8 37.037.534.542.537.8

■Hr —J 83.7 j 82.5

83.080.0

82.9

83.2 83,0 82.9

j 83.0

82.583.583.3

123 - -105 38.3 8 1 . 5

130 38.3 80.9

133 37.5 80.3110 -125 38.8 j 80.7

113j

34.3 ; 8 1 . 0

133 : 40.0 j 80.7

49

115-9-12 Bread wheat national observation (Asassa,.Meraroy Kulumsa & Robe)

This observation trial is m^de up of therty four lines of breaad wheat and two check varieties* Most of the lines were selections from the breeding programme generated from Holetta Research Station.

Yields were quite high for most lines particularly at Meraro and Robe, The check varieties were out-performed by some lines at all locations* It appears worth while to advance some of the lines to tha next stage of testing as far as yield potential and disease resistance (leaf, yellow and stem rusts ) are concerned.

50

tv> M oj ro r o ro —>■ o NO co —-J o\ ui ^ OJ ro o vo oo -J on m oj ro

H*

oop'

I

_____________ 113-9

Code Variety Yield kg/ha;t -rJ c

: - P

O CiD-p a

*rlro>» rinS a>O W

Diseaseso p\

- P - H !

02 ^ j& ■§ |R S |+

tS j Yellow I £j _ ; Rust $ jo

• P C A ; Ch P. I ' o 5<D o { <0 m. w

+»: <H«2! Cl3 Wctf ! -P fit <D £ iH ( CO f tJ i * 1 f t j

ia c-H Pi ©- P ^ 3J • P ^ eS03

Fertilizer, kg/ha Planting date Seeding rate, kg/ha

150-DAP (18/46) 13/6/82 125

-p ■^ * It*0 S !*H O © 1W24 | Veern 56I 2580 . 95 i 77 141

1 6 I 0 ; 0 j 0 0 ; ° 105

25 j Bobwhite 149 j|

3950 991 85 145 3 i 0 i 0 !i 1 i 0 0 !0 9026 | Bobwhite 110 3220 ;1001i 83 128 2

* ■ i | 0 j 0 i 0 0 0 80

27 j Bubwhite 111 3510 Moot; j 77 133 3 ! 0 j 0 1 Tms $ms 0: 7528 i ti it 1 1 5 2320 } 9 9 f

* i 80 : 134 ■' 4 1 ° ! ° 1 0 0 0 8029 ; (1 tt -j-jS 3330 |100= 81 ; 145 3 1 0 f0 i 0 0 0 9030 n « 4 3 ■ 2700 | 98 ;

: i 87 i 138 3 j30ms T j i j ;50ms £ j

0 0 0 10531 j YKBH 2920 ;iooi 75 132 2 0 0 1‘ 115 •32 j TAS 68 1840 : 9 0{ 77 131 3 ! 0 j 0 !I I 0 0 0 80 (33 ! Kirac 2660 I 97j 82 144 2 1 0 0 i

1 ■ 1 0 0 0 8534 ; K 4328 2980 j 96 I[ j 86 134 ! ° j ° j 0 0 0 70

35 j Snkoy 3450 j 981 88 146 1 I o j o ; 0 Tms 0 9036 : Romany SC

13360 i 99

L.... ! I74 129 5 j 5ms[ 0 |

1 1 !0 5nis 0 95

Plot size, M 2*0

*

115-10 Bread v;hcat national observation (Meraro)

Jcde Variety Yieldkg/ha

— I

•■d§

m

m

0-t3 gra tj>f ositf CD R K

Lodging $ Lat e

Shattering

t

Height

cm.

jj 1000-

seed

f Weight gm.

W)•H0)IS 5*0J *

1 Peregrine 1 6210 90 98 0 0 95 33.8 83/4r£ Bob white 11 5040 100 101 0 0 120 - -- if 14 4240 99 93 0 3 115 41.0 80.9

4 t» 17 56OO 99 90 Q 2 95 37.3 8 2.4

5 i? 19 _ 5430 99 94 00

125 50.5 82.0

6 tl 23 5170 99 96 0 0 90 39.0 83.3

7 II 24 5380 98 101 0 0 90 50«3 82.6

8 II 25 7280 100 91 0 0 100 39.5 79.1

9 Sunbird 34 6380 98 98 0 0 9C 37.0 80.8

10 ti 35 5780 100 88 0 0 105 36.5 8 2.2

11 i t 37 2080 100 91 0 0 105 33.0 7 1 .2

12 PP 39 6120 97 99 0 0 90 5 6 .0 82.5

13 Bob white 48 6640 98 99 0 090 38.0 8 1 .2

14 ii 49 6990 98 97 0 0 85 38.5 , 79.9

15 Sunbird 56 6250 99 97 0 0 90 3 6 .8 83.8

16 K.Atlas 6810 99 102 0 0 100 50.5 8 1.8

17 CZK 60 7760 100 98 0 0 85 38.5 83.3

18 Weibull 6010 99 94 0 0 95 37.8 8 3.8

19 H75 6200 99 L F

<__________________________________________________________________

0 0 90 , 4 1 .0 82.3

54

co —1 ;-Q>On Cn Oj ro O v o c o —J ON >J1 ^ U> w

CDH-O1

O

Oso

W OJ&&>w

5 *H-4p*

n 3 CO bdo, r j o fl)O j 5 tx"£ vo 3 3- CT* 2 s r; CO

S' K S '-1-

OQ4

u . P> H* H-C+" C+ 2fl> O J O j O J CD (I>—a VJI

■£* ro ro ro ^ - X *—i wiV O 00 v n ■fs* OJ vo -J 4 ^ _i

o jvOOo

voO

[o3

O o 0->o^roooo-»o>jrv>-ps>o«j-s- o j r o r o r o o ^ o j 4^ —-j v n o o r o o n on o o v o o o v o r o c o v o c o o o r o—j v j i o j v j i r o v o o v o r o o D - * O ^ w w0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 13*

ftl

CD VO VO CO ~ J V O V O V O V O V O V O V O V O o o vo v o vo v n o o o v n O O O VJI Vn oo O O U i O o O O

Days to Heading

po r o r o r o r o o j r y w f f i c o f o j r o r o r o r o r o ! s t 0•p> U' m ^ iw oj j Maturity

—j On —j —j — 3 O n - j o n o n o o c o cjn —.i —j o n —jo v o o j j v n - ^ v n —4 - p * ~ h v n o r o c o o

f rv j \s ‘ w \ \J IV ov | v? va* 'tr v vj*-'o o r o vj i — 3 0 4 ^ * c o c o

Stand $ at seedling

sUi

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

o j o \ - . j c o r o H30 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^ 0 0 0 0 mg g rst .ss K g o o o c o o to co co co co poL e a f r u s t $

<. j o p* CD*=3SiH*CDct-v;

H-CDMOi

Ut r 1

if 4«CO

CD <6 (Dfli {UH j » -J M

t > CD3 ca4

g g8 «+■

~ 4

if.

115-11 Bread

wheat national

o'bsBrvation (Kulumsa)

y\*j 12 Bread I'/heatNational Observaton (Robe)

vj».LP\

Code

T* I•Yield

i & f H 1 Di seasss l ?Varietyl a) . C <Q' -P -P

t n fin* 0 CO,p_) N 1 I -Hkg/ha

(-P R -P -Hcq 1 cq pi i !>s -Pnj 0 j c3 c3 R ffii P S1 }

h ON O |-P O •0“ i

tH -P E -P d CQ 0 CQr-v . w

Bust 4,«i-i ! ® ^ -e+? ^ fL-P iiO « ! nJ - H EI

i-i rn o5 -t-1CO K m if)

0’ EC

1 Peregrine 1iS 3740 ! 35 75

lj 146

1

2 1 0 0 55ms 10 : 9 : 1402 Bobwhite 11 2280I ! 80

1 89 i 166 3 40ms Tms 0 | T 0 : 1403 Bobwhite 14 5190 I 85i 79 j 144 1

J ! 60nu 0 0 ; 0 0

1| 120

4 Bobwhite1 17 5650 80 77 1 150 4 0 171 ins 0t; 0 0

I: 1105 Bobvrhite 19 5 8 4 0 70 76 1 1 5 0 3 0 0 0 I 0 0 1 0 06 tt ;? 23 6230 70 8 2 ! 1 5 6i 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 07 it t? 24 5390 | 70 75 : 144 5 0 0 0 0 1

(i 105

8 tt t? 25 6120 75 76 147 4 i 0 0 0 : 0 0 1109 Sunbird 34 4140 75 75 1 148

1•4 0 0 80Ms 20 0 150

10 M t! 35 6180 75 82 i 160 4 0 : 0 0 0 0 10511 it ;t 5340 85 174 152 8 10Ms

10 0 50 0 125

12 PP 39 i 6090 85 74 : 151 4 0 1 0 • 0 ; o 0 14013 Bobwhite 48 i 6700 7 r 175 1 76 •151 5 , 0 0 0 |o !0 11014 Bobwhite 49 7230 90 78 : 152 4 0 0 0 j 0 0 10015 Sunbird 56 7570

I65 84 •158 4 ; 0 0 0 : 0 0 95

16 K. Atlas 6730 80 1 76 156 5 j 0 0 0 0 0 10017 CZK 60 5850 85 j81 159

j5 i 0 0 0 T 0 90

18 Weibull I 5O4O i95 j 83 162 5 j 20Ms 0 0 i 0 0 10019 H 75 1

14420 |85 |8$ 161 1 , 0 0 0 u 0 135

20j ST 535 A 4440 !80 77 154 3 j 10ms 0 0 ! 0 0 95

21 ET 590 A 5400 ! j80 80 157 j 4 i 0 Tns 5Ms It 0 12022 j

1ET 620 A 6050 ;75

i72 155 4 ■ 0 0 0 0 0 140

23 ! Sunb.ird 152 2640 j 85 77 { 155 ! 8 ; t N Ims 100S 10c 0 100

57

w w o 3 &>

tdo

IV UJ u> tv UJ ro ro ro ro roUl ro O vo 00 —3 OS VJI

--- , - _tjl w £

0UI Ld tr1 bdpr H- > ci O $5 o

Ui cd 5 o' fr" a1o P w cr1 c? ■=*o H* 13* <rt" ►3*IY> 0\ 4 2 H* o H-CO oo P< c4- tr c+(D (D

_\-f* _>. _1 4 O00 V/l VO VO

ro-t*

<D(0

VJlo\

oopu<D

054H-

S-

o\4-'i Vji-!^vn-fi'Ji^vji'ji~J m ^ 4—j —I'-ovouj-q r o w —3 ro ro o vo ro-i uo O w v o c o f o v j i v t i o \ o co uj roo o o o o o o o o o o o o o

C O - J ^ U I - J - J C)-^ CD CO 00 —3 03 GO>Ji <jl Ui U1 Ui U) O Ui Ui 'Ji O VJl Ui O

-4 —3 —a CO CO —J —3 -~-3 — —-1 00 —0 —J —Jc o o N - o —i —i. c^ONvn ro ro vji —> vji —a

U l V J] U ! \ J 1 \ J 1 \ J 1 U I U l ^ ^ U i Io n ^ w o \ ( 3\ u i \ j i o o o \ 0\ ^ co ro

4

•-<1m H*

(D •t *

- S -ft,

Stand. $

_ „ _ _ _ VJi O', VJ1O O O O O O O O O l O O ^ ^ OM Cfl 01

o o o o o o o o o o f f ow to o o

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - ^ ^ 0 0Un>=si

'W roO O O O O O O O O O O O O O

O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

O O O V D V O V O ^ O (Vi rOUJVO-^VO O O O O V T I U I U I O V J I V J I V J I O O V _ n

Days to Heading

Days to MaturitySeptoria

(o-9)

Shattering

iHeight ____ Q ff U _ .

115-13/82 Bread wheat yield test (frost) Meraro

The test was "undertaken in frost prone area at the highland station of Meraro. The objective of the the trial is to screen,varieties of wheat which could tolerate frost hit. Unfortunatelyf there was no frost incidence during the test period. Most of the varieties in this trial were found to be susceptible to yellow rust* The degree of infestation was rather low for the top yielding lines.

With regard to yield there was no significant difference between the four top yielding varieties. Test weights were low for the varieties which were heavily attacked by yellow rust.

55

03 T J ^1 *nCD l—1 CD 1—1CD P 4 0P- P c + c+H* CT H -2 H - M M

oq 3 H# H -oq N tS3

4 CD CDG3 *-{c~f- V 3 0O c+

ft*•* CD ro

P>

cm

ro ->>OJ VJI

C O - J 0 \ V3\ oj ro »d v o co ca ui 4 oj ro

ro

oUJ on VJI VJI ' OJ ON y ro L»J -P=> VJI ONOJ VJI vo —LON f\3 0 —kro VJI Co VJI —0 VO 4OJ VJI 0 —J VJI VJI 03 vn 0 03 03 vn O ro On COO 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O O —3 0

roco

V O V O V O V O V O O O O v o O V O O O V O V O V O O V O— J v o v o V O V O O O O v o O v o O O — J V O VJI o —-J

VO VO vo O VC VO CO VO 03 03 O O 03 VO o v o v o oo -* —J oo vo vji vo oj ro vo -j ro co 4 rv>

t-3•-3 O j *-3 —>> WO O O ^ d O O O M O O O o o s o o o k Is m :-j ux 03 0203 03

O O O O O O O O O O O SJ O O O O O SJ03 0 3 03

— J (. aJ ON

0 O 0S H Kr/3 S 03

0 3

roo03

t-303

5-3 *-3

s §0 3 03

-P*o 03 H3 Ong w o0 3 0 3 03 03

—I -io o03 03

ONO303

O O -P*o0 3

-P*O voo o t-3w o VJI 03 VO O O O O VO COo o oo o h3W

O tr1 f0<

e0 3

003

• a

w

&

11 u II

_JS_ -- Je—J

VJIVjiO

VJiON

5*cm

<P-~J | vjivjiONVjirol—‘•o n o n o n O'*—‘■ ojvjiro

O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 o

Stand $

Days to Heading

Leaf rust

Stem rust

Leaf

Bar

Septoria-(O1?)

ro o\ o -*> vo o ro o o on o ro o o o o

ro rooj VJI

oj ro ro -*• -* vo oj u w -* vo vo oO oj oj vji o oj Covn oj oj vji vji vji vn co oj

oj Oj Oj oj oj oj ro oj oj ro oj oj oj4 ON -J ro VJI O OJ VJI -J VO 4 —i4 js» OJ 44 vn oj4 Vji

VJI CO CO co UJ O VJI o 03 Co VJI O O CD 0 0 O O

—3 —3 —3 00 —3 —J 03 VJI —j —3 ON -J —0 —3 —3 O O -0 onOj —j ro 0 —3 ro —* -^1 V O VJI VJI O J 4 ^ O J V O O co Oj

0 0 • 0 • 0 « 0 0 a • 0 0 » e 0 •|ro O J VJI V O O oj 4 ^ ro ro ON—*• O O O O 4 ^ VJI ON

Early

ooPie

Gq

trP

H*<DI—1P*CO

&fc>3

t?H-COCDPCQCD03

H- tr4

a °?

Shattering %

Height cm

1000—seed Weight gm

HI—Weight kg

Bread v/heat

yiild test

(Frost) Meraro

60

115-14/82 Bread wheat frost ebservation (Meraro)

This single plrt observation was planted at Meraro with the aim *f screening bread wheat lines which appear to be resistant to fVost. Nevertheless, the season was not infavor of the objective ef this trial as there occured no frost at all. Thus, screening against frost was not made possible. In this observation trial also lines which were more or less resistant to yellow rust appeared with high yields.

»1

Xt=d>TJf-Jo3rt-c+

-H-1- '(->71

3H - H* qN N- \ij CD

Prt-

p p^Tv i on

no tv no ro o vD oo -A _ \ _A

-<] on vji -P~ v*j ro o vo co-nJ on vn -p- v» no ooCbo

t o

S' -p-

; o- •> -jon

|C-ICOcD'Tj

OOOl\>

-o -p- ~0 VJl ONVJl VJl V-Nl p-**Oo -<] -p- •.'O OO -i -o -p--o ONVJl -P- -P- COvn o V.MONo o o o o O O O o o oa\ONo

-p" ONVJl Vj-I vn V*i Vn roro Co OO —1 vO V>i -p-vO _A -o ro VJl vO -0 oo o o o o o o o o

O vD O O O O ON O O O O O O O O O O OO v.0 O O O O O O O__ Ua----------------- — --- a - ^ - ^ - ^ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

m3 vO vO vD vO -P~ -P" ON -O V>! vD vD OO O vO VQ v0vm on \o oo v>i ro —>

C O vOOn O \D vO vO VO vO O ON Vjl Ul CO MD V£5 -P- -P-

VJ1 h3S O O CO O co

-* vji t-DO O O Co i j? iCo Co

cq\rr0)

H-CDI-1&

Oo■V]aVJ1as:

Stand %

Days to

Heading

o ro H3o i o o o o o o c o i I Leaf rust go oo ^*7"CO

V>i -A H3o o o o ECO CO CO

o o o O I o oC/3 COro v>j Vni vm k o O I O O O O O O O O M S E COC/0 CO CO

OO OO ON -p"O O O O c

rr-O O O O O CO

ro On \0O O O O I o •

o o o o I o 00

v_n on on on -o oo o o o o o o o o o

Leaf

ar

t-aCO O O O O O O O I

ON'jiONON'jimchaNPi on 1 ONONONON-p-aNONOONi

roo o o o O N

O O O O O O O O O O O O V j l O O O O o

O O O O 0NO-p- Or 0 V>J-p-OOOO-^CV^Jf\j>OO o

O -i o M -io o vji vji vji \D vO VO -i -a V>J V>JO VJ1 VJ1 UI O O VJ1 Vjsl — V>1 |\J O OV / l O O O O V / l O O O V J l

*-< WCD H -H COH CDo P

COo»-S 0)COid -

Stem rust

Septoria (0-9)

Lat-h- b-113 O 03 £L,- 0q ^ I

Shattering%

Height Height •m

115~

lk

/82

Bread wheat

frost observation

(Meraro)

A 15-T5-20 _ Yiald 'ssessment Tri -Is on Wheo.t (Asassat Meraro, Bekoji} Kulumsa, Robe & Dhera)

These sets of tri Is consisted of established varieties and lines of bread wheat which proved to be promising over years.

The tri Is were plmted with nd without fertiliser at all the testing locations with the s-rne objective as last ye-r, that is to see the perform nee of the verities without the application of fertiliser since i-hese V3rieties were selected nd adv need under fertilised conditions. The fertilized sets of t'.-e tri Is were given the recommended rate* of fertilizer to the respective locations.

Disease incidence was not as sence as last year in general.

At s^ssa no significant yield differences were obtained between varieties under both fertilized nd unfertilized conditions. The response of some of the varieties to fertiliser application was quite good and one of the commercial varieties K6?5‘0-Bulk gave 68 f yield increase with fertilizer application at s me location.

At IJer-ro I"6 °95—4 \ showed a high response to fertiliser application (48 /). There were significant yiald differences between varieties both with and without the application fertiliser. Some varieties also showed negative response to fertiliser at this location.

All varieties responded quite nicely to fertilizer at Bekoji. This is in agreement with soil analysis from this rea which indicates low level of phosphorus. Significant differences in yield were onscrved only for unfertilized set. Over al] yield increase due to the application of fertilizer was hi.;;h for Bekoji (32V ).

t Kulumsa most v -rietics showed economically positive responses to fertilizer. As opposed to other locations P.6 29 5—4 A responded neg tively when fertiliser was used for the reason which could not be explained.

2

The highest over 3 I I yield response to fertilizer (36 ct ) w ps

obt ~ined at llobe. significant yield differences v>ere oT'fc ined in both trial sets here. *s regards response of invidusl variety at Kobe the highest yield increment of 67 was outlined from I<6106—9 -

/>.t Dll or a the response of IC-v — Ila.z x ? ,?1 — Bbt L629O — Built and Nacozari s to fertilizer was attrrctively high.

. 6* .

115-15-20 Yield Assessment on wheat j-th fertilizer at different locations

Code j” Variety

i---- ------

I Locations VarietyRankI‘ Aassa | Meraro Bekoji Kulumsa Robe Bhera mean kg/ha

1 j Enkoy 3480 I 3150 4790 2870 3730 2070 3682 62 K6290-Bulk 4030 J 3360 3280 2820 4220 1130 3807 2

3 K62S5-4A 3170 | 4630 4820 3470 3870 2600 3768 34 Romany Be 3070 I 3500 5020 1840 2990 2340 3160 11

5\Kav.kaz x kal.Bb 3200 i 890 5120 3340 4690 1340 3830 1

6 ET.13.A.2.L.3.L 3140 ' 4220 4740 3430 4280 980 3468 87 ET.12D4L.7.L 3350 j 4680 3420 2920 3790 2330 3785 48 K6 106-9: 5300 5310i 3260 238C 4630 1700 3797 39 ET.13.A.11.L.1.L 3360 4210 4520 3770 4420 (1356) 3606 710 Dereseligne 2740 j 3980 4030 3380 3540 (1336) 3171 1011 Furr x Cno nSM

No.66 Cm 4210-1 0y-4M-8Y 5550 ! 4200 4420 2460 3710 (1356) 3279 9

Station mean 3343 : 4362 4836 2991 3988 1356Station rank 4 I 2 1 1

l ... 3 3 6

1 1S-1W 0 Yield Assessment on wheat with out fertilizer application at dif forint. Torations

6.5

Code Variety Locations Variety RankAsassa Meraro Bekoji Kulumsa Robe Dhera mean

kg/haEnkoy 3000 4430 4020 2370 2710 1450

— — — — ... „ .

3000 6 !p K6290-Bulk 2400 3620 4130 3310 2820 1270 2958 8

3 K6295-^A 2280 4750 4280 2550 3030 1440 3055 44 Romany Be. 2400 3100 3920 1880 2380 990 2445 11

5 Kav. Kax x Kal-Bb 2830 5630 4040 2730 3420 1830 3417 16 ET.13.Ao2.L.3o6 3160 4650 3190 3150 3 110 1610 3145 37 ET. 12D4L. 7 - L 2?4o 4690 4000 2310 2860 1310 2985 78 K6 106-9 3170 4940 3760 2900 2760 1710 3207 2

9 ET.13.A.11.L.1.L 3520 3270 3000 3230 3630 (1451) 3017 510 Dereseligne 2340 4290 3540 2600 i 3160 (1451) 2897 911 Furr x cno "S'*

No.66Cm 4210-1 0Y-4M-8Y 3430 3030 2520 2110 2460 (1451) 2500 10

Station mean 2842 4222 3673 2667 2940 1431

Station rank 3 1 2 5 4 6

* 66 •

115-15-20 Yield gain (loss) dueto fertilizer application at different locations

Code Variety Location Varietymeankg/ha

Rank(in response to fertilizer)

Assssa Heraro Bekoji Kulumsa Robe | Dhera

1 Enkoy : +480 +700 + 770 + 40 + 1020 + 620 +605 8

2 K6290-Bulk + 1630 +1?40 +1150 -690 + 1400 - 140 +848 83 K6295-4A + 89O - 70 + 540 +640 + 48o +1160 +607 74 Romany Be., + 670 + 400' +1100 - 4o + 610 + 1550 +715 55 Kav. Kax. x Kal-Bb + 370 - 760 +1080 +810 +1270 - 290 +413 96 ET.13.A.2.L.3.L, + 20 - 430 +1550 +300 +1170 - 630 +330 11

7 ET*12D4L7L + 810 -10 +1420 +610 + 930 + 1040 +800 38 K6106-9 ~ + 330 + 370 +1500 +380 +1870 - 10 +?40 49 jiiT® 13»A® 11 »Ls 1 *Xi - 160 + 940 + 1520 +540 + 790 - +700 610 Dereseligne + 4oo - 310 + 4*90 +780 + 380 - +359 1011 Furry x Cno "Sff +864 1

No 066 Cm4210-10Y-4M-8Y + 100 +1170 +1900 +350 +1250 -

c 67

_Yield Assessment on Hheat with & without Fertilizer \J[

Yield in kg/hfi _ot 87»5 j'~ DM

f I■rr MJ Jvjith Fertilizer tfith out ;■Yield gain !j Code Variety fj i(ifjODAp kg/ha) Fertilizer'; due to fer-*

*___ _ _______ fj3000 j|

tilizer jI 1 i j Enkoy i 3480 0CO"St+

2 ¥.6290 - Bulk 4030 2400 \ + 1630 (3 K6295 - 4A 3170 2280 ]; + 890 j4 Romany Be 3070 2400 I + 670 I5 Kav. KaZ x kal - Bb 3200 2830 ! + 370 j6 T5T 13. A* 2.L0 3.Lo 3140 3l60 i< 20 IJ

! 71 E® 12D4L? L 3550 ? 2740 ; + 810 |8 IC61O6 - 9 3500 3170 i + 3309 ET 13.A.11.U1.L 3360 3520 - 160

10 Dereselegne 2740 2340 ;N■3430 |

OO•T+

11 Furry x CnoMSK No. 66 CM421(M0y-4M-8r 3530 -I- 100

Treatment mean 3343__ ^2752 ;t 4 591

L.S.D. 5$ NS NS I

C.V. 16.4$ 20.0# |Seeding rate, Kg/ha 150 150 jPlot size, 6.8 6.8 |

• Sowing date 13June 13 June i'] .- ■ - - -tt-Mni -_BTWT ■ -- "V- - 1~| WL-1_______

1 1 1 6 Yield Assessni&nt on v?lie -1 with 3.nd_ withcut^ Fer tlizer

(Meraro)

TTield in kg/ha. ?,t 87.5^

.... - - ~ — -• --------- ■ ■ ■ -Code Variety viith fertilizer Without Yield gain

ij— _ (150 kg/ha DAP) Fertilizer due to

Fertilizerr | 1

Enkoy 5150 4450 + 700i 2 K6295 - 4/i 5360 3620 + 1740I 3 ET 12* B.7.L.9.L. 4680 4750 - 70! 4 Romany Be 3500 3100 + 400I 5 K a,v-ka z x K al - Bb 4890 5650 - 760i 6 f ET 13. A2 L.3. L 4220 4650 - 430S 1 ET 12.D4.L.7.L 4680 4690 10; 8 ( K6IO6 - 9 5310 ' 4940 + 370! 9 Aurora, z 1>. - Bb 4210 3270 + 940j 10 ET 13 A.11.L.1.L 3980 4?90 - 310| 11

l____Furry x Cno "S" 4200 3030 + 1170

!I) Treatment mean 4562 4222 H- 340i1 L.S.Do5f- 893 1366

{' if 1218 NSC*V. f 11.5 1900Seeding rr;«.te, kg/he. 150 150Plot size, 6.8 6,8Sowing date 23 June 23 June

69

1.1.5-17 Yield Assessment on ':he..t with '.nd without Fertiliser (Beko.ji)

Yield in kg/ha ^t 67.5 '7

Variety J ith Fertilizer (I50fcg/ha DAP)

-ith out ’ Fertilizer

Yield gainl due to ! Fertilizer?

Enkoy 4790 4020 + 770 !r.6295 - 4a 5280 x 4130 ! "I* 1150ET12. 3 .1 .h 9.L } 4820 | 4280 540 • 1

Romany BC 1 5020 3920 -!• 1100 !Kav—kaz x Kal-Bh i 5120 4040 + 1080 i jET 13. j62. L.3 L ' 4740 3190 1550 |Ef 12. D,c I.o 7cL4 5420 4000 + 1420 i iK6 106 - 9 5260 3760 + 1500 .Aurora x 1 ->1. Bt>. ; 4520 3000 ) + 1520 | ;ET13. A.1 1 .L.1.L 4030 3540 + 490 IFurry X cno ,lbk* 4420. 2520 i + 1900 !

jt it ,

Treatment mean 40 56 3673 1 1183

— -- .i

32 $' 1L.S.D.5 f I US 874 !

it -i1 /•t NS 1 192 t

!

C.V f ! lo.O 14 .0 i iSeeding rate, kg/ha ! 150

i150 ; 1

1Plot size, if' 6 .8 6 .8 1ifjowing date 25 June 25 June |

.1 . J

70

8 .Yield Assessment on e^.t with. and without Fertiliser (Kulurasa)

Yield in kg/h* rb 8?

Code |i

“ 1

2

3456

78

9 10

11

Variety

EnkoyK6295 - 4AK6290 - Bulk Romany Be K n.v-k a.a x Kal-Bh ET 13 ;'2L.3 L ET'i Z . D j L . 7 L.

K6106 - 9

Aurora x k&l. Bb r ET 13 A.11.L.1.I,I Furry x Ono *’Si:

: Treat<nent rne.?,n

| L.5*D. 5 $>

\ 1 f

p v rf-Jl V

! Seeding' rote, kg/h .2[ Plot siae, £

Sowing date

1th Fertilizer (l50 kg/ha DAP) i

Without Fertii iser

Yield g .in due to Fertilizer

2870

28203490

354034502920

2380377033802460

306871597613.71. 0

6 ,0

1 July

i2709 791 ITS

17.2

150 6*0 1 July

t28’ i + 40

3510 ! ~ 690

2550 !; + 640

1880ii ~ 40

2730 i + 810

3150 ! + 300

2310 ! + 610

2900 ' + 380

3230 I • 540

2600 i + 780

2110 350

359 I 13 %

71

115-19 Yield Assessment on Nhe.at_ with & without Fertilizer ( Robe J

Yield. kgfc t S7 .5 °A DE

Code>

Varieties 1 --ith Fertilizer | (150 kg/h? DAP)

.Hith out Fertiliser

Yield incrernen. tj due to Ferti-

l i z e r ____

1 Erikoy 3730 ' 2710 + 1020

2i K6 ?95 - 4A 4220 • 2820 + 1400

3 ST12. B.7.L9.L : 3870 • 3030 + 480

! 4 ■ Rom any Be : 2990 | 2380 + 610 I*; 5

£ au-koz X 3r:l Bb 4690 . 3420 + 1 2 7 0 ;4 /■oi ET 13. A.2.1.3.L • 4280 i 3110 + 1170 !)! 7 ET 12. D.4 .L.9 .L 3790 1 2860 + 530 ;

8if

Ko 106-9 46 30 : 2760 + 1S70 !fi 5

Vurora x 1 al-Bb-Swn 4420 J 3630 + 790» 10 ET13. A.11.L.1.L ; 3540 j 3160 + 380 j

; 11 Furry x cod ”8" N o„66 i 3710 | 2460 i

12501

iLocation mean 3988

1‘ r--S40 1048 , '

C.V. f ! 13.8 j 1 1 .9

LSD 51 937 592rf • Nc;1

j808

Vi Seeding rate, kg/ha 150 j 150 1

} Plot siae, M • 6 .0 6«0j

_______Sowing d^te

:

16 July1

16 July1

/X

\

72

115-20 Yield Assessment on Wheat with & without Fertilizer (phera)

Yield in kg/ha at 87*5$ BM.

Code Variety1With Fertilizer ;

(100 kg/ha PAP)iWithoutFertilizer

Yield increament pue to Fertili-

: zer

\

ii

1 Enkoy 2070 i• 1450 + 620 j2 K6295-4A 1130 | 1270 - 140 i3 K6290 - Bulk 2600 i 1440 + 1160 i4 Kav-kaz x kal - Bb 254P J 090

,

+ 1550 i1j5 ILT12, D o© oL i»7 »L 1540 I 182P - 290 t

6 K6106 - 9 VO CO 0 16,10 - 630 J7 Nacozari nSn 2350 I 1310 + IO4O >

8 Ku79 - 11 - 11 1700 j i

1710 10

Location mean1

1864 i U51 + 413 28$LoSoD. % NS J NS

" 155 m J NSC.V fo 38.1% ?i

Seeding rate, V*/ha 150 •; 150

Plot size, 6*8 | 6.8

j: Sowing dat e 8 Tuly j

I8 July

115-15 a/82 Yield Assessment Crial on Wheat (Asassa)with Fertilizer

K\1

: Code V a r ie t y

i

%CTI

-PCO L

ays

to

| H

ea

din

g

IO -p -P *H

r"

au(h

I

•

S -P. CD CQ -P 3

■ 02 W

)is eases

Y ello w Rust

Le

af

j Ru

st

f.....■

£ -M m ’H S<D Ohri h—<

Fhta pi J>s -P c5 t? Pt ^

0 ON -P Ift O O

CO«iS

* 1<D

1 Enkoy 99 19

,

134 4 0 0 20ms 30ms 108

2 K6290 - Bulk 99 79 136 8 0 0 •50ms 10ms ., 120

3 K 6295 - 4A 99 84 138 1 0 0 20ms Trms 110

4 Romany BC 100 76 130 6 0 20 80ms ‘ 40 ms 123| 5 Kav kaz x K>.1 — 3b 93; 87 141 3 ' 0 0 0 10 ms 95; 6 3T 13.A.2.L.3.1 99 81 140 3 10 mw 0 ■10 ms . Trms 110

I 7 ET 12 U4«L*7L. 99 87 143 5 0 0 0 20 ms 83I 8 Z6106-9 98 : 86 142 7 0 0 e<\ tn£ 30 ms 110

9 ET 13 * A. • 11 .L.-Il 1rO 85 140 6 0 0 ; 0 Trms 11310 Screselagne 100.' 68 122 9 0 0 ■ 0 Trms

*95

11 Furry x cno ’ s : Ho. 66 .cm 4210-104-411-84 99 84 . 140 7 0 0 70s ; 30 ms 85 '

- ;

115-15*) Yield. Assessment Trial on Wheat (Asassa)Without Fertilizer

: Yield 87• % DM Kg/ha j Relo

r

■

, c5 -P CQ Day

s to

Head

ing i>a0 -p-p *H

03 ^ >> -PtT:- ctiR S..

I? seases

s .bjO OQ ■H £ O Ow

l1 Code>

Ii

i— -

Variety

'■ Se

ptarra

(0-9

) Ye 11 ow

1,.

Rust .Ch *pct5 03 pj

<j 1

Enkoy 3000 100 99 79 123 8'

0 0 50n s 0 103! 2 ■ K 6290 - Bulk 2400 » I100 ■7-5 124 7 0 0 10mi 88 .-J| 3 K 6295 - 4 A 2280 76 99 84 136 6 0 0 Tri;fS 20ms 95: 44 Romany Be 2400 80 99 76 129 8 0 0 50m?: Trmsi 115.: 5

Kav kaz x kal - Bb 2830 ’ 94 90 87 142 7 0 0 20m£ 40ms 88

i 6 27T 13.A.2.L.3.L 3160 105 99 84 140 7 30ms 0 ' 30m: 10ms 110

; 7 ET 12 D4o 1-7oL 2$40 91 96 86 142 7 0 0 ■5ms 30ms 8°J 8 K 6106 - 9 3170 106 98 84 140 7 0 0 30m j Trms 103: 9 AT B o A o 11 o L * 1L 3520 117 [98 86 144 5 0 0.30mj 0 1131 .»I 10 ; Dereseldgone 2340 78 98 68 121 7 0 0 5^s 105 •;: 11 Furry x cno’s’ No.66

owr1210- ■1 Cy-4M-8" 3430 m 98 83 141 7 0 0 70s Trms 93 :

O M3 05 -J ON >J1 4^ ro

hr}

is

Q ojoO -s. p -»■ o- tw m o

So4to

h-*

£

ON0 ON1

ND

n n-■Aro oj

>

&> o

t>-t

Ja0>tSl

t-1 tr*

rv) tr* H

oj K ' 05

34fcdoo

HJ

&

M M *•3 On fN> NO

ro vji ItcJ •£*9 |>

t-1«NOetr*

o<<;

•f Oj Uirv> no ro ojo 00 -v —o o o ^

^ w ro cd ui 00 ro ND o o o o o

-£* V7I VjlCT\ U ) jCo o\ vno o o

0 0 —1 OO O NO CO NO 0> ND OM "J |\5 U ^ IO O O —v ^ oo

NO NO NO NO \ 0 NO ND ND NO NOOO —J NO OO V3 U i OO IN) NO ND

oo

CD

PhiH*CDcl-«

H*CDH

OO

9

y.

00 NO NO NO NO NO O VO O NO CO00 ON ON OJ f\) —J |\) -1 U1 OJ NO

t-a VJ1 4 B& mm

o o uiam

EBONJ1

O i-9v_nH3f\jOv_n—^ro0 4 3 4 0 O O OM B S B 3 &w « m k j w m m o

00 I-* co t-3 i_.j -s, ^ ro -to o o0 0 0 4 O O O O O

Stand fo

Days to Heading

LeafRust

Leaf

EAR

0 0 0 0 0 ^ 0 0 0 0 0 4StemRust

0S vji On N_n -J vji on On

O O O O O O O O O O O

o - k - 5--*- oo-i o 00 ro noO O Ui U 1 Ul o >jl Ul Ul o VJ1

-£=* OJ UJ OJ OJ UJ O-1 OJ -IO —J NO *~3 K ) -V NO OJ - i O Oj0 * 0 0 » a o » 0 0 ^00 OJ O N J I O j O O j O O C D O j CO

—J 00 -J 00 —4 CD CO —J 03 CO CO- P ^ - s - N o r o N o o 0 ui 0 0 roo « e a » o s a o 6 «U 1\J1 O O Ol Oj' O 4** O NO Oj

SeptoriaLate

Shattering </0

Heightcms,

1000-seed Weight gm„Hl—Weight kg

NJII

H*C-f-&

$<rfH*MH*N«

16a Yield

Assessment on

Waeat

76

O vo Oo —J On vji oj r\X'j ooP--Q•*1n n >

sWON4 4 VO o ro

M 6*04ro ON

1 y4e>oo M • rop VO tr* oo o {V « wzi tr* v> —j «o

_i0tr1t—*

1»tr* O J

0ir*

WO'

WP3JoNH

bJO'

WO @3 ONe> ro& ro vo

w1

vo1

V JI1o

1tr*\voe

■&

4H-(Dc+

ly; 4i. U ^ -1 ^ Vn ^ u< ^O r o r o v o o N O N O N —^ —-j o n j Oj vp -~3 -P» vo vji VJ7 O Vn f\> vn0 0 0 0 - 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 . 0

ON VO -—3 00 ON OJ 0 O {V) —J O CO o01 ^ O <1 -V o

O V O V O V O V O V D V O V O V O vo O On On -"3 Co oj 4* Oo 00

CO VO VO VO VO VO O 00oo —o On vo On Ov i\> vo vo CO —3 VO

O3ca

o o H343mo3tn

'-3 o 4(-3 >*3

0 4 4 0B B 3to to w

13mvn3TO

01OjO3w

o3mo->8Til

-tO3mH343m

o3TO-O Vji 00 ■ Oo -F>O V J i O O O O O O O O O

VJI 1-3 1-33 0 0 0 0 4 4 O O O OW CO Eft—J vji Vn ON ON On -t* ON 4 Vn ON

0 . 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ' O


O - i - * - A V O —^ 0 - ^ 0 3 —s-VOO O O O O O O Vn vn vn vnOJ 0-> -£*Go vo —*

Oj W -P>. ^ O n o j —* IV5

OjOj oj oj oj roO O OJ OO Co vji CO co Oj VJI oo

—JOJ 00 —JO VO 00 03 —3ro o vo

oo

■£* oj vo On oj On o— j c o c o O oOJ o o oO 6 ft O

ON O J O N V JI

W Kla>Jj1 m

° ooakn

oPai-jo isf

Stand 4>/°Days to HeadingLeaf Rust f0Strip Rust on Le f $

M R Rust /°

Stem Rust $Septoria

(0-9)

EarlyL a te

H- t*4 ft %

Shattering <j£Heightcmso1000-seed height grns

Gl-W eight kfc*

H-<rHt*1osfxj4c+- H- I—* H- N <0 4

OnO '

KH-(i>M>TOTO(0TOTOo(i/&§S3*(DPc+

11=» a> 4J»»o

w

o VO Co os vn 4*

td tea. W til W Wi-3% Os >-3 *3 <5 o3—* £ o - vs> OS ro (-AJ• 1 « e *<!b> vo W j.te> NQ -£=• « w5V o ro W o-k t-19 i* 0 r* *TIt* H-1 t--'0 A» o h—*h-> tr* 0» o' tr* bd0 e O'

oop i<0

<4p4H*CDcf-

m■«fci

^ ^ ^ UI UI 4^-P* o Ui W -Pi -Jro w ro os ro -t=»o o o o o o

vji vji -pi. vn O CPrO 1\)

o oroo .o vo

03 o

vo oo \c> ro 4> oi -»> vo o oOJ vo On UI 0 - ^ 0 -* O O

00 \£> OQ VD VO VO C O V jD V O V O V O

00 VO VO VO VO VO VO 00 VO 03 00vji o ro O —1• vji os os oo ro

co co oo oo co a? oj oo vn os -£=■ ~J

03 OO <39 03 COOs Os vn —3 vn

{-3 *3 4* >34 Os O O H*w 1 3 3 0

s; DQ 4.m .-*■ . T ---

P3 C+- c+0 4 4 0 4

3 3 Bm oi co

.W&

W(D

H* CD f—'C O

a

Stanci^

Uayts v. Heading

Days to MaturityLeafM m L

*-3 f-3 1-30 4 0 4 4

3 3 3 0to OJ W

c+- OJ0 4 0

0 3 3 3 0W W W L ea f

o o o o o O O >-3 O O 4

EAR

DM H c+O

Vn vn vn 4> 4 uj w ui ^ Ui S e p to r ia

(0-9)

O Vn O O O vm ro o ro vn S h a tte r in g

_____ I . . , . . , . .

voVn

vo — o O Vn o roo V Jl

o ^ vo o o vn

4 4 4->o ro o w w ^—4 —-JVn Oo OJ O U»

4> 4 Oj 4 UJ-» ro o\ ro -J0 0 0 0 4o o vn vn oj

--3 CO OO 00 00 OOvo io o ro -»

HeightCm.

1000—seed Weight gm,

oo —J o vo oo oo OO — —k oO vo oo ro o Lo vn vo os —J os

Hl-tfeightk g *

115-lZa Yield

Assessment oi Vfheat

(Beko.ji) With

Fertiliser

78

O VO 00 -3

*<

XJ1

%

OjQ

1svp>I—*fcdxsxs:t*

wC\0ON

1V O

fc) iJ> 4 ** r o t~~* 0W--3 Ojtr'

Vn 4^

Wo

<5 3fl>

P>N

tuM oKU>1

hio'

Eg «ON_a ro ro voWJj!

VO:* :

VJ1I

o

oop.CD

*3pj4H-(Dc+

v n v /t 0 - 4 O -j» OVOro 4 » o o\ o vo 4^ ro 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0

-f=* .fs» K> ->• Ooo oj roo o o

o\ OO -J voOJ 00 V I -£*>

O ~-3 O VO

O VO -i 0 0

O O ON Oj

OO

--1 0 0 —J VD © 0 5 - J VO.vo oj -{. o —i oj vo ro

CO VO vo O J v o o \

00. .00 v o v o v o v o v o o o v o v o O N V o r o - * - i - ^ o j v o io i o oo

Oo Oo CO Oo OO VO OO 03 03 VO OO—J O N U I V J l O O - ^ O O O O O O O u f 00

O O f-3 (-3 O 0 4 4 0

3 3 tn ojO O f-3 H3 rot-3

4 4 0 43 10 3 3ta mm

trttt?9J

CDI-1

00a

sStand tfo__ _Days 'to HeadingDays to Maturity

' ,ll~ - i-j ■ -1 r** ■ ■ ■ ■'4 On vji h3

0 3 O O O U l O O 3 4 001 3 3 OJ 3

, . . . --------,--------- — J B------------ J Q , -------------- tfl__ ____

~i vn o oO O O O O O O O

Leaf

Jlust

Leaf f t CD

EAR

-PS.OJVJI

31

Septoria(0-9)

VO O O J vji rv> (n> o o

v o O V O O O O V O - iO O O V/i O V n O O

00 vo vo O VJi O

-F^-F^4^0J0J-P^-f^4^ -p2» -q oo —j o ro O j 4>» O J ON t v ON

O j O O j v_n v n O C o v n v_n v_n . Vj i

— j o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O O 0 0 o v o r o - j - - ^ r o - v o o roro v/i o vji m on oo vo ro vo

Shatt ering °h

Heightcm«

1000-seed.

Weight gm

Hl-Weightkg.

asH-c+Ky*

os.CD4cf H’ f—1 H- N CD 4

VJII

Hi}H-CD

>OJMCDOJTO3

OP*-r*

E?CDSJ<rh

wftoLj.

i -c -

115 - 18a Yield Assessment on Wheat (Kulumsa)With Fertilize?

CodeiIij Variety

\\i Diseases io .1 >I

yield oJ oji/o DJ* l 1 T -bOCg-1iIjJ--- .. - -. _

kg/ha Rel«iLI S-o?-P' m: Days

to

Head

ing

Days

to

Matu

rity si 0 q>; -P f & Oj C) v_<CO

&e&1

ava0 p

--------------------------------------------------------

1 in£ $t>5 ■ £ ra S -faf rH fco S © .<3 ^ *-H 0 -P S* <£ - <U M psj W jffl

1 Enkoy 2870 100 93 67 122 3■

0 0i ! 70ms Trms 15 103

2 K 6295 - 4A 2820 98 90, 70 126 3 0 0 \ 10ras 0 0 1053 K 6290 - Bulk 3490 127 95' 67 144 5 0 0 0 0 5 115

4 Romany Be 1840 64 95: 71 . 125 3/11 0 0 0 A0 40 : 1285 Kav - kaz x kal - B"b 3540 123 9 8! 76 137 7 20ms 0 20:TlS 0 0 98o L'i' 13 ®A • 2 «li o 3 3450 120 93| 78 138 ■7 0 0 Trms 0 5 1207 ET 12.D4.L.7L 2920 102 9 6;I 73 132 .4 : Trms 0 70ms 20ms

Trms 10 , 858 K 6106 - 9 3280 114 9 2! 70 123 ' Trms 0 30ms 0 0 1079 Aurora x kal ~ Bb Swn 3770 137 88] 75 134 8 0 0 0 0 J 0 100

: 10 EF 13. A.2.L.3.L 3380 118 941 81 137 4 ' 0 0 0 0 : 20 118• 11 Furry x Cno !,S" No, 66.» 2460 86 86 j

[i

70 124 2/11 . O

1

0 0 0 ,1 01

93

115-1813 Yield Assessment (KuTumsa)Without Fertilizer

i[Yield 8'i M DM

f ’ Diseases VI'Odg-. f? } . iCode Variety

Days

to

Head

ing k O 4 *•i-l Yellow ]

:/haf1 ..

Relo-P *H

; ei si1 s1 Pt s

h 0> O I Rust I \ 8 -f-> ft si to

§+=■CO-t3 O ft w Q CO 03 'BA

aflj IQ <1> 3 Pn

E +-*at to -p p m frjG> ! -p+3 | O I c3 '• si ;^ j" J

£lD E -H O 0

1 Snkoy i.2830 100 95 68 117 ; 4 0 0 50ms 0'.-j. - 4

'0 j 17 ;100

2 . K6295 - 4A I 3510 124 93 72 -14 0 . 0 30ms 0 0 j 8 100

3 K6290-Bulk 2550 90 93 70 117 5 Trms 0 0 0 0 | 10 107

4 Romany Be. : 1880 66 93 ' 72 3 30ms 0 0 0 0 ; 0 117

5 Kav-kaz. x kal - Bb 2730 96 92 77 - 7 0 0 20ms 5ms 0 : 0 . 876 ET 13-A.2.L.3.L 3150 111 88 79 - 6 0 0 30ms 30ks 0 | 18 105

7 3T 12.D4.1-7-L 2310 81 • 90 75 - 3 0 0 ;80ms 30ms 0 } 0 808 K6106-9 2900 102 87 j 75 Q 3 0 :0 ■30ms 0 0 | 4 105

9 : Aurora x kal-^b Swn 3230 114 82 i 76 132 7 0 o ;30ms 105 , 0 | 1 951° ET 13=A<,11 oL«1 .L 2* ' '0 92 92 j 79 4 0 0 j 0 0 20 j 2 120

' 11 FurryiTao nS” No,66 --------------------

. 2100'

74 85 | I70 123 8 0 o 'Trms 0 0] 0

i I85

8

£

<3

OPoCO

CT\cr\

o VO oo -0 CT\

w > r> l? j£ t-fl 1-3

ONO —i

VM 4 o i \ ) V0 » ON 0

>K

fcJ >9 1 e o—i -p- ro

VO 0 e♦ P tr*It* H 0 •0 >3 V!_A 1 O o«

bdtr» tr*

lT<o '

02

VH

§5VJ»IS)

* 4 -

t*rp >

wcr*

oB

Woo

V ro -

fc=d W MHi

ON &s ro or\> vo

iVI

tt1-p-

i Jt=*

-<J

t

I

voi

ooftCD

P4H*Q

VI VI -a vn-P“O O

- P --P"8

-p- VI CJ\ -N3 VI VOO O

w £oo vO O O

[\J VI -p*vo oo rovo -o roo o o

VI

Vio

pr&p

KiH -a> f_ift

o

o o o

o o o

0 S-tom R u st

g .... ~3 OCO

O

—

o o o o

o

oo

o

crs vn ON Vn C\ v n ro CT\ on

vOV>) Vn a PVJI oo

o v nVOoo ro

ooooGO Vn

-p-

VI

Vn1roro

V JV O

VJ-p-

rvj VMVO

OO OO

VMvOCO

VIo noO

rv>vO

-P-o

oo vnVJVJ

vn

-V]vn

- O OO00 —\ft eo n ->a

ooo

~oCTN«VJ

OOOvO

OOO«■vjOnro

-VIOoa-J

OOO *n3VOO

LeafEAR

&£cnct*Septoria (0-9)

Heightcm.1000-seed Weight gm

Hl-Weightkg.

115-19a Yield

Assessflent on

Whe£t (Robe)

with Fertil&er

82

o ^I Hro 4 o L w0 Q1 o

►-5* ***

A-'S-P=-* feJo O-- o>Onro4ONo

O vo oo on vji -p oj ro

> W on

OJ o4 o rv>p> vo »M I -S

vo t->03£jo's?2

—J t-*

W©Otr1

w Wo£ BVOw* 2<<tsi bdX owV\->owo'

ojo\O

oj ro ■ roon -o oooj oa onO O Ooj oj ro oj-»■ -£* uj o-i ro Co ojO O O O

ro ro OO —4 ro — o o

ooOJ IN) i. P-a>

n NON tro Oro vo *=H

of VJI P)40—J 1 H-CD« ■P» H-L-*evo{;»

£9&

vo—J o j o o - ^ r o o o ^ o o -p* ro On vji ^ Oo to o

~--J —J OO -—-J —1 —J CO —3 OO 00vjt oo ov O Co Ov oj oj vjt ro Oj

—3 VO CD OO —J VO C O —J V Q CO —J—J O O Oo —* on On o O —J

U1 UlVJlVJlU'rO\ON'nVJ1V71V/lO on co 0\ ui o O vj -P* ro o

t-3 On On ro -FO 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0

to B 5 3 5ffi 9 (9 u

3O 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 000

-ps.o

O 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0m

o o o o o o o o o o o

-4 -f5» On vji on vji oj on On -p vji

—3 O VO VO —J O VO O - J V O O OCO V/ l VJl VJl VJl Ul O V J l O O C O O O

oj oj oj ro oj oj ojro oj o4 oj ro -J vji o o v j i v d ro4 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 *00 oj Co O Vji Co vji Co o O O

—0 O O O O O O - J C O C O - J - 3 oo -JVji —* O —k —k O —J VO — Goo o o o o » o 1

Stand f 0

Days to

H eading

Days to

M a tu r ity

L e a f

R ust

Stem

.Rust

L e a f

M R

H(DO

£ 1 C+-

Septoria (0-9)

H eight

crru

1 0 0 0 -s e e d

W eight gm

HX-Weight

k g

s;H*c+&og.

$.»•H*MH*IS(D4

115 -»

19~b

Yield

A

ssessmen

t on

Wheat

(Ro

he

)

115-20a Yield Assessment on Wheat (Dhera)Witjaout Fertilizer j L j.i••

oo

Code Vari ety

1 Enkoy2 K 6295 - 4A3 K 6290 - Bulk4 Kav - kaz - kal5 ET 12.D4-L.7L6 K 6106 - 9

7 Nacozari rtSn8 Kv 79-11» 11

Yield 87

<kg/ha s

- Bb

14501270

1440990

18301610

13101710

Rel.

100

88

9968

126

111

90

118

Cc?-pCO

93 8394 85 93: 83 83 73

0 •p01rJP

S’■H<3<D

Diseases

6773 677472 71 7173

o*pto&p

!>s i ■p j •H- P

,n3

113116

112

119118

113116

115

rj- HO

- Pftoto

onIoa0t-3

-p ; £co o>£ +*ft ; cq

-p;JO-

3<0

45^soiitms |

° .) (

10ms I5

60ms | tms i tms I§ I

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

10ms

s 1 -P0

t <L> iio£C

m -p 11 s i { 0

0 ho iO 1j 0 0 } r—1

j •<— *=; i >*T*<

94 28o } 8 1 .6

69 30o0 I 8 0 .5

103 3 2 .0 | 7 8 .1

81 33-3 ! 78 ,0

63 2 8 ,0 !' 79 «6

75 25 08 ! 8 0 .1

73 ' 28.3 | 78 o567 35 .8 ( 81-5

8*f

r

CO - 4 Os v_n 4^» Oj i vOOa>

p '.£ & ‘■a 1-3o CT\ <1 OS Os

—a c* —i .-A wV o M ! \ o

P OSrV

o VnI 4 to

H- 1f

0 > 1 1

— 1 r; vo M td -P*W 1 1 c5 >1

t" 1 w

o<<5

itrio '

OOX> r oW VO Ul UtVnO -ps

o-P=*O

roosoo

ojo

-*■>. — 3 iv ro vn-3 4> oj On oi

roo

oo

Oo CO 0 0 vo CO —J 0 0 0 0Oj O 0 0 VJi Vn vn o OJ

ro—jro

osos o\Os

o -*vo o oo vji os o

—1. ro

VJi ifc* -£=■ OJ U1 VJ1 4

<1%H’(0<ri-<<!

£Wj



F- (D t—1 p oo

& s

Stand <f0

Days to Heading

Days to Maturity

Septoria(o-9)

1-3 OJ Oj4 VJl Vn

O S S 3m m cn

oj

VJ! ' n h33 4w o © o 3 o o

w

Vl OS ‘-3 OS OS —J —J0 0 CO 4s.. vo —S. o Vn

e W Oj Oj ro OJ oj OJOj VJ! OO os

> « • * • o • e

i 0 0 O 0 0 v_n Oj O o

CO-—J oo —4 CO oo —-jo -4 o vo O o vo• • • . 0 • oOJ VO o Vn o —3

OS00

&aCo

00rvo

Height

toH’M<E)9)WCDM

!D

cm.

1 0 0 0 -seed

Weight gm

HI-Weight

kg

113-20~b Yield

Assessment cn

Wheat (Phera

With Fertilizer

These trials consisted of different wheat lines which were tested and selected at different locations.

The aim of the trials was to screen varieties wnicfc would b .st adapt to the locations.

Check varieties were included for comparison at different locations. Some of the lines performed nicely than the check varieties.

115-21 - 26 Bread wheat variety trial (Asassa, Meraro,iiekoji, Kulumsa, Robe and Dhera)

86

115 - 21-26 Bread Wheat Variety Trials Grovm at six Locations

Entry VarietyYic2.1 d kg/ha.

I

]jocationAsassa Meraro Bekoji Kulumsa Robe Dhera

P ' —

; 1 Arora X Kal-B6 Sum 2360 ! 5320 5220 5530 5100 1500

2 ET12-R-7oL„9oL 2900 6680 5170 5280 4780 2180

3 7c An X Inia-B-Moni

2150 :I

6780 5820 5180 5730 1620

4 Giza 139xGh 1360.00 2790 7550 5670 3730 5650 2170

5• Kuz-Baho1S 1X Kal-B6 3490 6620 6000 ^530 5750 1380

6 - Inia Cm 3308...('/elib inia - B6) 3080 7050 5370 4250 5630 1330

7 Ku 78-1 1 - 1 5 1 2540 5830 6000 4700 470C 1270

8 Ku 79-11-45 3660 7280 6280 4920I

5450 1350

9 Kul 78-11-114 2680 8680 3680 4750 4850 2100

10 Nacozari nSM 2580 7070 6330 4750 4730 1600

11 Ku 75-11-6 2590 7150 4820 3600 5250 1780

12 Brochis ”S 1 Cno-B6 ■2010 2.100 4600 4030 4680 2200

^3 Ku 79-11-12 32-50 1700 4120 3270 4 poo o^n

14 Ku 79-1 1 - 1 1 3350 4250 540 O 4030 2600 1400

15 Ku 79-11-5 5300 4070 5230 4550 1520

16 Ku 78-11-9 0 3400 4650 4050 5680 4825 1080

17 Ku 78-11-77 3 110 4?.8o 5100 3550 6000 ; 1250i18 -PF 79354-IAS ss IAS20 3490 7730 5620 4250 5200 I 1730

19 Tc To) Cno”SM, cm8625 2980 - - 4330 4700 ij 1420

20 K 6661-12 2810 - 4770 - *; 1300

21 Enkoy (Check) 2280 - - - - ; 1070

22!K 6290 Bulk (Check) 2360 - - - • 1870

I

_ _ __ _ _r !I

vl jI

37

115-27—32 O^bseryation of bread wlieat locations

Lines of wheat tested in this observation trial are selects from the previous y e a r ’ s nurseries, The objective of this observation is to select lines which would adapt well to different ecological iiones in Arsi region* As checks K6290-Bulk was included at Asa^sa and Dhera while erikoy was entered at other stations viz. Meraro, Bekojij Kulumsa and Robe# The check varieties were planted after every tenth plot for comparison at the respective location.

In general, most of the lines were found to be resistant to rust diseases. As indicated in thfe table yield figures followed by asteriks show better performance of the lines than the check plots. These lines will further be tested.

* 88

115-27-32 Observation of "bread wjieat J- ines grown at six lo oat ions

j—fc. r-

Yield kg/haLocations

Entry Variety/line Asassa j __ __ j

Meraro Bekoji Kulumsa Robe Dhera

1 Check... 6530 j 7o10 3450 5270 5360 1690

2

VCGP - 11-1 3700 j - 7750x j 4260

'6420x 1260

' 3 It) -2 2900 I 5940 5610* 1

;4360 5800x | 1380

4 i(T -3 2410 j 5150 4800x

X56OO3470 - i860

65 !u -4 4340 5520 4390 4610 1200tf “5 I* 3850 4380 6590x 4600 5240 630

7 I? -6 4830 5420x 3760 6120X 11308 It -7 3980 3780 4650* 4790 5610 700

9 Laketch 3190 320 • 3920 ( 2590 1140

10 Ku81- 11-9 4450 5550 5160Z j 4350 ' 6820x 87*: 11 f t -10 1580 6230 3590

4380; 2910

5160

3580 : 1150

! 12 !Check 4360 9220 6210 ’3180; 13 [Ku Si- 11-11 : 4300 7420 j 3650 : 1610 ; 5530 2800

14 ”-1 2 ; - 6150* 5190I 6470x 1870

15 t; -13 - 896O 4880 I5540

6 870x 2210

16 u -14 4380 - 6290* 6730x 1820

17 ©15 5700x 5810 : 5000 j 6250X 6430 99018 -16 5590x 8640 3960 3510 5160 650

19 »t -17 5300s1 | 9950* 4060 t 3640 6620x 123020 n -1 8 5470* ; 9440* 4350 I 4300

34606790x 1040

21 ti -19 576 ox ; 7990 6900z 6280 1120

22 n -20 J 2180 | - : 39901 : 4530 ; 5750 770[ 23 ; Check : - 8560 : 6240 I 6230 6480 ; 1640

| 24 j Ku 8l--11-21 2690 \ 7230 5640 3230 5100 1050

25 i t -22 3210 ! 6640 6050 5420 6150 1420

26 t l -23 3770 I 7180 6050 I 4820 7020X 1820X27 9} -24 3370 8200 5270 - 8300x 2250X28 » -25 2950 I 7370 5350 5040 5890 132029 f t -26 4100 I 8670 7180X 6550 5210 1000

[30 -27 : 4240 [ 7940 ; 7040x i - 6930 : 1190 ;| 31 I .. -28 [ 4140 - : 5300

: 59^05560 : 6470

:._6520* J JAQO .1560 ;

I 3? l K -24ii - \ 6050 1.82*- ’

u

iintry ' Variety/line

3334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758596061

! 6 2 I 63i 64

6566

6768

Ku 81-11-30CheckCheckEu 81-11-31

" -32” -33” -34" -35” -36•« -37" -38w -39" -40

CheckKu 81- 11-4 1

" 42" -4 3

-44 -45 -46

-47 -4 8

-49 -50

jcheckKu 81— 11—51

It _52

” -53•» -54" - 55 " -5 6

" -57» - 5 8

« -59 " -6 0

Check

!

Asassa

5360 7140 5110

4140 3220 3200

3130 3690 4180

f 3790j 2700 ii -l

2850

3780 5850 o 020

♦-----------------------

! JVieraro

Yield kg/ha __Locations

xx

5630

4230"4830x778ox3760x35404410J45004220:

4040"3370

i 3380

1 3580

i 3820

X

4820

4660

5030

1j ±>eKoji

4 ---

! 5380, 7050i 9580

9560

10750x 8960

988ox 10800x 8270

12 140X 9750 8560

I 9360 7060 10590 1 1080x 9390 8900

10080

9510 8650

10740 8740

' 8480 ? 5040

+■kuluiusa Robe

5130540037307610

1 6550 j 4830xI ? Y, 5430 4660

X

I 6740

i 6540

6020

5570

6170

6040

5050

■ 8080IS

j 7510

I 6630

j S400x

! 8040

7500

8450x4240

9140i 6950

' 59407620

8920

8520

8320*6410£ Xj 9440 ! 8160

9000

\ 6920

6460

7770' 7440 5600

7070! 6080

| 6660

'4630JL

9160; <36 80

2080

x

6870

6180X

46405010

4800"5320'397051703

47604800

42705080s4870

x

X

4900

4830

3990

4260

4270f

j 4430! 6000

4280

5360

4310

53805120i

!3610 I xj 4850"'1 3570I143104740x4110

7060 I 8200

| 4940 { 58ooxrj 5030 ! 5720x 4440 5560

| 3830 i 4370! 5050

j 4350

1 4650

‘ 5840

5690

3980

4580

4080

5130 4060 4610

| 6140X

| 5880

j 4720 j 5740

4480

4680

5600

5730 ( 7530s[6500s[5320 I 5640s 7600s 6200X 5300

x

Dhera

2380 2870

3900 3940X 3140 3300

3320 2250

1670

1500

1200

940 2760

2350 1520

1160

1880

2220

2200 3120X 3360X 3280x 2800

3030 1080

640

1370

2260

2080

2270

1870

1200

1590 1830

2180

115-35 & 36 Durum Wheat National Yield Trial

(Asassa & Robe)

The trials were conducted at both Asassa and Robe with and without - the application of fertilizer«. The aim of the trial vjas to see the performance of durum wheat lines which were selected and advanced under fertilize and no. fertilizer condition *

The trial convested of eleven durum wheat lines and a commercial durum wheat variety (cocorit 71 )* & bread wheat check (Snkoy) and a local variety*

D istribution of rainfall during the growing period was normalat Robe while it was seavty at Asassao Regarding disease leaf rust was seen with high magnitude on same varieties as usual-

ipplication of the recommended rate of fertilizer had greeter effect at Robe than at Asassa* All varieties responded positively to fertilizer at both location&'<>

Code 4 showed good performance without the application of fertilizer, at Asassa. With use of fertilizer Boohai was the best variety followed by code 5 an(i 6 at both testing locations with mean yield of 3215 kg/ha, 3068 kg/ha and 3025 kg/ha*

91

o j r o v o Co ON VJI roooPCD

! 3oc<tda> P

; p .

CD ,0

I c+-

I OP*! OP

t"*ooP<P4(->•oc+

t"1OopoE3*CDo

oooo4H-c+

oEJ*CDo

o op 43 . p* = CD COP =I—1 ✓— x

ro H -iI—I V JI o OnO OJ

ON Oj —*00 I On -a. ro oj1 O5 £CO PI COtdUlIotr> — CSJ

> o>CO ~ - 03 Q 2b 400 o _* p, VO H-ow <co a>I 4w | co 3

k 'LSJ Q

CO

> s^ CD = WCO H-” CO o = fc>w-fc*v=?» o0 _k JO1> Il ro ro -j.

4^- VJi I On Oj Oj 4 —" IS =I CO O 2

-> ofcj p CSJ 3 I p^

-pi* CDfcJ <-> CSJ Mitd nCSJ —

o4CO

VJICTnO J

On

O

O j

0 0 o j ON O ro1 X

tJj •-<! O o o O CO t-3 roH- P-O top (D Q t) a ; j P s Wc+O CO dq 3 fci o COa s P< fc> CO OJ1 CDCD t’-i P- 3 O£ 1 —3 VJIp 34 1 3 CD0'J 4 ro_i —0H- tri 1 t-* P 3 a bd VCOOO I-1 o C/2 COo Oi «<H- td 4 ,—X "d p H-1 c-t" CSJON 1—1ro >*to (NO£5C!td 1 ON 1—I >■1 tdP- ooCOo 03 OJ 1 ■MVJI pd COCD —io bd 3 W *-0 o ON P 1 P VJIwM OOJ CO3 o M VJIX NO 3 1 wfc» 3 Oj ON o CSJMn) CO CO_^ —i M 0

O t—1 ON1 _VO q |N0 u VJI-ps»1 CO o I OJo CO Ofc) CO

1

txJCOItdCO1

tJCOro = t d \ vji I

H

OON

Q w

ION f bd fcj M CO I v _x

O JO jOnv o

I

4 ^O

p4H-

CDc+

«<

IO ro O j O j O J O j O j O j o j O J O J O J O j 4*a- CO O —^ 00 vo —0 - 0 - 0 ON VJI —3 —J o00 VJI ro O O j ON ro CO ro -SJ —J —] O 00o O O O O — J o O O O o o O O

xOvo

VO MD ON -J

- J

. O J

->

oj ro

vo

O n

O j

O

VO

O O

ro

CO

o

Jik On Vji

SJ O O

O O VJI

O n

V OCv

00

O j

0 0

O '.

1-3 On i*3w 9 3S s sco co CO

v n

CO w3CO

voON

coO j

ro4s>

O n

oC Q ._

4 ^osCO

vo vo—J ON

o j O j

vji oo

O O

voVJI

ro

O JO j

4 ^

ro o\ s oOO s CO

ro _A VJI —3 ro O j Vji ( K>o o s O VJI O O o*=5? o W ?-Ct S S;02 CO CO CO CO CO Ul

1

1 O:

O O O j o o - o_k ' v

; VO _> VO O vo _i. V o! O O o OD o o VJI O J

: o j O J O J 4> -F O j -p=>> O J vo —J —a 00 O', i jj: e O 0 a o 0 «! O 00 CD VJI o CO O j oo! Co —J CO CO —3 — J

! O J O j C o O C O 00 vo0 ° o o 0 e

t ON vo O n 4 O j o O J

■>oCO

VJIC3Sto

—j coVJI

VO

COO j

VJI

VOVJI

ON

O JON

VJI

o

f-3

U l

VJ|

M

O J

oO J

4 ^--J

VJIOOoON

VOVO

C O

O J

ro4

ON

►93

vo

C O

O j00

VO

CO

O Jo

O

•-34

VJI

VJI

vooCO

ONo VJIosCO

j70MS

!

VJI

gCO

VJIO

CO

o VJI (NO

vo rv> __s.o C O VJI

4 ^ -T- O j

ON 0 0 o jo e o

VJI 0 0 O j

—J " O o *—0 —i —Ja o o

—^ O j O J

o

»-<H-CD

P-CO —JVflO'i

Stand %

Days to Heading

Days to Maturity

Septoria(0-9)

Leaf

YellowRust

EAR

StemRust

LeafRust

Shattering ____*

Height cm,

1000—seed Weight gm Hl-Weight

With Fertilizer

oj ro vo

J— 1 o H O o oo p o H 4 fci _io rl o z* _V&> o o U i ooM <<; 4 a z 03

H- vo 2< «—s. ro 1 1P> & —J Oj —*■ H4 —J 0 0 ui w

£H- o s . On CT\ 03CD /-s IV) OJ 1 oc+ o

£1

<<; - j . on bd K® td -* U i o

r—\ O rt t/ 2 t I 4tr* IV § 1 o 3o —i OJ

BI

o O bd O £P>M

fcs*(5O

?&■O

g

o ti 03 - Jt

P* tot CSJ wCD OO P> 03«V 3 %

CD»>]-*

&.

ta

I <SH-

oj mu¥ & I J?oj *t? lt\>

_s.UIonOJ'xTas

M

p;OO

tflfcjo4Uiot

00 .—a O n vn O J ro

o b d t d k { t f ^ I—! O ro o t*4 o e <D pj W 4 o « b d H - W

3 o b d 9 tJ o « a Ui c+-W ( 0

Q £N

IO 5 t i Ui i —3

O Jvn

H- ^ 1 o j esj Zi o fc) _v -J**>—■. -J- O W O j = ca NIV) O H- b oo ro 03 w a o_i O <rt- K o n ON - i = cr1 pj H-vn -P- 3 ON ro vn ^ 1 OoON I ca

•fc1 ON

O J —v O J <0'— H* Q 2 ■8> vnON O Ui ON 1 (- •—>■ J H - 2 1 Cl bgfI O Ui O n I M y

b d 3 O MO j C/i s ^ 3 . c n O J vnO I 02 s I O O CoK O M 03 w 1F1 b d —J cf r 4p* Ui 1-3 o m P - O J O03 I £ ON w O j

'_' o _s \_^ • ONo Q £5 I w vo» W £0 a e> 1P • t* ON vj pi BP * hi y oro o bQ pu 03e> 1 o I.M EWH

ooP<<D

H'(0<+«<;

ro ro ro ro roOJ U i Oj c& vo ro ro ro ro ro Oj ro ro roro —3 ro Oj ro —j —3 vn ro _!k OJ ro ono O o O o co o —j vn 00 —J oo vn Oj

O o o O o o o o O

vo —j vo vo vo vo vn vo vovo vo00vo—J vovo voon vorv> vo0° vo

ONVOOD VOON

rOOJ'•[Ulti

Stand %

—j —J ’*■'3 —JVO f-4 Oj OjVO

--4Civ OOO —J 4

roui 4^ oj oj 4 o oo OJ■P* Ojvo Oj4 OJO

ro

roCo

0o

ojOj

S3 ro Vn 4 Oj ON 4 Vn 4 Oj

o o o O o O O OU i

O o

TR o O o o O O o h3—A £ vn Vn JV> i-3Q o S *30 S o w Vn Vn (-jS <71 CO S S mUi Ui Ui CQ Ui trt 03 §1CQ_o -JW i " rv> Vn UI _t. vn Ui _»o Ui j. Ut O o o o S! VnCA £. fr=< S >= s U i U i

U i U i W O i Ui 02 Ui MO o O o o o O o o o O

t>3VO

ro —i

CJ\

oo

sm

ojvo

"•0vo

rovo

oo

oUi

roOU i

OO-P*Vn

UI

Oj

&Ui

Days to Heading.

Days to MaturitySeptoria(o-9)

Leafi

EARStem Rust JLeaf i Rust

OOj VO —J VO 0 3 Oj O0

Ovn

oo © 00 Oj O vn

Coo vnoOj

Shattering__________ 1 _______

Heightcme

0j 4^ 4^ OJ Oj 4^ 4^ -Ph OJoj Oj ro Vn On co ro --3 U i ro oj• • o « e 0 tt 0 a « « oVj i U i vn O CO 00 CO 00 o Vn 00 CP

1000-seed Weight gm,

—jVO

Oj

—4 VO

vo

00ovo

-0vo(V)

CO t-4o voro oj

GOO oooo

—j 00vo

00o —Jvoro

HI—Weight

115-35~b Durum

National Yield

Trial (Asassa)

Without Fertilizer

fcJ 95F &■p* COW &)l|sl MO H fc) M tSl -

OJ8\Vw5w

Co —4

p bd ■feH o adO!x Y 1

cn &} oH- Q

^ ^ cn

ro-. V

VnONOJON

I1

OJo

Ht-4P*w

1*3ft}&

o

yffofcjo

s

wto

ro ro ro ro roro ON o-> -P* _^ ro -*-»3ro vn o j vn Vn CO O J ovn o O o O o o o

Vno C\ VJ1Co

VnCO

—J OJ

Oo

'gCO45*o03

A- '■ t

o o

CNo

00ro

4vn

ON

roVJl

D2o

ON

eft

4*Vn

vn

4s*Rro4*U>l-TC/1

on

—4

U>

Os

VnJ-tl —*i Cftvnot**ttm

-feOn

O n

4s-vn

*-5

Onvn

K f l

vnas03

Stand f0

Days to ReadingDays to Maturity

Septoria(0-9)

Leaf rust

Stem rust

t*H*ta4fli‘toi<D,tQ

; r

o

g1OJOCO

O

VO - O OJ OJ

4=> o j O -<J • *O 00

O jo00

vo O n • «vn vn

vo _i.CO o o

— - V -

4^ 4* 4ro —J O J• • *o vn vn

—-3 —q —jvo vo 03• « •

O ON *£>.

vovn

ti0 'CD H>

M M

•t?j < 4

8 B

Height cm

^ f 1000-seed* I Weight gm- t * - ----- --* I HI-Weight

\ kg

Code! Variety jrield S7..% DM kg/ha

10

11

4i

*\ 0 * " j

13 jH I

Mexi !TS'f x Chap-21563) Fg »:S" CD4501-A-2Y-3Y- H M y G11' i:Sn~9?.dic.vermm>-G11 :fSfr AA ;:S<7 CD 819-1BS-1B3- ODZ

Or «s» (21563/61-13C x Lds)‘ Candeal II, CD 3862-1IiS-lBS-0D2 Cocorit 71 (Dnrxun c> eck)Snkoy (Bread wheat check)Local variety (local check)

1225

1950

2100

2050

1700

925

115-36 Dunam wheat national yield trial (Rohe) without fertilizer

IAON

Code! Variety Yield 87.5# DM

-------- —1 • Ld 357 /oi 8155 Ko 58-40

7 !8 i

3iiJi

Hi

Cit 71 candeal II, Co 3369-2BS-2BS-2BS-6DZ

T. Bur spb-Ram-G11?IS” x Jl.Sp.do VC/AACr. nS" (21563/61-130 x LDS) Candeal II, Co 3862, /GS-6BS- OGSGDO VZ 466-pic ftS" CM 17061- 1GDt- 1KDZ-3KDZ Yemen-Cit ”SJ! x pic ”S" /'i^anory B-B CD 1004-2BS- 1BS-CGS.EoohaiCr* ::S" (21563) 61-130 x Lds) candeal II, cd 3862-1BS-1BS 1DZ-4D2^0DZMexi "S" x chap 21563) pg !:S?t CD 4501 - A-2Y—3Y— 1H-CY .....

kg/hc

780

480

630

650

230

1030400

520

2J0.

1

§4sCO

46

61

61

jO M •*= Rj •Hi

^ ®j[

5861

50

86

79

79

60 j 87

o-M -sd& S01 33 -pU &

145

143

145

j 58 j 75 J 141

7982

142

144

t 45MS

TRMS

25MS

TRMS

TRMS

0

8

i S3 j 83 I 144 I 8

10KS

TRMS20MS

10MS

15MS_j , 0,

0

0

TR

TR

a>J

0

TR

96

4 ^ o j rv>

oo

I - 1

<

%<0

o«<5fedCOe>

Oooo4H*c+

C+- Pi§ • I

OOf»M

&a>

Hr

CD&>

a>

&

&CD

ft

_J*O

IoM

-»• O P> W 01 •

Q r

o

Bp -CD

K 2 W

ro 8oo

v n on soM Lw 1— 1 -vos bd o f ? 2tl —i —s.Oj Oj bdCo O ON

?

bdf

bd( A

ro ct\ co oj—j O Oj roO O O o

H o

iSJ

r »*-3 19 Ipj IH- I O J • I^ \ CD *42I

Q

05

ONroo

oop*CD

<$H-CDri-

P ?(fe

H*CDMP -

CO—3

S3 M r?£\

[

v n v n O nOn on k ji o j

42* -Psro ro oj 4

CO -ps» Oo —q

O O O O

Oo —3 ON Onvn vn oj o

O j

roo j O Jro o j

o j

o o co o

f s i

ONvn Stand f>

—a Days to Heading

4 ^4 ^

Days to Maturity

vn Septoria(.0-9)

O j

i“ j

Leaf rustH* jCO T <D I

o

ONvn

40Co

Stem rustt H ' 1CD [CD&> Hc+* M

O

s ;

fcrj&

4c i

4 Mc i-

IHeight cm.

f 1000^seed [ Weight gril*

97

Durum Nut with Fertilizes, 115^*35»36

I;C«de Variety/Treatment LocationAsassa Robe Main

Yield Iterk.. .r

! 1 Ld 357/C18155 ND 58 - 40 4080 1700 2890 41 2 ij

Cit 71 Candeal II, CD 3369-2BS-2BS- 2BS-0DZ 3700 2230 2365 12

! 3<tT.Dur- Spb. Ram-Gl1»S" x M.Sado Vo/ AA"S")- 3770 1780 2775 7

4i.t

Cr."S" (21563/61-130 x Lds) candeal II. CD 3862-108-6133-605. 3570 2150 2860 6

5 GDo VZ 466-Pi o'* S”cm 1706l-1Gdz~1kdz-3kd2 3670 2450 3060 2

6rYemen-Cit^S" x Plc”St,/Taganm*y.9« 13 CD 1004-2BS-1BS-4BS-0GS* 3720 2330 3025 3

7 Boohai 3780 2650 3215 18

i*Er^S" (21563 6l-130xLds) Candeal II, Ld 3862-13S-1Bs-1Dz-4Dz-0dz. 3720 1225 2473 11

9 Mexi "S" xchap—21563)Pg,,S,t CD4501-A-24- 34-1M-oy. 3967 1225 2596 9

10 G11;’S,r r. die, Vernum-Glls »M"S 11 LD 819-1Bs-1Bs-0dz 3830 1950 2890 4

11 Cr.f,S" (21563)61-130xfjds Candeal II, CD 3862-1Bs-lBs-Odz 3100 2100 2600

i

8 i12 Cocorit *71 (Durum Check) 3020 2050 2535 10

13 Erikoy (Bread wheat check) 2680 1700 2190 13 J[ 14i ' I £

Loc'i,l variety Location mean

285O3533

9251890

1888 14 i

sf.

\” Rank i--- --— ___- - - - - 1 2

C.V $ 20.3LSD % NS

1 i

V

Durum Ifut without Fertilizer 115-35106

Code Vari ety/Tr eatment Location iMean Yield Mean Yield|kg. Rohe kg.Asassa j

MeanYield

jHank

ii

1 Ld 357/oi 8155 ND 58-40 2630 | 780 1705 42 cit 71 Candeal II, CD3369-2Bs-2Bs

-2Bs-0dz 2250

000<3- 1365;

12

3 T .Dur o Spb .Item-a-G 11 nSnx M.'Sado Vc/AA^s") 2380 I 630 1505 104 Cr."S>r (21563/61-130xLds) Candeal II,

Cd 3862-1GS“6Bs-0gs* 3170|I 650 1910 1

5 God .VZ466~Pig"Sucm17061-1Goz-1kdz-3kdia 2280 | 230 1255 136 Yemen-Git,,S"xP/c,,S5,/fl?aganroy B„B cd

1O04-285-1BS-4BS-0GS. 2550 | 1030 1790 2

7 Boohai 2770 00 1585 68 Cr"S" (2156361-130xLds) Candeal II,

cd 3862-1Bs-1Bs-irz-4Dz-oDz„ 2700 520 1610 59 Mexi chap.21563)Pg,,3,» CD4501-

A-24-34-lM-oy. 2780 0

t— CM 1525 9

10 G11 "S”, T.aic. Vernum-Glls, AA"^1 CD 819-1Bs-1Bs-0dz 2920 620 1770 3

11 Cr.r,S"(21563/61~130xLds Candeal II, Cd.3862-1Bs-1Bs-Odz 2630 320 U15 11

12 Coc^rit 71 (Durum check) 2320 830 1575 813 Enkoy (Bread wheat check) 2570 600 1585 614 Local Variety 2320 270 1295 14

Location Mean 2519 545Location Rank 1 2

C.VLSD %

1 <fo

115-37-42 Bread wheat micro yield trials (Asassa, MerarofHebe and Dhera).

In this test wheat selections from the 19S/81 nurseries and observations were planted in replications at different locations* The main purpose of the trial was to select lines of wheat which adapt best to the testing locations and the surrounding areas.

In general, diseases, particularly yellow rust was not a problem as last year. Since all of the lines in this test were undergone regorious selection last year (1981) almost all were found resistant to diseases this year (1982),

Very impressive yields were obtained from most entries at the highland station of Meraro. At Asassa only two entries significantly outyielded the check variety, enkoy* While at Meraro the check entry was out-performed significantly by only one varietis . At the other stations namely, Kulumsa, Dhera. & Robe no varieties were found to be significantly better than the checks.

100

o V O C O —^ ON U l 4^> O J l\> O VO C O O n U l O j ro

- ~ r ~ . -----

« *S f*{ ^ W £ w « « *? f* -* r* w !* f* J r w

£ £ £ £ £ £ ^ t i L i l i £ £ > ^ k £ ^ lVO 4 ^ O J O r o Vfl CD ON ^ I V J

co

oj ro oj — ro ro ro — * oj m . - * ro m u w-o ro O —J —1 VO (J\ U l U l ON VO — * OJ v o O O j CO VJI —J Oju i o o o r a r o c o v n u i c D ^ O O J C O c o O V J j O J r x > Q 3 Q© o o o o o o o o o o o o o oo o o o o o o o

Gn no ro —j —j co o O o o\ ~j ro vo oo oo vo o - o y i^ ^ O j O j V U - ^ - V O ^ ON —~3 co vo C O - » ro —J VJ I ON o j O j

c o c o c o vjn OO CD VO c o r o -~a ■ c o c o <£ v o v o J * ■*» S£— 3 —] —j vji vji (5n Ui ^ -q co oo Oj vji ~j 4 oo 4Jl. ^ ffl

oop>CD

<3f ih“CDc¥

p*&>

CD

C D—4Is.s

Stand $

—O ,_j n o CO CO —3 CO CO —J —-J —J CO Co CO —3 —J ~ J —3 rp-j 0 0 i T j o y g 4 tqt u v j i o v o -p* _ » . • o s o n o o v j i -<j v o ~ a v o o \ -U ' V » b U

1 Heading

^ O j ^ X o J 4 ^ u > r o i N o i N j t \ ) v n i o r o r o r g r o r o ro* •cv O co ON -k oo oj —3 On On oj Oj —j Oj On On Ov OJ

Days to Maturity

Ui on ro oj oj oj 4 ro on —J oj oj oj 4»

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

O O r o O O O O O' o o o o o o o o o o o o

Ul OJ —J —0 00 CO 00 CO -CO Cp -6® —J —3 —a Vp ON00 CO OJ OJ Ul Ul VJI o o Ul C O O j O O

—- j — On — Ul Ul oo o

Shattering

Height cm

£ft 11oj oj oj oj oj o-» ro -> oj oj U> Oj

ro -i — oj o Qn Vji qo o -f* o n o v j i -• 0 * •O j O J o o OO O O VJI O J O J C O O J C O O O VJ I o

is? ! & » I 1000-seed

‘M S Weight gmUl

00 -q O O O O G P C O O O C O O O Q p C O O O O O O o O O - - j _ _ i - » j o o j r o 0 - i 0 j 4 ^ 0 o j 0 j r o r o f v > c o* » » « • • » * .i •V O U l U l O N O - P = * ~ ^ O 4^ © O v U l O 4^ 0 0 O 0 \

00 . 00 00ui I o ro

4 00 Hi—Weight kg

115-37 Bread

wheat micro-yield

trial ( Asassa)

| Code! Variety . Tield 8i .5^ dm.

1 4j l

I\ \ s - -i. _____

■

kj/ha ! Eel. i j ]

J ™ -

1 I

1-pzo

5 a»;-H m xi • bcc © .Q A

0 +=-P -H02 ^ -P TO CC>

i .21 iKu 80-“ 1 :

1-43 1850s 76

50 85 : 126

j 22 Ku 80- 1-44 2130 I 88 ] 01 75 iat23 ICu fOu 1-47 j 2900 \ 119 80 82 139

\ 24 Sf.u 80- 1-54 1780 I 73 . 75 71 133\ 25 Ku 80- 1-61 2250 I 93 : 73 IS 145i 26 Iiu-80^ 1-64 2680

1 .1930i 110 5G 83 135

! 27 I.u 80- 1-65 | 79 588 79 ; 13028 1 u So 1—66 •3950 ; 163 i 75 ; 77 ; 12729 x'u 80- 1-6 7 2450 : 101 : 88 12 127

. 30 I u 80— 1-58 2780 : 114 ! 85 :1SS ' 126

: 31 I u 80- 1-70 . 2330 : 96 8 5' 79 ; 13632 1 u 8o~ 1-71 1?0C : 77 ' 65 75 ' 13333 i>u 80- 1-15 1550 ; 68 . 7- 75 ; 125

- 34 6 2$ 0-Bulk i 2230 j I 92 ; 54 76 129j 35 ■iSnko'y (check) 2430 j 100 1 89 .75 • 133

P lo t s i z e , K

F e r t i l i z e r , kg/h a ;

P la n t in g d a te :

Seedin g r a t e , kg/ha

2*0

150 DAP 12 June 1982 150

1

0

0

0

2orsooc0

0

301.30

0

ions20KS 10KS J.

*3 s ® 5b CDm j*d 'Sio -h o oj

-prC}HO•H© tiQI.

0 75 3C,5 84.O0 I 76 C1.2 35.00 : 75 35*3 Gi.30 ; v-3 34-3 £2.0

0 i3 40.5 G2.C0 ^3 32.£ &0 .7r\j 7C- 45*3 7.6.0

0 i0. 35.c Co. 52 • 73 40.5 C2.0

G • c 3C-.5 CO.O0 •> 33.5 C3.2C SO 4C-.0 C4.0

C S3 37,5 ;3 .-6

0 SC 3: *0 C0.0

0 ; 3 J3#3 €2.9

L.S.D % L.S.D 1«t C.V

1245 ks/2ut HS

26 .8 <f0

>’r 102

f

115-38 Brea

d

wheat m

icro

--,yield

tria

l (M

era

r

I Codej Variety!h2 \ ] Yield S I M DM

><!■>»*-«» U B A k % i u J | g n M * M M

J, kg/ha ? Rel.341

20 Ku 8 0 -1 1-41 6880 103

21 Ku 8 0 -1 1 -4 3 6200 93

22 Ku 8 0 -1 1 - 4 4 980 15

23 Ku 8 0 -1 1 -4 7 j 755O 113I

] 24 Ku 80-54 i j; 25 !ku 80- 1 1-6 1-i 4I 26 |Ku 80- 11-64

| 27 ;Ku 80- 11-65

j 28 k u 80 11-66

| 29 ]eu 80-11-67* 3 0 Jku 80 - 1 1 - 6 8

31 Ik i2 80- 11-70

j 32 ]ku 80-11-7133 k u 80- 11-15

34 ^Enkoy (check)

2 5550

j 6930

: 6250

7300

6750

7730

6500

17250|5 9 8 o

<5200

16700X}

83

103

93

109

101

115

97

10889

78

100

1■¥>m

98 92

95

97 j

95 |

92 j

90 j■91

95

89

99

95

92

100

100

1

H ot size,.M Fertilizer, kg/ha Planting date Seeding rate, kg/ha

2.0

150 DAP

23 June 1982

150

L.S.D ^ = 1558 k g /h a

L.S.D 1 fo « 20S 2 11

C.V = -11.9 %

104

115-40 Bread

wheat micro-yield

trial (K-ul’amBa')

if)5

^ w u ' U U ' M i o M r o r o r J ro ro•h W -Jk O Vu W —J 0\ U) ^ Oj (\j

ro

£ 0 p S p : £ £ £ £ £ £ £ ! * ! * * !£ £- ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ^ » *

s* fl>

£ ^I I I I I I I I I I I _ i _ i

- J 0 \ 0 \ 0 \ ( h 0 \ 0 \ i j | ^ I |O 0 0 - 0 -> to

• ^ U ; U i ! O W i y ^ L i J | \ 3 U J f O U ; - k U » ^ 0 1 ^ 3 03 VO -i O U1 ro O VJl fvj

oo o oo oo a u vn ui o o ui u< ui uio o o o o o o o o o o o o o

o Q O Q p O N O N - j V D - g V j I - q ^ 0\ ^ O O n C T n —q \ O O V D U J \ J l - q V O ro c d

VO CO ^ CD VO CO VO vo CO vo VD CO CO 03Co O co O Vn O O- vn O Vn CP CO O

Ofe! OI o pj<D

<

%H-<0cf*

£

>S3

w<D

H‘f-1pbCD

a

ON -J C ^ O N O n On ONO n O N C N O N O N O N - jvn ro (\j Co vn —a -pi Vn o\ o\ ^ ^ ^ oj

o j O j v n O n o o o n — j — j o v — j o n .p*.

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

Stand. $

Days toILsaiUm-.Days to Maturity

Septoria(0-9)

Leaf



>9 ,9 r" ,Co ^ *5 00 vo o 00 co vo covn vn oj vn vn Q vn o O vn 0 0 0 0 0 co

Ear

Stem rust

WCD p .H 05H <D& 9> »s 09

<D4 tofS09c t-

Height cm

10 6

O V 0 0 0 -<J VJl ^ W M -»■ C VG o o - ^ j CJ\ U I ^ U fO _ j.

c p Q p a i c o c o r o o o c p c o o ^ f f i O o o o Q p o Q p a g ) ^p p p p f P 0 P r f p p p p F P P P P bd

ttTTTT^TTTTTT^>TTtTT%1 ^ ^ U U i U i f O ’ _ k O J ( \ j .--a. _ i _ * O ) ^ ON U I - »O J - i V O ^ U M M V I - i O-f^LO-i n-* CO

- ‘ - 1 - » l \ 3 f O M P O ^ - > ' IV) J - i L)JO N O N r o O 4^- IN) -1^ U l U t VQ Uj o o s o oO C D 0 0 O L l» O O O J c o O J U I U I O J O Jo o o o o o o o o o o o o o

O J ^ C u ^ U l U l U l W U i ro U) •£* -ti» —Jc o o o - j - j m - j o \ - a r o u i . £* c \ r o

!f5 O I o r pi CD

<

$H-

&

f io ro ^ ui ui On ui Oa uj ui ui ut U I O O Q O O ^ U I C O C O O J O J C O U I O O J O

M J U IN3 U M ,—»■ —0 Ut ~-J Ul ui fO Ul ui O Ui OJO O O O O O

U l 4 ^ co ON co On O - 1 ^ O

U l ON U l U l -fc> • . , ,o u i o j u i c o u i < S t a n d fo

[ 00 -3 —3 -%J 1— —«J -*3 —-2On w ^ - ^ - i M - Ulli

VO Ul —J voIs, Ul -fi 4 ^CO O O J — 3 OS

O J - F ^ ' F ^ - F ^ - t ^ O N U l W U l j 5 . U O J O J ^ | b U i ^ U l ^ f o

O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

O O O O O O O O t d O O O O O O O Q O O O

D a y s t o

M a t u r i t y

Septoria <fo~9)

Leaf rust

S t e m r u s t

U lO O O O O O O O O O O O O O

UiO O O O O O

O O O O O O O O O O U I O O O O O O O O O

L O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o

— J CO — 3 V O 0 0 0 3 VO' — q V O C O Q p C O - JU l o O U l U l O O U i U l O U I O O O

v o —j o o c o v o n o V ji O U i U l o o

©01H }

i?d$

S h a t t e r i n g f c

Height cm

115-41 Brea

d

wheat

micro

yie

ld

trial

(Rofo

e)

7 2 Hi T l(0 1— 1 <D M

fl> 4 O

P - B c4“ <7+-H- c + H-t J H* 1-* 03

0$£

H -N

H -N

4 (D

P *»H- p **

r i -<D l\

&0t5 ' 5 * *

J31cu

ftft

U l ro U l

O <3> 0 ro•

Ch fc) 0& %

**

voooro

0 J-H• 0

*=3 0 2 U l* •

11 11 11

_s.—J 10

ro ro —jOs•

ro 0 0

otj

'ts*

107

0 J O J ,r o r o r o r o fO r o t o0 v o 0 0 —J CT\ U l 45* O J

w

Vpi' £ £ £ £ £ £ £

0 £ ? 0 0 00 2 ? 0 0 CO 0 0 CO

? p p P _&1 p p p

_V —1 —V _k _s _%1

_^1 ■

. a ■ 1

_*1

_t1 I1—J

1O s

1O s

1O s

1U l " o v

1O s

1U l

0 0 —J O s 4 ^ 4 ^ _% 4 ^

-f*roO JO

Oo

o j r o r o o j o j r o r o - ^ ro-* O v o v o o o V JI ui v o o u iO O J C D U l O O U l V JI U l0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

O Jv o O O J O J V O V O CfS 0 0 — J

—3 U i - < i 4 ^ v n u i v n o s G \ o \ u i C O C O O O O C O V J I V j I O J U I O j O J

o j 00 o j 00 4^*

OJ 4i,Ui-F*4^4^4^4^*4^4i» vo —* O J 0 \ U 1 0 J - f c s . - ~ 3 0 J

4 ^ U l O N M U l ^ ^ O N Q D ^ 00

:Ns.0 0 0 0 g O O O £d o O '"1

U l U l


..... iDays to heading f

Days toMaturity ,

Soptoria(0-9)

Leaf rust

Stem rust

o o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 Shatteringi

- » J C O u c O VJI U l U l

0 0 O0 C o VO 00 — 3 00Ul . Ul Ul O O Ul o ^ Height cm

|M N) J* -iO v o CO —J ON Vn 4 . OJ (\) o VO CO -4 On vn 4 ^ w

!{*! W ^ ^(0 £ 0 £

i i ? ? ? .| M \ «« \ ---^( t i l l[4 4 Oj Oj[oj —v Vd 4*

pS £ wpi ^ w w£ pi £

p o o o m o o c p o o a j c o c o c p g o c o O D O D C o r rP P P P P P P P P P P P P F P Pi i i i i i r i r t

oj oj ro ro _k _joj o ro vo co ck ^ oj —

i i iMD CO —J

bdPi9?

hpj

8* s

co

t ~

a o IO oPj0

sH*<0e+

“T

'vn 4* 4 4 4 Vnvn o co Vn co VnO O O O O O

u> -j co ro ro ojo 0\ o 4 On o

^ On —*3 On 4b. o*>IO O; O O Oj co

ON ON **~vj ■■■Jon co vn ro on oj

o j —* Co ro vn 4 . oj co ~P=» o roCo co O co co vn vn vn vn vn oj

o o o o o o o o oo o

ro

ooo

O 4 Oj Vn O O

ro .ON VD ON 00 —] —-3 4* -<l VTI ONO ^ vo 'Jl 00 OJ ON CO —3 ON

4 O N O N O N O N O N O N v n v n - j ' O co vn co co O oj vn co co O oj

o On ^ . On On onro oj oj 4> ro o 4* oj vo —j oo

—* vn ro oj on 4*

-•j —i Vn O OJ o

vo > OJo

VJ1o

£>

<D

ONro vo

ONo

ro

ro

oj vn oo 4 , ro -p* ro on vn oj oj oj vn

Stand jS-

Days to headingDays to Maturity

Septoria

V nvn on vn vn 4==> on vn vn gn vn vn on on 4 o j on 4i» | Height omO 4^ ro vd ro O n \q o —v on. 03 co co ro ro vn —4 _i o vn o n

*-cJH*<DMp,

03

vn

1

115-42 Bread

wheat micro-yield

tria. (phera)

; 'no9

m'j* >-<H 4 t-rfCD H* (D 1—’<D P5 H OP - B ct* c +H - <H- H*a H ’ f—1 OTon P H* H -

& N NC& CD

pj 4c t- P><D ri*

5V(D fo

IVot>

Qf*5

£W

—>■ r oon ui o ch o ro &vo00ro

o t r 1 t r 1• I I<! W D)• •fc* W

■st mi! II U

4VD telCOi*0*3£5**

u > u > w L ^ u » r o r o f o r o f O ( o r o r o 4^ u> ro -»■ o vo co —3 ON U l -P* OJ to

£?sj !*J NON £ £ £ £ pjr oVD o o OO CO GOP P P p P ptr i _v —V —4.

1 _iI

—A1 1 |

! v1 J 1

—31ON

1o \

U l —X*. O CO

I I

o o o n c o c o v d o a r o w '<3^ o o o —4 o ou i u i o o o o O o j O o p Vj i u j o o c o0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

o op 4 4* -£=«■ 4 0\ m Ul 4 Ul W OO VD —] — 3 VO U l U l 4^ U l U l 4^ 00 ro

—j - j On ON —3 —-q ~ j 4i> (J\ U l 4 . OsCO U l LO VjJ OJ O OJ O GO W U l CO OJ

Os —: On —j On —j On —i —j on on —a onco ro o j o cd Oj on o —>• vo u i ro o \

[Days to Heading

—i o4 » VO

O O —* — ■—* — ^O O N C h r o J ^ r o r o U J luDays to Maturity

U i r o — 3 u i o n 4^ - j on u i u i u i 4^ —3Sept or ia (0-9)

o r Stem rustU l U i

C O O o O N U l U l U l . £ * U l U l U l O \ . { ^ ONO OO -*■ ^ ^ U> 03 Ul O O U l f O O N OJ Height cm

rI!hese observation trie Is composed 97 lines of durum wheat k6 290- Bulk and Enkoy were included at Asassa and Robe respectively as checks* These check varieties were planted ofter every twenty plots* At both locations some of the lines showed good resistance to leaf rust and better performance than the check varieties.

115-43 & 44 Durum wheat national observation (Asassa &.Robe)

1 1 1

t r

115-43 Durum wheat national observation Asassa)

I<:6 290-B ulk j( check)

I J

i

1J

3 IJ

4270 100 ? 7 1

1

i 7 7

j 12121 3120 j 98 j 12122 4020 58 j 7 7 I 123

23 3 4 2 0 98 J 73 ] 1 2 4

24 3 7 8 0 ?8 74 12325 4 0 7 0 9 8 j 74 ; 1 2 4

26 “ 9 8 ! 74 1 1 2 3

27 3800 9 8 i 75 j 1 2 4

28 1050 7 0 1 83 121U . J j J P q ___ [.1P 0_ J J 8 ^ 1.126 j . 2t_}

0 j T

0 \T

10MS 1 T

0 !|55KS ;■ 5

5KS i T

5MS ]j! 5;

15MS jI T

0 i|o

m J L!.

THS

50MS

! TMS

15MSM10 |

lOMS^ 120 ;i 4

20MS;H5 j

15MSil10

5M sj135

f - T vn vn Vn vn vn vn vn vn -P5» -fs» 4^ 4» JSk 4 ^ 4^ td «I —j CT\ vn 4 ^ O J ro ->■ O VD 00 —3 ON vn 4^ O J ro ->■ p ON

OnOOOnr\3O ojO

O J -»•o v o

8 8

i i w w ro ->■ w -v OJ 0 > vn \CTn 4^ O n v ovo ^ O U1 M W Oo o o o o o o

oro ~ O CD vO O,o

PO 1 VO ?

-p*o

(V>o

o

O j O J o j Oj O j o jvo oo — j O n vji ^

Oj -a->• vo vn vn O o

OjvnOOr\3-£=>oo4 VD O O

O J(V>-FO

o j o j o j rv>

rv> Oj o j v o

§ 8

O J O Jo

roVJIoo

vo00 -ps»vn vo

00vooo

voOO

100

_iOo

j 100 Oo

O — 4 vn Oovn vooo

VD00

vovn vooo 00vn vovn vo

oo

■j 1000

_^oo

oo

vo00

voco

j 100

|

oo

j 100

vo—A vo _i VDro vo — Jro

0\ — j — JON — j ON — avn CO

o— j 'JO j

— 1f\3 — J OONvo 00 o^

—J OJON■P*

C n4^

ON-fs*

ON4^ — 34^ — 34^ S

-ovn_k _>. _i _\ _\ _> _fc _i. __s. v v _vrv> rv> OJ OJ ro ro ro ro IV) 4^ ro OJ rv> ro ro ro ro rv> ro ro (V) ro ro ro fOON vo vn ro OJ 4^ vn rv> 4^ o 4^ vo ON ON OJ ro O ro ro ro CN OJ

v n u i a ^ u i v j i O \ \ v j i j ^ 4 ^ o j o j v n + ^ v n v n v n v n v n v n v n co 4^ vn 4^ on o j o j o j on

O O O O O O ^ ^ O O c+co cn 3 MC/3 C/i

r+O O c f c f ^ f O O O O t f F i O O c+ o o o o o O O O O cf O O cf c± O cf

, .cj- , o cf c(- o cf .cft O O O O S O O S ^ O O S O O ^ ^ S ^ ' ^ OCQ CO CQ CO W CO CQ COvn —s. o j

.«d- a O O cf o cf o vn cf

CO CO CO CO CQ CO CO

'A o I o o p- <x>oq&pi

Stand </>

Days to heading

Days to maturity j

Septoria.19=21_______ 1 i

f0)fuH j

t-J8

Stem rust^

vn vn cfo o o o g o o s o o ^ oCO CO w

K!

I Io o oj rovn vn o O

ro ro ro —-j oj ro

cfcq

vn3

cf£c)

vnCO

vnCO o

vnCO

vn■—?

COo o cf

COvnCO

,9h~*CQ

vnrlCO

O jOCO

ov~=rfGO

vnCO

_\ _X _^ro — * O —* o O O vo (V) 4^ vn O J rv> rovn o vn o vn vn vn o o vn vn vn vn o vn O

Leaf ru3t

Height om.

t\j

jL.

r * CoUl CO COO-’

COro 00 bd&

►si'onrov o

P

tro ro ro ro t v 4 ^

OS '(T)

O j O -P* co Os O ro OU S rs:> V O _* V O ro KO o o o O o O

0 3o

rou iONO

VD CO —J — 3 — JOs ui oj ro ONVO

ON0 0 ON

—JON ON ON U l

ON4 ONo j

ONfO

O n

O JONIV)o

roc o

ro4 ^c oo

O j

Oj

O

ro~o

o

OJo

voo

OJIV)o

o n ro

UlOOjCO

On oj O OI I I o j r o

ro u i oo vo o o

0 jOONO

roooo

roroO

OjONUlO

£j r

OCD&

!*!ONro

voo

ON U l O VD

KjOs I atj H-CD—0 tr 1—’o p P

vO VO vr> —j VO VD VO00 Ul OO Ul Ul Ul oo

vo o 00 O CO O O O O O VD

Ul o o o o o ooo

O VD o u i

VD Co VO vo VO VO CO O Ul O Ul Ul o o o o

O s o n —j —o o n o n O n— —-J —* O —1 —-3

o voO OO

CO vo u i ro

' —>> _ i __S. _________ N ____________ 1. ___________\„ro ro ro ro ro ro rv>

ro o j rororv>ro r o r o r o ( v > r o u j o j o j o j o j o j o j ! v ) r o r v > r o r o - i cvOJro ro ro ro ui —j co co ro -*• ui os vo ro -£>• -£* rovo

;O N u i o j 4^ u i

t

Os -0 Ul ON(V)OJ-pi O N O 1-3 o 1-3 O 0J IO Ul ON Ul ON Os ON

ro —»• -fc*O O h3 O H3 K3 O3 3 13 3 CO 3 3Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul

=y~T3““X33"ro -> ->■ h =) 3 0 0 ro° ! ^ j g 0 8 ! ^ ! j 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 c 0 3 3 0 0 3 0

u i c o c o c o c o c oUl Ul Ul

O J O j ro v o

co ui

o o

oI o o

o

Stand fc

Days to heading

Days to Maturity

c o

Septoria__ L2=2^____

tr jnti jt) a Jo |h- P [t-1 \m Hj fl

r

ro o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

o

—i o

CO!=f oUl

aCO o o o o o sCO o O O o o o

OJ —J ro ->• H CO OJ —4 ■f* -P*o o o o >-JI o O o o o o o O O o o og CO 3 W-=» 3 ’r*Ul ui CO CO CO CO Ul CO CO C/3

£co Ulo o o o

Cdp4

CDo ip s: |ot I CD 4 I w

Mc+

5 Stem rust/o

£3 _3 0 0Ul 3Ul

aCO I 0 3 0 0 03 G O

Ul

c o o v o —j o o rv>

O U l U l o o o o_ % _ i _ i f o r o r o r o v D r o r o —^ v o r o o j o j p o r o —i f o r o - ^O O O O O O O O O O O U I O O O U I O U I U I O U I

co

o o o o

Leaf rust$

Heisrht om

-a *V>J

Code,-0ft-

! 87i 00

i S9

909192

93949596

97

Yield !—■■■■ ■ 1

. Ikg/ha j

IT

}

! 2o 10 j flop *

1540 4

3750: <2040 |

3230 {

22820 j

3480 j

640 i

1280 I1

4190 :

F6290i- ]

Bulk(check) |3950 '

§-pro

0 S* -p £•rH CD 'C i f

O -P -P -H

9o j8 5 !j70 •

100;

85

98

9560

9 5 »

4 5 ! 9 8 !

4■i

100

Disease:

td •H U - o On]

CO

69 * 122 \ 5 jS./l | 13« j 2

Yellow rustS Leaf j Ear •p -PCO CQ

2 2

£ <4H<D c5-P CDCO h—I

0 0

ao-p

•Ha)ffi

IP^q* totsj

72 133 "" - j 0 I - 12068 124 5 TICS 0 0 0 11571 125 5 0 0 0 TMS 7061 124 5 - - 0 - 9063 121 6 0 0 0 0 12085 131 2 0 0 0 TMS 130

85 133 3 0 0 0 0 13086 135 4 0

0 0 10MS 11079 137 2 0 0

!0 0 120

67 122 5 TMS 0 Ii

I0 60MS 110

] 125 I 135

Plot size, V? : 1.0Fertilizer, kg/ha : 100 DAP + 100 ureaPlanting date s 26 June, 1982

1 1 5 - 4 4 Durum wheat national observation (Robe)

J--------

j Code Yield r ~ n1 Diseases

n£ kg/ha i!i1 ^ fellow rust$

I

j! "d

s4ro

j J L

i 5 3| co T)>> 03 CQ 0) Q

— _

75

-pm2ct5 (D . ~i

Cd2ShE0)-pro

1----iLeafj

Ear a•H ✓— f-i O'S iPh v— J (3) [e

ight

cm

______h—1 .......p

i 01 i

2120 I 80 70MS| 20MS 0 0 8 85ii 02 3 1640 90

85

73 10MSl 0 j ! 30ns4

80\ 9 I 105 i

5 03 2560 77 0 0 0 0 ! 7 j 100

oc3o

85 72 0 0 10MSJ 80 8 I 90 5i 05 2480 98I SOS 0 40MS 50

79° ]

3 065360 ! 50 79 TMS ! 0 0 0 0 140 j

I 07 5650 60 82 TMS 0 ! 0 0 ! 0 145 J08 6120 i 75 76 0 0 I 0 0 i 0 125 j

09 5090 75 78 0 0 0 0 0 125 5 >10 2590 85 77 0

00 0 0 105 !

11 6200 85 75 5HS! 0 0

0 0 115 i i12 3540 85 77 0 0 0

00 120 |

! 13* 4340 80 75 0 j 0j 01

0 0 95 |I 14 i 4230 , 75 7 5 , 0 I 0 0 1 0 7 100 J

15 2170 70 78 i 5?1S 0 0 0 5 140

i 16 j 2260 75 77 50MS 0 0 0 i 6 801660 70 75 70MS 0 20MS 3° | 110

18 , 1480 70 73 40MS ° 0 0 6 1153} 19 1690 70 7 3 1 0 0 70MS 0 6 110

i 20 20 2Q 7 5 1 78 | 0°

4oms;j 30 6 120

; EHkoy j (ch eck )3620 95

174 ! 6 OHS

I0 :

i0 0 6 , 110 i

j 21 2690 65 78 30MS 0 0 10 6 ! 115 j

i 22 2510 • 80 78 j 6oms:. 0 6 OKS- 10 5 I 110 }

3 23•j 1990 75 76 j 0 : 0 70MS! 20 6 ; 110 j

24 ,2000 75 76 j 0 I 0 40MS 20 6 j . 100 j

25 ' 1720 80 75 10MS 0 20MS 50 6 Ij 10526 2100 70 75 50MS o j 30MS 50 5 j 100

27 1460 80 76 0 o j 6 OKS 0 5 j 100

28 1170 80 80 !, 40MS 30S ! 0 0 i 6 120

29 2740 85 80 :i;0 I

i0 '

i80MS 20 ! 6 | 115 !

116th-

DiseasesYellow rust^Leaf Ear

1

coHU <O CTnJ

p.cii<D CO

20KS \

(check)3690 j 41 j 1630

10MS 101® i 0I401IS 0

-•*I 0

0 0 j 0

0

50MS0

0

| 30MS I 0

6 QMS 0

90S 00

6 OTIS 0 ! 060MS 0 30JJS30ITS 0 0

70MS 0 20MS50MS: 0 0

80MS 0 0

0 I 0 0

0 50MS 0

TMS40MS

0

0

30MS0

30HS 0 0

0 0 0601 ISj 0 ! 0

50MSj 10s 0

0 0 50MS5MS1 0 50ns0 : 0 20KS0 0 0

60ns 0 TR

j » J TR

10

30

20

10

70

0

20

0

100

0

30

0

6 0

30

20

8 0

50

0

0

50

10

20

50

70

10010

100

0

T

10

40

so

•H<n

120

120

110

135

110

140

115

95 115

100

110

1 0 5

1 1 5

110

1 4 0

8 0

110

1 3 0

8 0

1 1 5

1 0 5

1 0 5

1 1 5

1/15

120

115

115

115

105

140

Q 11 8

CodeTT0

lL

Yield. _

tt£-

| Days to

heading

j

Diseases

•E0•P.Ej•r-{ J0)W

<up j

-PW3U

0),-3, ...... - j

CQ3U

E<D-PVI

Yellow rust %

......

—, S

eptoria

1 ....

(°~9

) .

_

Leaf Ear

i 1 ..___| J 190 3880 ! 75 76 0 0 TS 0 6

1: 91 3250 75 78 0 0 0 20

7 1- 92 1710 75 71 0 0 0 10 - 6 !93 45500 75 I 734 0 0 0

0_ -

794 4910 80 90 0 0 ! 0 10

|5

95 80 91 0 0 0 10 - 496 1530 75 91 0 0 TS 40 4 120

97 3830 75 92 0 0 0 5 4 130

Enkoy ! ! j !1 1 ) i

(check) 5260 95 74 70MS 0 ! 0 0------- i6 j 106 :

Plot size, M2 : 1.0Fertilizer, kg/ha 2 100 D/iP + 100 ureaPlanting date : 16 July, 1982 %

,•1.191

115-45 Bread wheat regional obsei^ation/dry__land (Dhera)

In this observation 36 lines of bread wheat were included to screen out drought resistant ones for moisture stress areas. Stand at seedling was quite mormal for most entries# Disease was not a problem during the growing period in this area*

Days to maturity ranged from 94-114» In general plant heights were rather short for most lines* Nevertheless taller varieties gave higher yields* Some lines appeared with promising yields and thus worth further testing in drought prevailing wheat growing areas.

r o —4 — ^ f o f o r o o j —* —* ro fv>0 1 r o C D u » u » r o o o o n ^ a u m v o ^ U ' ^ o jU l U l Oj L j ( > U l - g - On O VO —j —4 . N

U l U ) U l O I U l U l ON ON ON ON ON ON U l CTs ON ^4 o \ ON Ch Choo —j —o —j —i vo ro ro oj oj ro ~s> o o on -j o

VO VO VO VO VO VO VO O - i - ^ O O V O O O —i . V O _ > , —5.—~j 4 ~«3 U i On v o o O On — ^ o j O j O j 4 * r o

f\3 —i —l - A —O vo oo — 3 Os Ul 4s. O.' To o vo co on ui 4s. oj 'ro

ro_ _ . . . _ o j v o —j c o O j v o

O O O O O O O O -J 0 . 0 0 O O O O O O O O

m o lo p. <DJ L j

o VO VO VO 03 VO VO VO vo CO vo VO oo VO vo o oo VO VO 00o oo ui c o m o o ui ui ui o o o m o o o o u i u i oo m

On —j O'* On —] on gn u i ui o j —j on —g - o _* On o j o - » u i

U l t-3 i-3 O J 1-3 i-3S O l ^ K O O O S O O Q O O . O O g O S O O u i u i i n to ^ co u i

to

sim CO

O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

—J ~ J ON O n O n —-q —q 0 0 0 0 - ^ 1 — 3 U 1 U 1 U I - J V O ON ON QO ONJ - ^ U l O OJ U l O j OJ O OJ r o O U l U l U l O U l O O U l OpI_____________....._______ _ „ ____

te*0*trfi)

* fh- ;(d r

Stand $ Seedling

Days to Heading

Days to Maturity

Septoria 0-9

Leaf rust$

Stem rus't'fo

f&>c+-CO

h* tr1

f t I^ I

Height cm

115-45 Bread

wheat regional

observation/dryland

Coden£

Yieldkg/ha

V. JP(—1

S'S+» a)to co

I | Days

to

| Hea

ding

•

21 2860 100 61

2? 2670 98 60

23 3260 100 60

24 2740 98 7125 3220 95 7126 2420 95 62

27w 2473 100 66

j 28 ! 1710 85 62

j 29 670 85 | 61

j 30 1050 85 | 61

31 1000 85 ‘ 61

32 1140 90 6433 1170 85 62

34 710 95 7135 1210 95 5936 1230

- -.....95 64

In this replicated trial eighteen bread wheat varieties ineluding two commercial varieties K6 29O-Bulk and enkoy as checks were tested at Dheraj a typical moisture stress area in the lowland.

Plant haight was affected by moisture problem in the area during the growing season. As regards yield only three varieties appeared on top of the check varieties, however there was no significant difference "between varieties* It seems test weights of some of the varieties were not seriously affected dueto moisture stress*

115-4 Bread wheat regional variety tea/dryland (’Phera’)

123

4 Oj ro —1 o

“vo co —J ON Ul 4 o-> ro —11

<T~bT o ~i r “aT *wT' T- j “5““0“CD o p &) _k *-3 H * H- P 4 & i—'CD o o < 1 3 Ul c+- O e4- CD CD CD CD4 T cr* o U-» ro ON e+ o 3 4 4 4«<5 £ 4 vo VO CD N o 9) 03 p P& o —i 1 4 £ 0H- • 02 —J — J Y1

f

f P ra 4 _Jk _Aw e+CD ON

ON fON 00 Y CO H- CD 4 rov_x -3

" *rJ s —' ONU i U i o *~r!

O '“ p c_J.M -~0

U J f%3 o CD ^

= Iui y™ H*

'tIO

£

Vo

£

M M -i l\3 -iW tjj U l Co ON ON ONo —o u i ro -o -J Oo o o o o o o

'X> o On — j -i —j OnH O Lo -0 U> —*■ CO

roON U) MO ro -joo oo -~Jo o o

4^ VO o-> ro O vo

ONOo

fO -k -»■O v o V J1PO —3 U lo o o

U i u>OJ VO —j O On u i

On co O

ON C O00 ui Co 4^

u > v o

n ~ — w— ";■— 1 CO — J — J[—o ro o o~>I_________

co co O ui

CO VO Oj Oj CO -Jr o u j

On U l U l 4 ^ O ro oo —a

Ul On u i ro O

! on —j u i On — j — ] On| C 0 U l U » - * -»■ O V O

On —j oo ro

ONvo ON

ON On ON U l U U vo ONco

-£=> O 4 -k 4. UJ L»J u j O n v o r o — jovo 4 ->

-> uiO ** O Ul o o oUi Ui 3Ul

0 * 0 o o o ^ s ^ ^ o oU l U i U l U l

t H3[ o o o o s o of Ul

s i sUl Ul Ul

tio o s s o g gM CO W W W

;4^ U l O n O n 4 ^ ON ON O N U > ON U l OJ VO VO ON ON 4 ^ ON

O O O O O O O

—J ON ON ON ON ON —jO Co 4^ oo O —k Ul

o o o o o o o o o o o

ON 03 CO U l ON U l ON U l U lU l VO VO 4 ^ 4 ^ —3 VO L«J VO 4i* VO

u j o j r o u -> -P=»* ro 4 ^ vo o-/ u i o ->>

'O o UJ Ul Ul Ull>~> oj o~> -p* o*> o-> lo 4» o-> J lOOQ-qppdt o 45=. c o — j O L V U I O N ^ U l l u u u - b e e u

Stand $

Days to heading

Days to Maturity

Leaf rust$

Stem rust%

Septoria

Height cm

CO bJ o j u CO Ul UJ t -weight gm

oo co —J OO Q? CD co o o ro

jCO -J Ul O 4 vo -pCO CO CO CO —J —Jio io j . oj vo ^

4^ o ui ro

oo —J o oo

Oo CO^ • HI-weight on u i u i u on ro leg

tr* h* ir4P p oe+ $q PbCD f

Y 1CT\

|cr)hIt'Dfa

a

►iI?.H-C

pi;

<&

H-CDc+c+CD01c+\&

MNMS

124

115-47 Bread wheat .^Ethiopian dryland nur sery ^hera)

.Among the fifteen lines of "bread wheat included in this nursery not a single line could "be selected for further test as all the lines performed very poor# One of the lines failed even to head up to harvesting, it seemed to be a winter type.

Ji *Tia> M 0 Ma> ** 4 O

<* c+p* H- H-w H' M ca

ot) & H> H-<re N K

4 (D a>& P- 4C- 0> **fi> cV*«* a> ro

C"3OtJ 'S*> »3

»» BO oa

CDo o

Ch o •

1 & fclUl

<<*5

voCo 00ro \

-£>o\

115-47 Bread

wheat /Ethiopian drylapfl

misery (Sher,

126

Thirteen improved varieties and one local check were included and the trials were carried out at Eekoji and Asasa. Chit of these the three top yielding varieties at Bekoji were ARDU-12-9c. SH-37/F3-M-1-20H and EH 270/ F2-4E^-11-95—H-3 with the yield of 7380 kg/ha, 6820 kg/ha and 6000 kg/ha respectively. (Table 125-1.2)

In general, the stand was good at Bekoji but lodging was found to be severe particularly on a few varieties. Regarding diseases scald was observed c the severety was higher than the other diseases relatively* (Table 125—2)

It Asasa the highest yielding varieties with yield of 3550 kg/ha & 3520

y.g/ha respectively were IAR /H/485 (std. ch.) and ARDU-12-9c. (Table 125-1.2)* ."'ontrary to Bekoji lodging was not observed on any cf the varieties and also the severety and incidence cf scald was not high at Asasa* (Table 125-1)

125-1,2 Food barley pre-national yield trial Asasa & Beko.ji,

125-1.2 Food barley pre-national yield trialfAsasa & Beko.ji)

Yield kg/ha at 87.5$ DM.

Code J Varieties

01 EEJ37/F3-m-1-20H02 E05/a/f3-B~1-22H03 EH163/F3-4V2H04 EH165/P3-3-8H05 ARDU~12—9 c06 AEOT-12-8o07 EH259A/F2-7B-108 1H273B/F2—3B—2109 SH270/F2-4B-11-95H-310 IH270/F2-4B-11-5B-511 EFI5 2/F4-4—3B-3- 2L12 EH294/F2—23-1B- 1

13 IAE/h / 485 (std. ch.)14 Local check

Location meanLSD~5#LSD \$c .v fo 2

Plot size?m DesignPlanting date Fertilizer, kg/ha (NfPgOc) Seeding rate, kg/ha

Locations Varietymean

. Rank jAs as a Bekoji

2680 6420 4550 4 1 j2770 5020 3900 10

2080 5800 3940 8

3480 5920 4700 33520 7380 5450 13020 3150 3090 133130 4700 3920 92150 4020 3090 132670 6000 4340 52030 5950 3990 73070 4700 3890 11

3200 5450 4330 6

3530 5950 4740 2

2200 4750 3470 12

2820 5370HS 911KS 123135.1 10.22 2

RGB RCB with three Rep#l3June 27 June57/57.5 57/57.5

85 85

125-1 S?irarofgE. nnd- oil, or rcnoi^x*- data of .fuod barley pre-national .yield trial growi at Asasa *

Code V a r ie tie s

°-P uo<a c•HwTi o >w h-P ro co ,c;

3 tO D iseases

. 9&+= Vi."Sk H

eigh

t cm

•■B

0)O •w sc i &00

0

e■s•

IXJ

Head M aturity Scald0-9

Net b lotch0—9

-

IStem ru stdjnt°

Leaf ru stf

01 EH 3 7 /F3-K-1- 2014 70 93 138 0 4 30.1 S tMS 1 77 43.0 57-602 EE5/ A/F3-B-1-22H 75 93 130 3 4 30s 10: S 3 83 41.3 59.403 SH163/P2-41-2K 70 95 137 0 3 5s 5>TS 4 77 41.8 62.504 EK165/F3-3-8H 73 90 135 tR 4 0 5s 1 84 45.0 6 2 .205 ARDU- 12-9o 75 92 127 4 4 10s 20t.'c 13 85 42.0 57.506 ARIU-12~8c 100 105 121 9 2 N N 40 93 38.8 55.6

07 EH. 25S l/F2-7E—1 98 83 122 0 3 10'T'S 50?Ts 31 97 48.8 65.908 ELi27iB/F2-3B—21 80 91 138 0 3 10s 15-rs 5 53 56.5 63.1

09 EE27C/F2-4B-1 1-95H-3 70 86 126 0 4 10*!S 30W 1 79 37.8 6 2 .510 SH270/F2-4E-11-5B-5 53 88 138 0 4 tRTTS 25t^ 6 78 39.0 6 3 .011 EH52/F4—4-3B-3-2c 88 100 138 0 5 0 50 w* 7 | 83 40.0 59.0

12 EK294/F2-23-1B-1 88 88 129 2 4 ictth 65 wp 5 83 40.3 63.5

13 IAR(aJ/4G5 (stdo ch) 88 91 126 1 6 10 Mo 20-MS 16 82 43.3 59.6

14 Local check 78 90 123 0 5 40-ms 45^S 5 82 39.8 6 1 .6

Code Varieties Days to Diseases Lodging % ' i-P ttDss

OQ'd 0

Head Maturity ^3cald0-9

Ket block0-9

; Stem rust o

I Lea£ rust$

Late *»o-H©

s0-p i<-1 r

a t

* I'd05 I <D • i03 F5 I5 ?rj -S'c5 ■&8*P C$ EG CQ <Dw O 1

- Ill -11 - .V v-.ur_ r- 1 __ ■ 1 ■ m ! i4 ^ I01 EH37/F3-M1-20H 05 ✓ J 103 156 i

4 i 4 to0i

55 r; 58 0 110 | COCMir\

02 EH51 a/f3-£~ 1—22H 90 100 156 ! 6 iI 6 5 I %i c 45 0 ; 110 II83 i

45.°03 Mi 16 3/F3-41-2H 92 94 158

f2 6 35c I 45s | 20 0 43.5 j

04 EH165/P3-3-8H 92 95 160 3 7 15.-; 5Ql:.: 0 0 114 | 49-5 j j05 ARDU-12-9o 92 96 156 7 5 I5i;s 15273 38 0 112 I 45 • 3 |06 ARDU-12-8 0 95 85 137 8 4 201,15. 5 0 104 4-0 « 007 EH259 A/F2- 7B-1 92 87 155 3 4 20.5IS 60?tS 4 0 119 56 e 008 EH273B/F2-3B-21 95 100 15? 5 6 :.iS 40MS 0 0 82 64<309 EH270/F2-4B-11-95--3 94 93 155. 6 6 15 0 35MS 10 0 78 39-810 EH270/P2-4B-11-5B-5 92 94 157 7 5 1Cr7S 35S 0 0 110 41.811 EH52/F4~4-3B-3~2L 93 105 156 4 6 25 s 25 3 40 0 116 41-812 EH 294/F 2- 23- 1B-1 92 96 156 7 4 40-MS 70S 10 0 72 40.513 IAH/li/485 (std. dr..) 92 95 150 5 6I 18: MS 20. HS 53 0 99 41«014 Local check 93 93 | 151 6 I 6

\15 s 50 s 55 0 108 41.0

130

Pood barley national yield trials included nine improved varieties and one local check. The trials were conducted at three stations namely Asasa, Bekoji & Kobe.

Out of the ten varieties included in this trial and laid out at Bekoji variety M 163/F3-17H— 1-1 proved to be tbe top yielding variety with the yield of 7^90 kg/ha followed by EK163/F3-107—4H & ARDU-12-60B which gave 7210 kg/ha and 6840 kg/ha respectively. At this station all the improved varieties out yielded the local check. (Table 125—3 . 5 )

Considering diseases scald and net-blocth were observed on some of the varieties* EH163/F3-45—3H—3-3 and- EH165/f3~22-9H though they happened to be best yielders they were ^unong the varieties that were severely attacked by scald. (Table 125-3,5)

At Asasa ARDU-12-60B, EH163/F3--113-6H and IAR/h/ 485 (std. check) were the three best yielders and they gave 47^0 kg/ha, 4630kg/ha afld 4490 kg/ha respectively .

EH163/F3— 107-4H with yield of 3860 kg/ha was the top yielding variety at Robe other high yielders at this station include EH163/F3-&H— 1— 1 & ARDU-12-60B which gave 3580 kg/ka & 3550 kg/ha respectively.

AS swatter of fact yields were much lower at Robe when compared to the other stations*

As for as disease incidence was concerned net-blotch was observed to be severe were as leaf rust attacked some of the varieties with variable degree of severety. Most of the varieties showed considerar- ble resistance to scald and stem rust (Table 125—3—5)•

125-3?4»5 Food barley national yield trial ( Asasa, Bekoji & Robe)

25-3>5 barley national yield trial if Asasa, Beko.ji & Robe)

Yield in kg/ha at 87.5$ Dm

Code Varieties Locations Varietymean

Rankiisasa Bekoji Robe

01 EH163/F3-17H-1-1 3600 7690 3580 4960 302 EE 16 3 /F3-45- 3K-3- 3 4250 6730 2840 4610 6

03 Si 163/F3-113-6h 4630 5840 3510 4660 404 m w ~ 12- 10c 4030 6750 3090 4620 505 ARDU-12-6OB 4760 6840 3550 5050 106 ARDU-12-9B 3760 6060 3180 4330 907 EE163/PS-107-4H 3850 7210 3860 4970 208 BH165/P3-22-9H 4280 6730 2660 4560 709 IAR /H/ 485 ( std. ck) 4490 6210 2550 4420 8

10 Local cheek 4010 4900 960 3290 10

X.ocatio n mean 4170 65OO 2980 4550LSM US 895 761LSDlfc HS 1208 1028O.sifo 2 22.5 9»5 17.4Plot sizefm 2 2 2Design RCB RGB RGB with 4 repFertilizer kg/ha(NP?0-) 57/57.5 57/57.5 57/57.5Planting date l3June 27June l6julySeeding rate kg/ha 85 85 85

12 5 -3 Summer cf diseases and other agronomic data of food barley national yield trial grown at Asasa.

Code Varieties! » l d

015n

Days to Diseases

Shattering

I «M)^ I •

.

1Jt-H1—i

Head 1 Maturity Scald0-9

Net "blotch0-9

Stem rust€

Leaf rust%

EO

• H

0)W

^ *J

O •O -f3

O i s

01 EH163/F3-17H-1-1 80 106 111 6 5 15ms 28 s 3 105 4 6 .3 59.802 EH 16 3/F3-45- 3H- 3- 3 85 99 132 5 4 30 s 30S 8 108 57o5 6 3 .0

03 Eli 16 3/r3-113-6E 85 91 136 5 4 20MS 8 s 10 105 41.5 64.104 ARDU-12— 10c i 83 93 134 6 4 30.s 40.MS 3 99 45.0 62.305 .ARDU-12- 6 OB 80 91 132 6 6 10'MS 25S 16 96 40.3 6 2 .0

06 ARDU— 12-9B 73 92 109 6 4 10S 8 MS 0 91 46 . 3 6 3 .0

07 EH 16 3 /P3-107—411 85 91 137 5 5 i 18 MS 30MS 5 98 34.8 57.9 j

08 EH165/P3-22-9H ! 78 94 138 | ^ 3 40 MS 50MS ! 6 102 4 6 .0 6 1 0 1

09 11 AR fil/ 4B5 ( s t d. ck) | 80 , 91 108 6 4 23ms 15 ms 1 91 4 2 .0 59.9 j

10 Local check 88 89 129 5 3 45 ms 45 MS 3° qoo 43.0 62.3 j

125-4 Summary of disease -and other agronomic data of food barley national .yield trial grown at Beko.ji

Code Varieties-pcJ-p02

CD rd >S I S'* -

D?y s to Diseases Lodging I %

late

Shattering

%

Height

cm.

0 •o) a w 5bO 0S t

4•

%

•1—1

Heading

Maturity Scald0-9

Nettil t ch0-9

St em rust$

Leafrust%

01 EB163/F3-17H-1-1 94 107 165 4 5 0 2Q.IS 20 0 122 4808 61.302 S116 3/F3-45- 3K- 3- 3 92 93 164 3 7 0 5 MS 14 0 177 56.0 64.903 ES163/F3-113-6K 92 93 166 7 3 0 5ms 24 0 114 46-5 62.504 ARDU-12-10c 90 93 164 7 6 0 45MS 56 0 106 46 .0 62.905 ARKJ-12-6 OB 90 94 162 6 6 0 15ms 69 0 110 42.0 6 0 .0

0 6 iRDU-12-9B 90 96 1b2 7 6 0 5ms 65 0 107 44.3 63.407 31163/F3-107-4 H 91 39 161 6 6 0 35MS 59 0 107 36.0 59-008 HI165/F3-22-9H 90 87 165 A4 7 5ms 65ms 0 0 112 47.3 6 2 .1

09 IAR/n/485(Btd« ok) 91 89 162 5 6 5s 50ms 50 0 107 43.0 60.9

10 Local check 92 94 159 4 7 15s 7 Oj.t 3 73 0 113 42.0 6 1 .9

125-5 Summary of disease* and other agronomic data of food “barley national .yield trial flrovnri at Robe

Code Varieties

•I

-pwCD

rds Q -p +=in co

D?.ys to Diseases

Height

cm.

I _

% .0 e w So0 .0 -p 0 ? \—

•

t •• ttO

Head Maturity Scald0-9

Netblotch 0-9 >

Stemrustic

Leaf rust *

01 KI163/F3-7H-1-1 85 89 128 0 5.2 0 13 S 115 40.8 6 0 .3

02 Eil63/F3-45-3H-3-3 85 88 237 0 7.8 5 S 10MS 115 42 .8 60,5

03 EH1S3/F3-113-6H 90 82 129 2 .2 6 .0 0 14 MS 115 40.8 63.9

04 ARDU-12-10c 84 83 126 0 7.8 0 11 MS 108 39.3 6 1 .O

05 ARDU-12-6B. 89 82 126 0 7.8 0 19'MS 110 39.5 58.9

06 ARDU-12-9B 86 85 129 0 6 .8 0 21 MS 108 40,3 6 2 .0

07 ELI163/F3-107-/H 94 84 127 0 7.8 0 15 MS 104 30.5 56.9

08 EK165/F3-22-9H 89 89 127 0.5 7.0 0 16 MS 98 38.5 6 1 .3

09 IAR/fe/485 (std.ok) 89 82 127 0 7.5 0 40 MS 103 34.5 56.9

1° ; Local check 69 81 126 0 5.8 60s 65.MS 96 31.3 55*5

The national yield trial on malt barley included 8 different varieties in which Beka & one local variety were included as standard dicok and local check respetivelji Similar to food barley the trials were carried out at As as a, Fekoji & Robe*

At Bekoji EH99/F3—D-6-14H-3-3L with the yield of 3790 kg/ha out yielded the other varieties followed by 5E99/F3-B-4-12H-1-1K and EH99/F3~ D-5-13H— 2-2L with yield of 5380 kg/ha one1 5260 kg/ha respectively ( Tabl e 125-6-8) .

The stand in general was satisfactory and it was better than that of Asasa. Regarding diseases scald and net—blotch were observed on most of the varieties and the severity was not high as compared to the food barley grown at this station (Table 125- 7)«

EH172/F2-T— 2— i8H-7-7 was the best yielding variety at Asasa with yield of 4210 kg/ha* It was followed by Ei99/F3-D-4-12H— 1-1L which gave 4100 kg/ha*

Regarding diseases scald and net blotch were relativley severe; besides these, stem rust & leaf rust were observed on most of the varieties

EH99/F3-D~6~14E-3-3L war the top yielder at Robe with yield of 4140 kg/ha and followed by EH 172/F2-T-2-18K-7-7 which gave 3480 kg/ha*(Table 125-6-8).

Considering disease net blotch and leaf rust were observed on all varieties with different magnitude of severity from variety to varietyc

125-6, 7»8 Malt Earley national yield trial ( Asasat Bekoji Robe)

125-6,8 Malt barley national yield trial (Asasa. Beko.ii fiflobe

Yield in kg/ha at 8 7,5^ DM

Cods Varieties LocationsVariety

| meanRankAsasa Bekoji [ Robe

01 EH99/F3-D-5- 13H2-2L 2790 5260 3460 3840 502 EH99/F3-B-4-12E-1- 1L 4100 5380 3510 4330 103 EE199 /F3-D- 6-14H- 3- 3L 2940 5790 4140 4290 2

0 4 1EE 172/F2-H-2-9K-2-2 4040 5000 3050 4030 1

4 ;1 0 5 EE17 2/F2-T-1-17H-6-6 2880 5260 3250 3800 6

06 EE-17 2/7 2-T— 2-1SH-7- 7 4210 5050 3480 4250 307 Beka (st.check) 3550 4280 2550 3460 7

wLocal check 3480 4380 2430 I 3430 8

Location mean 3500 5050 3230 3930

LSD % 1050 597 728LSD 1% US 812 991CV $ 20.4 8 15.2Plot 2size, m 2 2 2Design RCB RCB RCB with four rep.Planting date l3June 27 June 16 JulyFertilizer, kg/ha (KP^O^ 46/46 46/46 46/46

Seeding rate, kg/ha 75 75 75

125-6 Summary of diseases and other agronomic data cf mr.lt barley national yield trial £rown at Asasa.■■ ■ 1 —* ■ ■ 1 » • * — « %-•- V —-«■ ■ III u— >» t, ■ r. ■■!>> >iw ■ ■ i i ■ — —i ■ — i ■ i » . uua ■ ....... ■■■m.i

J| Codd Varieties+=> t(D fo £

•H

CQ^ G)

§ £

co

Days to Deseases | Lodging

§

■g

*6h<0

4 *

i

j Head

1

| Maturity Scaldv0-9

t 1

Netb lo tch

0-9

Stemrust b

j Leaf rust^

L _ ....... .

*

I LatefcJ3GT*MOJ ^

s.co

3 ___

CD 0) • CQ t*0

o M oo

•tjQMI •

■g•1—!Hi

01 EB99 /F3-E-5-13H-2- 2L 83 97 140 5 5 30 15 0 8 86 47.8 6 8 .2

02 EHS 9 /F3-D-4-12H-1- 1L 75 94 138 5 5 15 10 0 2 93 42.3 7 0 .4

03 EK99 /F3-D-6-14H- 3-3L 70 97 139 6 5 30 10 0 3 84 42.3 6 9 .0

04 EK17 ?/F 2-H— 2-9H- 2— 2 90 92 139 5 3 35 20 0 18 95 46.0 6 9 .3

05 W . 17 2/F2-T-1- 1711—6—6 83 92 135 5 4 20 35 0 20 81 39.5 70 .6

: 06 Eri 172/F2-T-2-18H-7-7 88 92 134 6 3 20 40 0 6 85 | 40.3 70 .9

07 Beka (std . ok) 88 9 2 129 7 4 10 t 0 25 88 35.5 70 .0 j08 Local check 112 120 5

j “ vrrJ N J 0 ... ...i . .. . .

60 90 jl5 . 1 )

6 6 .5 1

01

02

030405 I 06

0708

H? 99/F3-I>-5-13H- 2- 2BSH99/F3-I-4-12H-1— 1L 3i95 / 3r-1-6.-14II- 3~ 3L EE 17 2/F2-K- 2-9H- 2- 2 Erl 172/F2-7-1-17H-6-6 EH 17 2/F 2- 2-18K- 7- 7Beka std. ck Local check

fd <D£ >+= wCO ..C!

91 93 152‘

2 6

90 93 154 2 6

90 95 150 r-D 7

69 127 154 6 590 126 156 6 591 127 , 156 5 T06 95 ; 151 N i 589 j 79 141 7 i 8

Io~ 9

*

15s 15ms 0 0 106

5s\

'5ms 0 0 1030 35li‘S 0 0 10910s 50ms 0 0 106

5rns 23ms 0 0 94tr 65ms 0 0 970 10ms 0 0 94H | N 0 0

101

•Pcjco

IS)0

O eO 4=o is

52.5 51*553.5/] n C‘i I O J

43.038.5

ih i

70-170o971.069 o 5 ,2 ,0

72 .0

6 5 .6

70 .6

S"a s

123-8 Summary of diseases and, other agronomic data of malt barley national yield trial grown atjlobe.

Code Varieties"aJ £•H

wnd CDS >-p d

Days to Diseases .L edging %

Lat e

•

0EO-P•a•H<DW

6

rd©<D o

8 O \—

bQMO-e

•rH

Head Maturity Scald0-9

Net blotch0-9

Stem rust1o

Leafrust ,

01j EH9S /F3-D-5-13H— 2- 2L 90 84 131 0 8.0 5s 2Qas 23 99 5 2 .8 6 5.9

I 02 5K9S /F3-IM- 12H-1-1L 88 83 128 0 8 .0 0 % s 31 103 45.0 69.9

| 03 iiH95 /F3-D-6-14H-3-3L 94 85 131 0 7.7 0 14msc6 ! 113 45.5 70.6 j

04 E 17 2/F2-H-2-9H-2-2 83 83 127 0 8.0 0 1 % 5 ; 73 ' 90 49.5 6 5 .5

05 Uli 17 2/F2-T-1-17K-6-6 83 82 127 0 8.0 0 1Q-IS 54 86 32.3 69.0

06 EH 172/F2-T-2-18H— 7 -7 80 61 126 0 8.0 0 21MS 59 93 36.£ 70.0

07 | Beka (std. cky) 7 6 83 127 0 7.7 0 9ms 78 86 27*0 6 4 .6

08 | Local check. 93 82 109 0 N N N 19 114 33.5 58.0 i

Ten varieties and lines of tef together with a looal variety and a commercial, Dz-01-354 which were included as a local check ard standard check respectively were tested in this trial. Maturity ranged between 144 and 147 d?ys. Regarding yield there were significant differences between varieties. But no variety is prefered to the local check.

145-1 Tef national yield trial (Kulumsa)

145-1 Tef national .yield, trial (Kulurnsa)

j Code Variety Yield 87.9St!- DM*1 ..... “ 1 Diseases io Lodging r - !]«£i

kg/hap a -2 -H

Leaf rust Late i * i | <D bD

! i•HCO

erf a) P &. &&-sP S He

ight CO *4-

d> 'SO -H0 <u £

11 Dz-Ol-354 (standard check) 2670 73 147 40 80 0 .2 5

1 2 (T-140 x 566) (T-140 x 186) TBT 76— 26— 7LS-obs 2680 67 147 40 83 90

j0 .3 8 j

(418x566)196-TB * 76-79-7LS-0BS 2510 68 145 40 70 98 0.33 \

! 4(566x 186) (418x186) Gond.sel 196—21LS-)LS 2350 72 146

t40

1

50 ) 90

1

50.35 J

5 1(566x186)310 TBf76-45-8LS-0BS 2410 66 144 40 83 90 j 0 .20

: 6 ; Dz—01-172 sel. from germplasm 2480 66 147 4078

891 0.23 }; 7 |

! 8 1 I

(566ri86) (418x 186) Gond sel. 196-3LO-3LS-4S

Q*566x186) 3l9(j86xA-40) 3543 129-5T-S-2LS-SB-SB

2220

2430

71

70

147

145

40

I 7°

68

80 1

83

91 !

0 .28

0 .28 J9 Dz-OI- 1 8 4 cel. from germplasm 1920 70 145 40 78 j 88 j 0.35 j

L 1ULoC:i.l variety (local check) • 2620I i6g 145 40 85 ;

75 : 0 .2 8 j

Plot size, M ;Fertilizer, kg/ha ; Planting date :Seeding rate, kg/l:a :

6.0

150 DAP (18/46) 27 July, 1982 25

L.S.D. %

L.S.D. %

C.V.

318 kg/ha 430 9.1 i

1 2

145-2 Tef pre-nationrl yield trial (Kulumsa)

This test consisted of eleven lines and varieties of tef £z —G'1—~354 was also included as a standard check. No remarkable differences in maturity were observed between different varieties* When it comes to yield there was no significant difference between the five top yielders. The standard check, D&-01-354 was only slightly out performed by one entry#

83

88 j

COvn

O Ovo

C OC O

95 co — i

COO J

COvo

C o— 3

vo V O

o o o o o o o o o r> O O o• « « • 0 • • o * e • eU J u j O J O J O J O j O J O J ro ro rv) O j O jo <J> O vn vn O o o vn Vn vn O O

-Es.

Y1ro

Fc•ij?53• 3 .»-*•ro

S

EIjr'■ pj

S'

t-

!c:•P

1000-seed weight gms.

223-1/82 Date of planting and, plant population on horsebeans (Kulumsa) •

With the objectives of finding out the optimum date of planting and optimum population density for each date of planting a trial on norsebem was layed out at Kulumsa during 1982-83 cropping season.A split -plot design with dates as main plots and spacings as sub plots was used. Four dates (28/5 , 10/6, 26/6 & 9/7 ) and four spacings (30, 40, 50 & 60) cm were used in the test. The distribution of rainfall during the first two planting dates was erratic and this resulted in nonuniform emergence of the plants.

In general, the result obtained showed that planting during the first week of June with 400,000 plants/ha produced relatively higher yields (Table 223-1).

As indicated above the rainfall distribution was not uniform during the cycle and this result can not be conclusive. Thus in order to get reliable information further test3 are deemed necessary.

"'1kk

0 t ? t ? t J fc> tJ f Ci fci t J fc) trJ W r1 4» 4 4» 4*OJ OJ OJ _.V OJ r o _k ro n o r o i

i!*rJ •V T l •TJ T t *-0 Tj *TJ *t : H-J - d "x! ’TJCO vd 4 r o oj4> r o 4*_uOJ -A r o I'O 4»Oj OJ0 CO !— 1 1

CO 4 OP« c+ c+ 1i---H-3 1—1 COO' H- H-N N ^ ‘Q cr•u 4 -<r+-O s fu—* fV) • 4-**V -i

rj' —s_^_ _i 'O r o r o r o r o ro r o r o ''O r o n o Oj jSu 44 v n On ON ro oj Lu 4 v n ON ON —J CO 00 O 1OJ c o r o r o CX1 O J O ON ON r j O n o — J on covn jC-j r o On O vji ro pv v n v n O J r o r o OS r o 00 n o 1■

uto

CDWWgjoH-£

r o 2 ! v o O o * o p ono>

n ii n itro -*• ro

vo on o co

c_.£i—1Ch Ch aO CD

tTJ *T> X) -d 4^» oj r o — *

II II 11 il l

fe°OJoH-

ON VJl 4 » OJ O O O O

**at)p >

H-ti a> S i—1

vo*

vo o vo vo vo vo o vo vo vo o o vo o vo o i St -nd ^Q V O V D O O O V O O a i O *

vn o v o i vji vji vn Vn — ] — a vn o n — j O n O n -j O nVJl O' VJl ONVJ1 VJl VJ1 —J —J Vn VJl —J VJl ON 4 • Days to Flower

ro ro ro n ro ro ro -r w o j ^ ^ oj 4^ ojOn vji VJ VJ! vji vji co —j vn vn oo VJl ON vo ON

—-3-3 CO CO co —J 0\ —j —4 On VJl —0 ON ON ON VO OVDObJVO -1 O -P=> vji 00 VJI CO ON 4

•Days to Maturity

IV) 4- vo VO CO ON VO ON ON o vo O VJl —i VO VC

I FlowerolSplantI--1 f <-t|Pods/plant

fci tj & !cn u> w ;o

M

IItro I! to

—* — i. —* — - —> —a. — » — —u —i — .v —2k —i —% — -V __s—~3 —0 On —0 —-0 —0 -P» 4 —3 CT\ Laj vjh vji

4 O*' L O Oj U' UJ Uj U> U U» Oj0 0 c c o o o o c o o * c o o - «

O g o co u i vji co v.n co o~> co 03 O co oo o Co

j—im cm.

Oj ro O j Ui o : (jj U1 oj f'j no ro Oj ro o j Oj roo o a o • o o o « . « e o . » .OVJIOJCOCOOJ O O CO co Oj o On oj On 00

J OJ -» —i OJ VJl VJl ON -C * Jt CO CA CO G\ ON VJl O ON CN —* O OO vo VO VO VO VJI On O —» —* ON tLatc I____ J

tr*o

•Horizontal ■Spregd of the plant

Chocalateln- ‘j B P l_o A5.Jg I

‘ fe • ?Rust 0.5 |o | In 1

o j 4 -pa. i o n o n v j i v j i v j i v j i v j i v j i vn vn vn ? Height VO OJ o W -i O -J W Ul 4N O _i X' -1 OJ *: cm.15finI CO : CD <rl~;CD'Oj3'i'dioro

O j to o j O j O' Oj O' O j O j O j O j O j O j oj o j O j4 OJ -pi* 4 > ro OJ On — j Oj O ' s CO vn O’J Os .pi,— i -fs o — 4 ro vo l-j ro —0 —3 CO vn oj -£=• co* o o <t o e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0O cc CJ CO o O O OO VJl VJl VJl OJ 0<j CD VJl VJl

—-“-J —1 *—J —O —-J — J —*«3 —0 —*0 —0 —>3 —*0 ——v)C > -<J CO CO CO -O —v —.1 — —J —0 —□ —3 03o o o o e o o o o o o r e c o *

0 _% O VO O O-’ C U O U - ^ C O O j U ' O j

11000-seed iWeight gm1 ~|E1-Weight | . kg.|

■or

is,TJ■ (-J

IH-Ptftj|§fpb»*n

? c+

! c+-H-I'O13O3"-r<! 1ICOcrwIOJP»3

Ipi —1

1lis»

Spacings (cm,)

30 x 5

40 x 5

50 x 5

60 x 5

Date mean

C.V.

LSD* %

LSD. i/o

223-1 Yields in kg/ ha.

Sowing Dates Spacing means28 May 10 June 26 June 9 July

24-60

2620

' 2890

2370

2600

2780

3050

2860

2230

2310

2520

2180

1590

1620

1630

1430

222.0

2333

2523

2335

2585 2823 2310 1568

Sowing date Spacing Sowing date x spacing

1 0 .7 # 12-8$

198 kg/ha. 213 kg/ ha N.S.285 kg/ ha 285 kg/ ha U.S.

Design — Split - plot2Plot siae — 9*6 vn

Fertilizer - mil

Sixteen varieties of horsebean comprising load and introduced materials were included in the NY? and the trial was planted at Gondie.

wtnnd percentage was generally very good for all vareties and ranged between 93 — 99 * two most important horsebean diseases chocalate spotand rust were observed commonly on all varieties. Yields were generally good ?nd varieties NEB 207 x 74 TAT4—42c and coll. 23/77 (both are new ent~ ries) gave the highest yield of 48.6 qt/ha and 44*8 qt/ha respectively. The improved check kuj e-2-27-33'didn*t do well this year and gave only 28.7 qt/ha. (Table 225 - 1).

225 - 1 National Yield Trial on Horsefcean (Gondie)

VarietyYield 90rf

DM.kg/ha

i |-p

ir.NEB 207x74TA74-42C 4859 99Coll. 23/77 4464 96Local Check 4391 97Coll 27/77 4359 08Chocolate spot spreader 4266 99OS 20 DK 4258 88Coll 26/77 4172 96Coll 31/ 77 3984 96NEB 207 x 74'T:\ 74-2C7 3805 98Lume Nazareth 3773 100Coll 286/ 77 3672 96MKT i\ddis Al an -477 9574TA2050 x 741*A - 236 3391 93NEB 207 x 74TA74 - 6 A 3172 98Kuse 2 - 2 7 - 3 3 2867 84NEB 207 x 74TA74 - 6d 2484 96

Plot size, M Fertilizerj kg/ha Planting date Seeding rate, kg/ha

)

Diseases 0.5—TIT-- *--- — aCI?.-.-1 T)Lodging ■

Xf s0) hoCDC/2 -P Lg

htO4-3 C_i o-f-3 «H ■ 1 rHf.1—1 Pm

<dco S >5 o CO ?3

>1 -H(T5 ff.P) s

1 IoO -Po o ^ Ph O CD

M2

HQ) -P3 £ o ,_i J_i

CQCOtJo?

CD SlO•H • ci '5b o -h,■—\G) •as i xi IP> PH -----

r—1 i Ip-i U

iUvyCO .3-

(1) £~ Cd <3 r~HHH

52 131 3.0 ; 1 .3 6i 22 3 78 125 446.3 76.653 133 3.1 1 .0 66 20 3 31 128 479.0 77.560 135 2 .1 i 1 .8 67 25 4 73 139 478.5 78.553 133 2.9 1.3 84 22 4 25 128 46 2 .8 77-655 131 2.5 1 .0 65 21 3 54 122 9 46.0 78 .257 135 2 . 1 j 1 .0 73 21 4 43 126 4 5 6.0 75.553 133 2.4 • 1,0 74 ?6 4 33 125 472.6 78.353 133 2.9 ; i . o 67 21 3 11 12f 438.5 77.752 134 2.4 1.3 78 18 4 48 133 46 8.5 78.052 133 2.9 1.3 70 19 3 40 121 386.8 78.153 133 2.4 ; 1.8 78 19 4 28 128 408.0

480.377.6

53 132 2.6 ! 1.3 70 18 3 33 131 78.353 132 2.5 , 1-0 77 21 3 30 116 442.5 77.453 131 3*5 : 1 .8 58 18 3 64 123 471.5 76.553 134 2.4 , 1 .0 75 22 4 16 117 4 8 6.5 78.0

51 131 3.8 ; 1 .0:

. 1 _____

65 18 3 36 115 4 8 1 .8 77.0 .

3.2 L = ,D. 5? = 1152 kg/haNone L.S.D. 1# = 153918 June 1982 C.V. * 2 1 .1 i

200

225-2 Pre-national Yield Trial on Horsebegn (Gondie)

Eighteen new varieties of horsebean and one local check were included in this trial. The trial was layed out at Gondie to evaluate the varieties for their yield potential» resistance to diseases and other desirable trials.

Emergence wivs generally good ?nd stand percentage raged from 93 - 100* Considering disease incidence chocalate spot and last were observed commonly on all varieties ?nd the severity of chocalate spot was relatively more pronounced.

Yield results in general were encouraging and a, mean yield of 4-6 qt/ha was obtained at the station. Here all the new varieties out yielded the local check and the highest yield was obtained from coll- 5/77 which gave 57 qt/ha (Table 225 - 2).

V

22S - 2 Pre-national Yiold Tri-.l on Lorsobean (Gondie)

oia

L .

Variety

Col] 5/77 coll 2/77 Coll 28/78 Cell 26/78 Coll 43/78 Coll 47/78 K.3. 20/78 PGRC 027052 Coll 22/77 K.S. 3/78 Col] 111/77Halinex Fab a Coll 1/77 K.S. 5/78 Coll 105/77 K.S. 1/78 K.S. 289/77 Loo? 1 Check Col] 291/77

Yield 90 |, ^DM 5 ^ “f“i ■" "A. d

+3CO

5708 5646 5604 5198 4990 4917 4313 4703 4668 4667 4615 4594 4573 4490 4458 4354 4094 3823 1510

; O -P u0' £° s■ o ro <—iIP)

! 9798

100, 951: 99: 98i 57f 99i 99! 96

9993 99 99 9794 999797

-t-

±

57! 59 : 59; 59 .58

56 ■ 56 5 57 .5957• 59.58! 59• 56

58 58 64

1

o +>-H02 ^^ US

134135135134135135135135133135133135

I 132 i 135 j 134134

j 135136

D ise a se s 0 .50-P0)

1—lO +3o o

& PiO CO

2.53.3 ■:. 23.0 2o72.32.02.5 3.0 3.2

v< • C3.02.72.52.7

-PCD-3P*

2.02.01.72.2

1—I

* *\ C 9 J

1.31.72.0i • j

1.7

737377766772 87 0677 7171

1.0 7172 7478 62 74 74 76

1 o1.71.3 2 .22.7 U51.3

j1-pq J o«> *P.P. I CQ a .. Tj T3 G)o ! cPh [M__I--

Lodg- § ing ^

21ior. 126 j 27 24- 191 3 25j 3 221 3 22] 3

1

4= -Hr.J f 0Pi ■ jx;

-v; 3! 23; 4! 28] 31 33 r 3 22 f. 3] 24 1 3i 28; 4j 28 ( 3| 20i

3!3333

5772684847606862

oO53676368 62

E0 ilD 0CQ +=ci W) O -Ho 0

60 14575 ! 147 73 ! 135 73 j 147

I 149 ! 142I 148i 139 I 154I 151 S 159j 140

54 i 150 153 1391411144 139

, -probi 0 »>4*I **+

354.J405.348.356.461382.355.

3,8 I .3? ,c • ,0 '

330.3379.3 :3 7 7.5 : 326. 552. 357. 365. 369. 349 *414c315.

5 i 79.0 3; 77.4

77.579.276.077.6 78 c 178.378.0

5: 73.9 5i 78.38 ; 72 .50 . 78.001 78.1

j ■oo •

77.977.375.9 76.0

456*0 •* 75.8

_____i . . -

Plot size, M"Fertilizer5 kg/ha Planting date Seeding rate, kg/ ha 200

3.2 L.S.D. % = /i 0 1) 0None L.C.D. 1# = N. So17 June, 1982 C.V. = 16

kg/ha

151

225 - 3 Advanced Nursery on Korsebean (Bekcji)

Twenty lines of horsebean which had performed well during the initial stage of testing yrevionsly were advanced -nd planted at Bekoji i.or further evaluation. Two improved varieties iTC 5$ and KV;; 2 - 2T — 33 were included as standard checks.

.Moisture stress and low tempra.ture prevailed prior to flowering which is the critical stjge in the development of the coop, st-nd percentage ranged from 45 - 9&*

Considering the development of diseases, no variety was found to be free from the two common diseases of horsebean (Chocalate, spot -.nd rust) eventhough the magnitivde of infestation was variable.

with respect to yield the improved variety NC 5$ gave the highest yield of 49.4 qt/h- followed by FGRC/s 027273 and Kuse 2 -27 - 33 with yields of 47.9 qt/ha nd 44*4 qt/ha respectively. In general terms, < however, yields were very low. (Table 2?5 - 3)

- 3 Adv need Eursery on Ilorsebe^n152

Plot size

Pl?jiting d ie

Seeding r -- tg > kg/ha

6 .4?!2

25 Jime, 1982

200

4L 3 sys to Diseases 0-5

Variety Yield

kg/M..

St nd I FlowerjMature\.

Choc-late Spot

Rust - Pods/Flint

Seeds/JPod

P'letot Weight in cm.

NC 58 4938_75 ' 62 158 \ 1 .0 1 .0 27 3 85

PGRC/Z 0272-73’ 4791 58 ! 67 161 i 1 .0 2.0 : 26 -) 85Knee 2-27-33 4452 98 ! 1 5 5 1 1 .0 :,o I 26 3 90pgrc/z 027247 3458 80 ; 61 156 ; c .0 2.0 17 3 85PGRC/l’ 027^71 3416 96 66 160 j 1 .0 2.0 15 3 70PGRC/ E 027258 3133 45 : 62 156 j 2.0 3.0 18 3 89

PGRC/: 027266 3095 85 ! 60 156 i • 1 .0 2.0 16 3 65PGRC/z 027280 3028 95 : 60 153 j 1 .0 2.0 20 3 65:grc/e 027282 2991 93 , <33 154 1 .0 2.0 14 3 80

PGRC/z 027279 2869 80 60 158 2*0 2.0 17 3 75p g r c / z 027286 2805 96 64 154 2.0 2.0 20 3 75p g r c / e 027259 2773 80 : 63 154 1 2.0 3.0 25 , 4 85p g r c / e 027281 2588 8 Q 62 156 ■ 1 .0 2.0 18

13 75

p g r c / z 027269 2400 60 | 63 164 ' 2.0 2.0 16 3 90

p g r c / e 027249 2339 65 i 62 154 2.0 0 r*C c V 19 ■>j 80

p g r c / z 027257 2:66 95 67 154 2.0 2.0 11 2 75PGRC/ E 027261 2245 80 67i 156 2.0 3,0 15 . 3 70p g r c / e 027253 2239 83 i 61 154 2.0 3.0 21 2 95p g r c / 1: 027260 2105 75 ; 65 154 2.0 2.0 21 3 70p g r c / e 027274 2098 73 1 59 156 2.0 2.0 19 3 65p g r c / e 027255 1803 75 ; 61 152 2.0 3.0 16 3 65p g r c / z 027254

- . ,r — .. .

1031

- -....

65 ! 59ii*

152 . 3.0 2.0 20

i

3 65

»Fourteen different lines of horsebean nnd one standard check were

included in this tri*& and planted at Bekoji. The development of the plants was very good -nd stand percentage ranged from 98 - 100* Here the incidence of the t:-Jo common diseasest chocalate spot and rust was very low,

Medn yields in gener-.l were very low and ■ almost all of the new lines out yielded the standard check.(Treble 2 :5 - 4)

22^-_4 lic-tional Variety Observ t ion on Horsebean (Beko.ji)

225-4 Hational variety observation on horsebean

Variety Yield 90# DM

§+>CQ

0-+> f4<PCD 5 n Ch

Diseases 0-5 |

Seeds/pod

•ras0-P■H0v-H

<D•pCU.tHO -PO O O p<£!> co 0

-pCQ-Pf«

•P§ <—! ft

OPml----— —p g r c/ e 027177 4500 100 62 1.0 1.5 8 3 100

PGRC/E 027231 4328 100 61 2.0 1.0 10 3 95p g r c / b 027163 4313 . 100 61 1.5 1.5 12

\3 105

p g r c/e 027210 4188 100 68 1.0 1.0 ! 15 4 95PGRC/S 027142 4125 99 60 1.5 1.0 14 3 103

p grc/e. 027189 3984 100 64 1.0 1.0 10 3 93f g r c/e 027226 3906 100 60 1.5 1.0 12 3 93PGRC/S 027116 3875 100 61 1 .5 1.0 17 3 88p g r c/e 027171 3734 99 60 1.5 1-5 10 3 98

p g r c/e 027141 3641 99 61 ■1 .5 2.0 17 3 98PGRC/s 027112 3547 98 62 1.0 1.0 17 3 88p g r c/e 027143 3453. 100 60 1.5 1.0 9 3 90p g r c/e 027208 3391 99 ' 60 1.5 2.0 14 j 3 90Kuse~2— 27-33 2891 100 64 1.0 1.0 ‘12 J 4 ! 80PGRC/E-027209 2750 . _ 100 58 2.0 2.0 12 : 3_i 83

plot sizer.M Fertilizer, kg/ha Planting date- Seeding rate, kg/ha

3.2 .NON®28 June, 1982

200

L.S.D. % = 759 kg/haL.S.D. 1$ = 1054 wc .v . = 9.4 #

155

225—5 Frost resistance screening on hbrsebeans (Meraro)

Sme 4C different materials obtained from different countries in the world were planted during the year at Meraro to screen out those lines which are resistant and/or tolerant to frost. However, the weather conditions during the cycle of the test at the station were j.av*racle and the incidence of frost was relatively low.

The performance of the lines was variable and yields ranged from 5 qt/ha to 36 qt/ha (Table 225-5)*

The result in general shows marked inconsistancy and points out that this experiment should be continued for some more years inorder to obtan reliable information.

225-5 Frost resistance screening in horsebean grouri at Meraro

Variety

ALAD -160 253154253807253808 FNA Sel. FFGT Sel.. F7DD Sel.. 251331 NC23 ALAD 373

njI—I r—iD \ •H tyD !>-<

SBFMPL 46//76Sel.PFDB Sel.3ALAD 359 BC- Sel.369497 ALAD 259 78SL48590 SBPHP 'l / l6 S e l .{

I<use 2-r27-33 NC 65

NC 22 78548476 74TA 374 FPGD Sel.^ 254001 CS20j»380905 rciLai anese large74-A 516 78548426 262913 253806

3644 3528 3347 ’3134 13034 i 2988

S2878

2666

2550

2456

2406

2325 2244 2213 1094 1959

1950 1913 1900

1894

1875 179411744 1 1666

j 1650

1469

1459 1397 1300

1266

1250

1200

H 188

rd-PCO

100

95 95 95

! 100

| 100

3 IOC- 70 80

90 100

100

70

100 j 100 j95

100 1100

100 I80

45 100 j 100 i 100 j

70 I

6 5 1 60

100

100

95959555

-p uCD

CQ £>5 O O rHQ i65 ■6665 63 70 75 7566

66

65 68

7466 | 77 j 65 j

H7067 6368

63 6780 I

t

65 j

7065

6766

67 67 63 70

-j.

Diseases -p £0 -p © r ,

+3CtJ 0rH fli O CQ LO

§ 0 i 1 «“♦ ? *»

•H •H-P •, 1 ,—1

CQ P ^ CD rt

Q £

-P LT\ I dc .q bD 0CO -H

io k1—1 KV

. Ph160

5I 3.0j 3.0 2 60 i

160 2 . 5 3.02

77162 13 . 0 3.0 *i 2 | 70158 3 . 0

i2.0 ! 2i ! 60 1 i

159 j 2.0 2.0 2j ■J 73 ]160 , 2 . 5

1 5 7 1 1 . 5

1.5 2.0

2

! 2i

70 j 65 j

j j

1 7 4I 1 *5

1.5 0 63177 2 . 0 1.0 0 75172 1 - 5 1.0 0 7015 £ 1 . 0 1.0 0

60159 j 2 . 5 3.0 i 2 68177 | 2.0 1.0 I 0 77158 i 2.0 1160 i 2.0

2 603.0 3 50

160 1 . 5 2.0 3 I 55170 1 . 0 1.0 0 63158 - 5 3.0 2 65186 1.0 0.0 2 68176 2.0 2.0 0 75175 2.0 2.0 0 75169 2.0 1.0

i1.0 1 , 5 j

0 80186

1 5 8 .1 . 0 ;2 . 0 ; j

0

2 i

100 60 S

178 i 1 .5 ; 1 . 0 ; 0 J 70 I1 6 5 ! 1 . 0 j 0 . 5 2 j 53 |180 1 .0 1 0 . 5 0 70185 1 . 0 j 1 . 0 0 73186 1 . 0 1 . 0 0 j 80

COV— 1 . 0 0 . 0 0 75

185: 1 . 0 j 1.5 0 s 117160 j 2.0 ; 1 . 0 3 ! 60

1 6 5 ; ------- i

1.5 j —--------- »

0.0 : — i . 1 1 . 4 7 J

157

V ariety I Diseases

Yie

ldkg

/ha

i

0

b 0 erf ..-1

0+» <yM ^

O £ cho

cola

te

spot

0

-5

+=>W J3 6 Fros

t h

it0-

5

PI

int

! hei

ght

in

cm*

ALAD 159 1141 60 66 165 1.0 1.0 2 55

ALAD 272 1119 85 65 16C 2.0 0.5 3 i

1 .0 5 050

371802 1116 : 80 | 65 175 1.0 70

New MAMMOTH 950 ; 95 78

66

184 ; 1.0 1 .0 0 73

MERARO MARI' ET 897 55 165 1.0 1 .0 2 50

NC 20 691 80 63 160 2 .5 0 .5 3 55

76TA5635 6 5566 99 6?

-----1

180 2.0 2.0 0 80

plot size planting date Seeding rate

3.2 m = 23 Jtine, 1982

200 kg/ha

158

With the objectives of evaluating the yield potential, disease resistance, and other important agronomic traits 43 different lines of horsebean and one standard ohccke were included in this test and the trial was planted at Bekojj on non-replicated plots*

No new entry performed better than the standard check, Kuse-2-27-33•

Yield and other important observations made during the cycle are presented in table 225-6.

223-6 Preliminary screening nursery on horsebean (Beko.ji) .

225-6 Preliminary

screening nursery

on horsebean

243-1 Date of planting and plant population on field peas {Bakqji)

A split plot desion with dates as main plot amd spacings as sub plots was used in this trial. Four dates 27/5 » 12/6, 26/6 and 8/7 and four spacings 1Q, 20, 30 and 40 cm were used and the trial was conducted at Bekoji# The result obtained showed that there were differences in yield between thh different dates and spacings and generally peaking planting during the first week of June with spacings of 10 cm between rows and 5 cm within rows seemed optimal for fieldpeas around Bekoji area (Table 243*1) •

161

1'60

VarietyYieldkg/ha

t ) Ti§ s

• p - pm c o

Days to - pA-i '

• r1O .A £

0

i .grHpu

Diseases 0-5- p£cti

1—1 ftCQTi0

Ch

I

u% ' 0

1—1fr .

CD

2

0•p0

H - P O O

§ £ w3

T)O

"■vlM

00)

CQ

ac: n- 27296 2255 75 68 158 85 3.0 3.0 35 3

ACC N° 27334 2216 100 66 157 60 2.0 3.0 15 3

ACC N- 27345 2148 9 8 67 : 153 95 2.0 3.0 1 5 3

ACC N- 27312 2102 1 0 0 5 4 153 75 3.0 3.0 16 3

; ACC N~ 27327 2055 85 64 158 75 2.0 2,0 203

ACC N- 27333 1 900 60 66 158 70 2*0 3.0 17 2

ACC N— 27337 1798 98 66 154 80 3.0 2.0 19 3

ACC N- 27352 1330 55 67 157 80 2.0 3.0 37 3

ACC N- 27328 1306 ^5 64 156 60 3.0 3.0 18 3

ACC N- 27332 1 291 50 701

157 65 2.0 3.0 27 3

j ACC N- 27351 1164 I 45 68 158 65 2.0 3.0 22 -

j ACC N° 27335 111454

67 154 5° 2.0 3.0 14 3

I CS from Selale (Piche)I -........

870

--------35 69 | 158 ' <4

60

12.0 2.0

114 3 j

Plot size Planting date Seeding rate

6.4

25 June, 1982

200 kg/ha.

162

H M M t-) (-i y y t.- yu » u w -»■ o j ro ro —*■ ro ev>

>Tt,X ) ,-d*T)'T!,T}'-CJMd'-d'TJ,X}'Tj,- d hl d ‘T5*T} -fb. ro ro

u» vn vji oj O O j O j

o n ONVD TO

—i —A —i. rv> M K> ro ro Oj K U -PN—J 0 0 oo VD o OJ Oj ON —3 o Jis, vn— 3 On ON O ro f\5 OO 0 0 ro IN') VOOl Oj —3 O O VD —k Oj C O VJI —» ro VD

U l VD - J VD U l CO —-J —3 VO VD CO VO OO VD VD OOJ CO O —3 VJ1 O O -S* t\J VD o roHD CO —J o

C O O O C O O S C O O D C O C O C O C O C O O J O O O O C O C O - i 0 0 - v - * 0 w . - ^ O P O —

VJ1 ( ^ v n ^ u i u i u i v n u i On v ji On u i u i CJ\ vjn r o o - ^ o - ^ o n o r o —o o m o v d v o o vd

O N —3 ON —J On Oo CO On —q QO VJ1 ro Q -~J VO VO

— *3 — J ON ON —j ON O n —-J o n — J ON — j O n —J — j

<%H-<0<+

trp3

K|H-0)p*MDS.s

Stand $

Days to flower

Days to Matvuv- it:

Pods/plant

Seeds/pod

«H*WVDPra<Dca

pfvnO Vn o Vji O O O O O Ol O Oj Oj Vji o j vji

O O O O Ui U Oi Ui Oj

O -> • *00 o oj

OC O

CO VD —J C o VO VO VO VD VD © V O O O VD O - s-i 0 N O Q V O - * OO Co V O- fc * C DO N- f5 » O OC O- f^

VJI —3-p=* ro © •OO VJt-Ps —J00 VO VJI VJI VJI ON J2*

CO O J 0 3 0 5 O l

O J Oj o Oj o

CooLo

-*■ (V)on ro o j von

ono n

co OJ-fs*CO

C O ONoO VJI

CO —J O VD

OjCD —3O vo o o COo go -o

O VDCO

ui ui ro vo o voVD

• •O O VJI

CO CD —3 O O VD

CD —J O VD

COOOn VD o - o VJI

Asoochyta JbU^W____

PowderymildewHeight cm.

1000-seed Weight gm.

Hl-Weightkg*

243-1 Date

of planting

and plant

population on

field peas

(Beko.^

243-1 Yield in kg/ha

Sowing dates Spacingop 3.C ing s27 May (D1) 12 June (D2) I 26 J-une (D )l 8 July (D^)

p1 10x5cm 3020 4580 2030 i860 2873 iF2 20X5" 1530 3490 2380 1610 2253 j

P3 30X5" 2320 2730 1870 1780 2175

P4 40X5" 1690 2690 1910 1350 1910

Date mean 2140 3373 2048 1650

C.V.L.S.D % L.S.D 1$- Design Plot size Fertilizer

Sowing dates59.2$

1091 kg/ha. 1567 kg/haSplit plotc 2 o ro

Nil

Spacing31.4i- 518 kg/ha 695 kg/ha

Sowing dates X Spacing

NSNS

'This t r i a l consisted of ninteen d i f fe r e n t v a r i e t i e s of f ie ld p e a s and

was conducted at B e k o ji l

Emergence and development of p lan ts were v e r y Cood and s ta ” d percentage ranged from 98- 100 ,

Regarding thb development of d iseases powder mildew and ascocyta

b l ig h t were observed, but the incidence and s e v e r i ty of powdery

mildew was marked than ascochyta b l ig h t .

S ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n ce s in y i e l d were obtained between v a r i e t i e s and

Fp/NUR (7 4 -WT give the h igh est y ie ld of 48.4 qt/ha* (Table 245-1) FP/KUR

/74-K and purvus were the second best y ie ld in g v a r i e t ie s with a y ie ld

of 46.3 qt/ha each.

164

245-1 National yield trial on field peas (Beko.ji)

245-1 NYT on fieldpeas (Bko.ji)

Variety Yield 90# DM

t5

§-P10

0 •p <DCO £0CO 1—1Q ch

0 -p•P *HCO ^ >> -Pof oi O S

D jLseases 0-5n•COe-ptip

•H<Dw

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

--1

100

0-seed

Weight gms.

!! t>n i ® M .rHW

kg/ha<15-p -P•a-aO -H CO rH

* J(H ?<D i IS 1—I O -HpH E

-p

1a03rd0PH

rd0am<D<r>W

H ’/NUr/74-W 4836 100 82 143 1.0 1.3 8 7 110 202.8 80.1PP/NUr/74-K 4625 98 76 146 1 . 0 1 . 8 8 7 94 170.3 78.5Fvrvus 4625 100 73 146 1.3 3.3 9 7 91 174.3 78.9Cell 92/77 4531 100 7 6 146 1 .0 2 .0 8 7 104 162.0 80.6

Cell 173/77 4391 99 76 146 1 . 0 2.3 9 6 94 149.5 79.3NEF 7 Goba 4336 08 76 154 1 . 0 1.5 8 7 108 141.3 79.4BT/Kur/ 74-F 4242 100 81 147 1 .0 1 . 8 8 ? 95 165.3 80.0

FF/Nur/74—N 4009 100 76 146 1.5 2.0 6 6 108 1 7 1 . 8 79.0 JCell. 101/77 3914 100 81 151 1.3 2.3 8 6 104 1 6 1 . 8 79.5FP/Mur/74-F 3734 100 87 147 1 . 0 1.3 8 7 98 190.0 79.9FT/N-ur/74-B 3313 99 86 151 1 . 0 1 . 8 8 7 100 202.0 79.9NC 45 3063 98 81 155 1 .0 2.3 8 6 93 145.0 79.5G 22793-2D 3055 98 85 149 1 . 0 1 . 8 8 6 101 154.8 80.3G 22763-20 2938 99 83 150 1 . 0 1.5 7 6 91 143.3 8 1 . 2

Pis 48/73 2734 87 77 156 1 .0 2.5 8 6 111 249.5 78.3Pis 384/77 2617 91 82 151 1 . 0 2.0 8 6 104 1 6 3 .8 7 9 .3 ]Lrcal check 2586 93 86 (154 1.3 1 . 8 6 6 80 1 6 4 .5 78.9

Pis 1677/77 2438 94 82 [157 1 . 0 2.017 6 104 149.0 7 9 .3

Pis 501/78 2117 79 83 f)58 1 . 0 2.0 8 69 *L 229 .0 .j 81 .0

Flot size, M 3.2 L.S.D jf: = 802 kg/ haFertilizer, kg/ ha None L.S.D 1$ = 107D ;!Planting date 25 June 1982 C.V ’ = 15*8#Seeding rate, kg/ha 150

166

Similar to the national yield trial on fieldpeas the prenational yield trial also consisted of ninteen varieties and was also layed out at Bekoji.

Here stand percentage ranged Detween 83—98 and. the two common diseases, powdery mildew and Ascochyta blight were observed with variable severity on almost all. varieties.

Regarding yield coll 91/77 and coll 157/77 were the top yielding varieties with yields of 4^*0 qt/ha and 41-8 qt/ha respectively (Table 245-2).

245-2 Pre-national yield, trial on field peas (Bekoji)

Variety

Coll 91/77Coll 157/77PGRC 032447PGRC 022423Coll 205/77Bekoji 62/77Fis 507/78Pm.Blue coll235/77PGRC 032 480G 22763-20-MohG 22854-3G pru-BlueFF ExD7 i'i ohFP/i'IUr/74-OFru-B 1 ue-G 22854- 30Fis 564/78

Moh. G22763-2CPis 514/74Ifis 758/75

I Pis 451/73 _______. • 2 Plot size, m

Fertilizer, kg/ha Planting date Seeding rate, kg/ha

Yield 90$ TM

kg/ha

4604

41773969384438333677347934173417333331463125312523752375232320311656

j£5i

oI—1

o4-3^ I

I I ICO

3.2None25June, 1982 150

837579

98 i 9 3

| S3 98 I 80

j 96 j 83

j 98 j 82

| 88 *77

( 88 ‘,75

! 99 ?75 j 85 i 77| 83 |78

i 84 i 77■ 97 *74j 84 i 76

88 175 ! 1j 80 176

j 76 185 j 68 181

I 89 178

L.S.DL.S.DC.V

Jl = 1210 kg/haVf, = 1624 ?i

= 2313 #

168

245-3 national observation of fieldpeas (33eko,ji)

Eijhteen lines of fieldpeas and one standard check 436? were included in this trial. Growth and development of the crop in general was good and the severity and incidence of the two common diseases on field peas (Asoochyta blight and powdery mildew) were relatively low.

Considering yield the highest yield, 142 qt/ha was obtained irom rGRC/E 032103 (Table 245-3)

169

U) TJ *-o-d •D TJCP h-1 CD 1—1

CD P 4 o M- M- H - H-

P* P c+ C+" W CO CO raH * c+- H -3 H * M 03 VJI 0\ O n

aq 3 H - H- ro _i O j INO

CKJ N N o.> VJI ON

4 CD O . X \

05 P * 4 «• — 3 —J —J<rt* a: 4^> -P» O J

CD c+- 3CD F t*

0*5ro

t rCq s>

vn ro '.sJ O o ts

r_ . <1*

g o

VDCOtsa>

-\ > .S

o->of>5

3

Otr

ro row -o ro o j-C5=> __. c o — k

v n >- oj

roVDvnoj

M- O CO 13*On> 3

T*=1

fO OJvo oCA O

VO O

O ororo01O JohiH

fb di—1CD

T)hSHItrjl-1£Cl)

OO

roVJI

TJ4rtr?M£Torv>ro-oPOJt)

CQO JO n

Q!rdOOOjto

■fs*O n

-ao

oOJroOJ

VD

2ooojro

o

QOoojPOoVDvn

b

5iCDMt3tS!

*13CTWo

Oro

OO

TJQ■Ho

oOJro _iOOJ

Oj oj o> oj O ro ro roO nO j n o VD 00

oj oj oj oj oj ojoj vji on co oo —*vo roVD —3-* Co ro

VJIco vn o nroO j4 >

t - 1 t -

o n — a Co O J vo o

—j45-

COO j

—-jCO -0CO OOvo 00VJi CO — J

VDO

voo $

VDO

CC oo CO o j vn u^ —0VJI —JO n COVJI — j ON ON O n

--3 ■— 3_jO'* COo —JO n

Cooo

cn CO _i. _J. _1 _^ _J, _\• e on vn 4 vn 45* ■4 vn vn NJ1fc* t) _ i O J - J CO O n ON ON CN ON ON O vo r o

—V — \ — :• —i —^ —!> —V __i _i _nii II o • • 0 o o • « O « • 0 • •

o o o o O o o o o o O o o ororo ON — i. -J. _ ro ro — ro _V s v<. • O s « » « » a 0 • « o « o • 0 9

k n o vn VJI o vn o o vn o vn vn VJI onb3 _\

05C n CO VD — ] ro — j VD co VD CO —0 - < l

— J ON — J VJI —J CO vn —J — 3 — a ON CT, vn ON

GO O n co —J r o — j —3 VD ND Co O o vo voCo O j o j O J O Co CO O j o VJI O J o vn o

CP5zr&

co o | Stand $o vji vo o

(

<

}-■cc—«<

H*COEvcC

t?

- Jcoo * Days to flower

vn -£* vn -£*.o vji ro no —3

« 0 • ft

ro

Days to KaturiV

VJI

Asoochyta

B lig h t

Powdery [ mildew

| Pods/plant

o n | Seeds/pod

i

o | Height cms.

! col

*u Irc,SolIt?

wo

<05c+H-O3Jo{3.r H'b H-LO

I50)Ira

«.r>

i

170

245-4 Advanced screening nursery on fildpeas (Bekoji)

Thirty seven different lines obtained from indigenous a,nd introduced materials and one standard check (CS 43t>K) were included in this, unreplicated plot nursery trial to evaluat their yield potential} resistance to diseases and other relevant agronomic traits.

Stand percentage was variable and raflged from 55 to 100 and ^scochyta blight and powdery mildew were observed on all lines though the degree of infestatio n varied from line to line considering yield Pis 384/77 excelled all the other lines and it gave 45*1 qt/ha*It was followed by the standard check CS 436 k which gave 41*1 qt/ha (Table 245-4)

245-4 Advanced, screening nursery on field peas

V a riety Y ie ld ikg/ha

F is 384/74 4513

DS 436K set B 4109626/73 3863

L - 1384-Moh 3672

Moh—P i s 814175 3656Sualof Timo 3603

FP EX DZ 3531

porc/e 032676 3269Moh—P is 863 3234P is 863/78 Moh 3228

pgrc/e 032662 3178

Moh-Pis 3/75 3034

P is 423/74 Moh 3000

Pis-3/75 Moh 2922pgrc/e 032700 2822P is 383/73 Moh 2797P is 814/75-Moh 2763PGRC/E 032694 ! 2756CS 436k set A 2728P is 129/74 2706

P is 421/73 2703Moh-Pis-383/73 2700pgrc/e 032672

;2656

Moh-4384 2422

pgrc/e 032692 ! 2422

PGRC/E 032674 ; 2356

Day6; to

r.

+>§rH

CO■"Ci

%-P

H2§ 1

! ISU-t 1 O'U__

100 1 74 141 6

98 i 78 146 780 ! 75 153 890 73 143 980 76 1 148 1993 74 144 8

93 83 152 8

90 76 149 QJ77 74 147 11

93 69 144 10

95 76 147 1594 75 146 16

85 76 144 11

55 76 147 , 12

95 84 151 6

85 75 144 6

85 76 145 5

95 77 151 8

94 83 >153 7

90 77 J 154 9

87 66 | 153 | 12

90 ; 74 ! 145 ! 1298 !

: 76 ; 148 i 5

55 77 I 144 i 798 77 i 149 j 6

97 78 |

I

152 j 7

X)0p.

rd00zn

-paho•H •

I ^ 0! -P S3

S 'HrHcw

Diseases 0-5

Ascochyta

Blight

1 owdery

Mild

ew

6 105 1.0 3 .0

6 140 1.0 2.0

6 95I

L 1 .0 j 2.0

6 110 1.0 3 .0

8 115 1.0 2.0

6 75 1.0 | 3 .0

6 100 1.0 2.0

6 75 1.0 1.0

6 105 1.0 3 .0

7 70 1.0 3 .0

,n0 95 1.0 I 2.0

8 105 1 . 0 1.0

6 ! 95 1.0 2.0

6 75 1.0 2.0

6 85 1.0 2.0 |

6 125 1.0 1.06 85 1.0 I 2.0

7 85 1.0 1.0

6 90 1.0 1.0

7 90 1.0 2.0

6 i1 10 1.0 1.0

7 I 80 ;4 1.0 i 1.0

6 i 75 ! 1.0 1j

2.0 jr J0 !j

90 : 1 .0 ; 2.0 ! 36 j115 j

r1 .0 i 2.0 |

6 I i <

110 1 1 .0 1.0

172

V arietyli

Y ie ld

1 g/ha

*CO

?grc/e 032705■■ u-i-i ■*—

2200 Q8: oh~Fis 423/74 • * 2097 53fPGRC/E 032681 1953 ■58- pgrc/e 032691 1925 : 100

I I3RC/e 032702 1878 j 80pgrc/e 032718 1875 I

c,/r00pgrc/e 032669 'vi"

COV

80F;RC/E 032689 1834 ! 88

fg r c / e 032661 1728 88

I F'rRC/'E 032698 1565 I 70

j? !HC/E 032671 1488 80]F 'ffiC/B 032655 ; 4-- ------------- • ——...I

1131 ■ ___ i

90

Diseases 0-

5- LT\

00 co

147

1546

•6

6

70

100I84 157 8 6 8576 146 9 6 ! 80

6 | 7576 151 71

76 | 150 6 6 100

87 157 4 4 30

77 j 1471

10 ? 100r.r? 168 • 6 ■ 6 j 55

Cf

t ;XI 4 50 5 0 00 fan 5 r-j T-i0 •H 3 5 1— I0 rH i 0 •H<r F Q 1 P h E

* 4

1 .0--------

2.0

■ .0 2.0

0•0•

•’ cO 2.0

1.0 1.0

1.0 1.0

1.0 1.0

1.0 1 oO

1.0 1 cO

1.0 1.0

1.0 1.0

1.0 1.0

P lot s iz e

P lan tin g date

Seeding ra te

3.2 m

= 25 Jvne 1982

= 150 kg/ha

m

Thirteen new entries and one standard check (CS 436k ) were included in these trials and the trials wero carried out at jTeraro. The nain objective of the trials was. to find out those fieldpea varieties which are tolerant to frost, since frost is the primery factor with considerable impact upon yield in this area*

One set (set a) was planted ©n f2/6/82 and. the other set (seb b) on 23/6/82. This was done in order to have a prolonged frost oocurance period during the cycle..

Unlike previous years, however, t.iere wasn't a very serious frost incidence during the year.

Stand percentage was substantially low for some varieties in both sets in general.

With regard fo yield the standard check CS 436-K excelled all the other intries in both sets with yields of 65 qt/ha in set a and 58

qt/ha in set b.

In general terms yields were good and promising (Table 245-5a &5 b ) .

245-52 and Winter hardiness observation on fild peas (Meraio )

245-5a Kinter, hardiness obaervation on

j V ariety *;

Y ie ld 90? DM

kg/fcia

---------

3 ^

: 1I cfij w

f I

! 5J +HO

»>>co1 P)

CS 436 Y 6552

_____

98 90

AW-76-78 5229 67 76

A»v—76—119 4302 74 84: v_76_i35 3969 RO 771 t

Art-76-124 3469 60 76

Ai*v—?6—48 314-6 1 55 : 76

Aft-76-106 2802 67 : 87AK-76-304 i 2438 42 j 77av-76-308 : 2167 3° | 79Ah-76-301 ; 2052 33 j 78

At,-76-303 ] 1844 53 j 77

AV-76-302 j 1656 37 | 80£w- 76—108 | 1625 J 25 1 79

1616 __ J ___2_7 _ j , 11.

pict size „2

Fertilizer, kg/ ha Plrnting date Seeding rrte, kg/ha

3.2None12 June, 1982 150

Xield pegs (set a)

-pJ] 0 -p

i

£0 1! O '.\jO -H CO rHC fC;

! >5i o) b

T* nd i I5 1—t

O -Ht i

,ptI

to

£t-M___ - i

I s $ &!_ . . J

00CQ -P

<4 f t8 ®'J— .>*

L - —

! bj)I >H 0O£*•• 24

Ain1

171 1.3 0.7 2.0 99 164.0 75-8

’ 177 2.0 0.7 2.0 108 176.8 79.0

164 1.7 0.7 ) 3.0 71 158.8 79-2

169 1.7 1.3 2.0 105 184.0 75.5

j 185 1.7 0.7 f 2.0 93 135.0 78.1

i 170 2.0 1.0 3i0 112 166.3 75.9

] 1^9 2.0 0.7 3.0 j 69 149-5 74.5

I 171 2.0 1 *0 3.0 101 175.8 75-6

: 170 1.7 1.0 3.0 52 1C-7 .8 78.1

; 169 2.0 | 1.0 3.0 70 183.4 : 78.1

169 2.3 i 1.3 3.0 60 ! 157.5 69.5

171 ;j

1.3 1 0.3 ■> n3.0 81 | 188.5 72.5

171 j 1,31 .° 3.0 j 7° 173.0 | 73.0

J J l J 1 . 7 ; 0 .7 : 2.0 :i ° L . ; 169.3 : 71.8-

L.S.D % = 1131 kg/h:

l.s.d 1% = 1528

C.V = 22.0 %

245“5"b Winter hardinesB on i'ield peas (^et b)

1 in

8

1 £

5 :Q!

§ ®CQ -P 1 Sio wO *H

J . 1 . . .

shQ•H UO0 ^

1rHw

j 99 155-8 ?- 7 3 . 7

j 105 1 76 .0 72.6

j 103 1 8 2 .5 70.2

j 02 1 5 8 . 8 7 7 .1

j 99 1 3 2 .8 76.3

80 141.8 7 1 .6

J 106 1 6 1 . 5 71.6

| 66 184.5 74.6

3 99 177.5 71.3

i 8o :J

170.3 6 9 .8

j io8 : 169.3

155.0 j

74.5: 68 | 6 7 . 8

: 7 9 ! 180.3 74.9

88 | 183.8 ; 70.5

Plot size, V? =fertilizer, kg/ha =Planting date =Seeding rate, kg/ha =

3.2

None23 June, 1902 150

L.S.D %

L.S.D 1i

C.V

1392 kg/ hi 1O81 ”

23.3 %

176

245-6 Preliminary screening on fieldpeas (Bekoii)

Kore then one hundred entries were included in this nursery together with one improved check CS 436—K and the trial was layed out at Bekoji* The objective was to screen out those lines having good yield potentialf resistant to diseases and other important agronomic traits such as seed colour, size and shape#

The weather conditions were conducive during the season and disease incidenee was not serious in general.

Uith regard to yi&ld entry Acc. 32758 gave the highest yield of 45 qt/ha. (Table 245-6)

Eighty seven entries produced seeds and those entries which yielded more the# the standard check are reported in this paper six of these which yielded about 40 q^/ha could be advanced to the next stage of testing for further evaluation.

OJ OJ OJr o r o ino—3 —J —JON —jvo O j

OJ O j 0 - ' -> •£*

OJ U lo

“ 5 :: :! = - "n

r)

Oj o j O J O J Oj O J O J O J O J O J Oj Oj O jr o ro r o ro r o ro r o t o r o r o r o r o fO— j —j —3 —j OO — 3 — 3 - 0 — 3 —•3 — 3 — 3 - JU l Oj O J ON o v o 'U l —3 0 0 —J 4^ Cj VO■Ul 4 r o ON —1 —*• —-3 O — J v o — 3 o

oo

oo

OJfO

COro

o jr o03Ooo

OJ OJro rv> OJ

r o

g>»I o lo

O J O j O J O J O j O j O J O J O J m w m m ro ro ro ro ro

oj uiu i 4

o> Ul Ul Ul OJ —J OJ ON fo VO

O JCO

ON ON UI—1 o o o

CO

O J-rOn VO VO

O JUlvo

co On •ui U l 5 vn orui

roui.Ti.

o

CO —*3 —-J —-JO n VO O J - 0 VQ ON

O -’ O J Ul Ul 4 > U l 4^ O

— J NOU l u i

CO —jON v o

Oj O J O JU l U I On—J CO ooo 00 o00 NO

U i v n Ul

O j O j O j On On On -i -f* O j — 4 ^

c o —j v o O Ul O

0 j o j Oj o j— J — J CO OO—* O j Oj On

VO 4 ^ 0 0 VO

CO VO Ul voui o oo o

O j o j o j 00 NO VOon ro u i

NO r o O

On o o vo o ui o

O j o j Oj 4 ^ 4^-VO VO NO o —*U l 0 0 CO —3 ON—1 1 CO GO VO

45. 4* -£=»r o r o o j u ir o u i o c or o O j v o c o

o o v o v o v o O O u i o

co OO vo vo voO U l o O U l

OQ

tr

PH-(Dc+

►-< H- (D i—i &

S t a n d f

oo0 j

-<! CO — 3 VO Ul VO 4^—J — J —-J —J

ON oo CO OJ - J OO ON O OO

— 1 CD VO CO OJ C^ Days to flower*

v*n rrs, 1°) aN « ^ S£L p * U l U l U l U i ON U l U i v n 0\ ON ON U l u n O n G\ C\c*- U i O On o j —* V O o o o j —* o o r o —4 O j — j —J. i>» o n CO 4^ —* —* —*■ ON CO O J 4>> o j

o v o v o c o v o o v o C N f o r o 00 4^ v o r o o c o l t r o o j o o j - i ^ o o v o i ^ o j r i f oo u i o u i u i 0 0 0 0 u i o u i o u i o u i u i u i o o u i o o u i u i v5i u i 0 0 0

D a y s t o

M a t u r e

Plant height in cm.

Ascochyt 1 Blight 0-5

ON ON vo ON CO 00 00 O', VO -J On ui O On cc> f\-> VO -~3 —j O On u> O Ul qo

Pow dery

m ildew 0-5

ro4S>Y1ON

OP[h -

isLis*cotoM

-n3-n3

178

V a r i e t y Y i e l d

k g / h a

“T — !Its ^I Tii SI -p I “ .

n 0 , 0-P 0)

Pi hw £f w p -pCO rH I CO ff>

P <h|Q S

-plib

. © £

P 3S ' HCh

ir>

O .3O I'J OW rH*3? P3

1J

! &O <Dn n

1 2 rH| O -Hi Uh S

r ~i pi w! rH

tord0Pu S

eed

s/p

od

\CC 32745 3366Tj 75 76 (153 95 * n.i 0 -~j 1.0 7

0 !5! 32807 3344 | 90 ! 78t 160 •So 1.0 1.0 9 6 Ij

32775 3313 i 65i 1 81 ! 158 110 1.0 1.0 7 6

3274C 3163 i 55 79 160i 115 1.0 1.0 11 6 | 132751 3138 i 70 80 154 100 1.0 1.0 8 632759J 3125 ! 70 5 82 165 85 1.0 1.0 5 6 I32789 3053 185 81 155 95 1.0 1.0

86 ]

32744 3019 70 77 151 95 2.0 1.0 , i 1 1 5 I

32803 2975 j 78 81 161 85 1.0 1.0 9 6 i32776 2966 1 80I 81 161 85 1.0 2.0 8 6 !32746 2922 1 70 t 76 152 80 1.0 1.0 J 7 5 i

■ 32727 2863 1 75 : 37 1 6 3 1 110 1.0 2.0 6 iO

32772J 2863 ! 70 77 ! 1631 90 1.0 1 .0 j /-O 6 i

» 32779 2863 I 80 81 1o1 ! 90 1.0 J 1.0 ::

7 6 j j32786 2859 1 SO 78 157 | 95 j 1 .0 ! 1 .0 j

.

5 i $ j” 32733 2838 70 78 155 i 9° 1.0 1.0 7 1 6" 32818 2822 1 85 90 163 110 1.0 ; t . o I 1.0 6i: 32792 2819 1 90 77 154 75 1.0 1 . ° I 5 : 6 j

” 32788 2800 j 7 5 , 82 157 105 1 .0 !, 1 .0 j 12 ;632797 ] 2775 195 79 158 1 125 1 . 0 j 1 . 0 j 12 i 6

! C3 436 j: 2769 1 Oj- 1 ±

83 0 164 j 90j

2 .0 j 13 i 6

Plot size I 1 tin date Ic i -tion "ertilizer

= June 28, 1962 = Eekoji = Nil

179

265-1 oc2/o2 KYT on early end late sets of lentils (Kulumsa)

Two sets of trials on lentils (eaivy set & late set) were tested at Kulumsa during the year.

In the early set thirteen differ eit varieties and one local check were included.

Two common diseases on lentils (rt st and root not) were observed on all varieties and rust was found to "be serious on local materials compared to the introduced ones.

The late set comprised of fifteen different varieties and a local check. Aoain as in the errly set rust was observed on all varieties.

I'iEL 35^ i the early set and R—186 and NEL 35$ in the late set seemed to perform better than the rest yd jldivise. The resilt obtained here indicated that e=rly planting seen jd to be advisable particulatle3r with the late maturing varieties.

265-1 NYT on lentils (early set)

Variety Yield 90# DM,kg/ha

. .

..* !S ’ ® I____ 1

N3L-358 2969 ! 81

-355 2453 80

- 142 2203 84ELr- 103 2172 85NEL- 944 2141 81

Local check 2141 86

SL - 59 2031 , 83MEL -518 1938 83 •’ NEL - 1068I 1922 80 |I EL - 122 1906 83 jEL - 50 1719 83Lasta Lalibela 1703 80

El - 74 1531 83Pent -L-20 641 78 j

2llot size, M 1 .6

/ertilizery kg/ha s= NonePlanting date = 20 J uly, 1982

Seeding rate, kg/he = 50

I0-pto ?Q <h

0 •&to 3S'Sp IS*

DL ceases 1-9 Lodging

i Early

f------

Shattering

j:_____

.II

.§

%2

* i0 &w +3d> V)O -H0 0

i r.auo ••H ttfl <I V M 5 3=i !

1 3 3CO£H-H

-p0%05L................. .T “ — «. 1 -n- rTrr -

59 127 3.5 14 10 41 27.3 83.762 127 4.0 1 18 8 40 22.5 83.263 116 • 5.3 1 20 6 36 23.8 83.561 117 5.0 1 28 6 42 24.0 82.7

60 125 4.5 1 21 5 39 24.5 8 1 . 7

63 117 5.8 1 15 6 42 20.8 82.4 I j

62 117 5-8 1 24 5 37 22.5 81.9102 182 4.0 1 00 6 49 20.3 8s-. 2 I63 117 4.8 1 24 8 3 2 23.3 82.8 363 117 £.3 A 25 6 3 7 22.8 83.3 j63 116 5*5 1 26 5 3 3

22.0 83.2 ;62 116 6.8 1 19 6

i33 82.6 82.1

62 115 7.0 1 24 5 34 20.3 82.950 117 3.8 03 6 2 7 23.3 82.0

L.S.D % » 390 kg/haL.S.D 1# 522 "C.V = 13.9 t

265-2 NYT on lentils (late set)

00Variety Y ie ld 90* DM

kg/ha

§

5

R-18 6 3828i

ooNEL - 358' 2969 34 j

Jr - 184 2938 85 |jNSL-355 2766 70 jJNEL -256

KEL-357

2750 82 |2672 85 |

[R-59 2672 85

R- 252 2328 75

Local check 2281 91

EL-142J 2156 80;R-132 1969 83 !iNEL-944 ! 1922 83 :j Arsi (F u l unis n) 1766 82EL - 50 1734 79

NEL - 219 1625 83

NEL - 228 1484 80

2P lot s iz e , M

F e r t i l i z e r , kg/ ha

PI suiting date Seeding r a te , kg/ha

1.6

None

16 J u ly , 1982 50

Days to

flov/er

j!

Days to

Maturity

i___________

Diseases! 1-9

Lodging

»[ i Height

cm.

! y

I _

rd s 0 5b 0CO -Pci 1»b 0 - h O <D

-p•H • O q07 *1—Il-.HK-W

r[Rust Early

88 146 2.8 14 44 21.8 81.6

59 121 3.0 14 39 26.0 82,0

85 146 2 .5 15 43 29.0 82. 8 I;

59 122 3.8 18 44 24.3 03.2 ;59 129 3«0 15 46 ; 24.3 8 1 .9 i

59 128 3.0 21 41 23.? 81 .9

68 147 3.3 11 43 j 22.5 79.9

71 147 3.3 11 39 j 28.3 8 1 . 5

58 119 5.8 18 38 : 20.8 82.5

60 120 5.3 14 36 i 23.3 83.0

92 ! 148 | 3.5 14 38 j 21 .8 82.0 !58 : 120 6.5 18 36 ; 22.0 i 83.6 |

1•

6° 117 ; 6.5 24 35 i 17.0 83.0

60 118 j 6 . 8 29 33 : 22.8 82.959 129 4.0 23 27 23.3 80.0

61 | 128

j• U

l

i

16 j 29 17.3 80.3

L.S.D. % = 616 kg/haL.S.D. 1 f = 823 ”C.V. = 18 ,4 f

315- 1—8 Linseed, national yield trial (Asassat Beko.ji, Kulumsa» Robe)

Linseed national yield trial consisted of fifteen varieties from which victory wa3 us ad a3 standard check and one local variaty for each respective location as a local check, The trials were laid out at Asasa, Bekoji, Kulumsa & Robe,

The trials were undertaken with & with out fertilizer with four replications each. Comparison of the fertilized and unfertilized trials revealed that there is no marked difference between both treatments in mean seed yield. (Table 315- 1-8).

Over the four locations the mean seed yield for fertilized trial was 1090 kg/ha compared to 1110 kg/ha for the unfertilized trial (Table 315-1-4 & 5-8).

But higher location mean of more than 1830 kg/ha was obtained at Beko.ji from the fertilized trinl. Severe lodging occurred at Kulums which may be a factor in explaining the low yield under fertilized condition.

The mean yield of fertilized trial at Asasa was 1115 kg/ha; however the unfertilized trial mean yield was 995 kg/ha, thus the fertilized trial gave relatively higher yield. This didn't hold true at Robe in other words the unfertilized trial gave relatively good yield than fertilised trial.

The stand persent for a.11 varieties at Bekoji was very good and more than 80^. As stated above a considerable number of varieties showed variable lodging percent at the main station, Kulumsa. But shattering was not observed. However, at the other stations none of the varieties were suscepitable to lodging.

There was a moderate incidence of powdery mildew, pasmo and wilt at all locations. Powdery mildew was relatively serious at Asasa (Table 315- 1&5).

3*0- 1. 2 : Liasegd, national yield trirJ. with fertilizer JLS<yi?x<Volumsa & Robe)

Yield in kg/ha at 93$ M*

»„ . w»?ui wt m « ■<{Godsii

arieties »jAsasa

Locations__jSeEoji j Kulurnsa j Ro*be

iVariety j .ne~ZL

*Rank \

joi I. A/Li/124 J1140 ; 1410 960 I 830i 880___

■ « 1{02j IaE/Li/ 126 | 910 1650 8G0 ! 770 1050 j 9 j103 .,4R/Li/157 | 910 1270 .00 440 83o 14 j;t-4 i.2t/Li/ 158 | 540 1560 760 810 1020 11 i 1

■‘5 !■05 ol 937 1260 1590 1J.40 930 i 240Co •' 1299 1040 1690 930 630 1070 8 i07 « 1510 1190 1410 380 780 940 1

12 ;08 ft 1525 J 1080 ■1710 1/ -n 840 1270

2 !

P9 i " l56o j 1430 1140 930 640 1040 10 |10 ” 1652 1170 1790 1300 630 1240 J 5 I

1240 j 5 j11 « 22Q7 | 1330 1580 1280 76012 2605 1 1040 1830 10 TO 1130 1250 4 II3 . « 2698 ! 1140[ 1720 1150 1070 1270 214 iVictory (std* check) 1340 1610 1240 930 1280 1 !

H _ lLocal check j 790 680 600 590 670 15 |

Location mean 1115 1508 986 789 1090LSIS % 314»8 311 583 36iLsr % 421 415 NS NSGP* 2 19*5 14o5 41*9 32 0 7F_ot sizejm 4 4 4 4Design ROB RGB , RCB RGB with fcsrPeriilizery kg/ha (N Pflc) Planning date

23/23 23/23 23/23 23/2311 June 27 June 3 July 17 JulySeeding rate, kg/h.a 25 25 25 25

315- 5; 6, 7, 8 Linseed national yield trial without fertilizer (Asasa, Beko.ji Kulumsa & Robs)

Yield in kg/ha at 93$ DM

Code Varieties Locations Varietymean

RankAsasa Bekoji Kulumsa Robe

.01 im/ii/ 124 1120 l6l0 9&0 940 1160 &02 im/hi/ 126 940 1580 980 1000 1130 903 IJffi/Li/ 157 910 1430 1030 740 1030 1204 IAR /Li/ 158 900 — 930 740 860 1405 CI 937 1080 1440 1200 1290 1250 406 1299 900 1650 1040 680 1070 1007 1510 920 1290 800 760 940 1308 " 1525 1260 1810 1230 980 1320 109 ** 1650 1010 1380 1240 650 1070 1010 « 1652 1130 1800 1160 1000 1270 311 " 2297 940 1610 1260 810 1160 612 « 2605 930 1490 1280 980 1170 513 ” 2698 1250 1630 1330 960 1290 2.14 Victory (std. 0^ 880 1430 1350 890 1140 8

Local check 760 550 1010 790 780. 15

Location mean 995 1479 1120 863 1110

LSD % kg/ha 305 202*3 NS 303LSD 1 $ kg/na US 270.8 NS KS

0

i

21.9 30.3 23*6 24.2

Plot size, m 4 4 4 4Jesign RCB RCB RCB RCB with 4 RepPlanting date 12 June 27 June 3 Jyly 17 JulySeeding rate kg/ha 25 25 25 25

315-1 Summary of* disease and other agronomic data of linseed national yield trial with fertilizer (Asasa

Code Varieties 9ce

3)§ i -p c3co &

Days to Diseases•

> £ 00+=*§>0>w

*8 © •© g KJ <SOOOv~

&•

t«r-tW

Flower Maturity Powderymildew0-5

Wilti

Pasmo0-5

01 I£R /Li/ 1244 74 95 140 1-5 1.0 0 71 4-3 74.002 I£R /Li/ 12o 69 92 138 1.5 3.0 0 65 3.7. 74.603 I£R /Li/ 157 60 95 139 2.0 3.0 0 60 3.1 74.404 I MR /Li/ 153 68 97 143 1.8 0.3 0 64 4.1 72.4 •05 Cl 937 75 105 131 3.0 0 0.8 71 4.6 74.006 Cl 1299 74 91 147 2.0 4.0 0.3 73 5.6 73.207 Cl 1510 74 99 146 2.0 4-0 0 §0 4.9 72.408 Cl 1525 73 95 147 2.8 0.5 0 73 6.2 72.8

3 09 c i 1650 79 93 149 2.5 1 . 0. 0 j 78 6.4 72.010 ci 1652 75 92 149 2.5 0.8 0 74 6.6 72.011 | CI 2297 80 95 151 3.0 0 0 84 6.9 72.012 CI 2605 73 95 150 2.0 3.0 0 80 6.7 72.413 CI 2698 69 95 147 2.3 3.5 0 74 6.7 72.814 Victory (std« ck*) 69 89 146 3.0 0.5 0 80 5*8 73.2154 -1-- Local check 59 - 149 2.3 2.5 0 68 4.5 72.4

/

3 15-2 !3iJ:iine.ry of diseases arid other ^ronomic data of jinseed national yield with fertilizer (Beko.ji)

Code Varieties

I

-pr3% -p

CQ 'tj 0) q >

! -p co

D^rs to Diseases «p:0-pf t•H0K

rd0)0) • CQ Ettf)8 .2 ?

•

i I

- I* . J

Flower maturity|Powdery ’mildew

0-5

Pasmo0-5

Wiltdf01°

01 iIAR/124 9° 95 172r ---------

2 .5 1.1_ . r_

0 56 4.7 70.0 202 j m/26 ! 89 95 172 2 .4 1.4 0 50 4.4 6 9 .503 I A V W 157 84 94 172 p f.^.0 1.1 0 53 4 . 3 iJ i. 004 I^d/Li/158 84 03 172 ? O 1.1 0 55 4.5 67.0

05 CI937 83 86 171 2.8 1.8 0 55 5.3 69.506 Cl1299 86 85 17S 2 . 4 2.0 0 59 5.8 68.507 CI1510 91 95 178 3.5 1 . 1 0 57 5.1 69.7

08 CI1528 91 94 184 2.0 1.4 0 72 5-7 65.909 011650 69 95 177 3.4 1.3 0 55 3.1 68.9

10 CI15S2 88 95 km 2 .3 1.6 0 72 7 1 , .1 68.9

CI2297 81 1 94 176 2 .3 2.0 0 70 7.7 68.1

12 JI2605 89 94 184 2.6 2.0 0 77 I 7 .4368.0 \

13 CI2698 84 94 183 2.4 1.6 0 67 5.8 69.5

14 Victory (std* ck) 80 94 181 2 .1 1.0 0 68 3.1 68.5

15 Local check 84 94 174 2.8 1.8 0 61 3.1 69-5{

315-3 Summary.. of. diseases and other agronomic data of Linseed national yield trial with fertilizer (KulTms-,'I

:coc.e1 Varieties 0 < Days to Diseases LodgingLate

jFlower Maturity Wilt Pasmo % 0roCQ

Ti <D§ E-P egCO x! Po

wder

ymi

ldew

0-5

% 0-5

Height

cm <DQ> •01 8,OOO

«•S.rHw

01 Iiffi/Li/124 86 86 142 1.8 3 2.8 26 86 4.03 70.402 i m / Li/126 84 86 140 2*0 4 2.4 53 85 ■3.9 71.003 IAR/U/157 83 86 145 2.0 1 1.9 41 81 3.7 71.204 •IiR/Li/156 83 86 143 2.5 0 2.4 20 88 4.2 76.005 CI937 89 65 148 1.8 20 89 88 3.6 78*8 .06 CI1299 85 74 124 2.3 6 3.7 53 94 4* 1 66.6 j07 CI1510 81 87 148 2.5 | 3 I 3.1 49 43 4*1 72.008 0115 25 89 83 145 2*0 1 3.3 40 104 5.3 70.0 .09 G H 650 86 . 82 145 2.3 5 3.1 53 93 5.3 70.010 CI1652 89 80 146 2.5 3 3.0 33 102 5.7 70.211 CI2257 94 ■ 78 141 1.8 3 3.8 6 110 §.7 70.012 CI2605 85 79c 138 1.8 3 3.1 38 99 4* 1 68.013 CI2698 91 75 135 1.8 6 3.9 60 96 4.8 70.214 Victory (std. ck) 95 ■ 72 ■ 131 i 1.8 6 4 .1 56 98 4.8 70.015 Local check 81 ; 82 142 : 2.3 4 4 .1 | 55 . 97 4 .2 70&2

315-4 Summary of diseases and other a;(:Tonomic data of Linseed national yield trial with fertilizer (Robe)

Code Varieties•pctf

CQ£ > ttJ U -P 1CCO &

Days to Diseases Lodging^

Height

cm.

4Flower Maturity Wilt%

! Powdery

i mildew

:______________________

0-5__

_

Pasmo0-5

■s .TiCD0) • co e S3)0 0 0 —

tJo.

t•rH£rj

C1 IAR/Li/ 124 71 83 145 1 3 2 0 56 4*4 72.202 IAR/Li/126 76 81 143 2 3 2 1 56 4-1 73.4;c3 IAR/Li/157 59 81 " 1

3 2 0 49 4 .0 3 73.2C4 I.AR/Li/l5^ 70 81 140 3 3 2 2 54 1.1 73.605 CI937 70 81 163 1 3 1 0 54 5 . 2 72.4C 6 Cl1299 73 79 145 1 3 3 0 58 5 . 6 73.407 IAR 71 83 152 1 3 3 0 56 4 . 5 73.408 CI1525 73 78 160 0 3 2 0 63 6 .6 73.209 CI1650 60 81 158 2 3 3 4 60 5.3 71.010 C H 652 64 79 160 1 3 2 0 63 6.7 71.2

j 11 CI2297 49 79 160 3 3 3 0 78 7.0 80.0

| 12 CI2605 71 80 162 2 3 2 0 76 6 . 7 77.413 CI2698 69 81 156 2 3 3 0 72 6.03 76 .8

14 Victory (std.ck) 75 78 153 3 I 2 ! 3 0 i 72 5.6 75.4

i 15Local check 71 79 155

4 1 3 i 1 !1. 1.65 4.3 72.4

31f-5 nummary of diseases and oilier agronomic data of Linseed national yield trialwithout fertilizer grown at Asasa

£dej Variety-P tiD 03•H^4=CO-r* 0S >CD fn•p ro CQ

Days to Diseases•B04s•HXI

•■sQ>0) . M BbDOO

i S

" """ •w•t•

1—1

Flower Maturity :

L -- n -- , ,

Powdery mildew 0-5'

Pasmo0-5

Wilt°h

01 V AEi/Li/124 65 99 147 1 • I 1 .0 3.0. 61 } 4*03 74*002 I Aft/Li/126 56 99 149 ; 1o7 5.0 5.0 56 3.9 76.2 i03 IAR/Li/157 60 94 139 ; 2.0 0 3.0 60 ! 3.1 74.4

04 IAR/Li/ 158 65 97 147 1.7 5.0 2«0 61 3.9 74.6 j05 CI937 ' 75 82 135 2.0 - 0 65 4.5 74.0 |

06 CI1299 57 82 152 3.0 1 .0 0 60 5*5 76.4

0| CI1510 63 97 151 2.0 0 0 60 4 .8 73*6

OE CI1525 65 92 152 2.5 1 .5 0 75 6.1 73.2

05 CH65O 65 91 151 2.0 0 5 63 6 .4 73.2 j

1C CH652 68 90 152 2.0 2.0 71 6.5 72.4 j11 CI2297 63 91 154 2.0 1.0 I 0 74 7.1 i 71.6 | i12 •;CI2605 ■ c: ->•: 53 91 154 2.0 1.0 0 74 6.2 70.4 j13 {CI2698 66 89 1r'3 2.2 2.5 1.2 ! 70 6 .4 ! 72.4 i 114 ^Victory (std.ok) 65 81 153 2.2 1 .0 0 i 69 ] 5.7 73.6 j15 Local check 56 94 154 2.5 2 .5 0 60 | 4.9 72.6 j )

315*-7 > 1'f'_J5 eases uUi.-r agronomic data of Linseed, national yield trial without fertilizer,srown at Kulumsa

Code Varieties-P tiOa s

•rH

CQ

'xiS. >CO Sh -P CJC O .£}

Days to Diseas,es Lodging f0 Lat e •EO

•P■a• HCDw

<D • O S CQ SoO •O -PO 5

bDI A r-M •

%

•1—1 hd

Flower Maturity Powdery mildew 0-5

Pasrr.o0-5

Wiltt

01 IiR/Li/124 89 85 142 3 n 2.0 6 5 84 4.1 74.0

02 I AR; Li/126 89 86 142 I 3 2.5 10 18 88 4.0 72.4

03 IAR/Li/157 85 62 141 3 3.5 10 | 16 80 3.9 72 .0

04 IAR/Li/158 89 64 144 3 2.5 2 19 78 3.9 71.6

05 31937 91 63 125 O£ 3.5 20 54 65 4 .1 70.4

06 311299 93 73 130 2 4.0 10 38 89 4.7 70.4

07 311510 85 74 146 3 2.5 13 14 85 5.8 71.2

08 311525 89 78 146 3 4.0 3 21 100 3.5 73.0

09 CI1650 93 78 133 2 4.0 4 28 101 5.7 72.0

1C 011652 185 81 116 3 3.5 11 78 99 3.5 73.0

11 j CI2297 90 79 146 3 3.0 3 5 108i

6 • 2 70.4

12 CI2605 90 79 144 2 3.5 15 35 98 i5.7 71.8

13 C1 2698 94 73 140 2 3.5 15 43 76 3.4 70.4

14 Victory (Std*ck) 95 73 133 3 4.5 20 48 91 4.7 70.4

I ^Local check 89 64 133 3 4.0 10 31 90

___4 . 6 71*6

193

Fifteen different varieties together with one standard check and one local check were Tin eluded in these trials.

Victory (std.ck)£; PGRC/ 3013522 were the best yielders at Kulumsa with yields of 9^0 kg/ha and 940kg/ha. respectively. However, yield between variety means was not statistically significant (Table 315- 9 & 10) .

At Bekoji PGRC/E013522 proved to be the highest yielder followed by CI2674 which gave 1570 kg/ha and 1530 kg/ha respectively. As opposed to Kulumsaj at Bekoji there was significant difference between the treatment means.

itegarding other agronomic data at Kulumsa late lodging was observed on all varieties, more over this is one of the factors that resulted in low yield at this station (Table 315— 1C)

315 9»10 Linseed pro— national yield trial (Eeko.ji &Kulumsa,).

Yield in Kg/ha at 9 3$ DM

Code Varieties LocaLt ions VarietyRank•Bekoji Kulumsa mean

01 CI1412 1150 780 970 1202 » 1617 1280 530 910 1403 ft 2565 1470 840 1160

204 " 2604 1380 900 1140405 « 2674 1530 j 650 1090 ' 9

06 ” 2743 i 1470 ; 800 1140 4 I07 «2786 1530 660 1010 11 |08 PGRC 013522 1330 940 1130 709 JT 28 1400 900 1150 310 " 33 1570 650 1110 811 " 013539 1380 900 1140 412 44 1200 730 970 12i13 j 59 1430 640 1040 1014 i Victory (std* check) 1440 960 II 1200 i 1

1 I

I ® i Local check 780 580 ] ---------

580 15 I

Location mean 1356 764LSD5% 305 ITSLsr 1$ 412 m

2 13«5 33*8?lot size, m 4 4Design RCB RCBfertilizer, kg/ha (NP^O^) Planting date

23/23 23/2327 June 5 July

Seeding rate, kg/na 25 25

315-9 Summary oi diseases & oJier agronoic data of limeod pro—n-tinal yield trial grown at Beko.ji

Code Varieties -p\$.-pw<TZ ©c > £ &to

Layt to Diseases Lodgingt

late

Height

cm. t .

rd0toO *0 i>

.ri4.-ParHJU

1 Flower Maturity

Powdery

mildew

o-5

____

____

_

Pasmo0-5

Wilt%

01 CI1412 89 98 183 3 .0 2 .5 0 0 59 6 7.8 67.8

02 CI1617 87 100 187 2.5 2.9 0 0 63 68.3 67.7 j

03 C l2565 84 98 167 2.5 2.2 0 5 60 69.3 6 8 .1

04 CI2604 84 98 185 2 .4 2.0 0 2 59 57.5 68.0

05 CI2674 89 96 174 2 .5 2.5 0 0 67 70.3 6 8 .10 6 CI2743 85 • 95 184 2.2 2.2 0 0 61 40.3 68.7

07 012786 87 105 186 2.0 1 . 7 0 0 58 31.3 6 8 .1

08 pgrc/e 013522 84 95 175 2.5 1 .7 0 0 67 60.8 70.1

09 pgrc/e 28 82 97 184 2.0 2 .7 0 0 62 66.8 6 9 .1

10 pgrc/e 013528 90 96 174 2.5 2.9 0 0 74 51.5 69.7

11 pgrc/e 8469

175 2.9 2 .5 0 7 ! 73 53.0 70.6

12 pgrc/e 44 89 101 183 2.0 2 .7 0 j 0 63 i 68.3 6 7 . 7 1113 fgrc/e 59 87 | 96 175 3.0 1 .9 0 0 64 53.0 70.6 !

14 Victory (std. ck) 85 | 96 182 2.0 2.2 0 0 64 52 .8 6 9 .2

15 Local check 82 | 96 '.83 3.0 2 5— i

0-------

0 57 49.8 70 .2

315-10 Summary of diseases and, other agronomic data of linseed pre-national yield trialgrown at Kulumsa*

VD

Code Varieties Days to Diseases Lodging Heightcm.pctf

\&.-p rd § % -p clcn &

Flowering

iI

Maturity Pasmo0-5

Powder}mildew

0-5

VJilt*

*late

0102

, . _____

CI 1412 94 8 4 ' 124 3.4 2.0 3 72 99

03 p grc/e 2565 94 85 :■ 134 3.0 2.0 7 44 95

04 PGRc/E2604 95 84 v 133 _>. 5 1.9 4 37 99

05 CI2674 95 84 I, 128 3.6 2.2 4 ^2 97

0 6 PGRC/E2743 97 82 125 3.4 2.2 •4 42 102

07 CI2786 90 84 136 3.4 2.2 3 20 104

06 pgrc/eo13522 93 84 134 3.0 2.0 5 32 87

i 09 PGRC/E28 93 76 139 2.7 2.4 6 30 92

10 CI33 93 77 139 3.2 1.9 3 27 94

11 PGRC/E39 95 67 134 £.9 2.0 6 44 85

12 CI44 92 87 147 2.9 2.4 4 14 10613 CI59 94 84 142 2.9 2.7 5 35 82

14 Victory (std. ck) 94 71 126 3.2 1.9 13 34 100

15 Local check 89 74 136 3.0 2.2 13------------ j

30------—.------

92

197

315-11 Linseed frost screening: nurcery (Meraro)•

Eighteen different varieties were included in this trial. riUe cordinal objective cf the tricJL Wc* to rind out those varieties that acclimatize themselves to the highland nf thp country ^ecially to the areas where frost is a problem. Out of these Varieties the three top yielding ones were C1119» C11777 and Victory with yield of 2380 kg/ha, 2300

kg/ha -and 2250 kg/ha respectively (Table 315- 1 1 ).

Out of these three top yielding varieties CI 119 and Victory showed good tolerance to frost. But CI 1777 was not toleranet to frost.

198

315-11 Linsoed frost screening nursery (Meraro)

Code Varieties lield kg/ha R?hk

0, 01119 23u0 1 '02 CI113 1750 ! 903 a -179 1580 15

04 " 320 1950 6

05 " 674 2000 5

06

CVJ

CO 1630 13

C7 « 941 1450 17

08 ” 1005 1800 7

09 "1069 1490 16

10 ” 2450 1650 10

11 ” 1761 1600 14

12 "2549 1500 18

13 ” 1279 1780 8

14 ”1777 2300 2

15 ” 1909 1650 10

16 f« 977 1650 10

17 Vietory 2250 3

18Concurrent 2080 4

MeanLSD5/f?LSD1#C.V $Plot size, m2

DesignPlanting date Fertilizer, kg/ha (N P20 ) 23/23Seeding rate, kg/ha 25

1805KSNS

27*8

2RGB with four replication 1 July, 1982

315-11 Summary of diseases and, other agronomic data for Linseed frost screening nursery (Meraro)

Code Variety I

HP $Q fC S3

•H

CQ(D

s i-P ID 50

Days to Diseases Lodging f0 late

Shattering%

*s0

-p

€•H0) 100

0 seed

. •

wb«

gm*.,

*Flower Maturity■>5U 53 © <D

•VS LT\ S H J O -rt O

a

Pasmo0-5

Frost damage %

1 0 1 CI119 90 94 183 2.5 1*5 10 0 0 99 .5.0j02 CI113 90 91 178 2.5 1.5 15 0 0 78 5.503 CI.179 85 92 178 2*0 Q08 28 0 0 87 4.504 " 320 85 91 177 2 . 0 2.0 38 0 0 77 4.505 " o74 80 92 179 2.3 2.8 25 0 0 87 5.006 " 842 80 94 178 2.5 1.8 25 0 0 74 —

07 11 541 81 91 179 1*3 2.0 28 0 0 74 6.008 ” 1005 88 92 178 2.3 2.3 24 5 0 73 6.0

09 ” 1069 73 91 176 2.3 1.5 55 30 0 89 5.010 ”2450 68 91 178 2.0 2.5 28 40 0 83 7.011 ” 1761 78 91 178 2.0 3.0 38 8 0 38 —

12 "2549 88 91 180 2.0 1.5 25 3 0 94 5.513 ”1279 93 91 181 1.8 1.3 13 1 0 81 2.314 "1777 75 93 179 2.0 1.8 55 32 0 101 4.515 "1909 90 92 182 2.0 2.8 18 7 0 76 6 .5

16 « 977 35 93 177 2.0 2.3 43 1 0 86

17 Victory 93 93 179 2.0 1.8 13 0 0 76 6 .518 Concurrent 85 94 162 1.0 2.5 33 0 0 70 6 . 0

200

Tile trial was undertaken for the first time at ‘both locations. It consisted of ten varieties from which R. black was used as standard check.

Regarding yield at Kulumsa gunhi 301a was the top yielder followed by urgentario and Amiath which gave 3040 kg/ha, 2740 kg/ha & 2610 kg/ha respectively, The stand percentage at this station was very good and more than 85$ for all entries. At Kulumsa there was no significant difference in yield between the tretment means.

Considering yield at Asasa the highest result was obtained from L.C.I ■which gave 1450 hg/ha followed by Ar£©ntario, The stand percentage and the yield potential wereP001, at this station due to the problem of moisture stress. (Table 325-1).

325- 1, 2 Sun flower national yield, trial (Asasa & Kulumsa)

325-1 y 2 Sun flower national yield, trial (Asasa & Kulumsa'l

Yield in kg/ha at 93?-S DM

Code Varieties I 'Locations Variety Rankj Asasa Kulumsa

o1 Kemus 1040 2510 1780 502 Argentario 1320 2740 2030 2Cj EU.i 30 V .a i3 iO 3040 2180 104 Sungro 380-A 1050 2600 1830 305 Amiata 850 2610 1730 806 Vnimk 1150 2280 1720 907 LCI 1450 2150 1800 408 Kovisad 20 1180 2340 1760 6

09 R.Black (st.ch) 99° 2480 1740 j 710 Eliodoro ! 710 ;

m r mi it m i J 2 2 2 L ! 1530 j 1° i

Location mean LSD %LSD r/c

2plot sizefm DesignFert ilizer, kg/h j

(DAP)Planting date

1110

347

471

21. S

6RGB

2510 1810

BS

HS 22.5

. 6

** CB with four reps

13

100 100

June 12 June

325-2 St.mmar.y of diseases and other agronomic data of sun flower .national yield trial (K).l>ircsa).•

CodeNO

Varieties

1-pCO

r r

l iCO*H S rd O

CuG>w

!

I *§O*PSCO-pCO

P a y s t o . I0uocti

J-OS. !rdH•H

cq

Flower Maturity

01 Menus 8 9 17 25 129 196r»O

02.

0 <JA 1u 25 1 2 0 \oy 8

0 3 S u n h i 3 0 1 - A 9 1 16 28 129 1 9 4 10

AU'j- Srm°TO 3 8 - A 94 16 26 1 3 0 205 7

05 _Api i at a to 15 26 1 3 0 200 8

06 Vnirrik 9 1 16 24 128 1 9 7 u

07 LCI 81 16 23 125 1S3 6

08 Nouirad 20 91 16 j 25 132 j 202 5

R.tlack (st.che) 89 16 24 120 j 205 : 7 !

10 LS/ladaro (ck) 83 r 20 24 114 j 186 22 I

m-pw2Sh ITNIOS Ci 0

0-51

1.5

1

1

1.0

0

0.5

0.5

1.5

t—l • Hs s T 1

On

oo0

0

0

Q

0

0

0

0

d)- p a5) IA G°ci I -'•<4? ! %P < j W

0.37 i 3

0.25

0.45

0.3

0.12

Oo 22

O o 1 2

0 . 1 2

0.45

1.07

2 2 23

|1.64

2

fao

- p

•a•Ho 3

<3>CDW

OOO

§>

257

238

268

'266

254

286

242

246

284

218

8 1 . 8

35.4

6 9.071.8

73.069.5

7 6.076. 5

8 1 . 8

80.5

325-3 Sunflower pre-natioral yield trial (Kulumsa)

l&is trial was conducted at the wa'.'.n station for the first time and it consisted of eight different varieties aJid one standard check*

■RJventhough tho trial was conducted for the first time the yield potential was more or less satifacbory#

Considering yield of the nine different varieties, hybrid-24 was the top yielding variety followed oy «prem HT-117 and A^gentario which gave 2980 kg/ha, 2690 kg/taa & 2540 kg/foa respectively* However, there was no significant differnce "between the treatment means(Table 325-3)•

325-3 Sun nowerjK &-national yield, trial (Kulums^

Yield, in kg/ha at 9 $ DM

Code Varieties Yield kg/ha Rank01 Sorem HT-117 2690

j! 2

02 Peredovik 20608

03 ! Hybrid 241 2980 1 J3 1eexii-ario 1 2540 3 I

05 Romsun 59 2020 906 Novisad 61 2280 607 Ala 2490 j 508 R.Block (std. clip) 2490 5

09 Eliodor0 (std. ch) 2190 7

Wean 24-16LSD % KS

LSD 1 % NS

CoV• 14*92Plot size, m 6

Design RGB with three replicationFertilizer (DAP) kg/ha 100Planting date 12 June, 1982

206

vo co

t~ 4Ui

J-*

&

o

w•o '

WP

R -

md -

P *•

—3 On V) •P*

Js> tel ?C1—1 O o£U <J (ft

H- K Qm S’. isf t

VJ1

cf"

s^CN V ) H-

O

w ro

%a14H*P*

<t>

CDO

J2 f?

MO4CD3ft!¥

tei o I O pj (D

V O CO CO 0 0 VO v o v o

O v n O J v n o o r o

r o f o r o M r o_ j. — j v y v n

----------- ----------

—i _ a _!•__w O J O J O J r o tv-— o n f o C ) o ON

fV> r o r o f o r cVO o o o v o O C

ON o ■3> v n o

O O o O O o o

_% _ v - j . _5.

ON 0 3 o f o r o ON u -

Stajid. oouiv’;

> o

o

roOD

rooo

o

'YxTT'"*E<D t,0> p *H -

u

<5m

C+-O

.Dc4-■i

Doweny milcow

ON - 4 O n O ' ON - p ^

l-.± _y -I Head diaa fe'

cmo o o o o* • fo • • ■

O J O n O v n —s.ON ON CO -P *

fN3 f\3 (N UJ M (O W W M__i '•-O —j o r o v n v n v o .p >o Ul *J vo On -»■ O O M

Empty center0-5

Shatering $

m r o f o u > r o r o re r o r o

vo —j v§ v“n ^ ^ c oo fo f Height cm*

— j — q ON -4 0> t*Vj **sj "S KJ \ U > i• • • * * » ■ ,T1 ,, ,ON r o O j VC’ Vn —J ! HI- \ k g .

■i

roYUJ

toThe objective o± this trial V7?.Syjdetermine an optimum date of planting for rape seed for each specific variety. 'The design used was latin square with four replications £■, four dates of sowing# The result obtained indicated that planting a-round mid-June (June 16) gave the top yield (table 333- 1)

,2d7

333-1 Rape seed sewing; date trial.

Rape seed sowing date trial (Eulumsa)

Yield in kg/ha at 93$ D.K.

Sowing date Yield kg/ha Rank

June 16 3090 1

June 26 2540 3[July 6 2730 2 Ipul y 16 2270

i- . 4 j

Kean 2660

LSD % 714.8LSD 1 ITSC.V 10. #

2Plot size, m 6

Design Latin squareFertilizer kg/h<a(k p2o ) 46/69

Seeding rate,kg/ha 10

co 333-1 summary of disease arid other agronomic data of rape seed sowing date trial(3

Sowing date Days to Diseases Insect Lodging <£ •-p05^L*P

CQrd 4>3 t.

Flower ing Maturity Downeymildew

*

Alternaria0 - 5

Aphid0-5

:

Late tiDPJa>-p-p

020

tb

srd(D « 0> Sw 5b

0bD

•-P J 4

■i. I .

,CJS3 © 0B Hh** i »-w

June 16 06 81 161 6 1.9. -

C 19 7" 1

173!*" “ — 7.7 67.9

June 26 88 78 151 2 2o3 0 43 10 168 7.8 6 6 .5July 6 86 72 143 3 2.0 1 54 6 170 7.8 660 7July 16 90 73 134 2 1 .6 4 24

5151 7.8

____ 67.3

209333- 1-5» 7 & 8 Rape seed national yield, trial (Asasat Beko.jii

Kulumsa & Robe).

Nine different improved varieties were used from which garget was used as standard ch^ck, The trials were carried out under fertilized and unfertilized conditions at four locations.

The trials were undertaken with the main objective of investigating whether or not varieties that are good in yield -under the recomended amount of fertilizer are also relatively good without the application of fertilizer.

As a matter of fact in the case of rape seed the application of fertilizer (NjP Oj- ) produced much higher seed yield when compared with the seed yield without fertilizer (Table 335 1-8)* At Ku lumsa the response in yield to fertilizer application was low whereas at Bekoji, Asassa & Robe much higher seed yields were obtained when fertilizers were added.

Under the application of fertilizer at Kulumsa. TowerselL and Towerse^ were the top yielders with yield of 3040 kg/ha and 2750 kg/ha respectively whereas from unfertilized trial Target & Towersel., were the high yielding varieties with yield of 2810 kg/ha and 2720 kg/ha respectively.

The three top yielding varieties from the fertilized trial at Bekoji where yanada, Tower & Riko respectively with yield of 2240 kg/ha 2240 kg/ha & 2230 kg/ha. However, as all entries failed to emerge at Bekoji due to lack of fertilizer, the unfertilized trial is not reported here.

At Asasa there was no significant yield difference between the treatment means and T.-irget (std. check) out yielded all other varieties from :ertilized trial which gave 1800 kg/ha, more over, Tower produced the highest yield from the unfertilized plot at this station.

The best yielding varieties a,t Robe were Sbwer sel^ and Kosa with yield of 2060 kg/ha and 199° kg/ ha respectively from the fertilized trial* However, pura was the top yielder from unfertilized trial at Robe with yield of 730 kg/ha*

Generally, yields were relatively poor at Asasa and Robe when compared with other stations# The stand percent at Kuluinsa was best and was more than 8o$- for all entries in the fertilized trial* The lowest stand percent was again recorded at Asasa*

Regarding disease incidence it was not sever all over the stations# (Table 335- 1-8).

335“ 1 4 ~ - -e- 'S'Ged t r i al, with f e r t i l i z e r ( Aa as^ T^Vnji ? Kulumsa &

Y ie ld in kg/ha at 93 <f0 DM*

Coden°

V a rie ty LocationsV a rie ty Rank j

|Asasa B eko ji Kulumsa Robe

01 Pur a 1730 1960 2590 1920 2050 402 Tower 160C 2240 2330 1770 1990 703 Escora 1180 2200 2640 1730 1940 804 Vanada 1590 2240 2640 1830 2080 305 Riko 1660 2230 2420 1850 2040 606 Kosa 1160 1900 2590 1990 1910 907 Towersel

1 1710 1850 i 2750 1370 2050 408 Tower sel^ 1760 1980 ! 3040 2060 ; 2210

:1 i

09 Target ( s t .c h ) 1800 2220___ !

2670 j 1960 j 21602 I

Location mean 1580 1900 2630 1890 2050LSD % NS NS NS NSCV fc 29.5 20.5 10.1 11.5pP lot s iz e , m 6 6 6 6Design RGB RCB RCB RCB with four repF e r t i l i z e r kg/ha

( np2o5 ) 46/69 46/69 46/69 46/69P lan tin g date 1 1June 27June 2July 16JulySeeding r a te , kg/ha 10 10 10 10

212.

$8

335“ 'I Summary of diseases ..and othfertilizer grown at Asasa#

anomic data for rape seed national yield trial with- * ——■ »• u.. k • • • k».< ntKMK-— - -— -----« w — — mmm t ■> n. mr

Target (std, ck.)

Lays to-p |Flower j Maturity « S3 I I -H I ,

i•xi <D i i£ >r3 b -p I

M A j

76

69

63

6870 69

69

74

75

1 62

64

101

65

94

97

93

93

63

167

167

170168

168

175 168

168

167

DiseasesAltsrnaria

0-5

Downey mildew 0 - 5

Insect.

__Aphides I Early Late

f

4.3

3.2 10

64

2.3563.2

•rHfHCD

-P-Pctfs

-T— J I * ' jme-mn 4 J»MmI ■■ —<—<mm —

Tb•H

■■d Q) (!) CO

OPI—J•v!

* —-M '0 9 5 1 13c ! 3 . 61 ! 6 6 . 0

U rj o 5 . 00 j 0 4 i 124 3

0 0 13 • 1 1 2 3 . 3 Jj O U • J>

0 0 5 j 121 3 . 7 2 6 5 . 0

1 6 4 .50 0 5 i 128 j • J

0 0 ; 18 \ 1 2 4 3 .5 j 6 5 .0

0 0 ! 4 j 119 3 . 7 <00.3

0 0 3 i 112ii

3 . 7 \ « ■>j1 O o . j

u „ J L J 31 112 3.6 I 6 5 .5

335-2 Swiimary national yield trial witi- fertilizer grown at Beko.ji.

Code Varieties Day a to Diseases . Insect Lodging <lo j“ “I ’ j

!fs I o

---------- j Stand

fc at

j ha

rvesti

ng

Flower Maturityj Downeymildew

0 - 5

Alternaria0 - 5

Aphids/°

(Early

i!

Late i i||*i!

Jt<Q I.a >!0-p i

s Height

crrio

4 ITi0<D 0CQ S&O§*—

9•CuO•■e

:•Hi jC 1

02

Pur a 'I ower

I 76 24

nO7u79

180

180

----- -32

2

2

42

— —0

0

0

0

1314

137137

4.24.3

62.3.j61.35

I scora 76 85 179 3 5 1 ! 2 0 0 13 137 I 3 .6 60,004 Vanada 73 79 180 3 2 ! 3 0 0 14 135 3.9 ; 6 1 ,305 E ike 76 80 180 4 1 4 0 0 13 138 3.7 6 1.3 !06 Kosa 76 85 180 3 2

40 0 12 136 3.5 6 1 .5

07 lower sel„ 1 75 84 180 2 1 I 3 0 0 9 134 3.8 6 3 .5

08 ■lower sel-j 72 83 181 4 2 ! 5 0 0 9 133 3.4 63.5jOQ Target (std. ck) 73 82 180

2 2 ! 5 0 0 9 130 | 3.5 63.5

214

335-3 Summary of diseases and other agronomic data for rape seed national yield trial with fertilizergrown at.. Kulumsa*

Codei'J—

'/ ariet ies

01

02

.03

04

05

06

07

08

09

i

Put a Tower Escora V an ad s

j Riko KosaJTower selI 1Tower sel^Tar get (st. ch e •)

\ ^

r3 -pco

89

88 94

90

88

89

89

8891

Days tor

Flowering Maturity

66

65 80

TO 70 7469

7066

144

144

145

143

144

143

143

144

144

i— DiseasesT Insect I LosingDowney j Alterna- } Aphids

ria 0-5 * clmildow0 - 5

0.8

1.2

0

0.5

0.5

1.5

1.5

2.8

1.8

of,f°

t - 2.6

2.4

2.9

2.92.9

2.2

2.6

2.1

2.6

1.5

0.5

1331.3

2.5

1.5

2.33.83.8

? Lat e! I

oo.3Fh©

Tf0OCO

** « .*4

£ ^ CT>£

’[ mO j °•H O

\ 2, I £i—‘ *._____ 1

18 14 171 • 3.2!

10 14 166 13.9

20 10 245 3.6

33 12 225 4-4

13 I 20 217 3.3

14 9 ■220 3.9

.31 16 250 3.7

50 15 227 3.6

30 ,1_ 1 J 212'I i ±

♦bD

•

%•

rHtd

62.2C. r\o c ! * 5

j 6 0 . 0

j c2.0

i 61.0

I 60*7 i 63.0

j 63.0 63.4

.335-4 S^maxy^of__dis_eases ar,d other agronomig data for^ra^e^seed national ield trial with fertilizergrown at Robe,

Coden£

Varieties

§v>VI

Days to Diseases

doS3•r1CD +»r IT-£8

•s0

1000

seed

wt,

gm.

•isO

•. t

'

^lowering

|

Maturity

IL ___

Downymildewi 0—5

U-tern a- Aphids ria 0-5 <jQ

01 Pur a 90 61 144 2 I 10 6r*— “— -3 137 3-5 62.0

02 Tower 88 60 146 2 1.5 7 7 147 3.6 6 2.6

03 Escora 83 68 149 3 Id 8 3 144 3.0 2 6 1 .9104 Van ad a 86 j 60 144 0 1.4 5 7 140 3.9 6 2 .3

105 Riko 89 62 147 2 1.4 4 5 146 3.5 62.0

j 0 6 kosa 84 66 151 3 1.4 6 3 137 3.5 62.0

107 Tcwer sel^ 84 61 145 3 1.5 4 3 139 3.4 63.3! 08 Tower sel. 82 63 144 4 1.4 I 4 3 137 3.5 6 3.0

09 Target (sta. check) j8 5 1

61 148 3 1s J ,

. . . i-6 _ i j .. .1 *140 3.7 6 2 .8

335—5» 7, 8 Rape seed ngbioi al .yield, trial without fertilizer (Asasa

Yield in kg/ha at 53 f DM,

Code V ariety r Locations V ariety

,

Rank j

IN- I

■j—, Asasa Kulumsa Robe

01 j Pura 5 1100 2200---- -----

730 1340 5 )02 j Tower

03 Escora

04 Vanada

05 Riko

Go Kosa

07 Tower se l 1jower sel^08

OS' Target ( st

1240 j 2280 670780 i 2320 -f>» 0 0

920 2520 6001110 2220 590800 2430 520

1090 2490 6501G40 2720 7201180 2810 650

-» 1320 1 6 ! 5 O j0j 1170 9j 1350 4

13107 !1250 8

1410 3I 1490 2j 1570

----------------

Location mean

LSD % kg/ha

C.V %p

P lo t s iz e , m

Design

Planting date

Seeding r a te , kg/ha

1030 2440

NS NS

35.6 12.4

6 6RGB RGB

11 J une 2 J u ly

10 10

610 1360 NS

32.2

6RCB with four rep.

16 July

10

335-5 Summary of diseases and other agronomic data for rape seed national yield trial without fertiliser grown atAs r.a.

Code Varieties

-P•rHN&.-PCQrd OH K,

3 k-P Coco x:

Dayw to Diseases Insect Lodgin£ ___

j Shattering

%

j

i______________________________________________________

j

Reight

cm {

i

i' -d 0 0

S &8O

r ..11 \ •

• i

£ 1

Flower Maturity Alterna- ria 0-5

Downymildew0 - 5

Aphids$

Early Late

!

01 Pur a 66 95 170 1 3 6 0 0 10 106 3.2 65.3 |

02 Tower 71 95 169 1I 5 0 0 10 112 3-9 65.3 i

03 Escora 48 105 176 1 5 | 2.6 0 0 5 j 91 3o6 64.5 j

04 Vanadp. 66 93 170 1 4 ] 8 0 0 8 108 4.4 65*4 J

05 Kike 70 96 174 1 4 I

.5 0 0 16 116 3.3 6 5o0

0 6 Kosa 58 100 175 1 5 I 15 0 0 13 104 3.9 0 5 0 0

07 Tower sel 66 96 170 ■\ 4 12 00 7 : 106 i3.7 6 7 .0 j

i

081 ^ .Tower sel.. • 64 96 172 1 S 10 0 0 5 i 106 3.6 66.0

1

09 |Target (std.ck.) 68 | 94 170 , 1 4 j -------

6 00 1

4 j 112 3.6 | 6 6.0 ! _____ e

335-7 P-f diseases and other agronomic data for rape seed nationaj.fertilizer ,'Town at ];ulumsa.

yield trial without

Code0 Varieties _____ Says t 0 Diseases J[j

V

fii[

rd$cu

Flowering Maturity Downymildew0-5

Alternar- ria 0-5

A

li4— -

| -pto

015[purr 84 6 9

__________146

____

1

____2

02 iTower1 83 67 145 1 2.6

03 Escora 86 85 146 1 2.504 V an ad a 88

I70 145 1 2.3

05 Riko P. A *• 76145 1 • 2.3

06 Kosa | 91 8C 141 3 2.6

07 Tower sel, ! 1

89 I J | 70 | 145 0 2.8

08 •Tower sel^ 86 j 70 I • 145 309 ; :Target (st. che.) i 89 : 68 145 3 j 2 .8

Aphids

%

Lodging

t

Lat e

uo

%JO• pfos

n30© o&!ojO *Q -e

W)

3 31 i 9 173 } 3.6 j4 10 166 i 3.S'k 10 10 170 1 4.13

2 joct 11 178 i 3 .9 fl

4 14 13 17.9 J 3 8

3 19 13 170 j 4.035 13

10 165 ? 4* lA 16 1 1 165 i 4 .0 35 34 9 161 3 3 .1 0

6 4.0

63.2 0O .6

6 3.06 2 .0

61.0

63.563.5 6 4 .0

335-8 oUM.iaiy ex’ diseases and other agronomic data for rape seed national yield trial without fertilizer grown at Robe.» — —rin ■ !■«» . j.,. »'.n ...... - r in n._i

Code

»2

V a r ie t ie s*

§CO

)ays to D is e a s e .. j Insect

%

fi5£CO

i H

eigh

t cm

«...

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.....

_ I

•t

(1) . § g>

8 ON—

•V)

•if

1i—1hHhM

Flower maturity Downy

mildow

0-5

Alterna-

r i a 0-5

Aphids0/1°

01 Fur a 53 78 158 10 1.0 5 2 106 4.1 62.502 Tower 53 78 157 1.0 1.0 5 1 109 3.9 62.603 Escora 41 82 161 0.9 1.0 3 0 82 4.2 64.804 V an ad a 51 78 159 1.0 1.0 4 1 104 4.1 62.3

05 Riko 50 79 158 0.4 2.0 4 0 110 4.2 6 4 .O

06 flosa 44 82 161 0.9 1.0 5 0 89 4.2 63.0

07 Tower sel.1 51 78 158 0.9 0.8 5 0 92 4.1 63.8

08 Tower sel,.3 1 48 78 ; 159 ■ 0.6 0.4 6 0 96 4.4 6 4.0

09 | Target (std.chk.) 49» i

157 | 0.6 0.6------------- 5 I... ° . J 93

3.6 6 3 .5

22C

3 3 5 - 9 1 10 & 11 Rape seed •pre-national yield, trial (Eeko.ji,Kulumsa & Robe) .

In this trial twelve different varieties and three standard checks S-67t S—71 & Target were included and the trials were carried out at Bekoji, Kulumsa and Robe.

At Beko.ji one of tne standard cnecks ( v_r-o7) out y ie ld e d a l l other

v a r i e t i e s with y i e ld of 3?50 k^/h* followed by PGRC/S48 which gave

3060 kg/ha.

Considering yield at Kulumsa PGRC/E021059 and 2-67 (std. ch.) proved to be the best yielding varieties than the rest.

p/En/sel^ <L PGRC/E-67 were the high y ie ld in g v a r i e t i e s at Robe with

y i e ld of ?280 kg/ha and 2190 kg/ha r e s p e c t iv e ly .

Except at Robe there were statistically significant differences in yield between the treatment means.

221

335-91 1C & 11 Rape seed pro-net ion.,1 yield trial (Bekoji v Kulumsa & Robe).

Yield in kf-;/ha at 93 f DM.

Location mean LCD %

LSD %

C.V.$2Plot size, m

DesignFertilizer, kg/ha, 1\-Replanting date Seeding rate, kg/ha

2460 2500 1840

821 kg/ha, 684*9 NSkg/ha

NS 933o2 —kg/ha

19.7 16.1 25.7

6 6 6RGB RGB RCB .46/69 46/69 46/6927 June 3 July 17 July10 10 10

2240

Code V e r i t ie s Locations _____ . V a rie ty Rank

Bekoji "ulumsa Robe kg/ha

01 p/3n/ sel^• • U w

2220 2250 2280 2250 “ 702 p/Bn/ se l 1830 j — 2160 1920 1003

1V/Bn/ sel^ j 2160 1600 1980 1910 j 11

| 04 1 E S / W s o l . 2130 2000 2080 2070 9 i05 PGFiC/ni 021059 2720 3140 1390 2420 3 006 » w 67 ! 1740 | 2560 2190 2160 8 i

07 « •> 86 2990 ‘ 2230 1980 24005 I

08 « 48 j 3060 | 2900 1510 24902 !

09 n .. 65 2220 | 2500 990 1900 12

1° Target ( std. check) i 2410 ! 2670 1890 2320 6 ! |j 11 33-67 ( - 3250 i 3070 1770 2620 1

| 12-W± 1 1 (. ' 1

2830 i

...___ 12580 1830

i2410

— 1 1 1 ~ ~ 1 <AV. a*. ..._ L j

335-9 Summary of diseases and3ther agronomic data of rape seed pre-national yield trial grown at Bekoji.

1—CodeN -

V a r ie t ie s!j (tip

(fl

%CQc;

Bays to Diseases

•!

$

i0

....

1

Sh

atte

rin

gf

j

•s0

•6•H0)m 10

00

seed

w

t. !

gm.

•ho

•t

Ia >H Iw

Flower Matur i ty Alterna-r i a 0-5

Downey0-5

Late

' 101 P (Bn) s e l 1 72 75 179 1.5 1.3 0 11 132 3.7

!0 2 .1 j

02 P (Bn) s e l 75 81 181 1.8 2.0 0 9 139 4.2 6 2 .4 i03

c-V (l n) sel^ 72 75 179 2.0 2.0 0 11 133 4.2 63.1 j

04 ES (Bn) sel^ 73 85 184 3 03.U 2.0 0 10 154 4.0 60 .0 |

05 PGRC/E 021059 87 93 1S4 3.0 1.3 0 2 164 4.5 65.506 pgrc/e 021059 77 86 181 2.2 0 0 6 142 4.5 6 5 . 1

07 pgrc/e 86 90 92 193 2.0 0 0 0 172 4.1 65.508 PGRC/E 48 92 91 194 2.0 0 .7 0 6 180 4.7 65.8

09 pgrc/e 65 96 98 195 1.5 0 .7 0 2 175 3.8 66.01C Target ( s t d .o k .) 81 83 182 2.0 1 .0 0 9 128 4.1 6 2 .611 ^•67 95 93 193 2.0 1 .0 0 1 175 4.5 65.7

i i 3-71 ( s t d .c k . ) 85 86 196 2.2 ____ __ 0 0 2 188 4 .6

.66.0

335-10 Summary of diseases and other agronomic data of rat>q seed pre-national yield trial grown at Kulumsa»

c\jr\j o J

2J O

JI o

p. 1

1 ..

® Varieties

rnCOX

Days to • i-oaro „ Insect Lodging $

•E0-P•a1

.£T)0)<1> e CQ E00°

L

tJoM

i%

1— 1

Flowering Maturity Alterna- ria 0-5

|

Aphids$

Late

01 I(Br) sel^ 90 65 173 1 .0 0 32 157 3.9 63.102 p/ln/ sel1 87 67 150 1 .2 0 25 112 6.3 63.003 X(Br) sel^ 87 65 148 1.5 0 29 165 6.3 6 3 .0

04 IS(Br) nel^ 85 75 147 1 .0 0 0 160 6 .8 59.4C-5 IGRC/E 021059 89 75 163 1 .0 0 0 165 6.3 6 6,0

06 pgrc/e 67 90 71 173 1 .9 0 77 164 6.3 6 6 ,0

07 FGRC/E 86 94 74 162 1 .5 0 Oc 178 6.3 6 5 .6

08 PGRC/s 4o 92 74 163 0 .5 0 9 180 ' 6.3 6 6 .6

09 fgrc/e 65 87 80 167 0.9 0 2 I 173 6.3 66 ,0

10 larget (std, ck.) 90 70 ; 173 1 .2 j 0 0 160 6 .4 :6 2 ,7

11 S-67 (std, cko) 89 7 6 163 | 1 .0 0 0 i 176 6 .4 6 6 .6

12 £-71 (std„ ck,) 90 | 79 166 0.9 02 I 187 6 .3 j 6 6 ,4

___ 1 ... ....

335- i i sugary oi‘ diseases^ and, other agronomic data of rape seed pre-na.tional yield trial .ecrown at Rohe.

Codem2

Varieties

-pc3^.-P

UlTi (1) £ >co ^ -P ctiw

Days to.. ~

Diseases I Insect Lodging <j,

Shattering

%

I

0£r5

1•H0)W

•-P

© c0) Sw §0

000

I

•

«■e>-».a

j

Flower Maturity

_________

Downey mildew $

Alterna- ria 0-5

____

Aphids*

Lat e

T r y --- ‘*r*1 jI 01 p (En) sel 92 57 146 1 3 .0 0 7 157 .38.8 62«7j 02 P (jjn) sel^ 90 68 146 9 2.0 3 0 ? 159' 4 0 .3 6 2.8

! 03 V(Pn) sel^ 89 59 144 2 2.0 3 0 7 148 4 1 -8 63^ 1

I 0 4 SS(Ln) sel? 90 74 150 10 1.9 3 0 2 154 38.8 62.9

j 05 PGUC/E C21059 79 75 160 4 2 .7 1 0 2 145 30.3 66.8

06 pgrc/e 67 92 68 146 9 2.7 4 0 4 171 39.0- V 0

07 PG^c/E 86 93 76 157 7 2.5 2 0 7 148 41-8 63.1

•’ 08 j pgrc/e 48 89 75 156 7 2 .2 3 0 2 174 44.3 6 5 .6

j 09 pgrc/e 65 90 84 162 4 1.4 1 0 0 190 3£>«5 65 oO| 10 Target (std. ck.) 84 67 ; 146 3 1.9 3 0 3 138 i38.5 ! 6 2c2 ;

i 11^■6? 92 75 158 7 2.9 3 i 0

4192 |38.5 | 6 5 .0

: 12 j__ t ! 1 J

95 e , i w 3 2.7 ___ __ 4 I 0— 2 195 ]39.3 | $6 .0

335-12 | 13 Mastard extension yield trial (Asass^.

225

The trial was undertaken at Asasa;, which represent the midium altitude areas with low precipitation. It was conducted under two conditions, fertilized and. un fertilized.

'The main objective of the trial was to find out whether the varieties that produce high yield with the application of fertilizers also mantain their potential with out the application of fertilizers*

However, the trial conducted with the application of fertilizer excelled in yield potencial and other agronomic aspects (Table 335-12& 13)*Hence the recommeded rate of fertilizer shculdbe applied at nppropriat time of application for mastard varieties inorder to get a relatively higher yield.

335-12 Mastard extension yield trial with fertilizer (Asasa)«

CV | Code p -

Variety Yield kg/iia Rank j■

J 01 S-67 1490 502 5-71 1510 403 S-115 1570 204 Awasa population 1530 3

05 Dodola i860 1!06 1 ___ i Local checkL- - . .. . J 0 0 6 I

Mean LSD %C.V fcPlot size, m2 DesignPlanting date Fertilizer, kg/ha (liTPgO ) Seeding rate, kg/ha

1500

ITS23.36

RCB with four replications11 June46/69

10

335-13 Mastard extension yield trial without fertilizer

Code Variety Yield kg/ha Rank

01 S-67 1180Vtm ■* ' — ™ r

602 S-71 1350 203 S-115 1300 404 Awassa pop 1350 1

05 ■ Dodolla 1310 306 Local check 1230 5

.i

Mean 1287

LSD % USC*V fo 15,4

2Plot si-Ee,m 6Design RGB with four replicationsPlanting date 11 JuneSeeding rate, kg/ha 10

ases ana oxner agronomic data of mastard extension yield trial with fertilizer (Asassa)li- *. ■iwiiiii ■ • i — i , , -n. .t..— d;a>». ► — . --w»—«■»!■■■» ' ■ Mil jmmi— ■ mtm ■ n i Mm <r». Ittlt <n« n«Wi ■inwrnmnli-nv.iw .•» a- • /

| Code N —

Varieties

a)3 £ - P CO

0? X

Days to Diseason Aph ids

! *j

; Shattering

| %

F

i- P

•a• H

<D

w 1000

seed

wt.

,.

. s®*...................................

I

i :d0

;••

r Hj~r|


Downeymildew0-5

01 S-67 68 95 172 2 4 0 2 127 3.8 6 7 .8

02 5-71 73 102 174 1 3 0 7 128 4-4 67.103 S-115 69 102 172 1 2 0 6 138 3.7 66.7

04 Awassa population j 74 102 174 1 2 0 6 141 3.7 6 7,0

05 Dodola 74 95 157 1 2 o.5 7 140 3.6 66.8

Oo Local check 68 < 108 14-8 1. _________ i ^ I ■ iL . i J

145•-.Imt.-v ju 3 . 8 6 7 .6 :

33^_-]3 Summary of diseases and other agronomic data of mastard extension yield trial without fertilizer .(Asassa)•

CodeIv—

Variet ies

i!-pc0

UlTj <DI S

Days to Diseaiues Aphids' Io

I— ,

i>0q•n-p "*-0

5*"

• .1. 1 *

•s0-p•6•5!

"

1000

seed wt.

| gm#

I

i t •

! ia ;3


Downeymildew

0-5

...01 S-67 64 100 178 1.5 3.2 0 8 125 3.9 6O.9

02 S-71 66 104 177 1 .2 2.0 0 3.2 128 3.1 60.9

03 s-115 65 103 180 1 .0 2 .2 0 4 120 3.1 6 7 .0

04 Awassa population 65 105 176 0.7 3.5 0 3 125 3.8 6 7 .0

05 Dodcla 63 102 174 1.5 1.5 0 5 122 4.4 6 7 .1

06 ! Local check 1 i0 179 0 .7 2 .7 ____0_ J_ 3 _ J * i L . Ah9J

229

The main objective of this trial was to find out varieties which can adapt to different ecological zones of the country mainly to highlands areas, and produce a good yield with this objective taken into consideration twenty two different varieties of Brassica carnata types of rape seed v/ere planted at Kulumsa. Most of these varieties showed promising results in all aspects, as to be included or advanced in the next stage of testing.

335-14 Brassica micro trial (Kulumsa)

230

335-14 Brassica micro trial (Kulumsa)

Code V a rie ty Y ie ld kg/ha | Rank

01 ( s -7 lx S - 6 7 ) S-71/21 (F^) 2400 1502 ( s - 7 1 ^ s—6 7 ) 5-71/23 (p5 ) 2230 1803 ( S—71 x Torch) S-71/35 (F^) 2720 7

04 » /27 2810 5

05 ,5 /29 " 2880 3

06 It /30 If 2510 11

07 .» . /32 " 2640 908 S—115 x S-6 7 x S— 115/33 (Fj-) 2580 10

09 3-67 x Target) S-67/4(F^) 2980 210 I m (Br) 166 2690 8

11 IAR (Er$ 172 2370 1612 pgrc/e 021105 2400 14

13 0 ro —3 2370 17

14 " 021118 2050 21

15 021122 3830 416 tJ 021145 2470 12

17 ?! 021148 3120 118 Nikolas

000—C\J 19

: Olog 2160 20 j

2 0 Target (std. ck« ) i 860 2 2

21 S-67 2810 e i

2 2 S-71 " 2460. . .

Mean LSD %

LSD 1 fo

C.2Plot size, m

DesignPlanting date Fertilizer, kg/ha, (liP O ) Seeding rate, kg/ha

2524

595

NS

11 .46

RCB with two replication 5 July

46/ 6910

Code Variety Davs to jjiSortSeb Insect Loging %IT- W)

■8-3•P

Flower Maturity Alterna- ria 0l-5

Downeymildew

Aphids^ Lat e•G

♦

i04-3

CO<D . rn c •

§ i fbw CS65)0

HPS

_________ _________I

•H<1) 0 0 —

01—1 %1— 1

! 0— ** " "'r",Lri’r j

01 (S-71 x s-6 1) S-71/21F. 90 85 161 0.5

0 .5

5i 1 0 ! 197 4.0 6 7.0 IJ02 (S-71 x s-61) S-71/23 F^ 93 86 166 0 0 07 203 4.5 66.303 (S-71 x Target) 3-71/25 I*V 88 84 164 0.5 2 0 0 201 4.8 66„504 (S-71 x Target) S—71/27 88 84 166 1 .0 2 0 0 198 4.5 66,305 (S-71 x Target) S-71/29 ^ 90 77 161 1 ,0 3 0 0 202 4.5 6 6 ,1

06 S-71 x Target ) S-71/30 85 84 166 0 .5 2 0 0 192 4*5 65.907 S-71 x Target) S-67/32 F^ 88 83 165 0,5 6 0 0 194 6 .0 6 6 .4

08 (S-115 * Tc.rget) S-115/32 F^ 90 81 161 0 .5 2 0 0 201 4-5 66.309 (S-67 x Target) S-67/4 -Fp. 93 71 160 1 ,0 3 0 0 185 4 .0 6 6 .5

10 IAR (Lr) 166 88 56 166 1 .00 ° 0 192 3.8 6 6 .5

11 IAR (Br) 172 85 86 168 0 .5 5 0 11 0 190 3.8 6 5 .8

12 PGRC/ji 021105 88 84 168 0,5 3 ° i 0 185 4.5 6 6 .9

13 FGRC/F 021117 85 87 168 0.5 5 2 i 0 . 196 3.8 65.9

14 pgrc/e 021118 78 86 167 0.5 0 0 0 186 3.5 6 6 ,4

15 PGRC/L 021122 95 72 152 0.5 2 0 5 173 4.0 65.916 PGRC/F. 021145 88 72 166 0.5 3 0 0 203 4.5 65.9

17 pgrc/e 021148 93 57 163 1 .0 1° 1

10 180 4.0 6 5 .8

18 Nikolon 88 83 168 1 .5 3 3 10 148 3.5 j 62.5

19 Olog . 90 76 165 1 ,00 I

0 !1

0 I 138 4.0 * 60.9202122

; I Target (std, ck.)S~o7 (std, ck0^S- 7 1 (std, ck,' j

LOCOCOCO 66 I

73 160 <3:? i § I 8 ! 8 I m3 .8 i4 .5 j&A j

90 __8 3... 165 1 .0 j__1. J 0 190. j 6<5.4. •

2 3 2-—

Twenty one different varieties and a local check were included, lfce trial was conducted to find out varieties that oan adapt to different ecological zones of the country mainly to the highland areas* Outi of these varieties the local check was the top yielding variety with yield of 3150 kg/ha followed by an unknown variety (code 18) and o ’-igo sel^ with yield of 2?80 kg/ha and 2750 kg/ha respectively (table 335—15)•

As a matter of fact most of the varieties were so promising that they may be included in the pre-national yield trial in the future*

Generally, the stand was good and more than 85% for all varieties. Considering disease the severity was low for all entries.

335—15 Rape /mastard advance observation nursery (Kulumsa).

233

333— 15 Rape/mastard adavance observation nursery (Kulumsa)•

Coden2

' ------- ---- |Variety J Yield kg /h a

IRank

01 Gullivar (summer rape) Sel j ?500 6

02 | " Gel * 2050 >

12 |03 " Sel3 2220 10

04 Nikolas sel, 1 2050 12

05 01 go sel.. 2750 306 ” sel2 2720 407 11 sel^ 2280 8

08 pgrc/e 21156 2650 509 IAR (Br) 167 2650 5 [10 pgrc/e 167 2380 7 ;11 ,5 021 12 2230 ! 9 j12 « 021129 1880 1413 " 021140 2280 8

14 t; 021138 1720 16

15 " 021139 2170 11

16 " 021144 1750 1517 Unknown 2280 8

18 »t 2780 2

19 Target 1980 13j 20 £>-67 2220 10

[ 2 1 Local check 3150 1

Kean 2319

agronomic data of rape/mastard adavance obaorvqtion nursery (Kulumsa)•

Code

1'!

Vari ety

Stand

<f0 at

harves

ting

______.

_____

Days to insect ! Deseases Lodging $•s0-p•a•H0)w

•■5Q)(!) • ” §> O8 *5—

“ |

w>•

•1—IM

Flowering

Maturity Aphids

*

Downymildev^

Alternar* ria 0 -5

L at e

i ; Shattering

; $

) 01 Gullivai (summer rape) sel^ so 80 145 3 0 0.5 0 5 ; 155 4 .0 60.9 !! 02 Gullivar (summer rape) sel^ 85

67145 3 5 1.5 ! 0 10 I 125 3 .8 59.9 1

* r• 03 Gullivar (summer rape) sel.. 85 67 145 5 2| 1 .0i! 0 8 ! 130 4 .0 63.3 ! j

04 NiKolas sel^ 90 67 142 6 0 2«,0 0 3 165 3.5 60.3 j05 Oli-go sel^ 90 67 142 6 4 2.0 0 0 170 3.5 60.8 j06 Oligo sel2 90 67 142 2 0 1 .0 0 5 175 3.5 60.8

07 sel3 85 67 142 0 3 2.0 15 10 203 3*5 6 2 .4

I 08 pgrc/e 21156 90 89 157 0 2 1.5 0 4 170 4.5 6 6 .7

| 09 IAR (Br) 167 90 69 142 00 1.5 0 0 200 3.3 66*5

j 10 pgrc/e 107 90 87 166 0 0 1.5 10 5 79 3.5 6 6 .0 j

I 11 PGlc/E 021122 90 72 166 0 1 0 .5 5 0 155 4.0 6 5 .5 ij 12 pgrc/e 021125 90 67 156 0 2 0 .5 0 7 206 ; 3.0 6 6 .4 j{ 13 pcrc/u 021140 90 75 159 0

4 °.5 J 0 10 ; W ! _ 4

| 14 PGRCi/E 021138 85 I 82 160 !, 0 0 0.5 0 7 j 182 4.5 6 2.4

I 15p g r c/e 021139 80 82 166 i 0 i 0 ! 0 .5

0 i 5 !192 j 3.5 65.7

j 16 pgrc/e 021144 85 82 159 0 2 00 I 7

195 4.5 65.5

! 17 Unkrown 85 77 159 00

1 .0 0 I 5 I 180 4.5 65.9

13 IT 90 65 166 ! 0 0 II 0 .5 0 150 4.5 6 6 .0

19 Target 90 i 77 142 0 0 1 .0 0 5 i 198 4 .0 62.3

20 S-67 90 82 158 0 0 0 2 3 j 198 5.0 6 6.9

21i

Local check ! ?o 82 168 0 4 ! 0 0 3 I 182 4 . 5 i 6 6 .1

235

These trials were undertaken for the second time at kulurnsa and for the first time at .Psasa and Rohe, oix varieties, one local check and one standard check (Sendafa) were included. The trials were carried out under two conditions i.e0 fertilized and unfertilized trials with four replications each*

There were no significant differences in mean seed yields between entries at any of the sites. At Kulumsa the unfertilized trial produced slightly higher seed yield. Heavy lodging and increased vegetative growth appeared to be the main factors contributing to the lower seed yields under fertilized conditions.

At the other stations the fertilized trials gave more yields than the unfertilized trials. But higher location mean was obtained at Robe from Sandafa, which gave 1*10 kg/ha in the fertilized trial. IAR /Gu / 157 was the best adapted varieties at most locations under unfertilized conditions.

375- 1-6 Nou£ national yield trial (Asasa, Kulurnsa Robe)

375-1, 2, 3 Koug national yield trial with fertilizer ( Asasa, Kulumsa & Robe)

Yield in kg/!h.a at 93 DM*

j Code ! K-1i4

Variety _ LAsasa

1 01 I AH /Ou/ 26 i 330J 02* IAR /Gu/ 72 4101 03 j « « 156 410

j 04 r. n 157 420

°5 M t! 158 47006 i( t( *}66 360

I 07 Sandafa (Std# ck*) 390j 08 Local check 400

I'lean 436LSD % ES

LSD % -CV fo 37F lot 2

s ia e , m 6

Kulumsa ■ j Robe

+

Design RCBFertiliser, kg/h.a (K,P205 ) 23/23

planting date 10 JuneSeeding rate, kg/h.a* 10

Mean yield kg A a

Rank |

I580

600

660650

700

510

530

1100 5

9901 960 ?

970

980

1100

1110

670

670

680

680

720

660

680

620

670

553 2 1

6

4 7

591 1020

135 kg/ka ESm

15.6 13.36 6

RCB RCB with four rep.

23/23 23/232 July 18 July

10 10

IS

OJ

375-4y 51 6 jvoug national yisld trial without fertilizer (Asasa, Kulumsa &

Yield in kg/ha. at 93 % DM

Codei Variety Locationsl £ Asassa Kulumsa

4 3 00 1 IAR /Gu/ 26

________750

02 " •? 7 2 2 3 0 750

03 n tt 1 5 6 4 6 0

OCT\f-

i 04 n 157 4 1 0 > 7 5 0

0 5:«

" 1 5 3 ; 2 5 0 700

! 06 tr 166 4 4 0 7 6 0

° 7 Sandafa (sfcd.ck.) ; 4 0 0 7 1 0

1 06 Local check , 3 7 0 7 0 0

Location mea i 3 8 0 7 4 0

LSD % NS E S

CV fo 4 3 07 1 1 . 6

Flot size, 2m 6 6

Design RCB RCBPlanting date Seeding rate, kg/ha

11 June 2 July 10 10

375-1 Summary of diseases and.. other agronomic data of noug national yield trial with fertilizer ( Asasa)

COK'NOJ

Code Var ie t ie s T la se a se s

P light &

hole 0-5 cc/'■Early j Late £•H

uG) V-

Or!'to

-riQ)OCO

i w

•? •& if

11>-p <T • i *H J 0 3 a> 0

* K i A____.........._ ; S JL____1r------01 IAP. 'GU / 126 83 ™ 0 25 41 0 0 3

! *| 115 2.6I ■:1 .2 i

02 i/n /cry 72 74 1 20 210 I 0 7 ; 114 32.8 ( j 60.8 |

03 Iau /GU/ 156 78 1 25 23 0 0 6 : 125 I 3.1 • j | 60.0 j

04 IAP /GU/ 157 67 1 25 19 0 0 12 | 112 (2.9 1 158.8 |

05 IAR /GU/ 15B 74- 0 25 21 0 ! 0 7 I 114 j 2o3 159-2 |

0 6 I.4R /GU/ 166 79 0 20 21 c ! 0 3 j 116 | 2.9 j oO,Q |

07 Seidafa ( stdo ck .) 75 0 20 21 0 I 0 5 i 110 \ 2 .7 i 5 7 .8 |

j 6 2 . 0 jI Oo J Local check 74 .... ____ 1 . 3 0 . . . 23 0 0 rO - 111 j 2»8 * *v. , ■ «.j<. iw r..< t ~c »j—

375-2 Summary of disease and other agronomy data for noug national yield trial with fertilizer - (Kulumsa)' mmmmm w^mm Jfam— > w — ~i i n iT < ^ » w ia n < r— w i m > t x t t i rhiiin»T» r t i f w i i r f — i r m —i—f ~fc

ONK\(M

375-3 Summary of disease and other agronomy data for noug national .yield, trial with fertilizer (Robe)

Code

. 1

0102030405uc

] 07

O P

Yrieties

iar (GU) 126 IAR (GU) 12

IAR (GU) 156 iAR (GU) 157

(GO) 158 I IAR (GU) 166

jSendafa (std. ck«) Local check

Days to Diseases Lodging fcFlower Maturity Shote | Blight « -

375-4 Summary of diseases and other agronomic data of noug national yield trial without fertilizer (Asassa)1 —-—*-• - mu. / j—■■ i ■■ n wm. t >t.r .»k.» ■ > • -* »■>. m mo • iw, ’"»■ i.-i-i. » m«.ow »««i >.«■ — raw «*■». mhuil ' *

\ 01 i

< 02 <i 03

j 04

» 05

J 06

j 07

I 06

Code j Varieties \ Diseasess2 ‘ {

I

Slight ShoteI A /

- p 0x1 £ hole1

e • H

^ - PW 0-5

Iffi (GIT) 126 Im (01:) 72

i m (a’) 156

IAR (GfU) 157 i m (gu) 15& im (aij) 166

Sendafa (std* ck*) Loual check

J Sterility jLodging

Ct>I W J

-JL. H

a?

J 68 ! 25 0 18

1 70 jJ : 17 I 0 24J *•• 71 : 20 0 18

S fyC ; 16 0 1975 j 10 0 1670 I 1 23 0 16

73 ! ■ 15 0 16

... 68 | __

Early Late •*

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

i 9 j, -n • ^

! * I> ^

£O-P€•H01 iH

TJ0)o ECO IS )

to

Qoo

0 ; 41102 j 2.8 |58.0 ■

0 41 5 101 2 .7 59.2 j

0 * 3 101 2.9 ^5 7 . 4 :0

1j 3 121 3 .1 0 5^«o <

* 1

0J.

j 2 103 2.8 \ 58.0 ;0

2j3 107 2.9 | 60.4 j

01■I

.1 .3 111 2-7 ■i CP 8 >

j •;0_ - S - J .. 2.8_JLiSMJ

2^2

315-5 3 i J i L Ll a£i£L-°J'A1Pr a^roiiotBicCic'.ta for nouf, national .yield trial without fertilizer (Y. alurnsa)

rCode Varieties Days to

-p ttf) •h | -p *w i

flowerj MaturityDiseases

Shotehole

Blight%

~ — I.Powd *

je y j i mildew

Sterility

%

"j Lodging i Late

1 1co ^L . ■_____

0-2 I

i01 LAE (GU) 126 98 94 165 1.3 25 2.5 2 .2 8402 IAR (GU; 172 99 95 165 1.5 28 3 o6 2.7 6503 IiiR ( GU) 156 100 94 165 1 .6 29 j 3.4 4.0 8104 CAR (GU) 157 98 S3 105 1.7 26 I 3.7 1.5 8005 I/iR (GU) 158 100 93 165 1 »4 29 3.6 2.2 8806 IiR (GU) 166 100 94 ! 165 1.6 28 ! 3.6 _

1.7 8507 j Sendafa (std. ck.) 100 94 164 1.5 25 3.7 1.7 ! 7908 Local check 100 , 90 ] 165 1 .8 |. . 23 1 . 3 . 7 j__ 1-6 ___ 8?

r f......... !a.o.■M

•Huo

■8 ^$

-p'S•H

OJ

X •bord r-4

O «(0 G •w to - g

00 •0 rH

:

375-6 Summary of disease and other aKrongnio data fcr noua national yield trial with out fertilizer (Robe)

7*.Code Varietiesm2

h _ L101

J c2

I 03

‘ 0 4

05

0 6

07

0 8

IAR (GfCJ) 126

IAR (uU) 72 IAR (GU) 156 IAH (GU) 157 IAR (au) 158

IHR {:■]) 166

Sendafa (std. ck.) Local died-:

Days to \ maturity

DiseasesShotehole0-5

■— r

Lodging ° jc

Latet*on•rl

43IJL-.,1

— I

>

9 ; ] r ................

O11 0

• &.L)

t: rc f, 0) •

1

1; G> a *

f t i

W

i °

to |

! ?|

•H 1 0 O0 ) .

1 ° j1 ^! jx |

______ . J „ ____ . M1

3 14 3 3 2 1 110 ?3.4 '64.O i3 ; u 3 6 3 j 106

i* 3.3 65.6 ?

3 ) 14 4 O .75 43

116 13.7 : 1 -* j 1 . j j3

ji 9 9 41 > 89 13.6 f ' 9 •-O . £ I

3 i 9 4 1 3 )<106 13.4 6 5 .4

3 i 14 5 4 3 i109 13.5 65.42.3 17 3 7 4 1

i 102 j 3 31 J 0 D 6 1 . 1

j ______ 2 1 . ____4... ___________ 2 ,________ __j ___ 3.±_2§LJAO. ...< 6 4 . 8 •!

The t r i a l was undertaken fo r the f i r s t t in e at Kulumsa* Thirteen

v a r i e t i e s were te s te d a l l in a l l .

Regarding y i e l d PGRC/E015518 proved to be the top y ie ld e r with

y i e l d of 680 kg/ha follow ed by PGRC/E0155^3 and PGRC/E19 which

gave 660 kg/ha and 650 kg/ha r e s p e c t iv e ly .

Generally speaking the stand was good and was more than JCffo fo r

a l l v a r ie t ie s , , However, la t e lodging was severe on a l l the

v a r i e t i e s (Table 375-7)* ‘This may be one of the fa c to r s fo r low

y i e l d of the v a r i e t i e s . There was no s ig n i f ic a n t d if fe re n c e between

the treatment means#

375-7 TTong pre-nation? 1 jyield trial Ifulumsa*

375-7 Kouff pre-ns.tional_ yield trial (Kulmnsa^

i (jode

r ~

j Variety j

(Yield kg/ha |Rarik

01 ! pgrc/e 01551o 680 102 » 015519 650 303 31 540 11

04 35 580 805 36 j 540 j10

j 06 j

07 3IAR (GU) 351 520 ] 12

I GRC/E 015583 ; 660 208 | 82 j 6 l0 : 1 6

I 09 i 10 •

89 j 600 : 3

640

792 5 I

11 96 j 1

560j

0 1/12 Sa&dafa 640 413 Local check 480 13 1

2

Mean LSD %

C.V

Plot size, m'DesignPlanting date Fertilizer, kg/ha (NP?0^) Seeding rate, kg/ha

592 NS

14 c 1#6

RCB

4 -July 23/23 10 '

The objective of these trials was to testify ‘ a daptability and

productivity of different grasses, legumes and root crops at different

sites for fodder production.

Three observation trials were conducted on grass, legumes and root

crops at Kulumsa and 4sasa stations in 1982/83 crop season* The plots

were fertilized with nitrogen and phosphate fertilizers -t planting time.

Regular follow-ups were m?de to each station to see the agronomic

charaterstios and genergl performance of the crops* Net. plots were

harvested to get comperable yield figunes*

Pasture and Forageif 100 Observation Trials

4100 - 1/82 Observation of Different Introduced Forage Crops (Xulumsa)

Nine different forage crops were tested for their addptability and productivity ~t Kulumsa station. It wo.s observed that Sudax St6 , Jajnalong M and Fribo E81 performed quite well. On the other hand no substantial yield was obtained from scaton park and straw bedry.

2k9,

.1100 - 1/82 Observ tion Trials cm_Different For-^e Crops (Kulumsa)

Variety! Herbage Y ie ld kg/ha

G.M. *DM

,96333

: J e m - l o n g I I

Seaton Park Htraw Bedry 3udax f-T 6

J.Sa.ti-Va Var. Uerds | 19OOC

-l.Satiy 1 Vo.r. Vestibenda I 19333

Er Fordia TS.81 143333g?riba E. 81

169333 I 17.1

Juno 81

:56667 i\33000

19.1 25.6

22.2

8.6

8.99.9

DM

11856

18400

-1964

4292372750433267

, Days to

>.ergene

St ?.nd

10101111

1010

10

99

100

100

100

100

100

95959595

Days to j

Heading

146

110

125125836850

Sinr;le F lo t r e sign

F'lot s iz e

F e r t i l i z e r

FIanting Date

Seeding R-1 e Gp?cing

6m100 kg/he DAP at planting13/7/83

20 kg/ha40 cm. between rows

250

4100 - 2/82 Observation of Different Pasture ?nd Forage; Crops (.Asassa)

The main objective of this trial was to select the best promising pasture and forage crops under \sasa soil end climatic conditions*

4b it w?s observed from the previons AKDU reports most of the recommended fodder crops were not tested under Asasa enuirommental conditions for the last years*

Because of this fact fifteen annual < nd peremina3 * fodder crop species were planted at;Asassa. to observe general performance and productivity of each crop*

Comparatively higher DM yields were obtained from Vicia Lasy e arpa Var. Lana, ftvrena Satina V>ar» Lamp ton, and Lamptcn/Lana mixture.

>£251

4100 - 2/82 Observation Trjal on For^e Crops ( Asassa)

I| Varietyi

Herbage

’ G-.M.

Yield k

DM

g/ll-.m

Stand

JLDays to Heading

tiiForage oat - Lampton • 21450 24.2 5191 85 102ii Forgge vetch - lana, 54400 12.6 6854 35 -j 0-?t/Vicis» mixture 29083 23.5 6835 Oo 1041 Pudan grass (ARDU) 7133 22.9 1634 60 120; Columbus grass (ARDU) 7500 23.5 1763 75 120jLolium perenne■ - - 60 -’ Cocks foot grass - - - -)! Phalaris tuberosa ■ - - -; Melilatus altissinvus i 1000 18.4 1840 40 -; Belichos 1 j<bl?b * - - - 45 -jMedics Jemalong 4450 16.7 743 15 -I Medics Harbinger “ - - 10 -j Coloured geinea _ - ■ - - -;Rhodes grass _ - - - -Alfalfa hunter TJiver

fi- - - 25 -

1 iit ■■ im-rr-mr r Mi n. i M„ „ . _..... . .

Plot size =Fertilizer r=Planting date «Seeding rate »Spacing =

2 2 Grass, 10m , net 6m100 kg/ha BAP at planting11 June*b per recomendation for each crop 20 cm and 40 cm for grass and legumes respectively*

4100 - 3/82 Observation of Lupin as Compered to other Fodder Legumes (Kulumsa)

Tjb 1101“ps Ir-.Mac:ot m c i? desypaepa. ^nd melilp.tus altiss^mis were used for comparison with lupine* The objective of the trial was to see the yield -potential of lupiaswith in this comperison*

Generally agronomic chararterstics of lupine were quite well*>: DM* yield was very low as composed to others*

255-,

4100 - 3/82 Observation of Lupin -s Compered bo other Fodder Legumes /i-ulums_a)

VarietyHerb ag

C-.M.

e Yield Kg/ha

DM i Dk

Days to "^nergene

Stand4

— ■ — | Days to Flowering

7jDolichos lablab 16133 16 .5 | 2662 10 50 115Lupinus termis 24533 10 .1 ! 2478 10 75 82

Vicia dasy<^opa - lana 66100 13.7 j 9056 12 70 114Melilotus --itissimus 24000 17.9 I 4296 f

J____ _

0y 75 131

L.S.D . 51 1219 kg/ha2239 V,

C.V. 11.9 d/

Design = RCB 4 reps.Plot size = 10m2 , . 2 ni'X om “

Fertilizer 100 kg/ha I) AT at Plant ingPlanting Date= 9 /7/82

reeding Rate = AS recommended for eachSpacing = 40 cm b/n rows

The objective of t. is trial was to see the possibilities of establishing different fodder legumes by over sowing for the betterment of the natural grassland of lovier altitudes*

The trial was designed in split-plot v/here the main treatments were zero tillage and minimum tillage gr. 1 the sub-plot-treatments were two tropical grasses snd 8 legumes*

Prom 1981/82 croping season it was observed that over sowing on nonr- tilled land is not promising at dryland. On the otherh?nd few tropical legumes such as mi cr op til1 ium a.tropurpureum ver - siratr 0, medicago truneutula v.?r» j^mn.long where firly germinated on minimum.'..-;' tilled' plots.In 1982/83 only micropij^iliumatroprupureum var. siratro shamed quite well performances ^nd the bot-nical composition was higher as compared to others#

4120 - 1 /82 Natm*al Grsss 1 and Improveme n t b£_0veSojdng£Wiera)

Minimum

Tillage

f ' ith

I'o Floghing

4120 - 1/8 2 lf'tur-1 Grassland Improvement /by Over j3ov:ing ( Oh era)

V ar i e t y / Treatment

: chl or is gay ana.:3h. gayana + stylosinthes Ch. gayan- -1- J&fmrloii-g-

h.o g?yana + Desmedium Chgayana + M. ?tropurpunen •I’aricum col or 0.turniT. color tiiiii + sytylosanthes jp. colora.tiun + jmelong F , coloratum + Desmediuni j P .. color.''•turn 4- E. atropurpii-raun

Ch. gay anaCh. gay an-- + st ylosanthes

1• Ch. gay ana + jom-long j Ci • gryana + DesmediumI Ch. say ana M. at-r£purpuramn I?. Coloration1

| P. coloratum + st ylos -nthes ?. color at urn + J imalong;*P. coloratum -t- desmodiurn ", color-turn + K. atVopurpur.eum

Herb-ge Yield kg/ha Da+e of Bot.Composition1 from

__LQ.Q.0_op.:•

G.M.!__ .___ „

< I DM. | DM Harvest

i 7250 45.6 i 3306 27/ 10/82 - i' 8750 { 4 6 .2 ’ A043 t;

"| 10500 40.9 4^95 '• 80

! 1000 41 oO | 4100 •: -5550 50=3 , 2792 ;;

j 8550 41,5 j 3548 tt

| 6900 46.9 3236 c; -* 5250 43.8 ; 2300 t-, -j 6300 50.2 ! 3163 - Ij10250 I

45-9 ‘1! 4705'• 20

i.".....; 6500

j

42.9 278*9 27/10/82 _19750 42.9 I 8473 -6500 4 2 .9 I 8473 ]

- ;9500 3 7.0 | 3515 [. _7500 3 3 .2 j 24-90 41

A 800 40.61 1>49 ;-

9000 39-7 j 3573 _1330 43.4 i 57726550 34-5 j 22608300 30.4 !

!12523 * * 21

■ . — --I

Design = oplit plotFlot siae = 20 mFertiliser^ 100 kg/li; D 'F

Planting date= 18 July 982

{ oving ! ethod= Br.-id easting

2 neps. j net 2 m2

**31 - Fertilizer trials on Rhodes grass (Kulumsa)

Trials on the effect of different levels of fertilizers and time of topdressing on Rhodes grass were continued this year. As it was indicated in the previous reports the objective of the trials was to determine the optimum level of fertilizers and time of topdressing on the productivity of herbage and seed yield of Rhodes grass#

Herbage and seed yields of Rhodes grass were increased as the rate of nitrogen fertilizer increased. Qiute higher yields were obtained upto 138 kg/ha N (300 kg/ha urea) for both herbage and seed production.

On the other hand as time of topdressing was delayed up to mid of July higher seed and Dm yields were obtained. Generally, yield per hectar was low due to the age of the ley*

1/74 Fertilizer -trial on Rhodes grass (Kulumsa)

Fertilizer level urea kg/ha

Seed yield kg/ha

0 24-4100 52.3200 72.5300 92.7400 93-8

Design - RCB 4 reps LSD 5%Plot size - 12 ^Fertilizer atplanting - 200 kg/ha DAPPlanting date - 1973Seeding rate - 10 kg/haMethod of planting — Broadcast

CV.

- 49ha/ha- 69 »- 39.7 $

258

-{£311-4/74 Stage of cutting _& level of N top dressing on Rhodes grass

(Kulupsa)

TreatmentsMain plot Sub plot

_ • j Y ield kg/hai G.m >

Cutting stage Eg/ha N _____ I Dm harvest JCut at hay stage 0 2167 35.9 ] 778 j 16/11

1201 i " ] J 1445 ]A

n 40 3717 . 32,:tt 80 3958 * 36,54tt 120 4500 : 34-7

| 36.7• 1562

Cut at sillage stage 0 | 2625 | 963 3/11

40 5208 j 34.5 ! 1797 ..

80 5475 j 27.5j1506 ..

120 5483 | 30.8 ] 1689Cut at grazing stage 0 1500 j 35*9 j 539 18/10

40 4333 1 3 m i 30.5

| 1348 ]Ti1

80 4&33 j 1474 "120

i £ l Lj 3 5.9 j 1571 | " i

Design Plot size Planting date Seeding rate Fertilizar at planting Planting method

- Split plot - 6 m2

April 1973- 10 kg/ha- 200 kg/ha DAP- Broadcast

Cutting stage N levelSE 1228 kg/ha 35 kg/haLSD 5$. NS " ITSCV. 70.0 38.0

Interact 250 kg/haNS

259

*+31'-5/74 Fertilizer trial on_Rhod.es grass (Kulumsa)

i Treatment Yield kg/h jI kg/ha i g» ] I Dm f I Height

i ” jT '|______I Dm

fi

_ .\ 1762

*1 W —r n-r-----

L

0 i 6500 [ 2 7 . 1 5 0t| 69 0 1 9438 30.3 | 2 8 6 0 ; 57[ 1 3 8 0 i 8813 280 2 i 2 4 8 5 60

I °46 \ 5083 31.0 I 1 5 7 6 [ 44

[ 69 4 6 ’’ 11813 i 26.0 '' 3071 77t138 46 ? 13458

[ 6250

, 26.0 | 3499\ 3121

1 79

0 92 [ 34.1 51

69 92 * 16270 | 30.0 j 488 87

138 I 18333 L_2Ii2„ 1 ft

Design - Factorial 32 iPlot size - 20 mr net 12 in‘

Fertilizer at planting - 200 lcg/ha DAPPlanting date - 1973Seeding rate - 10 kg/haSpacing - BroadcastingHeading date - 6/10/82Harvesting date - 7/10/82

SELSD %

1fCV .

- 200 kg/ha-412 "- 560 "- 1 6 .2 i

*+31-8/74 The effect of delay cleaning cut & N-top dressingOn Rhodess (K ulum sa)

Tra.r iety /r?rea^ment Ferbage yield ]rer1 O,*

Date of cleaning GM ,,,fDM DM& N top dressing. "^2

a Contnal June 17 1027 32.5 334h it 1T 1770 35.0 620

c " 29 1827 37.3 681

d July 28 3427 30.0 1028

e Aug. 3 4442 29»5 1310f S! 10 4438 28.3 1256

g 18 5808 32.7 1899

h !! 24 5770 31.0 1789i ■ 31 5885 27.6 1624

Design - RGB 4 reps2 2 Plot size gross - 20 m net 12m

Fertilizer at planting - 200 kg/ha DAFTop dressing — 200 Urea

Planting date - 1973Seeding rate - 10 kg/haSpacing - Broad casting

- -7 261

4311 - Fertilizer Trials on Forage Oati-v

The objective oi t is tri -1 wfs to know the optimum rate of fertilizers for different soil types at different sites to get higher herbage ~nd seed yield of forage ort.

As it was c served most of ti,e middled higher altitudes of /'rsisoils need phosphorus nd nitrogen fertilizers as comp-red to thelower ltitudes of the region. And it was quite important to knowthe rate \nd optimum combination of these two fertilizers (N PJ),-) forM 2 5higher yields of forage and seed.

The tri-1 was designed in a factorial with three replications t three location Kulums', Robe =>nd Bekoji. Only net plots were harvested for for .ge when 50$ of the plots st-rt. heading -nd for seed when the whole plot was re=dy for h-rvesting.

Generally, higher forage yields were iecorded at Kulumsa. from all treatments as compared to other stations. "nd significant differences were observed between treatments. Comparatively lower yields were obt ined ~t Bekoji rese-rch station. No seed was harvested at Robe.

311 “ 1 2 .Irija on C .t (Robe )ojvorvj irir -m —*- — ...--- ■■■— ...... ™ . . — . — - — H- .. - u.

1I1 i ! I

iS•H0 Ti CO 0‘ r? ■.__

j W j 1

1 *Hj; 5 .‘ I£ 5fertilizer Level

kg/ha

K . P2C5

' , ..Herb GM

j

/; e Yield_ kg/hg; f-DM DM

I

]q

i

L___1 82

S’•H O•xi -pto0 p W

IS Sr•H, w 'zi > >5 J. TO <D(=• K

; 0! i25 I <hTO0

[I 5

I V 21 rH Ov—'Tl•H

;I ••T4 ft

| S:

c0

0 I ! -p j i ^

•H<d ; WI

0 0 19650 j 1 9 .2 : 3773 3 ' 1 f c 108 J.7 io7 j 0.8j; 82 j

23 0 12600 i 18.4 | 2318 85 4/ 11/82 ! 109 5 j 1.6 1.6 | 0.8 79 i46 0 i 20700 I 20.3 ! 4202 87 2/ 11/82 107 5 j 1.7 1.7 | 0.9 91

)ii

69 0 20775 23.5 4882 87 5/11 110 c9 i 1.4 1.5 | 0.7 840 46 19000 ! 24.2 45? 8 88 28/10 102 5

i1.8 1 06 I 0.7 1030*3O 46 22925 18 .4 ; 4218 92 28/10 102 4 . oO 1.5 ! 0 .7 117

i46 46 21375 29.4 6216 92 28/10 102 4 1.8 1.5 ! 0 .9 12469 46 32100 ! 26.0 8346 93 27/10 101 1 .8 1.3 0 .9 126

0 69 19675 ’ 2 3.7 4663 90 29/10 103 5 1.8 1.8 0 .9 I 1102j 69 22000 |! 2 5 .7 5654 93 29/10 103 5 1-5 1.3 1 .0

I118

46 69 30175 : 3 1 .0 9354 93 26/10 100 4 1.9 1.8 1 .0 i1 13669 69 29150 I 2C.7 8366 95 26/10 100

i

5 1.8 1.0 1 .0:1 135

0 92 21725 i 34.5 7495 J92 27/10 101 5 1.6 1.8 n P U. 0 1 11223 92 26175 j 29.4 7695 93 27/10 10" 5 1 .5 1.5 0 ,7

111 12346 92 25368 1 28.0 7103 ;93 26/10 100 4 1-5 I 1.4 0.8 ! 126

09 92 27975 3 1 .4I

8784

i92

jI27/10

I101

J

I5 :

J

I1.3 1.7 1.0 134

0 U**“J• esign = :ctorial 4" (3 reps) 'or both "actors InteractionPlot size grass 4 12 M F'et 4 m2 :iE 525 kg/hc 1050 "kg /hafertilizer at Planting* 's shown above Lrx 5/ 1071 2142PI nting Date 19 July 1982 vf- 1444 2888Seeding Hate = 100 kg,/ha AL* V 20.9Pp-cing = 20 cm. between rows

4311 -

"ertilizer Levelkg. 'ha ; GM

N r2c5Ii

0 0 : 2387523 0 I 32625

46 0 j 27150

69 0 33500

0 46 34175

23 46jJ 34025

46 46 I 33950

69 40 292750 0 29375

23 69 33900

46 69 2677569 69 35500

0 92 3210023 92 29875

46 92 29375

69 92 28025

DesignPlot size grossFertilizer at plantingPlanting datecceding r;-.te“ p -.cing

2/82 Fertilizer gfeial on- p- t (Bekoil)

j: ~c 12 m

toriT.1 4 3repsT.T_X miVOt

Is shown above 26 June, 1982

100 kg/ha20 cm between rows

'"or both factors SE 775 kg/ha LSD 5?' NS »c.v 21.9 •

{ » ' x i i

; ■ vs.

Lz

ys

to

Heading

_Le•O

H. r*Hi *3

j -CJ; -H 1

1

! §

f DM ! DMi1j

i H; cr. -P; co

<MOH-l

* i •-P .M El 0 E c o ; ca 0O cthJ CA li

ddle cm

. I "d' *H

ft 5•HEh

sun•H• £

20.1 j 4799 87 ‘ 1-3 4 .50L ..... j 2 .21 j 2 .2 0 .8

I------~~;

11421.2 ; 6917 87 112i 3 49 j 2.1 j 2.1 0.7 13020 0 2 5484' 88 114 4 49 : 2.1 j 2.1 0 .8 : 12120o0 : 6700; 87 111 3 52 j 4 .1 I 2-3 0 .9 14221.5 1 7348j 87! 1091 1 3 54 2.1 0 ' -• 0 .8 13422 .2 ! 7554 87 110 . 3 51 ! 2 .2 I 2.1 0 .8 128 |22.3 ! 7571 92 ! 110 :i 3 54 ' 0 0 j ! 2 3

i 0.7 13022.4 ! 6558 92 | 111 3 49 0 3 - • j i r *4 0 .8 13122c 1 649 2;

1 90 111 3 53 2.4 I 2.4 ! 0 .9 12322 06 7614i 66 111 4 54 2.4 j 2.1 ;0 .8 13921.6 5783! 92 110 i 3 53 2.6 2.6 1. 1 136I f .4 5 887) 93 109 3 55 2.3 2.1 i 0.9 , 145r, O<-?-• c 7126! 92 112 3 53 2.4 2 .2 i 0 .8 14121.3 63S3 : 93 110 3 54 2 .2

i2 .2 i0.9 138

22.9 6727 66 109 i 3 49 2 .2 2 .0 j 0 .8 13022.7 6362

J 5 !

110 | 3 51___ I

2 .2 - ______

0.9 j 132

Jnt er ac tion1575 kg/NS

?eed Y ie ld

F e r t i l i z e r s kg/ha r'eed Y ie ld kg/ha Stand '/ ; !

2t)k

4311 - 2/8? ’Fertilizer Trial on ?or^,e Oat (Peko.ji)

N p2°5

0 0i

2900

23 0 i 24504 6 0 j 337569 0 j 3250

0 46 ij 330023 4.6 ii 350046 46

I| 345069 4 6 1 4300

0 69 272523 69 ■)

I 342546 69 1] 355069 69 1 5500

0 92 1II

26 7523 92 ! 3-3046 92 ji; 427569 92 <j

1__ L

4100

Design 2Factorial 4

Plot size = NetFertilizer = As shown r-'boveFlrnting Drt e+ 26 June 198?.Spacing 20 crfe Between rows

85 113

85 112

90 114

85 111

85 109

85 110

90 110

90 111

90 111

65 111

90 110

95 109

90 112

95 110

65 109

95 110

_<T .. >f._ — T

InteractionSE 421kg/ha .kg/haLSD 5? 859 •• ......... NS

if 1158

c.v.f, 2 9.5

invo<M

-TEunmsaJ

Fertilizer Level1: r/ /h .0 ^Uerbage Yield kg/ha

'iI

0 d)0 I ; --.LEAF _ +3

|i ^ 1[ a

T ~

}Ti1 •

|•

I ~ ‘"■wl

Ti*-0/ GM ?DM DM t +> cG) * \sd1 0 fcnJJ i*T

00 nJ

1• e!' T> 1 E

1 5'"•e< rH0 ji w ■<& •H (*—» ! : 0 I ^ • H fij

N................P2°5......

>>! j *

$ ; §11 CO 1

CO xJ. 75 > >0 CO • 1 0 ’ p w j<H Cc ' ) , J

i s?31

aMI ro ! ^

i '—•1, Tj • *H! s Cm

! g Height ! cI -H

\ 9! 0! *

>-*n to 1 M CD ! CO

0 0 58250 18 ,8 10951 ! 7 1100 ~ (89 j 3 j 53 j 1.6 * 1 .8 i 0 .9 •127

.. « ,i,..■—<«: 75: 1900 I

23 0 78075■| 17.7 |13819 II j 89 3 •521

1.5!1.7 j 1. 111921! r.1

• 1 1475 i

46 0 •7725076175

15*1 11665It r I ! 89 1 69 : 2.2] 2.4 I j

I 1.3!125 88‘ 1625 !69 0 20.0 15235 j i . 90 : 3 1

: 52 1.4] 2.0 , 1.1 ; 125 88! 1925 j0 46 70750 16.0 11320 t J; 8Q ’ 3 ! 59 ! 2.5i 2.3 1 .5:123| 73: 1425 |23 46 62570 13.3 8322 t!I j ^ 3 j 58 ■ 2.6 1#9 1.5'131 6?I 1725 j46 46 6^425 ' 1 6 .7 -10592 I tiI 9° 3 i 54 1 7 i. ( j 2.0 1,5 j 13 0i 78; 1950 *69 4 6 63675 15.8 10061 Ij It f 1

90 ; 3 ; 6 0 1 1 . 7i

2 .2 1.41127 77, 1700 \

0 69 66325 18 .2 12071 i j !4 ; 89 j 3 53 '1.6 1 7 1. 1 1.2 1127 53 142523 69 69325 17.3 11993 H 89 !

• i 3 57 1.8 2.1 1.3 134 77 1675 ’. 46 69 99250 16*4 16277 | t: 89 4 53; 1.9 1.7 1.0 129 68 1325

69 69 73000 19.0 13870 ! »; 9° ' 60 j 1 <,7 2.5 1.2 134 82 1 700 j0 92 66500 i6.0 '10640 t» 89 | 4 6 0 !

.1.8 j 1.5 1.0 132 68j 1325 :

23 92 |67250 17 .6 ;11836 89 ! 4 58 j1.9 !i

2.1 1.1 136 c *) oj 140046 92 75250 1 5 .5 !11664 H 89 i 4 I

I

5311.8 | 2.0 1.7 132 83 162569 92 1 j70000 1 7 . 5 j 12250 89 | 4 j

6 0 !1.6 ! 1.8 1.0 130] 85 1650 j— . . . . . . . . . . j.—.- — ----------- -1----------- ___________ L. ______L

Design Plot size Fertilizer -t Planting DateSeeding Rate"peeing

Faoterial 4 ’ - 3 reps = Net (m c

Plantings s shown above8 July 1982

100 kg/ha - CC ci a between lows

For both factors600 kg/ha

LSD % 12241# 1650

C.V 1 2.4 (herb -v;e)21c 3 (sunC.)

Interaction 1050 kg/ha (herbage) 2142 tf 2878

deeding r«te trial on for >ge oat w?s conducted Bekoji station. The objective of the tri- 1 was to ftftow' optimum seeding rate of forage oa.t higher herbage and seed yields.

The trial was designed in • complete block ;vith four replications*2 2The plot size was gross 6 m and net 4 m • The seeding rates were 50

■ ■75» 100, 1 2 5, 150, 175 =nd 200 kg/h^. Fertilizer orate nss ^okg/haLAP at planting,

deeding wis done by hand ~nd harvesting wa s conducted a.t half heading stage (50f heading)„ ‘Hie green matter yield whs weighed immediately after harvest# Ho lodging w^s observed, half of the grsss plot size was left for seed*.

Generally higher yields were recorded as the seeding rateincreasccL Stptsticalbly significant yield differences were obtained ^mong treatments.. The highest seed yield w*s obtained :&<t 125 kg/haseeding rate.

4312 — Seeding Kate Trial on 7or age Oat

4312 - 3/82 Seeding Rate Tri?.I on .For?ge bat (Bekoji)

Seed Production

Seeding Rate kg/ha

5075

100

125150175200

| Seed Yield kg/h 9.

X- -___: 3852

: 3955; 3642

4582 I 4324 I 3999 ! 4285

St-?nd f ! Days to : Maturity

80

859095 95

100

100

180

. Height in crn.

: 139 t

i 151 j 158

| 158• 150

j 154 ! 152

Designplot size = Fertilizer = Planting date Spacing

RCB 4 reps LSD % = 1523net 4m2 1# = 2087150 kg/ha DAP o,t P Inn ting CoV f = 10.626 June 1982.20 om. Let wee-' rows

4312 - 8/82 Seeding fig'be Trial .on. Q?t ..(Bekoji)

Herbag e__ Production

! Seeding Rate Herb?ge Yield kg/hp Deyr to Heading Heightkg/ha m fjM,V.. » T

'Rel St^nd 4 Flowring cm.

50 37875 22.7 8598 91 80 109 13975 44331 20.7 9218 97 85 109 150

100 40688 23.3 9480 100 90 109 150125 42063 25.5 107^6 113 95 109 150150 40750 28.3 11532 122 95 109 149175 40063 21.6 8654 91 99 109 153200 44469 26.9 11962 126 100 109 151

— ......... ___ ......-___r_

Design = RBC2

Plot size net = 4m

Fertilizer at pi nting ? 150 kg/ha

• of DAP ( 18,4 6)Planting drte = 26 June 1982, ,i X

Date of harvesting 15/10/83

Seeding rate = rts shown cbove

■SFJ 7 5 0 kg/ha

LSD % 1575 !f1 i NS

cv 10.56 f

Sp ac m g = 20 cm between rows

Seven forage oat varieties were tested at six locations (Dhera, Kulumsa, Robe, Bekoji, Mera.ro and Asassa) „

The objective of this trial was to select top yielding varieties under different ecological zones. At Bekoji and Robe stations all the varieties were tested with and without the use of fertilizers*

*>315 - Forage Oat Variety Trial

The result indicates that higher DM yields were obtained when fertilizer was used® Relatively low DM yields were recorded at Dhera station as compared to the otjter stations,,

315.' - 1/82 O^t .Variety Trial (phera)

Variety

CI 8235 CI 8237 CI 8251

CI 8257

JasariL^mphonGre^lgner

HerbagGM

s^Yield^ k i DM

j > 1* j stand *

Days to Beading Height cm.

j ... --

13906 30 .8 4?83 | 71 98 499344 29.3 2738 j 66 99 39

10883 27.3 2971 \ 68 99 3511313 30.7 3473 I 73 96 416445 3 1.2 2011 j 70 99 409945 29.2 2904 I 69 96 40

10813 32.0j

34^0 i 66 *1

97 48

Design = RCB 4 reps f'ffi 363 kg/h?

Plot siae « Net 4 JT1 LSD 5/ NS

Fertilizer at Planting = 100 kg DAP ( 18/ 46) C.V. 49.3$

Planting Date * 1 1th July 1982Seeding Rate = 100 Kg/ha.

Spacing = 20 cm. between rows

4315 - 2/82 forage Oat Variety Trial (Eultmsa)

Variety

Cl 8235 Cl 8 2 3 7

ci 8251 ci 8257J as.axi

LrmptonGrey^lger

: __ Average LeafHeading! Harvest ':Yo,

L--- 1-Xsml__}.... Lqn)J>. cm*_S5

9 5

9 5

9 5

9 5

9 5

9 5

Length [ -iidtriHeight j lodging |____1

48

51564 5

4.85856

2.12e02 . 2

1.61.81 . 9

1*9

118

116

125

117 106

118

120

8 5

5 5

1540

.Design Plot sise Fertiliser Planting date Seeding rate Pp ?.cing

PlGB 4 reps ?I-iet 4 m

100 kg/ha DA? (1 8,46) 9th July, 1982

100 kg/ha 20 cm. rows.

SELSD % CV„ $

1620 kg/ha HS1 8 . 3 7

272

'

4315 - 3 /8 2 Forage O.rfc Variety Trig,! (Robe)

VJith Fertilizer

Yield kg/ha Days to LEAFV ariety i 5t nd tfc Width Height ‘Lodging

GM DM DML .

1 Heading..... - i _ . . Harvest.

!To. Ease Middle ' Tip icm- Ji %

ci 8235 28000 33.3 8324 90 110 112 r ' 1^7 1.5 ’ 0.9I

105 j 0CI 8237 34150 28.0 9562 90 108 112 4 1.6 1.8 j 0.9 100 j 0ci 8251 33750 24.6 8303 90 111 112 4 1.S 1.9 !: 1.0 95 ! 0ci 8257 33000 4t.6 13662 90 104 105 4 1.8 :

1.8 j 1.0 150 I 0Jasari 35000 21.5 7525 90 103 105 4 2.1 2.0 ( 1.0 90 J 0Lamp ton 26825 24.4 6545 90 94 96 4 1.7 1.5 j 0.9 80 I 0Greyalger 24150 41*5 10271 90 94 96 4 1.8 1.8 |0 .9 0 0

i___ _________ _____ -- J[ I

Design plot size Fertilizer planting Bate Seeding Hate ■;.'p s.cing

RCB 4 reps Net 4 rn2150 kg/ha. DAP - 1 planting 19th July, 1982

100 kg/ha20 ci7:* between rows

S3 883 Icg/iiaLSD 1856 •'*

1$ '254S C.V $ 12.1

11 Variety1

Herbage Yield kg/harn¥J

Dr’ys to Herding

Days tc Harvest

! r ‘ " *

GM $ DML m

Et nd f

, , --- . . . •-90

No. of Le&£

Base "idth Middle Jidth Tip idth Heightcm.

ci 8235 25500 34.0 8670 111 112 ~ 1.5 1-7 0.9 80

CI 8237 27188 26.0 7069 90 111 V’2 5 1.8 1.8 1.0 80

CI 8251 30048 23.0 6910 95 1 ’2 112 5 1.4 1-5 0.9 95CI 8257 26719 29.6 7909 93 102 104 1.5 1.7 1.0 105

Jasar i. 24419 30.1 7350 88 103 104 4 1.6 1.5 0.8 95I -rnpton 22413 25.1 5626 90 109 112 5 1.7 1.8 1.0 100

Grey .lger 23931. ..

30.2 7227___

90

____ _109 112 | 5

. ____1 . ...J1.5 1.7 1.0 90

Design = ROB 4 reps 2Plot siae-- 4 m

planting Date =Seeding "i.te ''pacing

19th July, 1 9S2

100 kg/hr20 cm betv. ' rows

LSD %

Ct V

884 kg/h;NS17.24 f

4315 5/8? V -t r_iety Trial (Bcicojij

Tiith Fertilizer

I - Xie ld fe/haw•

I toV a rie ty t | f t and f I Heading ! Harvest Ko. f

_ GM .< DM

....DM i•

1 1 1

CI 8?35 57750 t9 20974 80 103 103 5 iCI 8" 37 580C0 20 1 16OO ’ 85 103 103

4 !ci 8251 55250 22 12155 85 103 1031

4 1ci 8257 53500 19.9 11449 90 108 109 * iJ : s a r i 57825 17.0 j 13375 90 109 109

4 !lompton 54188 21..0 9212 90 111 113 4 ;G reyalger 53283 2C„0 10657 90 111 113 4 ■

i Len

4'

5C

5:3£4244

44

HOB 4 reps Diet 4

DesignPlot size =Fertilizer t PI nting = 150 kg/ha DAPFl'nting Date = 26th June 1982

Seeding R?te = 100 kg/h?'c'p cing = ? C c m . between rovs

SELSD 5?cv

inCNoo

Variety

CI 8235

CI 8237

CI 8251

CI (.257 Jasari L?mpton Grey:lgres

43 l'3 - 0/82 i-at v -.i it: L,/ Lr .1. t* j. ( Beko;i i )

'■ithout Fertilizer

Herb

GM

51418! 49875 52008

44918

44958 45418 43293

friM

17.222.0

15 .0

2 1 .0

DM

18.0

19.6 17.0 j 8841

92559776

; 7726

9891

8629

9092

tand fDays to Ee-rding

Leaf Wo, Base 'idth

._

Fiddle ' idth Tip ’‘idth Eeight j cm

80 103 4 1c 6 1.7 0.7 111 !

76 100 4 2.0 2.1 1.0 114 |78 rOOV-----------------------------------

4 1-9 2.1 0.8 120 j79 108 4 1.7 1.7 94 !76 103 4 2.0 2.1 CO•0 .

11176 103

31.8 1.8 1.3 123

78 105. ...... ....

4 2.1 1.9 1.-4 120

DesignPlot size Ket = Planting Date = deeding ^-te =Spicing

P,CE 4^eps 4m2

26th June, 1982

100 kg/ha20 cm. between rows

LSD J,

C.V

395 *& /h a

830

rf- 1138

6.5f

4315 - 7/82 p' t 1 ^rietj Trij j. (Meraro)

.oo-OJ

Fertilizer at Pl-nting * 150 lcg/ha DAF (18/46)Fl nting 7 at e = 24 Junes 1982

Teeding 7? ate = 100 kg/haSpacing = 20 cm between rows

Vf

,V379627.3

Variety Herb % ;e Yield Stand % 3»ys to Date of Leaf-—

Heightcm.

GM c/ m DM . eading Harvest Leaf ITo Length I11 cm

xase idth Middle idth Tip ‘’idth

ci 8235 41375 29.0 12057 85 114 116 3 32 106 1.8 1.2 113CI 8237 44025 2 5 .7 11314 90 113 116 3 38 1.7 108 0.6 112

ci 8251 54100 2 5 .7 13904 90 116 116 3 37 1.8 1.8 1.0 101

ci 8257 43825 16.9 7406 90 98 98 4 29 1.5 1.5 1.5 108

Jasari 41450 16.3 6756 88 98 98 3 33 1.7 1.9 1.9 99L mpton 32200 18.5 5957 85 1 1 *T 116 4 33 1.8 108 0.7 108

Grey^lger 35373 ■j0 ■> j 1 • j 13195 83 114 116 3 38 1.5 1.5 0.7 96

Design RGB 4reps SE 1318 kg/haFlot size ITet 4 m2 LSD 5$ 2768

4315 - 0/82

o-INOJ Variety Yield kg/haft and

GM /DM DM

CI 8235 19230 21.1 4058 80

Cl 8?37 14590 22. 2 3239 80

Cl 8?51 15210 25.4 3863 90ci 8257 15380 23.0 3537 80

J as ari 15330 22.0 3372 85L-tfnpton 21130 23.0 4860 85

_l'a£s to______ii Height

Cm.Leaf

ading Harvest Ko. 'versge • idth . cm .___

Length

102 • 103 3 1.2 32101 103 70 3 1 .4 40103 103 75 3 i 1«5 2991 92 70 3 1.3 28

91 92 70 3 1.3 3091 92 95 4 : 1.4 38

design =

Plot size = 6 m‘Fertiliser ?.t Planting = iOO kg/ha D.4P PI waiting Dete = 11 June 1582

Seeding Rate = 100 kg/haSpacing = 20 cm. between rov/s

PtCB 4reps 2

3E = 1720 kg/ha.L.?D % = NS

C.V, 36.5?

278

4325- Sudan grass v a r ie ty t r i a l

Sudan grass v a r ie ty t r i a l was conducted at Dhera, and Kulumsa research

sta tio n s* S ix v a r ie t ie s were te ste d at these two lo c a tio n s . Higher

Dm y ie ld s were recorded at Kulumsa. There was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y

s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e among v a r ie t ie s at "both sta tio n s*

G en erally , d isease ( anthrocnose) problam was observed almost on a l l

v a r ie t ie s and i t was severe on IAR 1020 v a r ie t y .

I; 4325- 9/82 Sudangrass variety trial (Kulumsa)

GNo-(\!

Variety Yield kg/ha■fcW-W . M

Stf0;Days to Leaf

Height in cmGm fDm i[ Dm Heading ’ Length vfidthIAR 1007 34222 18.7 | 64OO ‘ 90 104 104 6 59 3.1 LO>

*

IAR 1013 35617 19.1 6803 85 104 w 6 59 2.5 159IAR 1019 32217 18* 7 6225 85 103 r 5 55 3.6 166

IAR 1020 •-9450 23.7 j 6980 85 103 it 5 54 2.7 163

IAR 1025 4545C ' 1 6.9 ,: 7681 90 102 *i 6 67 j 2.6 183

ARDU 40717 j 21.9 J 8917] . ____ ! 85 103

: ! 5 70 I 2.7 169

- RCB 3 reps 2

DesignPlot size — net 6 mFertilizer at planting.- 100 kg/ha DAPPlanting date Seeding rate Spacing LSD %

Cv.

- 6 July 1982

- 25 kg/ha- 40 cm between rows- I\TS- W

4325- 10/82 Sudan grass variety trial (

oCO<\J

V a rie tyji 1

Herbage y ie ld kg/ha j. .

GM f DM3

DM j 1

; j £ ! -

____

I - 1CO>> , Pj O 1P ^

„ ___________IAR. 1007 11883 23.7 2816 *] 70 79

ia r 1013 10000 24.2 2.420 i 65j

r»n ,(° 1

IAR 1019 13967 26.2 365s j 70 : 77 j (l

IAR 1020 0300 2 6 . 6 : 2208 S 65 : j

19 3i

IAR 1025 12717 25.7 i 3268 j 65 : 80

ARDU | 10250 2 1 . 1 | 2839 j 70 i 81 j

Design Plot size Fertilizer at planting Planting date Seeding rste Spacing

RGB 4 reps 2- 6 m

100 kg/ha DAP 11 July, 1$82 25 kg/ha40 cm between rows

O -P-P CO0)CQ >•*} Rtu CDPI A

Leafyness• Height

cm.

t f

r

-pW)sQ) *-1 _______

n5 -H*=t! s81 40 ? 3C.9 _ ) 79

81 , 4 42 2,5 78 |;? 4 : 41 2.0 ; 90 i?» < 5 : 55 : 3.1| ? 5 j

tt < 56 3.0 j 91 |»i 4 6o 2.1 | 94 j

LSD 5 f

CV- NS- 2 1 .ft

110lir columbus gr-r.p v-rioties were tested at Kuluinsa. The objective of the tricl was to select the best variety or fodder production (yield ^nd nutritive v^lue).

Comparatively higher DM Yields were obtained from IAR 935 (6 .6 2 4 tons DM/hg) nnd unknown variety from I^R (5.400 tons Dll/ha). Generali; rio st^tisticaly signific-nt differences were obt-ined among varieties.

43105 - 1/82 rplyjnbus Ct t .s s Variety Trial (Kulumsa)

43105 - l/8£ Cqlmn'bUB_Grass U^riety Tri- L (jK-ulumsa)

VarietyYield kg/ha to J?t "lid Dr?ys to Height

JiK J DM_ DM. _ FmerrenceJ : . . H e -’ding Harvest cm.Cro-ble I A.R 1047 22283 15.6 347a 9 90 92

jj m

1 0

111i

. 105Un known fvom IAR 27000 20.0 5400 9 9° 105 105 130I AH 935 30667 21.6 6624 9 100 105 105 125Un known from A7:DU 27444 . 19 01 5?42 9 90 104 '105 145

Design RCB 3 reps LSD. 5f NS kg/h?plot size = 2 2

10 m - net 6m 1 fc = NS

Fertilizer s 100 kg/ha t planting c.V = 38.9 f

F1 • nting date = 6/7/82

Seeding rate = 25 kg /h r-

cp ? cing = 40 cm. b/n rows

Harvesting stage trial was conducted for seed production on Rhodes grass. The objective of this trial was to find out the stage of h?rvest were the hijiest quantity and quality of seed would "be obtained,

Five treatments were used in randomized block designed with four replications.

It was observed that as harvesting stage was delayed the yield of the seed increased being highest at the fourth treatment. In general signficant yield differences were observed among treatments.

■ktty- - 5/‘ ' Harvesting Stage Trial on Rhodes grass (Kulumsa)

Harvesting Stage Trial on Rhddes Grass Seed Production

Treatments Seed yield j . „ kg/h a, I

Initial full heading 134 ;One week after full heading 111

Two weeks after full heading 211

Three {; ft tf 283Four r< v 253

Design

P lo t s iz e

F e r t i l i z e r

P lan tin g T)ate

Seeding r a te

fp-icing

PtCB 4 reps p p

16m net 9.6m 200 kg/ha DAP at Planting 200 kg/h a urea tapchresed in 1982.197310 kg/ha Proadcast

LSD %

c.v

= 16

* 26

= 21

283

4A1 - Fertilizer Trial on Vicia Dp.sycorpa (KuIuiiist)

Fertilizer tri~l on vicia dasycorpa was conducted Bekoji for herbage production Kulumsa for seed production0 The objective of the trinl w-s to determine ' optimum level of fertilizers (nitrogen & phosphorus) for herba-e and seed production.

Four levels of nitrogen c:rd phosphorus fc-r ' iliser were combined iri a factorial design with three replications.

At Kulumsa the stand and vi-Sor were not ?s good as the previous •'ears. Ko statistically significant differences were observed as a result of--' - fertiliser levels.

t Bekoji the general perfornence w. s very good and highly significant differences were observed among fertilizer levels. As 3

it w^s also indicated in the previous report the nssponse for phosphorus was quite high md this shows b^gh phosphorus differences at Bekoji.

28^-1

4411 - 1,8? Fertilizer Tri 0. on Vinia for Seed Production (Kulumsa)

Fer+ ili7err level kg/ha___NpOg

Seed Yield] *g/ha j

0-ays to Emergence

St 511a1

| L‘»rys to ! Heading

UarvetingDate

0 0 1642

j11 65 113 5/ 1/83 ;

23 0 22.?5J

1 , 65 113J

46 0 1495 ; 11 65 11369 0 1917 < 65 113 ;;0 46 1951 t 11 65 113 „23 46 20 G1 \4 11 65 11346 46 2531

111 70 113

69 46 2361 1<1 11 75 113 ’ *0 69 2198 11 70 11323 69 2163 11 70 11346 69 2698 11 75 1136$ 69 2737 11 75 113

0 92 2338 i1 11 75 11323 92 1526

1! 11 75 113 Si46 92 2483. jj 11 75 113 r.69 92 2340 i

1

J..1 * 70 1 1 j

l I J

Design = Facteri-1 4 - 3 repsO pFlot size (M )Grose = 10 Net 10 m Fertilizer at planting= ''s shown bove kg/ha

Planting Date Seeding Hate Spci r.g

= 7/7/82= 20

40 cm b/o rows

For both factors L interactionLSD %

l£C.V

NS kg/ha FS33.6 f

285

4411-2/82 Vicia Fertilizer Trial (Beko.ji)

Fertilizer level TT ,w/v,* Herbie Yield_ kg/ha_ Stand fDays t-c Date of

y gm :f’DM DM Flowering harvest

0 0 3226 ? I 13.4 4324

..............

65 128 6/1123 0 37133 ;I 16.0 5941 65 128 Pi46 0 33100 S 15.4 5097 65 128 1 *69 0 34567 16.6 5738 ' 65 128

0 46 47167 16 .5 7783 70 127 tv23 46 51133 9.0 CN c ro 70 127 t.46 46 50233 16.9 8489 70 126 t!

'' 69 46 49367 1 6 .5 ?. 146 70 126 t;

I ° 69 60000 1 5 .8 9480 70 126 ”23 69 59767 20.3 1213? 75 128 r.46 69 50767 14.3 7260 70 127 ti

69 69 56100 16.6 9313 70 128 tt0 92 65467 13.4 8773 70 126 t.23 92 73433 14.0 10281 70 126 t:

46 92 71000 15 .6 11076 70 126 t;69 92 74500 I16.O

IK- - . . J - __

11920 75 126 tt

2Design. = Factorial 4 - 3 reps S.E 460 - kg/ha

2 2Plot size Cross= 10 m net 10 m LSD 5f = 938 I!Fertilizer at plantings As show, above =1265 :iPlanting date = 26/6/82 CV = 13.6 fSeeding rate = 20 kg/haHr-acing = 40 cm b/ n rows

918

18632 5l0kg/ha

286

4412 - 1 /82 Seeding r?.te and r'pacir ,; Trial on Vicia

cl - sy carp a - Lana (Mimsa)

.yicia dasy* pj~. h s a trailing: growth habit *.v, >re rovj spacing might not "be much important for seed production.

The objective of this trial was to determine optimum seeding rate and row spacing of vicia dasyoarpa for seed production.

Four seeding rate and four row spacing were combined in a factorial design with three replications. The ground coverage and general perform?nce was almost similar in all combinations and no significant yield differences were obtained. High potential for seed production of vicia das.yc-arpa was observed in this trial as far as the two years result one considered. This tri-:l would be repeated for 1983/84 season.

28?

4412 - 1/8? ^Spacin^ Trial (Kulumsa)

\ jSpa.cing - S e e d rate! - eed Yieldcm.. . kg/ha K g/ha

40 10 196760 10 191780 10 2125

100 10 2083

40 15 2200

60 15 208380 15 1833

100 15 275040 20 230060 20 301480 20 1958

100 20 245040 25 2600

60 25 234780 25 2306

100 25 2967

Days to Emergence Stand f

1 4Days to ; •Flowering

12 65 11312 60 11312 60 17312 75 113 i12 60 113

12 65 11312 60 11312 75 11312 65 11312 65 11312 70 1131? 75 11312 70 11312 70 11312 75 11312 80 113

Design Facteria.l 42 _ 3reps S.E. 340Plotisizer(M2) 0Tross= 10 m2 Net 10 m2 LSD 5i NS kg/haPertilizer at Pl?p_ting= 200 kg/ha D4P (18,46) NS t:Planting date 7/7/82 C.V 27.3 f

Seeding Rate = \s shown above lcg/haSpacing ss

288

4415 Variety Trial on Fore/e Vetches

The o b je c tiv e of th is t r i a l was to screen out the best v a r ie ty

o f vetch fo r d if fe r e n t e c o lo g ic a l zones of Arsi Region. Bases on

t h is o b je c tiv e t r i a l s were conducted at B e k o ji, Kulumsa Robe and

Dhera experiment s ta tio n s*

S ig n if ic a n t y ie ld d iffe re n c e s were q?bse£y^d. at B e k o ji, Kulumsa

and Robe X.were as no s ig n if ic a n t y ie ld d iffe re n c e s were QbseoJ.evedat

Dhera* G enerally low y ie ld s were recorded at Dhera due to moi

stu re s t r e s s . Vi c i a .v i lo s a , v i c i a at rapurpureum, v i c i a dasycarpa var-

Iana were the top y ie ld e r s at B e k o ji, Kulumsa, Robe and Dhera resp ect

iv e ly .

289

4415 - 1/82 i[ora.ge_Vetch Variety Tria 1_(B ekoj^i)

Variety

Vicia desycorpa ~ Lana Vicia desycorpa-Kamoi Vicia atropitrpuretun Vicia villosa Vicia sativa

Yield kg/ha'— ■

Stand$

Days toGM %DM DM Flowering Harvest

— ~— — • — *

55604 15.9 8841 80 121 125

50025 13.5 6753 80 121 125

33363 24.7 8241 80 161 163

74958 16.4 12293 80 131 13128250 19*6 5537 75 101

l103

Design . =Plot size =Fertiliser at Plantings Planting date =Seeding rate =Spacing =;

RGB - 4 reps 6m2200 kg/ha Di\P 26/6/82

20 kg/ha 40 cm. b/n rows

SB. = 972 kg/ha LSD % =2118 «<• 1 f =2969 i!

C.V. = 16.3^

290

4415 - 2/82 Forage Vetch Variety Trial (Kulumsa)

Variety

Vicia desycarpa - Lana Vicia desycarpa - Mamoi Vicia atropurpureum Vicia villosa Vicia sativa

Design Plot sizeFertilizer at Planting Flqnting Date Seeding Rate Spacing

Yield kg/ha StancGM f DM DM r

40542 1 6 .7 ; 6771 7542967 17.9 ' 7691 7551083 21»C 10727' 7555208 18 .5 ;10213 7521833

- —18 .3 : 3995

iI ..

75

RCB - 4reps 6 m2200 kg/ha DAP 8/7/82 20 kg/ha 40 cm h/n rows

Days toFlowering ________1 Harvest

1 0 114113 114130 132114 114106 107

SE =1750 kg/haLSD % = 3813 tv'■ = 5346

C.V. = 30.8 $

4415 - 3/82 Forage Vetoh Variety Trial (Robe)

Variety YieldGM i DM DM

Stan _____

Vicia desycarpa - Law a 51213 19-3 9884 65Vicia desycarpa-Msmoi 51942 16, 1 8363 65

Vicia atropurp'ure'um 46917 20,1 9430 65Vicia villosa 38154 21.9 8356 65

t/icia satin?, 20033 23.3 4668 65

Design = • RCB - 4 reps So rri'i#

;tPayS-Jfe.Q

Flower

Plot sizeFertilizer at planting Planting Dafee Seeding Rate Spacing

6 m LSD. %200 kg/ha DAP r 1# 19/7/82 'C.V20 kg/ha 40 cm. *b/n rows

109

108

121

IO9

109

*= 1150 kg/ha = 3749 "= 6222 "■« 24.1 f

4415 — 4/82 Forage Vetch Variety Trial {Dhera)

Variety j Yield | GM

_J_ _ __kg/h

# DML . .

a ■ * —DM____

Standi

Vicia desycarpa - LfUa ; 12542 22,4 2808 50

Vicia desy carp a - Mamoi | 13250 20.0 2650 50

Vicia atropurpureum j 5500 ( 26.8 1475 30

Vicia villosa 0LT\ I*-O 23.8 2563 40

V ic ia satiV a} \ \ 1838 ; 26.0 479 20

Design RCB 4 reps LSD* %P lo t s iz e = * 2 6 mF e r t i l i z e r at P la n tin g

P la n tin g Date

Seeding Rate

Spacing

200 kg/ha DAP

11/7/82

20 kg/ha

40 cm, h/n rows

C.V,

Days to

Flower

^8

78

108

79

108

NS

NS

70 i-

T his t r i a l was conducted a t Kulumsa and Dhera research stations#

The o b je c tiv e o f t h is t r i a l was to rep lace o a t/ v ic ia m ixtures in the

lower a lt i tu d e s where Sudan g rass performs b e tte r then oat*

Four seeding r a te s o f Sudan-grass as main p lo t and th ree seeding

ra te s o f v ic ia a s sub p lo t treatm ents were combined in a s p l i t - p lo t

design with th ree re p lic a tio n s*

The gen eral performance was quite good a t both s ta t io n s .

S t a t i s t i c a l l y s ig n if ic a n t y ie ld d iffe re n c e s were observed between

seeding ra te s o f Sudan grass and v ic ia a t Dhera and Kulumsa* At Kulumsa

h ig h ly s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s were observed^among v ic ia seeding rates#

A n alysis o f n u tr it iu e value has not been done y e t .

^512 - 2, 2/32 .Seeding Rate Trial on Sudan Grass/Vicia Mixture

29^

4512 - 1/82 Seeding Rate Trial on Sundan rrass/Vicia Mixture (Kulumsa’)

Treatments (Seeding Rate)

Sud angr ass V i c ia

Yielc

G.M_______

1 kg/ha

cj DM _____

DM

Stand1

Bot. Composition of legume from

1000 gms.

CmeHeight

kg/ha U ...15

0 65467 18.0 11784 90 _ 170

20 0 57333 19.4 11123 90 ~ 14525 0 61200 1 5 .2 9302 90 - 15030 0 64883 23.0 14923 95 160

15 25 59550 18.0 10719 95 700 - 120 25 58033 23.7 13754 95 700

25 25 70867 23.0 16299 95 605

30 25 63367 16.0 10139 95 705 -

15 50 64400 15.1 9724 95 800 -

20 50 54367 23.0 .12504 100 600 -

25 50 64400 1 6 0 6 10690 100 808 —

30 50 58167 15.6 9074 100 !i------J

900 -

I) s sign Flot size fertilizer Planting Date feeding Rate SpacingHarvesting date

Split plot net 10 m2100 kg/ha DAT at planting 6/7/82As shown above 40 cm. b/n rows 20 October 1982

For both Factors Interactionkg/h;SE 220 kg/ha 860

LSD 5i 470 1965 »e; \i 640 t: 2850

C.V.# 42.7(main plot)23.4(Subplot)

295

4512 - 2/82 Seeding Rate Trial on Sudan grass/Vicia, Mixture (Dhera.’)

Treatments (Seeding Rates) Siidangrass Vicia

kg/ha j

Yield ,kg/ha Stand4

f

ViciaHeightcm*

GM i DM DM

15 0 11560 23*7 2740 65 _ .

< r-m .... ,1 m i l

11020 0 7277 29.2 2125 65 - 8325 0 7865 28.1 2210 70 9730 0 17522 22.8 3995 80 - 128

15 25 12860 25.0 3215 65 30 9720 25 12642 24*6 3110 65 10 13025 25 7656 32.0 2450 70 10 9330 25 19300 20.0 3860 75 20 12715 5.0 9502 25.1 2385 65 55 80

20 50 8803 28,4 2500 70 35 80

25 50 11245 26*1 2935 75 25 98

30 50 ; 16493 .21.5 3546 75 37 118

Design Plot size Fertilizer Planting Date Spacing

Split plot Net 10 m2100 kg/ha DAP at Planting 10 July 1982

40 cnis between rows

Far both Factors SE « kg/ha.LSD % = NSf; 1$ = NS

CV. i = a) 36,1b) 27.0

Interactionkg/haNSSN

4 6 1 1 - 1/82 Effect of Time of Fertilizer Application on Tedder beet (Kulumsa)

As it was mentioned in the 1981 report that fodder beet needs long growing period and nothing was known when this crop uses fertilizer most efficiently. Hie objective of this trial was to determine the optimum time when to fertilizers fodder beet.

Three periods of fertilizer application were used wheneby ' the b?se r^te (200 kg/ha D'P) was applied as a v::.ole or splited.

"'ron this trial it was observed that no stastistically significant yield differences were obtained among treatments. It seems that the site was not good for fertilizer trials, because of high nutrient contents of the soil.

4611 - 1/82 Effect of Time of Fertilizer Application_on Fodder beet (Kulumsa)

Root Yield kg/haTreatments

;a|

i I

L i

i DM DM

Zero fertilizer level j227407 6 .0 7 13807S*bZero at planting + all at 1

hoeing I 194398 5 . 5 9 10867Zero at planting + J- at 1S &

g- 2nd hoing!1189630 6.00 11378

■5 at planting + J- at 1°^ & {. *..t 2n< hoeing

i'i ^! 193611t.

5.40 10455

*i * S "tg- at planting + g- at 1° hoeing ; i89352 5.40 10225

All at planting ‘ 211019

I_____ __

5.50 11606

L ____ _____

Ijsign plot size Variety

RCBMet 5.4 m2

Aring borres

LSD 5?'

C.V f

FS kg/ha NS • 6.09

297

The objective of these tri Is was to compare promising pasture and forage speices occrose different experimental sites of the country.

These promising spe?ces were grouped into two sets (highland and low-midium land),, Each grohp consists of annuals and peremnials.

Generally higher DM yields were obtained from annual forage crops at all research sites of AJRDU as compared to the previous year. M Robe and Kulumsa more than one harvests were obtained

I.o substantial forage yield of perennials was obtained from Bekojiand Dhera stations due to poor soil condition at Bekoji and moisture stress

boat Dhera, These trials will contimi! for 1983/84 planting season .-to' get jnQro ■■ • informat ion.;-:.

i+8-10 Multi 1 ocational Cooprative Trials

4k 10 - 1/82 Multi-Locational 'Trial (Kulumsa)

Variety1 .... J DM

CI 8237 oat 9 461

Lampton oat 10138Vicia dasycarp-tana 10545CI 0237 + Vicia Lana 9 8 1 6

Lamptan + r u 1 1 8 3 7Pudan grass 4 9 1 4Columbus grass 4039Dolich.-’ Slab lab 3078

•'Herbage Yield kg/ha ' Date t0 ‘ Heading/ ji i Floweringi M e rg e n ce |

D-te of | Harvest i

5/ 10/82

29/9/82

1/ 11/82

8/ 10/82

29/ 10/82

20/8/82

20/ 10/82

1/11/8;

Planting Date = 7/7/82

299

4610 - 3/02 Multi - Locational Tri-il (.Oheral

* ! Herba Variety»

|;e Yield kg/ha

1DM

I/He'ding -

"loweringDate

------ -- 1Hate ofharvest

CI 8237 o?.t | 4895 25/9/82 30/9/82Lampton oat \ 4245 25/9/82 1

Vicia. D a sy c r.rp ? t ana 1468 28/9/82

CI 8237/Vicia i 4104 26/9/8?Larnptan/Vicia 2322 26/9/82 f;

fudan grass 6813 28/9/82

Colombus grass i 3994 26/9/82 >•IDolicho slr-blab1t1

1189 7/ 10/82 7/ 10/82

DesignPlot size cross fertilizer t Planting FIanting D-te

= RGB O10 ret 6

= 100 kg/ha D;'J = 1 1/7/82

2m

4810 - 5/(52 Ilulti-Locationsl Tri ai ■‘'nnuals (BekojiJ

VarietyHerbage Yield 1

DMg/ba | Heading /

Flowering_^ D.?,t e

Date ofHarvest ^

CI 8237 o,-t 12006 ! 15/10/82i 21/ 10/82

Lampton oat 9315 13/ 10/82 13/10/82 ■Vic-, dasyc^rpr. lana 12899 | 4/11/82 7/ 11/82

CI 8237/Vicia 10559 j 15/ 10/82 21/10/82

Lampton/Vicip 8996 ' 13/ 10/82 13/ 10/82

Trifolium nembense 131 : 22/9/82ii

24/9/82

DesignPlanting Date

RGB26/6/82

VarietyHerbage Yield kg/ha

DM

Heading /FloweringDate

Date of Harvest

CI 8237 o?t 11677 1 1/ 10/82 13/10/82Lampton o-t ' 9367 8/10/82 13/10/82Vicia. dasy carp a 6188 26/ 10/82 28/ 10/82

CI 8?37/Vicia lana 9315 1 1/ 10/82 13/10/82Lampton/Vicia Lana 7431 8/ 10/82 13/10/82 1Trifolium Tembensa ?&7 20/ 10/82 22/ 10/82

2Flot size gross = 10 m Net 6Flanting date = 24/6/82

302

4810 - 9/^2 Eulti-Locational I'rials Annuals (Robe)

1 r

V ariety

CI 8237 oatLampio. 1 0 tVicia d-?.syc;.rpa Varlana CI o237/Vicia Vartana Lamp an/ rTrifclim t'--imbense _ ’ ier beet - •'■ring Barres

Triumpl hot at

age Y ie ld kg/ha

Dll

Heading / flo w erin g .Date

Date ox

Harvest^

15587 27/10/82 7/ 11/82

11518 15/ 10/82 fV> ro jp CO ro

11322 11/ 11/82 7/ 11/82

12434 27/10/82 22/ 10/82

12535 16/ 10/82 17/11/827900 6/ 11/82 I8/ 11/82

5553 15/12/825238 t;

Planting Date = 19/7/82 from 1 - £ .?nd 1/5/82 fo" fodder beet

303

4-820 - 2/82 Multi-Locptional Trial Perenials (Kulumsa)

Variety

Chior i sgay ana-Mosr ar Penniset-un purpureum Panicum col ar atum Desmodium uncinatum

HeadingFloweringJBak

Date of 1i

Harvest

DesignPlot size gross Planting date

= RCB= 10 M Net 6= 7/ 7/82

304

4820 - 3/82 jjlult i-Locat ional Tr i al P erennials (Robe)

Veriet# Herbage Yield kg/ha DM

Heading / Flowering Sate

1Date of Harvest

Perennial ryegra,»s-Virus 4043 27/11/82Perennials ryegrass-5-23 4412 27/11/82Cocksfoot grass-cardus 1200 « 16/12/82

" ,5 -Danish 1171 - 16/ 12/82

Phalaris tuberasa-. ; ov sirrocco

■

-i6399 25/ 11/82 27/ 11/82

Phalaris tuberas*- •Mistrsl a 1833 27/11/82

Westwoldrye grass-Bars pectra 7069 27/11/82 27/11/82

Tall farcul 1334 16/ 12/82

Design = RGBoPlot size gross =* 10 m Net 6

Planting date = 19/7/82

305

Legumes h.-jve special inherent character sties for fixing atmospheric.-nitrogen through rhizaobium bacteria - VJ.ci.y- desycarpa is one of these legumes which c^n fix nitrogen from the atmosphere which increases the fertility level of the soil.

Based on this fact a trial was designed to observe residual effect of vicia on wheat yield at Kulumsa station on the field where vicia w^s pls-nted previously. The treatments used were zero fertilizer level and 100 Is ? J h r , DAP with two replications.

It w">s observed th-t no economically significant yield differences were obtained between 0 and 100 kg/ha DAP, which indicates that the effect of vicia on the subsequent whe=t crop was nearly ? s high as what is expected from fertilizing with 100 kg/ha IMP.

4910 - 2/8? Observation of Residual Effect of Vicia on ;he3.t_ Yield (kulumsa)

4910 - 2/82 Observation of Res idual Jiif feet of Vicia on jheat Yield (Kulumsa)

Treatments

No fertilizer 2457 80

100 kg/ha DAP (1 8,4 6 ) 2535 80

7)esign Plot size

RCB - 2 reps 300 m2 net 100 m^15/7 / 8 2125 kg/ha EnkoyBroadcasting

LSD 5f NS kg/ha NS

7lanting Date '•eeding R?te Variety pacing

C.V.

5» Horticulture 306

5"5-1/82 Irish Potato NYT (Kulumsa)

9 varieties of Irish potato were included in this trial and most of the varieties were tested for the last three to four years at Kulumsa. Planting materials were received from Alemaya College of Agriculture.

Statstically yields among treatments were found to be significant. Among the varieties tested yields of 736.3 qt/ha, 660.7 qt/ha, 573-0 qt/ha, ^37.0 qt/ha were obtained for varieties al-6 0 1, Al-305? A1-5&0 and Al-100 respectively.

Al-6^6, Al-5^8, i-1-257 and Al-20^f were found to be the least in their yield potential, giving 1*4-2.22 qt/ha, 225.9 qt/ha, 256.30 qt/ha and 31^.1 qt/ha respectively. There was observed late blight disease (Phyto-phtora infestans) on all clone tvpes with various degrees of infestation. Regarding disease incidence severe attack was observed : on most varieties in this trial. However, Al-601 Sc AI-5 6O were proved to be less susceptible to late blight infestation compared with all other varieties in the trial.

Yield and horticultural characteristics for different clone types are presented in table 1.

Table No. 1

end_Horticultural Characteristics for Different Clone Types (Kulumaa)

Variety

i a i -5681

Ai-2 5 7

A1-305 Al-100 Al-560 ,.1-148 aI-601 Al-646 Al-204

Total Yield qt/ha

225.93256.30 660.74 4 3 7.c4 572.9r 371 .8 5

736.30 142.22 31;4.07

Rank jMarketable Yield !

%Plant harveste

Late blighti (0-5)

Horticultural Character&stij s

872if35 1

96

6*1.72 70.00 73.13 54.23 6 8 .5 6

67.15 78.306 5 .5 0

4 5 .4 9

Decign RCSDP3 j.ntinr: date 14/4/82Seeding rate 20tubers/plotFertilizer DAP 300 kg/ha

2Flot size(net) 4.5m

LSD 5%

LSDC.V.

73.3373.33 86.66

88.33 86.66 70.00 9 1 .6 6

80.00

63.33

360.40 qt/ha 496.4c qt/ha18.23%

igcur TuberType

Set Capacity per hill

Eye | depth

0 G 0” 1

>0 0 ++ 0 0+ 0 |10 0 0 -+ 0 0 :

+ i+ 0 + .!10 c

+ "0 i

x Tuber type express tubersizeSet capacity perrheill capacity per plantEye depth of tuber when shallow (-)»» >i n n deep ( + )

308

515-2/82 Irish Potato NYT 2 (Kulumsa)

8 varieties of Irish potato were included in this trial. Planting Liaterials were received from Alemaya„ Host of the varieties have shown high yield potential. Yield differeces among the varieties were found to be significant.

Hence, Al-253 and Al-580 were significantly the highest yielders, giving 7^*32 qt/ha, 72*+.^4 qt/ha respectively. In this trial there was a severe infestation of late blight (Phytophtora infestans), however, the disease incidence occurred at the later stage of the crop development and therefore yields were not affected. Al-5 2 8, AI- iOh and Al-578 were highly susceptible to late blight.

Al-o2*+, Al-253 and Al-580 were the tolerant varieties to various degrees among all varieties considered. Yield and other relevant data are presented in table 2 . At Kulumsa, in general, disease incidence specially late blight was severe. However, regardless of disease occurrence, yield of most clones \ ere found to be magnified.

Tab 1e 2. Yield & horticultural characteristics of Irish potato NYT 2 'Kulumsa)

Variety Total yield qt/ha Rank

f

Marketableyield

%

Plant harvested

Disease Late blight

(0-5)

Horticultural characteristics, Vigour Tuber

typeSetcapacity per hill

Eyedepth

Al-528 227.26 8 75.81 6 1 .6 7 5 0 — +Al-108 337.77 7 77.85 76.67 4 — 0 0 +Al-404 408.89 6 82.16 78.33 5 0 0 0 0

Al-578 525.93 4 79.45 9 6 .6 7 5 + — 0 0

Al-563 522.59 5 84.20 90.00 4 0 0 0 —

Al-580 724.44 2 79.75 91.67 3 + + +Al-264 554.82 3 89.85 95.00 1 ; 0 _ 0

Al-253 744.83 1 83.26 93.33 2 J + + +

DesignPlanting date Seeding rate Fert ilizer Plot size (net)

RCBD13/7/8220 tubers/plot DAP 300 kg/ha 4.5 m2

LSD %

LSD Vft

C.V.

224.56 qt/ha 311.24 qt/ha 25.30f

310

515-3/82 Irish Fotato, (NYT) Bekoji

Ten varieties of Irish potato were included in this trial. Planting materials were recieved from Alemaya* Most of the varieties proved"heir genetic potential of high yield, except variety Al-5^8 -nd Al-'A 6 which were inferior in their y? eld results.

\l-646 was the only variety severely attacked by late blight and asa conseqnence it appeared with the lowest yield.

Yield and other relevant data are presented in table 3* a1-624, al-601 , -.1-204 and Al- 6 1 5 were the best yielders, iving, 5 7 5 - 1 9 qt/ha, ^44.81 qt/ha, 519-63 qt/ha, 313-70 qt/ha respectively, Significant yield differences were obtained among varieties. In general, most varieties proved to be best yielders & tolerant to late blight under rainfed condition at Bekoji.

Table No, 3-V.---nd Horticultural uharacteristics of Irish Potato NYT (i3ekotji)

(•

Variety Total Yield qt/ha

I

Rank%

Marketable yi eld

ss| Plant harvests )1•

Disease Late blight

(0-5)

1Morticultural Characteristics

Visour i Tuber SetCapacity

Eye dept h

TuberColour

A1 - 6 0 1 54^.81 2 71.1611

93.33 1--

0j

0 + 0 WAl-624 575.19 1 85.38 98.33 1 +

i0 0 W

Al-556 4 7 8 .5 2 7 6 .8 1 98.33 1 + I 0 0 + wnl-646 2 5 9 .2 6 10 70.08 88.33 4 c ■ 0 0 wAl-2 5 3 446.89 6 85.43 75.0C 1 0 i 0 + Rnl-148 402.22 7 79.79 8 5.OC

C + j 0 + B.,1 - 6 1 5 513.70 4 78.38 96.67

0 + I 0 + 0 pal-204 519.63 3 82.98 8 5.OO

1+ i - 0 W

,1-568 287.41 9 69.74 63.33 i1 +

|i -f* fllAl-257 336.37 6 76.89 66.66

L. . _____ ..C • + j

I- + R

j

Design RC3D •V White

— ■

L.S.D. 5% 230,53 qt/haPlanting date 8 July, 1982 R Red L.S.D. 1 % 3 16 0 16 qt/haSeeding r.= te 20 tubers/plot 3 Deep red C .V. 13.84%FertilizerSpacing

DAP 300 kg/ha 75 cms. between rows 30 " w plants

Net plot size 4.5m1

312

Ten potato varieties we3*e included in this trial. This ycfcar ( 1982) yield result in general, is low compared with previous ;years. Percrntage nf plants harvested were high for all varieties exc*^t var. Al-578 and Al-404*

There was not severedisease (late blight) occurrencc observod.Early blight ( disease incidencc was observed

515-4/82 Irish Potato KYT 2 (Beko.ji)

of tubsrc perpl<*«rv, -c... *»ox-ieties were inferior this year#on var. Al-58^ > A l — rA , *vn/ ,A .305. Tuber size and set capacity

Yield and other results are presented in table 4* Al—580, Al—5^0, Al-578 and Al—528 were the best yielders, yielding, 410.74 qt/ha, 382.22 qt/ha, 373*33 qt/ha and 339*63 qt/ha. respectively.

Table No, 4 Yield and horticultural i 1, i cs of Irish potato NY-

Variety ITotal yield qt/ha

Rpnki

Marketableyield

i

Plantharvested

Disease late blight

____(.0-5)___

Horticul tural characterustucs

VigourTubertype

Set capacity per hill

Eyedepth

Al-578 373.33 3 75.09 8.33 1 + — — 0

Al-404 262.22 10 8 1.80 6 6 .6 5 1 0 — — 0

Al-580 410.70 1 75.93 91.67 1 + 0 0 0

Al-264 310.-74 6 81-59 85.00 0 0 -Al-563 334.44 5 80.76 90.00 1 + 0 0 0

Al-560 382.22 2 72,63 95.00 1 0 - - -Al-305 298.88 77 67.03 90.00 1 0 - - 0

Al-528. 33r :63 4 79.82 85.00 1 + i - 0

Al-108 269.26 9 87.61 76 .6 7 1 + - 0

Al-100 280.74 B 69.07 85.00 1 + 0 - ________I

DesignPlanting date .ieeding rate Pert ilizer Spacing

RCBD9 July, 1982

20 tubers/plot DAP 300 kg/ha 75 cms between rows 30 " ” plants

LSD %

LSD 1 f

C.V.

43 -.66 qt/ha 0O.I6 "

8.1 lie

Flot size (net) 4*5m<

Irish Potato (NYT) Robe

Nine varieties of Irish potato wore included in this trial. Planting materials were received from Alemaya. Late blight was found to be low for most varietiest except variety Al-470, which was infested moderately. Yield result was moderately low as compared to other stations* Significant yield difference was found among varieties considered.

A1-624 41-601 & Al-578 were the best yielders, giving 451.11 o#/ha 348.15 qt/ha and 324.44 qt/ha, respectively. Al-100 8c &1-264 were the low yielders, giving 114.44 qt/ha and 108.89 qt/ha. respectively.

Due to climatic and soil condition, ridging soil to the crop in actual time was found to be unfarourable and therefore high percent of unmarketable yield was recorded.

Yield and other relevant results are presented in table 515-5/82 below.

514.-,

515-5/82

315

515-5/82

Yield Result and Horticultural Characterstics of Different Varieties

Variety

rTotal Yield

iI *f(3

I

%

Unmarketa Yield

ble%

PlantHarvested

Horticultural Characteristicsqt/ha Disease

(0-50 Vigour TuberType

SetCapacityPenhill

Tuber Col our

Al-578 324.^4

r

3 7 3 M 90.0C 2 0 0 4- WAl-264 108.89 9 86.64 70.00 C - 0 - WAl-560 268.15 6 8 0 .8 0 8 0. CC 2 0 0 0 INAl-470 313.33

'4 65.13 8 0. GO 3 0 4- 0 W/R

Al-528 30c.cc 5 71.48 ’* 8 5 .0 0 1 + 0 + WAl-60i 348.15 2 70.32 68.33 1 + + w

Al-6?4 4 5 1 . 1 1 1 73.81 9 0 .0 0 1 + + + w

00ii—i 114.44 8 7 6 .7 0 35.0C 0 - + - w

Al- 6 1 5 150.37 7 79.06 36.67 0 - 0 + B

Desifi RCBD w White Net plot size 4. 5m^

Planning date - 17-7-■82 W/R - White/Red L.S.D. 3% - 9 5 . 1 7 qt/haFertilizer - DAP 300 kg/h a 3 Black L.S.D. 1% - 131.07 qt/hc1

Spaci .ig 75cm x 30 cm . C .V. - 20.77 %

. -.3 yi6

6 v a r ie t ie s o f sweet potato were considered in th is t r ia l* P lan tin g

m a te r ia ls (( cu ttin g s) were recieved from K elkasa (IAR) and transplanted

on May 20, 1983 .

Frost problem occurred in December and January 1983* H arvesting

was done ten months from p la n tin g . Most o f the v a r ie t ie s gave

m oderately low y ie ld s compared with the t r i a l r e s u lt o f 19&1 *

Y ie ld s among treatm ents were found to be .run-significant#

At h a rv e s t, la rv a e o f u n id e n tifie d in se ct p est were observed- tr. . v a r ie t ie s 1coka-6 and Koka—18 causing r o tt in g to harvested r o o ts .

There was a lso observed rodent ( r a t) a tta ck to matured ro o ts .

However, Kokar-6 and K oka-12 w ere the h igh est y ie ld e r s , g iv in g

291.00 qt/ha and 288.72 qt/ha r e s p e c t iv e ly . Y ie ld and other t r i a l

r e s u lts are presented in ta b le below. Reseasons fo r unm arketablity

were mainly due to under s iz e roots and a&so root damaged by pest

& rod en ts.

525—1/83 Sweet Potato Variety Trial (Sheled)

31

7

Ta. 1 e 5^5-1 /83 Yield result _jUid horticultural characterst ics of dif erent variet_ie_s

| Variety Total yield qt/ha

Rank iMarketable

yield

iPlantharvested

Average No. of roots

per plant (m)

Average weight in gm,

per root (m)

Average marketable root length

Rootcolour

j Koka-12 288.72 2 83.38 6 2.20 10 152.75 18.56 R! Alemaya} 224.56 4 72.43 6 5 .5 7 10 102.02 25 .78 WK oka-6 291*00 1 73.54 86.67 | 7 134.68 23.56 sKoka—9B 129.47 6 73.36 0. 10 76.68 22.22 wK oka-9 163.67 5 77.95 48.90 1

l 147.21 22.23 wKokar-18 240.56 3 6 4.0 1 6 3 .3 3 8 123.20 23.67

Lw

2Design -RCBD W = White Not p o t s iz e 12.0rn

PI arming date -20 Kay, 19^3 • R = Red LSD % NS

Seeding ra te -30 c u ttin g s/ p lo t M = Marketable CV 28*29%

F e r t i l i s e r - DAP 300 kg/ ha

Spacing - 1mr. x 40 cms

Harvesting date - 22 March, 19^4•

318

Variety crimson globe, seed harvested from I'erraro were used for this observational trial* The trial was direct planted on dece,13».1982 and thining had been done on January 19 , 19^3* Net plot area of 31*20 and spacing of 40 cms bt rows and 20 cms within rows had been used.

Harvest was done on April 4» 19^3 and it tafees 127 days from Rowingto harvest, However, harvest had been slightly late from actual time of harvest. Mean total yield of 224*36 qt/ha was recorded from two single plots considered.

Percent unmarketable was reasonably high 37*55^* Reasons for unmarketability is mainly due to undeserable root character of developing numerous thin roots on each main roots* Some actual roots didnH have true colour typ&V‘~- To minimize the undeserable root characteron seeds produced in our own ecology, the trial on seed production shall continue deeply and more effert shall be paid in line of research work.

535“*l/£>2 Beet root yield observation trial (Sheled)

319

This trial had been transplanted on June 1?, 19 7 6, at Kulumsa as variety ob* trial under rainfed condition* The trial consists of nine varieties. In general this trial had showen poor adaptability and stunsted growth for all varieties, except variety beauty which had performed uniform growth and yield record.

Replanting for dried out plants had been done since 1979 and still some varieties are drying-out. From the progress of the trial as observed no positive result was maintained, there fore this observational trial shall be better studied under irrigation condition, since in some conditions the crop show response to moisture availability.

Varieties Included in the Trial:

615 - 1/82

(Plum Var. Ob. Trial) Kulumsa

1. Beaty 6 „ Bruce2, Nubiana 7. Frontier3. Satsuma 8. Methleyk* Shiro 9 Santarosa3. LatestanSfc

Below, yield result of var, beauty presented in table.

'u

Table Showing Results of Fruit Yield

TablePlum Variety Ob. Trial ( Kulumsa)•

V a r ie ty N o .F r ./ tr e e

(M)

t\

| N o .F r ./ tr e e

' (UNM)

tF r ./ t r e e

gm(M)

]F r / tr e e

gm(UNM)

Beauty A

i64 | 1199

" B 38 I 1094" G 17 | 567" D ”* t -" E j 1 50» F

j

NB:

No.Fr/tree ?= Number of fruits pertree.

(H) = Marketable

(UNM) - Un marketable

615 - 1 321

Si.v varieties of preen beans were conducted in this trial. The crop ha- taken 37 days from planting to green pod harvest. As observed there had not been major disease occurrence. Stand at harvest was 'good for most varieties.

Statsticaly, yield amen- treatments were found to be non-significant. Yi Id and other trial results are presented in table below. To come across the reliable trial result, che experiment ohall continue for one trial season.

Table - Showing Yield and Other Trial Result of Green

Beans Variety Trial (Kulumsa)

Green Beans Variety Trial (Kulumsa)

CodeNo.

........ - 'Variety

Yieldqt/ha Rank

Days toFlower.

Stand %

atPod Maturity

1 Tender green 68.39 3 62 852 Haricot MS. 80 6 67 753 No • 68 ?2o77 2 67 85k Dwarf 51.11 G 62 i+55 Primier 85.92 67 956 No. 6 51.39 k

\

67 80

FIanting date 3-8■-b2Harvesting date 1-11-82Spacing ko cms. bt. rows

10 ” " plants

Net plot size 2^.0 m‘ L.S.D. 5% NSL.S.D. 1% MSC.V. 25-5^

' '*<7* 322

Four varieties of onion was planted on seed bed, on 17 August, 1982. Variety mermiru brown and mermiru white failed to geminate on seed bed. Variety Adama red and bombey red were considered for this trial to be further studied.

Transplanting had been rione on 11 November, 1982. Singlerow-method of planting w .s used in this trial. Therefore yield was found to be moderately low. No serere major disease was observed. Significant yield difference was found between treatments. Variety bombey red cut yielded the other variety.

The tria.1 will be continued for two trial seasons and the result will be summerised.

Table 645-1/32 Yield and other Trial Results of Onion Variety Trial

6^5-1/82

Onion Variety Trial (Sheled)

Variety Yieldkg/ha

j_ , Weight Rank ,

! pm/bulb

Adama red Bombey red

123.40134.54

1t

2 | 110.32 1 ! 130.87

Design RCBDFertilizer DAP 200 kg/haHarvesting date 4 April, 1983 Spacing 40 cm. x 30cm.

Net plot size L.S.D. %

L.S.D. T/o

C.V .

3 1 . 2 0 m 198.79 qt/ha 995.70 "12.20%

32J

-° carry on this trial, two methods of planting was considered. The -nethods used was direct sowing and transplanting. F seed harvested from Meraro station was used. Standard gross plot size of 6m x 6m with four replication of each treatments had been under-taken. Variety copenhagon market was used for this trial.

jue to uneven growth of seeds, stand for direct sowing treatments was found to be low. However, direct sowing out yielded the other method ;ivin : 548.54 qt/ha. Yield among treatments was found to be significant.

Since there had been un even moisture supply at the time of heading resulted with stunted head formation and therefore yield potential of -he variety was found to be moderately low. However, the seed obtained from . eraro station had proved that comparable to the some variety obtained from obroad regarding cabbage head yield.

Yield and other trial results are presented in table below.

Table 654 - 1

Yield and other Trial Results of Cabbage Method of planting

654-1Cabbage Method of Planting (Sheled)

Code No,

1

2

Im Yield Treatments 'qt/ha

Rank Stand %

- - - - - ~f

I). Sov.’ing ! 548.54[

u

1 50

Transplanting [ 327.57 1 i2 60

, i

Direct sowing date Transplanting date Harvesting 11Spacing

25-11-322 - 1-83

20-5-8360 cms. bt rows 50 " "

Net plot size L.S.D. 5% L.S.D. 1%

C.V.

2 8 .8 0

13C.97 qt/ha

200.75 "

22.2 %

Black Cuoin • ;?Tukur Azmud" Nursery (Sheled)

3 2V

8^5 -1 / 8 2

Nine "Tukur i\.zmud5' lines which are collected from Arssi Administrative region were considered and planted at sheled research

2station to be studied under nursery 1.4sis* Single plot of I2.®fto area were used for each treatment. Generaly all lines had positively adapted and all lines Rave encouraging yield result. Further more, Lines Tfjo.

Arata and Sedika, Akiya was found to be the best yielders among the considered lines, giving 1 5 -^ 9 qt/ha, 1 ^ . 1 6 qt/ha, 13*33 qt/ha, respectively„

No serious disease was observed. Lodging percent had been magnified fcr all treatments as observed, however, yield was not effected due tc lodging effect.

Generaly, as observed the result is encouraging and this observational trial shall continue with more number of lines to be able select promissing lines and.' promote the experiment to variety trial.

Yield and other trial results are present in table below.

325

805 - 1 / 8 2

Yield and Other Trial Results of "Tikur Azmud"

Rursery (Sheled)

LinesTotal

I: Yield j Rank in qt/haj

Daysto

Flower

Height in

cms .

j

Stand%

!Lodging%

Sedika 1 3 . 3 3i

1

3 90

■i

80 80

|I

85

/.rata 14 . 1 6 2 85 85 60 iOgolcho No.1 9-99 1 95 85 9^ 7 5

\ Bekoji 12.50 100 80 75 85 i

] Shenkore Dibe 10.83 5 95 90 90 95 i

, Silingo 10.33 6 85 80 90 90 |J

( Akiya Waji 13.33 3 90 80 85 95

i Tijo 15.49 1 95 80 85 95 i

Goljot a 12.50 4 90 75 60 50 j j

MeanI

12.461 1

Planting date Fertilizer facing Net plot Horvesting date

June 6 ,1 9 8 2

DAP 200 kg/ha 40 cms. bt. rows 12.00m2November, 1 6 , 1982

326

8 1 2 - 1

Coriandor Seeding I-tete Trial ( Kulumsa)

i.r.is trial started to know the optimum rate of seeding. At Kulumsa, seeding rate of 8 ,1 6 , 3 2 and 64 kgm. per hac . was used in the experiment. Seeding rate of 8 kgm/ha, out yielded the other seeding rates yielding 3C.03 qt/ha, followed by seeding rate of 6k kgm/ha, yielding 2 8.41 qt/ha.

Seeding r tc of 32 kgm/ha, was found to be the least yielder, giving 19*53 qt/ha. yield among treatments was found to be significant.

As observed, v/hen seeding rate increase yield and lodging precent is also increases except for the last see.ling rate, which e^-oond high yield

\instead o^ low, but high lodfvag percent.

Therefore to come accross the concrete and actual result, this trial shall bt: continued with more modified range of seeding rate at least for two trial seasons.

Yield and other trial results are presented in table below.

Table 812-1 Showing Yield and Other Factors of CoriandorSeeding Rate Trial

Code No, Treatments Seeding Patekg/ha Yield

qt/ha Rank Lodgi .• 5 %

1 8 .0 0 30.03 1 152 1 6 .0 0 23.31 3 35V.J 3 2 .0 0 19.53 k 95k 64.00 ro co • 2 90

Planting date Fertilizer DAP Spacing 20cms

1 5 -7 - 8 2

200 kg/ha bt.rows

Net plot size L.S.D. 3%

L.S.D. 1#C.V.

1 6 .0 0 m2

6 . 5 6 qt/ha 12.04 qt/ha 8 . 11#

327

Six Arssi collections of coriandor lines were considered in this trial* Assasa Ho, 1 & Cheffegila lines showed earlin-fess to flowering & harvesting compared to other lines. Iine Arata & Cheffegilla was found to be highly susceptible to lodging*

Assasa No# 2 & Assasa No . 1 lines were tolerrant to lodging than all other treatmentsslines Cheffegila, Arata & both Meti & Ogolcho out yielded the other lines, yielding 36*11 qt/ha, 32*7^ qt/ha, & 32.22 qt/ha respectively.

Yield among treatments was fou nd to be non-significant. Yield and other trial results are presented in table below*

815-1 Coriandor variety trial (Sheled)

Tab 1 e 815~ 1 jield and other tr.al results of coriandor variety trial (Sheled')

. Code Treatn ents Yield Rank Days to Days top-------Height in Lodging Stand | Shattering :

No* qt/ha flower harvest cms * > * *______'1 iirata collection 32.78 2 76 110 105 r ~ 85 7° I 152 Assasa No. 2 23,89 4 98 116 115 5 90 :} 10

3 Gheffegilla col 36.11. 1 68 105 140 70 ; 95 f 154 Assasa No. 1 22.22 5 46 \1 105 85 - 95 10

5 Meti collec. 32.22 3 73 131 145 30 95 155 6

;Cgolci:o r< 32*22 3 95 131 83 55 , 90 ‘ 10

■ : « 1 -

Sowing dete Fertilizer DAP Spacing Net plot size

25,6,82 200 kg/ha 40 cms lot rowK 9»Om2

L.S.D % NS L.S.D 1$ NSc*v. 17-84 %

329

Crop P r o te c t ion T r ia ls

1 1 6 - 1 & 2 /8 2 Time and Intensity of Soil Cultivation in Tflieat (Kulumsaf Asassa)

As the title indicates the objective of the trial is to identify the

optimum time of ploughing, harrowing and to determine the intensity of soil

cultivation.

This trial have been running for the last three consequative years at

Kulumsa and Asassa# As in previous years ploughing right after the small

rain, harrowing when weeds are 10 cm tall and an other ploughing in early June

and harrowing prior to planting ga,ve highest yield increase at both stations

(3990 1 4084 kg/ha respectively)#

ploughing when weeds are 10 cm tall, harrowing in early June and prior

to planting resulted 3763 kg/ha to Kulumsa and 3279 kg/ha to Asassa.

Spraying with Gramoxone + harrowing and very similar result with

Gramoxone application in the absence of ploughing#

Generally replacement of ploughing, harrowing and drilling by Gramo

xone application few days before planting has performed contact action, to

ensure complitely weed free conditions throughout the growing period either

combination with pre-emergence soil acting herbicide or one hand weeding

provides the maximum result.

330116 - 1 Time and Intensity of soil cultivation practice in wheat (Kuluinsa)

Design s RGB with 4 r e p l ic a t io n

P lan tin g date = July 2

Date o f treatments* June 21 July 1

Number Number

— —

Plant height, cm.

of of 7 weeks Prior Yield Relative

Entries 1 2 3 4 5 Plants

/in 2'

Tillers

/ .»2

*fter

Planting

to

Harvest

kg-

/haValue

a P H II 215 66 60 94 3090 100

b P H H 236 69 6 4 93 3763 1 2 1 . 8

c P H P H 250 70 63 96 3990 1 2 9 . 1

d P H 235 70 54 89 3331 1 0 7 . 8

e P H 250 6 4 56 79 2521 8 1 . 6

f 3 H 260 54 40 71 1490 48.2

g S 236 4 8 38 64 1330 43

P= Ploughing

H= Harrowing

S= Spraying h e rb ic id e (Gramoxone)

L.S.D %

L .S .D .1$

C.V. f

823 kg/ha

1127 kg/ha

19-9

1= Right a f t e r the small ra in

2= VJhen weeds a.re 10 cm t a l l

3= April/May

4= Early June

5= P r io r to p la n tin g

116 - 1 Cultivation Pra< ice in Vjhe?.,t (Kulumsa)

<elstive number oi remaining weeds - check - ploughed, cultivated, estivated, drilled (a) = 100Date of weed counting = August 10

Entries

E 3

:Cj c.bo O

£ -H j r j i ;

o & — ..ft

CX5rHo W

^ CQ

r 4 £Cl)

^ f t O 5?

o o

ti*H1--1 «Q) p ,

i £ o

O

CQP

&-P

3 “co f t k ftCO COE

EG CQ • H -H i—1 COCtf £fU) ^

s &<4*. C".

i •cv- ft

1—1 p-lO VJ VJ

CQ•H «rH P(a: f t:! to o

i

CP•H-p ci ON rQ•h co P o

o oo

m ct> P -p o o P Jhcd ro P) O

CQP E

-P p lC‘ *H ft "P O ti ca cn

•HS3 O

cdoCQP«? «H

•H 0 )fn tjoj -h

- P rH0 Cv)to a ,

CQ Ci ■h h Ph o

Cv Ti rH Cf.O fn r£ CP ft ft 1

rj ti • a> p > f t<£ CO

CQccO Cl) Jh CP

rO pr.

c?>CQ O' •H CPS3 i-3

wifiaf-i w

1 g;O (P OQ

•H

f’CJCT3 CQo -rJ U <p O CP

E-i ?•

a1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 .

— ——H

1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 ! i o o 1 0 0

b 1 0 0 + 6 2 1 0 0 4 1 0 0 + lO O 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 + 2 7 4 0 0 1 0 0 4 1 0 0 1 9 1 0 0 '1' 1D 01 8 3 i o o 4 * 1 0 0 + 1 0 0 * !‘

c 1 0 0 + 5& 1 0 0 4 1 0 0 + 1 0 0 + 100'' 1 C 0 + 4 8 80 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 + 3 7 1 0 0 + '0 & r 3 3 1 0 0 + * 1 0 0 + 1 0 0 +

d 1 0 0 + 7 1 1 0 0 4 91 1 0 0 + 1 0 0 4 1 0 0 + 7 5 5 0 1 0 0 * 50 1 0 0 + 4 8 i 0 0 ' r 1 0 0 3 3 . 1 0 0 + ^ 1 0 0 +\

1 0 0 ‘:'

e 51 7 8 K ) 0 4 100+ 100+ 100+ 96 41 80 100+ 100 69 15 100+ 1004 1004 81 } 71 : 78

f 100* 53 1004 100+ 67 100 4 2 86 60 lOO"1' 100 100+ 48 0 100+ 67 100+ (100+ 100'1'S 100+ 100* 20 100+ 83 7 5 • 13 100+ 5 0 • 100 100 100'1' 2 2 7 5 1004 100'1' 100+ *1004

i100+

Actual

tt 1 ■ " ~i)!

( • ) + 7 7 4 5 3 5 2 2 1 2 , 3 24 44 1 0 2 2 52 27 4 2 6 2 8 3 i 89 372

« / 2 No. / . m - -- I 1

332

1 16 - 2 Time and...Intensity of /-oil Cultivation Practice in IJheat (Asassa)

Design = RCB with 4 replicationPlanting date = June 19Date of Treatments = June 10 June 18

-^i Number Number Plant Height, cm Yield

Entr Les 1■2 3 4 5

Of Plants / m

OfTillers/ •»

9 VTeeks *1 ter I-1 ant ing

Priorto

HarvestRelative ; Value

a H H- 88 161 58 96 2583 100

b P H H 109 228 66 107 3279 126.9

c p H P H 118 249 77 116 4084 158.1d P H 83 178 62 98 2664 103.1e F H 92' 143 63 55 2339 90.6

f S H 57 85

CO 84 9 66 37.4s 54 91 43 85 922 35.7 I

P = Ploughing I..S.D. % 107 kg/haH * Harrowing L.ScL1. 255 kg/haS = Spraying Herbicide (Gremoxone C.V. ic 5-2

1 = Right after the small rfin2 = T!hen Weeds are 10 cm ts.ll3 = April / May4 = Early June5 = Prior to planting

R e l tive number of remaining weeds. Check - ploughed, ultivated, drlli2d«(a) Date of weed counting August 14

Entries \m-ran thus Chenopodium! Misc-bro^d . _, Brcnus . Cyperus Total broad Total grass Tot -1.___ .4ngust i fo1 ius - -Spp. _ Lej.f weeds - F^cfcinatus SPP«__ Leaf weeds ___ weeds weedsa 100

100+100V

100 100i

100 100 100 100 100bc

100+100+

50100+

5053

100+100"

100+100*

82

58100'!‘100'“

d 75 0 100 55 100 74 56 61e 50 100 too" ?3, 1004 70 27 39f 95 ioo'!’ i0CH" 100' ioo'r 100+ 100H 100+£ 35 100 10C" 10C+ ioo'r 76 100+ 100"

-_- _ - «. • ._Actual(a)

No,/ 20 1 rs<L 60 2 23 62 05

334

- 1a & "it Direct Drilling ?jid Conventional^ Seed Bed Preparation

in Teff (Kulumsa & A,sassa.)«

Till-£e systems play an important role in m-int.lining prodoctivity of soils espicially in the tropics« Zero or minimum tillage reduces a.isle of viater and soil erosion.

Two sirnilla.r trials ( 1A6 - 1a, 146 - 1b) were cond'acted =t Kulumsaend Asassa resoectively. The objective of these trials w s to compare he conventional method of seed bed preparation with minimum tallage techni~ues and to evaluate the feasebility of growing teff under minimum Tillage conditions. At both stations the highest grain yield was obtained from convertion.al seedbed prepax- tion. "t Kulumsa. there was no signifi- c nt yield difference between the r.-.tes of fertilizers, where as at sassa the highest yield was ohtained by using 50 kg/ha D*'F 25 kg/ha urea.

l t nK\Design : Split plot 2 seed bed preparation (M.nin plots) x fertilizer r.?tes (sub

Variety B7. - 354

Date of Treatments : Ploughing date V,:-y 24.7ramoxone application July 15

FI .nting dtte July 2C

14-6 i '^d. Convention>1 Seedbed Preparation in TefT (Kuliii.is?)

eed Beds

I F1 ou.;,hed, Cultivated, •) Drilled

HTprsyed m d Drilled

Plant Height cm;• D AJ- i

Fertilizer Rates / ha Fertilizer Rates / ha :Df'F 50 kg | D.ilP 50 kg ] reed beds D&P IJAJ 50 kg : -DAP 50 kg

•. 50 kg Urea 25 kg! Urea 50 kg j J'e-n 50 k^ i + 1 Fe^nOre? 25 kg j Urea 50 k*

Fertilizer Mean

2411

2026

2411

1863

| I i 2 : 1 9 I 2 1 3 7

i ..~ . ~ i.... -

2452

1942

2197

1

2 .4 2 5 : ■ 83 I

! I1944 i 70 |

. j »- *-J. • » <M|i|I! I

“1—

bo

71

8 3

72

....- - U - .

L.S.D o for Ileans

%

1#

Cul t iv --- t ion Methods

NSNS1 8.8£

Fertilizers

iv o

NS10.9

plots

VDhS ,^ Relative number of:r -.lining Weed *: Check - ploughed, cultivated, drilled ( .1) = 100

D'te of weed counting 'Yu.-ust 18

146 - 1a Direct Drilling an# Conventional Seed bed Preparation in Teff (Kulumsa)

r*

EntriesE (DP W I cii£ d -Ho (D I -p

ow Ubo oO rH! CiO rH I O u £ .H>3 r ■ ! N -H >i—l f t T i (j 1 h (hO 0 . £ o • (P-* r--* c * i y

<H ,3 «v ft

I!

1

ri

j

"I

. 2

i '6i—i

. CO oi rH a; ,zi ch: O cc £ r~* •H! -H •H •H £> - Pi aO c/) 1 r-H CO CO' -H s 0 i 2 •H

: r*CD c; H Y) i—1pH • G f t : C * c CO

o

1 c: oO f t

1 ° '•I 2 1 H

O** c .

CO 02 •H -H rH COib o $ >

£ :> O rHo >1 >

rH £o oft O

Om

I CT> Chi -h a> I h rzsI ri *H -!-* rH l 0 Oj

w a5 P+j•H NS ojo 02 n•d p •H i

i—i <X: S -PU o Or'-l r. Jh CD

ft ft ft

f-

T i COcv,o o ^ cd & ISI 4

co io•H (1)

1 ^ w ! rc.

s 4 S! -H r

T*<0 CO0 <dSh OrQ (1)•jtt 1-1

CH- P c O 0) F-t ft

A 1 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 I 100 I!2 100+ 85 60 100* 95 100* 100 51 69 100+ 58 100* 61 100 0

! C;pog |

93 85 50 100 90 100' 67 28 46 90 11 10C* 94 50 100 71 i

B 1 97 85 100* 100* 16 80 67 31 23 40 100* 100' 63 75 100 65 ! •2 10C+ a.

100 100* 100* 26 80 100* 39 54 25 100* 100* 13 75 100* 85

3

' ctuq.1

100* 92 100* 100' 5 100* 100*

 On 23 70 100* 100* 81 !

. iI1

75 100* 8l

(*i) No./m2

45 13 10 3 19 5 3 39 13 20 19 10 16 4 1

_____!174

wCO/ri•0 COrH rcJt, O +=> CD O EH

rH CO-rJ4-3 -J)O CDF-> ll

100 100

80 87

12 71

100* 77

0 0, 100*

0 0 93

46 220

146 - 1b Direct Drilling .-oid Conventionfl Seed b e d ? reparation in Teff (Asassa)C"-N\nn design i Split plot 2 seed bed prep5.rs.ti0n (main plots) x fertilizer rates (sub plots)

Variety i DZ - 354

Date of Treatments.- Ploughing date May 26

Gramoxone application July 9

Planting date July 10

f eed Bedst

*... Yield kg/hg________Fertilizer Ks.tes /ha t .fertilizer Ro.ies /ha

Sprayed ■•nd Drilled

Fertilizer He^n

DAP 50 kg

DAP 50 kg jtup 50 kg + ! +

Urea 25 kgJUrea 50 kgSeedbeds

U . .

. DtfP

. 50 LgDAF 50 kg Urea 25 kg

D.AP 50 Lg +

Ur e ?. 50 kgT'lean

597

iG\

I r-

I CO 653 690 45 48 - 55 49

228 208 228 221 36 1 38 43 39

413 514 441

L.S.D. for Mean CultivationMethods

Fertilizers

%

1 ic . v . f

595NS72

NSNS24

Relative number of remaining weeds: Check - ploughed, cultivated,drilled (At) = 100

Date of weed counting; August 16

146 — llo Direct Drilling p.nd Conventiona.l Seed bed Preparationin Teff (Asassa)

E n triesGaliumFpurium

Cyperus Misc-broad

Lenf weeds

Total broad

Lerf weeds

Total grass

Meeds

Total

Weeds

a 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

2 100* 100+ 100 100* 100* 100*

3 100* 100* 86 100* 100* 100*

B 1 83 100+ 0 38 100* 912 100+ 100+ 100+ 100* 100* 100*3 100+ 100 0 100* 100 100*

Actual

(A1)Ho. / n2

6 9

.

7 13 9 22

339

The experiment was 1 id out in a split plot design with seedbed as mainplot and fertilizer as sub-plot. The relevant agronomic and protection data are shown on the next table.

As in a previous year highest "rain yield was observed from conventional seedbed with highest fertilizer rates at both sites. Relatively better result was obtained at Kulumsa on Gramoxone sprayed and drilled plots with high rate of fertilizer while poor yield was recorded =>t Asassa# Generally there was positive correlation between fertilizer rate -i.nd yield.

116 - 3 & 4 Direct Drilling and Convention?! Cultivation Practice in 'Jheat(Kulumsa, Asassa)

9nS Design =» Split plot ? seed bed prep ration (Mlin plots) x 3 fertilizer r-teB (Sub plots)

Var i e ty = Enk 0 yDate of Treatment; Ploughing d=»te Ifey 24

Gr^jnoxone application July 3Plnting d.-te July 4

116 3 direct Driljj._ng nc Conventional Seed %bed rer r tion in ;ie?t (R'i Lvmna)

3ecd~Beds

_____ Yi ©I^ kg/ha__ ____ ant. at ion [x

_ __fertilizer .Rates / ha_.DAP: ’j'DAP JOOkfj DAT ')OOkg’j Seedibe<JsilQX^4licS.a_5pk£. I’r ea100kg

i 1 1 1jploighed, Cultivated, Drilled (2303 2720 ! 3002

Sprayed -nd Trilled

Fertilizer Hean

1295 1595

184 1 215B

: 10 1

2554

i ,-ejn

2702

1666

Fertilizer Rates / ha*S''P.V10pk^ Tree Ok??:

1 8 4

143

DA? 100kg

193

176

DjiF 100k?? T j r e k l O C k - j j

r

197

182

191

1 6 7

toA? . jOOkr

87

68

_____L

P1 ant H e i 'ht Cm .

Urea *50k«

Rates ' ha.. 100kg 4*ia lOOkg, tyiean

97 91

83 78

LSD for I-Iesn Cultivation Methods Fertilizers

5f NS 484

1 f NS 881

C.V 48 12.9

-4*rAHel.-t,ive number of ram- ir.it..; t’cm L; Check-ploughed, cultivated, drilled ( Al) = 100

fate of eed counting: August 13

1 16-3 0irect_Dr il1ir.g_ ;nd Convention?.! Seed-bed Preparation in 7he?.t (Kulumsa)

Entries

A 1

2 3

B 1r<L

3

Actual( M )

No. / T:

----------

£ 0 ctip CO (H &D O£ S •H O 1-1O 0 -P co CO Cm

rH O U s •HP5 <T Cs3 rD •rH >

1—1 P. •H fTi 1—1O 0 O «s

d , C5 CJ 0 tu—

100

100100H

75

93

98

89

100

100H

75

64

75

82

28

100

9472

72

100 '

100H

18

CO2

£i rHj P ^

RJ 3C rH£■<0 O

>r—1 S-iO O

P-. r-^

;

0rHO CO

•rH *rHbD CO

•H £ 0

^ aO (T,0 0

|

a'£

•rH 0rH p.,0 P ,e wE00

100 100 100

ioo'r 100+ 6062 100 70

23 19 100*

23 38 100*

8 24 90

13 21 10

— .-------------- — ..........J

CQ3

cq 2

•H 1—1O

<H

}

j CO

j

j1

CO .•H } •H •H

£ -P : CQ ’ rH COCD CO i 0 1 Cif f lR 2 ; 1—1 0rr* ?JD 1 fl> P . 1 a ' > 1s

r~i: X ra : £ Sh :

O

. i . ™

c.: |

ca g s o u

PQ

100 100+

10088

56

75

88

16

Ploughed, Cultivated, Drilled Sprayed -nd Drilled1 o DAP 100 kg/ha2 . i l ( i 5? +

3 « 11 fl +

j 100 I 71

i iooH

100

. 10c

100100H100H

100'*' 100*

1 100*

-r-

Urea 50 kg/ ha Urea 100

CQ ca

CO 052 •H

ai <H-H •H 0 0

•rH RCO

T i-p •H 2 ;0 -p 1—1 O0 0 «

c u C - P-. C->

_____ __

100

70

73

7

42

7

71

10C6988

10C4

10G4

84

ct. ? •niTkCQ CQ CQ'Ti CQ 0 d

O Ci 0 cr u 0CO j 0 0 ,Q 0-p U 3- t!0CQ » & CQ 1—1

O <+H O ■■d » O' Cm

1— 1 1 CJ (i CO 0 -O fO •H 0 •H 0 O 0d, i f Eh

►H

— f

58

100

5050

100"

100

33

67

10C* j t00++ I +IOC j 100

>+100

100

0100

0

0

100

100

100+100*

8610098

cqco<f-ltlOI—Itl'•po

E-t

wrS0)O

100

100"180

99

10041004

oEh

CO'd00

100 j

10C+ I,9 8 I

91 !

100'

100'

+

347

3+2

'•1 1 6 - 4 Direct grilling^jndn ConvenJfional Seed bed Preparation in Hheai (j • .)

Design : Split plot 2 seed bed preparation (Main plots) x 3 fertilizer rates (sub plots)Variety : Rom?ncy BCDate of tre?tment * Ploughing dote K r y 7

Gramoxone applic tion June 18FIanting date June 20

C' /*v /~\ /~\ 1} a n ri Fertilizer Rates /hakjQ Q a jL 'G u .^

D *P 100kg

DAF 100 kg +Urea 50 kg

D'P 100 +Urea100

Ploughed, Cultivated, Drilled 2490 2381 *]

cprayed and Drilled 506 691 7 78

Fertilizer Me-n 149^ 1536 1641

. k.. - „ .. ___ __■„ 1T> - . - , | .. . _____ _ ^ ^

Plant - ;ht cm. Fertilizer Rates /ha

Seedbeds D4F j DAP 100kgj DAP 100kgI . | 0aP W .100kg 'd/P 100kg Imoan_ jlOOkgj Urea! 5<&g TJrea10QkgjMean |100 k® prea 5Pkg tJrea100kg|He^

Rel tive number of Remaining 'eeds : Check-ploughed, Cultivated, Drilled (A1) = 100

Date of ‘eed Counting : '-ugust 15

116 - 4 Lriect Drilling Mid Conventions Seed, bed Prep-»r?.tion in vh eat ( Asassa)

Chenopodium .''m ar an thus Bromus Gyp er us Total broad Total grass TotalEntries

1 ?pp. 'ngustif olius T ;ctin=)tus cpp. Leaf 'eeds ' eeds "'eeds-4< —■ - - * — v

A 1

i

oo 100

___________ ________ ..

100 100 100 100 1002 50 100* 80 20 o o + 100* 100+3 50

+oo 88 0 100 73 87

B 1 50 59 100* 100* 65 6 o -i-

100*•2 33 24 100+ 100+ 30 100* 100*3 67 35 100* 100* 43 100* 100*

Actual(41) 6 17 25 5 S3 30 53

No. /m

116 - 5 Compulsion of Cultivation practice with Gramoxone and Round up (Kulumsa.)«

Two pre-emergence herbicides (Gramoxone and IZoundup) was compared with conventional seedbed preparation. Both herbicides were applied on green vegetation a week before planting, Grsmoxone has controlled most of the weeds soon after application where as Round vj> showed a gradual effect.

Weed count and identification was done 37 days after planting. On sprayed plots there was more weed population as compared to that of conventional. As a result of that low yield wr-.s obtaind'.from sprayed plots.

116 — 5 Comp? r is ion cf Cultivation Practice v/ith_Gr •■moxone .--ncl Roundup (Kulumsa) in 1-.Trieat (.Ttokoy)

Design : RGB with 3 replic tion

Sowing date J&ly 13

Date of Treatment; a, Ploughed on July 1 =jid harroijed on July 12b & c fpr^yed on July 6

3^5' ' '

Dosage No. of Plant Heigh'fc, cm.“ • ■ ■ - — i

Treatments! a.i.|leg/ha

plants

/m2

2 monthsfrom herbicideapplication.....

Priorto

Harvest

Y ield

kg/haRelativeValue

a Ploughed & Harrowed

I - ... . '

232 37

r. - __-- .. m

80

11530 100

b Cramoxone | 0.5 267 26 64 836 55c Round up I 2-5 1

J - -

236

r r r \ ^

I I____ 75 1249 82

l _ _

L.S.D. 5 i NSL.S.D. NSC.V % 29

Entries

B

C

.ctual(a)p.-./mI

Relative number of rem-ining ,Teeds = Chedc - ploughed, Cultivated, Drilled Di.te of eed counting; August 20

H6 - 5 Com^axis ion of Cult ivat ion Pro ot ice with Gramoxone gnd Round up (Kulumsa)

E .3 ui r .C £ - O CP QOr-H j ^ ;<-H1 P* c u; ! a, : I

100

100 ■’

64

a? i•H-p ’o f-, < h ^ ;•h a I3 o ,O CO i

100

67 : 56.!

9 '

cC cr; o0 rH M CH £ -H

•H J> r*H Ph01 COO P.,

100

100' :

91

!rH O 10 •H -HtuD W •H £• O , A

I O "•!o O

; 100

! 2 6 42

Ci5 •• fl < >HI ^I 0)oo

33 19

wI M3 ' - P

» IS IS

w 2 •H i—IO<H•H-PCO£10£

| 100 I! 100'

100

,+100

14

14

An experiment was conducted at Asassa nd Robe to id e n t i fy the

best h erb icid e rga.nist major weeds in wheat.

An questionably Cpmpetitionfrom s e v e r -1 weed species lowers y ie ld s

however as there was no le av y in fe s ta t io n of weeds at ^sassa there w s

no s ig n it ic a n t y i e l d d if fe re n c e between treatm ents. On the contrary

appreciable y i e ld increase was obtained ;.t Robe due to Terbutryne, 'hlo-

rofoluron , Stomp 330E, Lontrel 111 ox.an + Iox.ynil r e s p e c t iv e ly .

• 'hen applied -t the ra te of ?.5 3 It/ha. d isp lays a good

e f f i c a c y -*gainst most Broad-leaved weeds,phalaris paradoxa & bromus

p e c tin ? tu s .

Tiie a c t i v i t y o f Terbutiyne as pre-emergence h erb ic id e i s dependent

on climatic- condition at sowing (moist s o i l ) , moreover w ell prepared s o i l

uid the depth o f the seed into the s o i l is determining fa c t o r .

I) esign % RCB with 4 replication Sowing d~te i June 19

Date of Treatments; f '.rid i June 20

116 - 6 1,‘eed Control in 1 Tie?t ( isassa)

c, k s e > b*i 117 j s k , 1, m, n ■ugust 16

Dosage No. of : Fl?jn.t Height|

, om.Treatments a.i. |

hg/haplants/m2 |

i_____ j

2 weel:s•from herbicide . application

Prior '■ j__.Crop jlieldt0 the-1th I kg/ha

h -rvest- ____ . . — 1..... -i

a I'o treatment:

113 72 lI

102 1• |

112097

b I '■ad weeding 109 69 98 i 1 | 2210 jc I>. CF A 1.00 103 68 96 j 1 2182 |d liCPA * Me coprop 0. 5h- 1 • 0 • 99 i 63 .98 i 1 2045 !

e loxynil 0.5 111 68 99 ; 1 2351f Terbutryne 2.5 102 64 101 | 1 2230

g .lloxrn + loxynil !0. 75+0*5 106 68 99 ; 1 2276h Brittox 1.5 106 68 101 ! 1 2196

j ;hlortoluron 2.9 106 70 101 ; 1 2111

j romoxynil j 0.37 101 63 97 1 1 2018

k Fanvelp 1 .6 2 102 65 97 ; 1 21171 Lontrel 416c 4.0 108 64 95 i 2 2052

m Fepro Special 2.5 9 6 66 96 | 1 2125n Lontrel EF 463 j 2.1 106 66 99 | 1

________ I—

2268

L.S.D. 54 - NS L.S.D. \f = NS C.V. = 13.71-

m c-«. h- on hj (t> pj o

L>-' VJI vji -p*. VJI o j 4^ 4^ 4^

ro'

O j OJ ro ro ro <V> ro ro ro Oj ro

! wO ' Oj Oj OJ OJ OJ 4*> ro 4^ Oj -£»

1 ^ OJ ro o j Oj ro "O ro ro OJ OJ OJ

iro

■\ -

OJ OJ OJ OJ V«>—1 ro OJ O-1 Oj OJ

OJtr

OJ Oj Oj VJI l-o OJ 4^ 4^

j o j OJ fV) o j OJ OJ ro Oj OJ Oj Oj OJ

->L . „

OJ ro ro OJ \5 ro Oj OJ o j Oj 4^

I

*■4^ OJ 4^ Oj OJ OJ OJ OJ 4^ OJ OJ

OJ VJI -fc» VJI vji VJI VJI J i . 4^ VJI VJI

r

ro 1V> ro ro ro OJ rv> OJ ro OJ OJ OJ

ro OJ OJ OJ Oj Oj Oj Oj OJ OJ OJ OJ

rr1 0)Dd2c+s- !m

cArmrrVithusvo vo

- ..... -J ngustifolivs

vo vo ' Guizotia Scabr?.

vo vo ‘ Chenopodium f \lbum i

vo vo I M a lvaIVert icil.rta

vo vo j G a l in s o g a• Pi.rvif.lorar — — — j

vo vo GaliumSpurium i

vo vo jj SonchusL ,_r?p.

vo!

DaturaStramonium

vo vo Oxe.lisSpp

VO vo Bromus Pectinatus

Misc - broadVO vo Leaf :eeds

R e la tive number of remaining weeds: IIo Treatment (a) * ;00

Date of weed count in g ; September 9

116 6 Weed. £ojitr_ol_ in_^he?t ( Asassa)

i COr-<

— -|

•rH rH

w o - d w(■': "rf O O

c< SIS

O C h Vi « :■1 C \

»1•

iin | CO

CO

t J< ■ CO • 0 T i Ir_j 0 j

%c. j

i

t

j

E n t r i e s jP c:h

- H“P -P£ 03 •

1

&r-> -H ,• H ?H j

7 1 g i

ru6• H ft ^ f t ?

• p ’r.S ! -0 £ ,e -pO o t f4 0 1P Q P * j

rH 00& D rd

•Va 0W £•rH

JO Q

1—1fH. i

O r-i '

• a w 1

■—1 t !

jj> is 0

1— l COo' r j- p 0 0 0

i Pir_i «/}

•rl wU I r H i

--1•H} j ‘ ° *— t <

jE-i

-i.

f;-h 5i

a. 100 I 100 '« 100 100 :

" |

100 ; 100

* ' •• J i

100 ! 100

j100

13 !481 I 36 !

j100+ 62 28 j 75 55 | 38 43 i j

° 6 5 1 55 j 100+ I 56 I95 ! 100+

1.. 71 86 ; 81 i

d 75 18 | 60 94 i i 100+ I i 75 63 I100+ 97

e 68 :!

l27 i 20 88 I 83 | 50 ; 55 83 j i 75

1

r 5 100'1" 025 i 100+ I 0 ! 29 100 79 |

g 68 36 40 26 j 77 | 100 i » ! 64 63 !

h+

100 + 27 I 0 3? iII

ioo+ ! 100+ ; ioo':';

100+ : 100^

i 100+ 10 I 4° ! 3 j i 100+ 100 : 86 » 93 91 '! ij 100+

I36 100 56 j 98 0

! I ; 100 ! 84 ! 98

i

k ,100*i

27 * 6o i j 91 j 84 ?5 i 100'1' 86 100+

1 ' 73i (J 9 i 6o | 53 !: 1Cj+ Q ’ 594.

100+I

93 ] •

m 38 9i

20 j 50 j 100+ 100 i 30100+

I80

n 100+

0

20 I 47 s’100+ 0

? .: I00'rL ....

86 99

— I----- 1 • -

Ac t u a l'ff

(a) 40 11 5 34 94 4 ! 561 132 188

Uo./lE2I____ j

i

351

Design i RCB with 4 replication

Sowing date : July 19

Date cf treatments: f,i and m July 21c,d,e,g,h,j,l,n md o August 25 k September 1

116 - 7 Control in 'he - t (Robe)

Ii

Treatments |

I

Dosage jMo. of . ja.i. jplants

kg/ha ! /m2 j*- ____ .4 . . J

Plant Height, 2 weeksfrom herbicide npplication

cm. ..Prior to

harvest _ ..... __J

I1

Yield |kg/ha !

:

a :;o treatment

iI 216 41

I I; m 1008 i

b iH-nd weeding 220 39 ; 74 1236 |c MCPA 1.0 204 40

j 751101

<1 UCP A + Kecoprop o.5+ 1 .0 200 40 ! 811337

e loxynil 0.5 188 42 77I 1105f Terbutryne 2.5 236 49 911 2550g 111 ox an + Ioxynilj 0.75+0*5 188 42 1 1534h Brittox 1 .5 188 40 j 78 1258 ji Chlortoluron 2.0 192 47 85 1664

j Bromoxynil 0.37 200 44 i 76 1283lc B >.nvel F 1 .6 2

CO 44 80 13291 Lontrel 41° C 4.0 192 47 I 86

11619 j

m Stamp 330 i? 1.98 196 48 | 88 1645 In Lontrel EF 463 2. 1 184 46 82 1458 |0 Cleaval 212 43 79 1427

L»S.T). 5/- = 327 kg/haL. .T). 1- = 424 kg/h aC.V. = 16.5f

352

Relative number of remaining Veedss No Treatment (a) = 100

Date of Weed Count in-: S'ept ember 17

116 - 7 Weed Control in T1heat (.Robe)

Entri = sPolygonum Nep -?.lense

Guizotia j Misc-broad Sc ->bra j Leaf Needs

PhalarisParadoxa

'Total broad L^~fWeeds

Total grass Treeds

“ ITotalWeeds

a 100 100 100} 100 100 100

r100

b 14 29 63I-\ 73 21 73 54

c o 42 50+

100+ 14 100+ 81

d 1 55CO ■ 100* 16 100 70

e- 0 13 100+ 14 100+ 84

f 1 6

1324 3 24 16

g 11 6 75 74 14 74 53h 1 3 6 99 3 99 64i 10 0 38 100+

9+

100 76

j 51 0 25 87 36 87 69

k 8 42 50 % 20 76 551 0 10 88 100+ 9 +

100+ 78m 25 100+ 63 40 48 40 43n 1 32 50 100+ 9 100+ 100+0 0 13 88 o o +

i I I !....................

9 o o + 100+

Actual (a) i o • /rr:

79 31 8 206 118 206 324

1

r o 3 3 >—1 C_J. <J=!t V CK} a> ■ o CT*

r

1

-ii* - o Vn 4^, CO ON 4^ O n OJ vn 4^ VJi VO v o

»f(iI

vn vn VD V^ ON VJI VJI VJI vn 4*> VJI —j On v o v o

i

|vn OJ 4*. 4 » OJ ro ro ro ro ro ro o j ro VO v o

4^ Oj OJ 4i> - 4^ ro 4^ vn 4^ VJI ro Oj v o v o

OJ OJ 4 * Oj ro OJ ro Oj OJ OJ VJI ro ro v o v o

OJ OJ OJ o j -> OJ fO ro Oj ro o j ro ro VO v o

On vn —J ON OJ vn —j Vn 4^ Oj O j OJ OJ v o v o

|Oj Oj On -fc. Oj ro ro ro ro ro ro ->■ OJ v o v o

r

i

-P* 4S* -P* IO vn 4^ VJ? ro ro ro ro ro v o v o

On —j 4^ ON —J ON - j ON -fs* OJ —3 ON ON v o v o

o j fO ro OJ - OJ ro 4^ ro ro ro ro ro v o v o

0<rf~4H’Ora• Polygonum

| neplaense

! G u izo tia \ nca.bra.

| Chenopodium f album ..

( Rum ex ’ bequar t i i

— r if(ti

---i

Commelina

| Plantago ;| 1 me eo lata

f ,1m ar'Mithus *angustifolius f

_ j --------------------------------------------

r G l in so '’a parui f lo r a

f Bromus , p ectin atu s

Pholaris

P ar ad ox a,

Loliumtemulentum

OsI

isisf'U' HI

f’co050MTO

. 3•ro

e[OJ&§■ ci-■ CD•3oJ

CO

—0

toio

VJlVs*!

35^

118 — 1 Control of "he-, t diseases with Fungicides ( 5theya)

This trial was planned to screen more effective rates of two fungicides (T: lb & PP 450)' "gainst leaf diseases of wheat. For that matter three different rates of these fungicides where observed ';nder Utheya’s ^gro-ecological conditions.

However, during the growing season there was no severe leaf disease incidence, except septoria. Statistically there was no signific nt yield difference between fungicides, different rates and the check.The trial has to be repeated with addition of new fungicides for further test.

355

118 - 1 Control of vfaeat Diseases wit]

Design

Variety

RCB with 4 replications

Romany BC

Date of Treatments Spraying October 16

T ~ ’

I..Treatments

Dosage Froduct It/ha

PlantI Height I ■m cmat Harvest

Disease Septoria 0-9 Scale

| Yieldkg/ha

I ~-- -

Iielative?Value

ii a Check 107 6 2090.

100

b Tilt 250 ^C 0.25 106 3 2070 99

c 1 Tilt 250 EC 0.50 107 3 2040 98

d Tilt 250 T3C 00• 105 4 2130 102

i eIPP 450 0.75 103 3 2070 99

f PP 450 1.00 104 4 198O 95

g

L

PP 450 1.25 105 4 1930 92

L.S.D, J; = NSLo S.D. 1 = NSC.V. % = 13.3

356

The techniques and plan for this experiment was similar to wheat (116— 1) • ■ Application of Gramoxone (Contact herbicide) on green vegetation a week before planting has controlled nearly all species of weeds. Guizotia scabra was exceptional for its capability of eventual recovery.

H Asassa the crop has suffered a lot from moisture stress th?t occured pi anting. \1 though insecticide' was sprayed aplids attackwas.severe on direct drilled plots as .a result yield.was extremely depressed.

Considerable results were achieved from plough less plots under Kulumssa’s soilf the highest yield increase being harvested from two ploughing and two h rrowing.

Despite the many advantages of minimum and ploughless cultivation some problems cannot be disregarded for crops like rape and teff, ploughing for rape is indispensable, (absolutely necessary)

336 - 1 & 2 Time -and Intensity of Soil Cultivation in Rape (Kulumsa & Asassa)

357

336 1 . Intensity of f-.oil Cultivation Practice in R,?pe ^Kulumsa)

Design = RCB with 4 replicationPlanting date = July 3Date of Treatments= June 21 July 1

i I Number of Plagts /m

7 weeks af t er Pi nting

• Number of Plants /m2at

Harvest

Pl.-nt Height, cm

,

Entries 1

ii

2

. __~ ~

3

---

u

1

5 7 weeks after Planting

Priorto

Harvest

Yieldkg/ha

Rel?t iveV.'.lue

a j i P H II 415 227 51 114 1998 100b P TJLI H 397 222 57 124 2328 116 .5c ; F H P H 449 217 54 125 2518 126.0a j P H 419 226 45 1 15 1874 93.8

e ! P H 389 240 44 1 15 1901

*;— 0IT\a\

f S H 404 236 34 93 986 An "j L i-y • 3

g j. - r — *

«2 443 252 35 92 1024 51.3

PloughingHarrowingfTprDying herbicide (Gramoxone)

L.S.D. %

L.S.D.C.V. $

420 kg/ha 575 kg/ha 15.7

1 = Right after the small r-.in2 = Hhen weeds are 10 cm tall3 = April / Kay4 = Early June5 * Prior to Flnting.

oc+£t—'

(H3 M j CO p j O o ' P>

ro

a-4H*Ow

1i Oj Co

On oj Ck CT\ O O O -> ro -* oj O. O, O+ ~T

1 Polygonujn . N epalense

C o r r ig io laC ap en sis

[ Ul

!

ro o 4 o o vo o OJ O, ~J O, O, ON o

T 'r +

-OO O —3 O O OO O O O o o OS o

+ + + +

■CommelinaSpp ..... i

_soo

ro -4 oo Ul Ul 4 O co ro oj o o -Fs» o

Ameranthuss p p

1!i -p*

i $r

—i ^ <v> ro —j ui o —j o Ul ui ui O O Ul o

—i ^ o ui w ro o o Oj Oj Oj —3 O O H*

G u iz o tia Sc-^bra

G a lin s o g a i P a r v if lo r a

f Hj w

4

. _v _iO O On o O C* oO, O, .-g O, O -o O

+ -r + -!*

_1 1 _A—j ui o o ro o Ul O O O, O Ul o +

O x a lisSpp

! A n s g a lis A rv e n sis

4

-£=*

_iOJ FO ON OJ O

ui ro -~j o on 4 - o

—3 o —o ro ui O o Ul O, ui Ul o o

+

Solatium?pp

1 Gbenopodium

' Spp

Os O O O O O O O ° + ° + ° + ° + ° + ° + =>

S e ta r iaP a lid e f u s c a j

' —0 O 4 . O O ro rg OO OJ O O VO VO o

. +___ + _____ ...P h a la i'isPgrad ox a....... . .. ...I

■'rT '”‘r

O o o O o o 1 Snowdenia 9^ ° 4. ° + ° + ° ° ° j P o ly s ta c h y a

ro°f,......

-V-S. _i OS VD 4» O o O O O U) Ul O

Bromus ' P e c tin a tu s i

r

| ro

\

:

O O Ul O O O O 0, 0 ,0 0 0 0 0 + 4- +

, . . . . . ....rj

M isc-b ro ad Le?i.f weeds

o o o o o o [ M is c -g r a s s ° + ° + °... ° + ° + ° ° | ‘ feeds

!' E ?f vo ui o ui oo o —j o > T o ta l broad

w j ^ ° + ^ ^ °+ ^ o ? L e a f weeds; . . i . .. _____ __ ________ r

4*.Ul

roOjOo

o O vo o o o oo, o OD o o o o

+ + + + +

O O C\ vo o oo o O. O OJ Oj o o

+ + +

T o ta l g r a s s %reeds

T o ta lT.reeds

uCl)c+COOHj

COCDP'0

1c+-H"J3Cq

£«chro

<T>C+-H-*s<D

O'<0*?OHhPO(t»5H-2H-t!

(ft

<UCPp>m

o£>-CDS'

‘dI—1Q

13*CD

O£<rt"

<0 .cf-(DP-

ftH-

COPi

Oo

OJOJo\

ft?[3

r®Ja»ISfp*|3J c+-ia>iw‘ H-

(hj

°r h-

o

s

fe-

r°

N■j0Jc+°!<pIh-I t s

f£5fbf

1 M P>

359

Design : BCB with 4 replication

Planting data June 19

Date of Treatments : June 6 June 18

336 - 2 Time gjid Intensity of Soil Cultivation Practice in Rape (Asassa)

ISntries 1 2 3

r

*

IJ

j5

j Number of P la n ts

/m^

9 weeks ,?fter

! P la n tin g

Number ofP i .nts

/ 2 , /m at

Harvest

...P la n t, H(

9 Veeks .

a f t e r

p lan tin g

sight.. cm

P rior

to

Harvest

Y ie ld

kg

/ha

R e la tiv e

Value

a p H II | ' 133 272 28 94 294 100

V P H H 153 291 38 1 1 2 480 163o3

c P H P Ii 194 254 56 . 129 10 19 34^.6

d P II 152 250 28 93 336 114.3

e P H 182 310 29 83 237 8 0 .6

f c* E 155 235 17 77

"ntCM 4 2 . 2

g;

C** > 106 176 13 67 9 1 31.0

P = Ploughing L .S .D . 5$ 16 1 kg/ha

FI = Harrowing * L .S.D . 1# 222 ks/ha

C = f ip raying herbicide (Gr^moxone) C.V % 29*5

1 = Right after small rain2 = ihen weeds are 10 cm t-?ll3 = -pril / May4 = 'larly June5 - Prior to planting

Time :?nd Intensity of e oil Cultivation Pradtice in Rape- ( isassa.)

Relative number of remaining weeds 5 Check, ploughed, cultivated, drilled (-) = 100Da,te of weed counting 1 August 14

" ' — lir r ™ - i- \ .f — “

Entries Chenopodium ilms-ranthus Bromus f }Cyperus Misc-broad Total brosd Tot?.l grass Total• Qpp. 'ngustifol:-'^ Fectinatusj. Spps Leaf '/'eeds Ee.?f v?eeds ••eeds '’eeds

a. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100b 50 100* 85 67 +

100 100+ 86+

100c 5G 10Q+

39 ' 100+ 100+ 100+ 77 -r100

d 75 71 100 I 56 10C* 100+ 100+ 100 +e 88 lOCf 81 44 100* 100+ 71 95f 25 38 100+ . 100+ 100* 65 100 + 100+T

■ct* -'.1

0 10 100+ 100 + 100 * 29 100+ 100+

¥0, /m^8 21 26 .9 2 31 35 66

361

336 - 3 & 4 Direct Drilling ,nd Conventional Seed bed Prep-r-tion in R~-pe (Kulumsa & Asassa)

Two trials (336 - 3 & 336 - 4) following the ssme pl^n were conducted gt Kulumsa '-nd ,'sass.-r respectively. The experiment vr-s laid out in a split plot design with seedbed ?s m in plot -rnd fertilizers rate sub-plot , As -* weed control device on directly drilled plots G r .unoxone was spmyed before pi nting.

The heighest yield was obtained from conventional seedbeds with the hieghest r-te cf fertilisers at Kulumsa, where as -t \sassa the haeghest {:rr in yield w-s obtained by using 100 kg/ha DAF + 50 kg/ha urea.

In general, from previous experimental results, it is -dvis ble net ■30 pr ctice the minimum tillage techniques sp.eci?lly on small £ro.in crops lil-e r?pe, teff eto under Asassa & Kulumsa7 s ^gro-ecological conditions.

CVJvorADesign; Split plot 2 seed bed preparation (main plots) x 3 fertilizer rates (sub plots) Variety: Target

336— 3 Dire c t_Dr i 11 in^ ? nd_ Conventional Seed bed Prep3r -1ion in Rr.pe (Kulumsa)

Date cf Treatment: Ploughing d--te Cr irioxone application Planting date

z-’j 25

J uly 3 July 5

I ".'.old kg/ha

Seed Beds:j

Fertilizer Ra*DAP 1 DAP 100 kg

! +100kg ' Urea 50 kg

, Ploughed, Cultivated, Driller 478r

635

Sprayed and Drilled 103 95

1Fertilizer I'e.an

j291 365

Lsr for tv.e-n

___PI -nt Population /m c

■\ip 100kg' Seed beds

Plant Height cm

716

282

1

459

6 13

160

J l_ _

Fertilizer^ Rates /ha._ Fertilizer Rates /haDAP

10Ckg

D AF 100kg

Urea 50kg

DAP 100kg +

Urea. 100kgMoan

dap

100kg

DAP 100kg DAP 100kg + +

Ur ea 50kg Ureal00kg

Mean:

a 213 203 194 203.

. . .

53 62 ; 69 61

* 345 342 351 346 b 84 95 102 .9 4

a 198 205 187 197 a 37 49 j 51 46

b 310 317 299 309 b 64 62 ; 78I 68

- ■ -J

— _____

r

III....

*

%ifc v

CultivationMethods

252

46336

.Tert Hirers

141198

29

Relative number o f Remaining creeds: Check - ploughed-, Cultivated, Drilled (A1) = 100Date of ',Teed Counting : ' ■u.st 19

336 - 3 Directdrilling ?nd Conventional Seed bed. Preparation in Rape (Ku^-umsa)

*■— - ■— ----------■

...---- -,

w >

E n trie s £ OJp ra s sO 0) f5D iH"3 CviH ft O CD f1* £5

is-H-p to O *hn ,q•H CtJ pi Oc oo

njn? f-(*40 O O rH M Ch S3 -H ■H > r—tfT- i~O P-i

ni i—io m■H *Htj3 m •h £ fn 0Oo o

nSS3•H0)S2 Pn O QiO CV:

■HCQ rH3 o-)-» -H§-sU 2 rf- bii E fl '

CQ’HiH •• ft6 S*

co m•H 'Hi—t co a £ b0 0 ■ ^ > fj ^

W-PctCQ PJ 2 -H S -P o o

(h O W p.

~

OCQ2c<h*H 0

c* -H -fr5 i—t © Cu K l-U

W c6 *H H O C$ T rH QU

■ XI C5

^ CQ tri Ti0 0k o1O <HCQ *t. •H 0E .-1

cqCOCuUElOta 0•H 0

i'

dO ^ ^ 0 ,0 01-1TO «H -p <t: o o Eh i-3

ra !S3 1ci 1h icuorH CQ [ i—1 W C!1 >z}-P 0 -P 0 O 0 IO 0^ f e- - ;

1A 1 100 100 -0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

2 100+ 100+ 57 91 "T100 57 +

100 67 +100 ■ 62 67 9C 0 100 85 94

3 59 57 71 82 100 67 50 33 40 32 100 60 7.5 8? 75 SoB 1 39 100+ 23 100+ 62 100+ 50 40 100 59 100

+100 69 67 68

2 38 100+ 100+ 18 100+ 24 • 100+ 83 8 100+ 61 90 100+ 65 60 633 38 100'K.• 100+ 14 ■ 75 52 +

100 75 33 100* 52 10G+ 100 64 67 65

yi.ctual .

(' “ 1) 121 23 7 22 8 21 12 12 40 37 92 10 4 236 173 409,T / 2 K'o# /m

■ - L .J ______ -----

5336 - 4

Design = Split plot 2 seed bed Preparation (Main plot) x 3 fertilizer rates (sub-plots)Variety = TargetDate cf Treatments Ploughing q MSiy 7

Harrowing : June 18

Qramoxone application: June 18

Pl-nting date s June 20

and Conventional SeedbedPr^^tio^ln R ^ ( ,,„r -

Yield kg_/haVdumber of Plants /m2 PI nt Height cm

Seed Beds.

Fertilizer Rates /ha Fertilizer Ra fces /hg Fertilizer Rates /haDAP DAP 100kg j DAP 100kg } dap DAP 100kg DAP 100kg DAP jDAP 100kg DAP 100kgl0°Vg i +

Urea 50kg iUrea 100kg'•ean

100kg +Urea 50kg Urea 100kgMean I

100kg j+

Urea 50kg Urea ^OkgAe :-.n

Ploughed, Cultivated, Drilled 315I

450 409 391! a) 173 140 109 141 * ! 46 52 45i! jb) 341 286 214 280 b) 108,

•11 lO 123 116

Sprayed and Drilled 056 106 i 103i

|88i a) 67 73 86 75

.a) 11! 15 17 15

! it) 135 109 130 125 b) 61 i ' r 64 65 63

----— ------ --------- ..... .......... . 1 __ __________ ____ ________ 1

LSD for Means Cultivation Methods Fertilizers

% 145 NS1 f 267 NS

C.V f 33

Relative number of remaining weeds: Check-ploughed, cultivated, drilled (A1) *= 100Date of weed counting : August 15

336 - 4 Direct Drilling and Conventional Seedbed preparation in Rape (Asassa)

ITS

G?,linsoga Amaranthus Bromus Mis c-broad Total broad Total grassEntries P.?,rviflora Angus't if ol iu.s Pectinatus LenjF weeds Leaf weeds ! ■■•Jeeds

A- 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

2 83 100+ 88 100+ 100+ 100+3 100+ 100+ 100+ 100+ 100+ 100+

3 1 8 0 100+ 100+ 16 100+2 42 14 100+ 100+ 30 100+3 25 3 100+ ■|00+ 26 100*

Actual(A 1 ) 12 36 8 2 50 8

No. /mi M --- -- . ----------- - —------- ----...— --- ——----->--- - . — =’■" — “““ —— ~

LIST OF CADU/aRDU PUBLICATION . .

EflaJtBsfci1# Report No* 1 «- on the Establishment of Regional Development

jproject in Ethiopia, October, 1966*

Part I General BackgroundM II Project Outline11 III Appendices

(A reprint of the Summary is also available)*

2* Report No* II *- On the Etstablishment of Regional Development Programme in Ethiopia, May, 1967■ (The building programme appears under separate cover)*

3. Trials and Demomstration Plots at Kulumsa in 1966t July? 1966*4* Reconnoitering survey of the Water Resources in Chilalo Awraja by

Carl Gosta Wenner, March, 1967*5. Creation of a Forestry Administration in. Arssi Province by

Gunnar Poulson, Maroh, 1967*6* Crop Sampling in the Ghilalo Awraja 1966» Plant Production Departmetn,

May, 1967*7* Results of Trials and Observation' Plots at the Kulumsa Farm.in

Arssi Provinoef Crop Production Department, May* 1967 •8* Sagure, a Market Village in Ethiopia by Bo Wickstrorrr, June,. 1967*

9. Forestry Nursery and Planting Techniques by Gunnar Poulsen, .June, -1967*10* Trials and Demonstration Plots at the Seed Improvement Station, ;

Kulumsa and Swedish Mission, Asella in Arssi Province, Regional Development Project, July, 1967*

11* Grain Marketing Experiment in Arssi by. Lars Leandor, August, 1967* •

IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD (CADU Phase I & II)1* Plan of Peration for Regional Agricultural Development in the Chilalo"

Awraja, Arssi Province, Ethiopia, 196T-1970.

2* Some Reflections on Water Erosion.in Chilalo Awraja by Gunnar Poulsen, October, 1969*

3* The Taungya Afforestation Method by Gunnar PoujLsen, November, 1967*4# Grow Better Bahire—Zaaf in Ethiopia by Gunnar; Pul sen, January, 196^* r

s.

5. CADQ Semi-Annual Report 1967/68» January, 19$3*

6* Census in Sagure-Yeloma 1967 tyy Eksmyr, February, 1968* ' '.7* The Changing Rural Society in Arssi Land: Some Findings from

a Field Study 1966~67 by A* Lexander March, 1968#

8. CADU (Pamphlet in English and Amhario)*

9. CADU Plan of Work and Budget 1968/69 (with preliminary estimates' for 1969/70)*

10* Cultivation Practices and the Weed, Pest and Disease Situation in some Parts of the Chilalo Awraja ‘hjr Bo Bengtsson* Ma^oh, 1968*

11® Introductory Agro-Botaaical Investigations in Grazed Areas in the Chilalo Avttega “by Sigurd Hakansson. June, 196^*

12* Results of Trials and Observations on Fields, Forage Crops at the Kulumsa Farm and in Asella 196T/68, June, 1968*

13« Crop Sampling in the Chilalo Awraja, Ar ssi Provinoe 1967» June, 19$*14* General Agricultural Survey of the Project Areaf Extension &

Education Department, July, 1968#15* GADU Statistical Digest, Planning & Evaluation Sectionf May, 19^«

15. Descriptions of Agricultural Demonstrations, Extension & Education Department, 1

17* Field Trials and Observations 1963/^9* Crop Production Departmentyl8« Feasibility Study on a Farm for Breeding rkvfc-fei«=> *,+

Arssi Province^ P3.anning & Eva. In at 3 on Section, September, 1^$}*

19, Feasibility Study on the Electrification of Sagure Town, Planning& Evaluation Section, September, 19^«

20, CADU Annual Report 1967/$, September 1968«

2l* Census in Dighelu Village, May* 196^»22. A Case Study of Peasant Farming in Eighelu and Yeloma Areas, Chilalo

Awraja, Ethiopia? January, 1969*23« CADU Semi-Annual Report 196^ 1 February, 1969*24* Results of Demonstration 1968* February, 1969*25» CADU Plan of Work and Budget 1969/70, April, 1969»

26* Tentative CADU Programme 1970/75» Addis Ababa, March 1969*27. Feasibility Study on Sunflower Protein Concentrate and Fafa Mixing

Plant by Goran Nyberg, Addis Ababa, May, 1969•28* Results of Trials and Observations 1968/69? Crop Production Department

Addis Ababaj April, 1969*29* CADU Evaluation Studies: Health Education (Base-line Study)

by Goran Nyberg, May, 1969*30. CADU Evaluation Studies! Crop Sampling 196$ by Goran Nyberg,

Asella, May, 1969*

31# CADU Evaluation Studies; Training of Model Partners (Base-line Study) "by Goran Nyberg, Asella, Ma$> 1969*

32* Progress Report No* 1, Implement Research Section* June, 1969*

33* Feasibility Study on Local Roads and Market Places in Chilalo Awr ja, by Lars Leander, Addis Ababa, August, 1969*

34* CADU Annual Report 19 6^/69*35* Census in Sagure —Yeloma by Gunnar Arhammar, Asella,

February, 1968*36# Census in Golja (Ketar Genet), by Gu-nnar Arhammar, Asella,

March 1969*37* Sanitary Survey in Golja (Ketar Genet), by Gunnar Arhammar,

Asella, April 1969*

38. Kap Study of Mothers in Golja (Ketar Genet), by Gunnar Arhammary Asella, April,. 1969*

39* Food Survey of Pre-school Children’in Golja (Ketar Genet), by Gunnar Arhammar, Asella, April, 1969*

40# Health Survey of Pre-school Children in Golja (Ketar Genet), by Gunnar Arhammar, Asella, April, 1969*

4 1, Report on a Combined Food and Health Survey in Yeloma Farming District, by Gunnar Arhammar, Asella, May 1969*

42* Gensus in Bekoji Village, by Gunnar Arhammar, Asella,Sept ember, 1969*

43* CADU preliminary Final Kwpux i, fur -l>iio Pori nH 19CI-7<%44* CADU Semi-Annual Report 1969/70# February, 19 £P*45. CADU Work programme and Budget 1970/71 (with preliminary

estimates for the period 197 -/T2 — 1975/76) Asella, Aprilj 1970*46. Report on Surveys and experiments, Crop Production Department,

Asella, 1969*4 7. CADU Work Programme and Budget for the Period 8,7*70 — 31*12«70

Asella, June, 1970*48* Results of Demonstration, 1969/70.

49* CADU Evaluation Studies, Crop Sampling 1969 by Goran Bergman, Asella, June, 197°*

50* Land Ownership, Tenancy and Social Organization in Waji Area, by Arne Lexander, March, 1970.

5I. CADU Annual Report 1969/70*52» Progress Report No, II, Implement Research Section, July, 1979*53* A Master Plan fcr Water Resources and Supplies within CADU's

^irst Project Area, by Carl—Gosta Wenner, Asella,November, 197^,

54.

55-

56.

58.

59.

6P-

61*

62*

63.

64-

65-

66.

67.

6 *

69.

70.

71.

72.

73.

74 o

Report for the Period 8.7*70 — 15®11.70< Asella, December, 1970*

CADU Work Programme and Budget for the Period 1*1*71 - 7.7.71*

Asella, December, 1970.

Animal Husbandry Activities 196$/69, Research and Livestock

Section, Asella, June, 1970#

Survey of Health Facilities of Arssi 1969/70, by Stig Lundin M.D*

CADU Evaluation Studies: Women’s Extension, Asella,September, 1970*

C^DU work Programme and Budget for the Period 8 .7 .71 - 7 .7 .72 ,

Asella, March, 1971.t

CADU Evaluation Studies: Training of Model Farmers (aftermeasurement of effect) by Goran Bergran, Asella, October, 1970.

Sanitation Survey of Bekoji, by Stig Lunding M*D., Asella, September, 1970#

Family Guidance in the CADU programme 1970 by Stig Lunding M.D*,

Asella*

Report on Surveys and experiments Carried out in 1970,Gror PT'orh-ra-fciott- Jippa-rtmejri;, Asella, June, 1971*

CA'PT revaluation Studies; n^np Sampling ±9(c f Planning &Bva.lnation Scotion, Asellaf Jn ly, 1971.

CADU Annual Report 1970/71*

An Analysis of the CADU Credit Programme 1968/69 — 1971 2nd its impact on Income Distribution, by Henook v~ -c*'1 - '• 1 - i_

CADU Wor> t v - ...- ..a iqjzi/r^* A**'11** October, 1971*

Health Survey in Sagure Village and Yeloma Farming District, by Gunnar Arhammar and Roland Exsmyr, April, 19£$*

Assessment of Status of Health in -an Ethiopian Rural fJoriBminity (Expe—i—rience of Two Years1 Public Health Work .iu Chilalo Arssi), By Gunnar Arhammar, May, 1970*

Survey of the Consumption of Coffee, Tea, Tobacco and Alcohol

in a Market Town (Sagure), Especially with Regard to Cost, by Stig Lunding M .D ., September, 1971*

CADU Evaluation Studies: General Agricultural Survey, 197*(Base-line Study for Evaluation of Impact of the Project),

Planning & Evaluation Section, Asella, July, 1971*

Feasibility Study on the Establishment of A Sural General Store

in Kentero, by Mehari Tesfay, Planning & Evaluation Section,

September, 1971*

Feasibility Study on the Establishment of Saw-Mill in Asella, and Connected Workshop for Wood Processing, Planning & Evaluation

Section, Number, 1971*

Investigations on Mechanized Farming andits Effects on Peasant

Agriculture, by Henock Kifle, Asella. March, 1972*

75* CADU Work Programme & Budget 1973/84? Asella, October, 1972*76* CADU Evaluation Studies; Co-operative Activities Before

Measurement by Arne Flodh, Planning & Evaluation Section, December, 1972#

77. CADU Annual Reports 1971/72 & 1972/73 - Voli I & II*78. Case Study on Farm Households in the Asella Area, April, 1972•

79* Progress Report No* III, Implements Research Section, July, 1971.

80. Report on Surveys and Experiements Carried out in 1971j Crop & Pasture Section, Asalia? April, 1972*

8l* Master Plan for the Evaluation of CADU, by John Holmberg,Planning & Evaluation Section, October, 1972*

82* General Agricultural Survey 1972, Planning & Evaluation Section, February, 1973*

83. Continued Research on Water Resources & Supplies within CADU,s Project Area, by Carl—Gosta Wenner, Asella, April, 1973*

84* CADU Forestry Activities by Gunnar Poulsen, Asella, May, ±9 (3*85. Trials with Experiemental Household Wells by Olle Schonbeck,

Asella, July, 1973*85*1 Feasibility Study on the Utilisation of the Munessa Forest,

by Johan Holmberg, Asella? July, 1973*

87* Report on Surveys & Experiments Carried out in 1972, Crop & Pasture Section, Asella, July, 1973*

88* CADU Work Programme and Budget 1974/75» Asella, October, 1973*89. A Master Plan for Water Resources and Supplies in the Chilalo

Awraja by Carl—Gosta Wanner, Asella, September, 1973*90. Surveys of Consumption Patterns in E theya Extension Area by

Johan Holmberg, October, 1973*

91* Construction of Earth Dam at E^u by Carl—Gosta Wenner, Asella,April 1973*

92* An Analysis of CADU Credit Programme 1971/72 — 1972/73, by Michael Beyene Asella, January, 1974*

^3} CADU Health Programme, Report of the Period 71-73 (l964 & 1965E.C.) by Stig Lundin M*D*, Asella, March 1974*

94* Three Research Papers on Plant Husbandry by Messrs*Betru Haile, Olof Hammar and Per Ryden, Asella, March 1974*

96* Progress Report No. IV. 1971/72 - 1972/73» Agricultural Engineering Section, Asella, March, 1974.

6

98.

99.

100.101.102.103.

104*

10 5.

106.

107.

108.109.

110.

111.

37,

112.

Crop Protection Trials 1976 ~ 1972* by Eric Ehgstrom, Crop & Pasture Section, Asella, April, 1974*

The Consumption of Household Water in Sagurej An Appraisal of five years Work on Water Sanitation by Stig Lundin M.D*, Asella,April* 1974#

A One-Round Multi-Purpose Study: A Combined Census - HealthAsessment Sanitation Survey by Stig Lundin M.D*, Asella*June, 1974*

A Plan for Industrial Development for CADU, by M* Mathai, Asella* July, 1974.CADU Veterinary Service, A Summary of Experiences by C. Tillaeus and P.O. Nilsson, AselJa, July, 1974*

Animal Husbandry Activities 1970—1973? "by Seven Persson Animal Husbandry & Breeding Section, Asella, June, 1974*

Report on Surveys and Experiments Carried out in 1973* Crop &Pasture Section, Asella, June, 1974*Fertilization with Phosphorous on Different Soils by 01 of Hammar, Crop & Pasture Section, Aeella, July, 1974*A Study on Asella Water Work by Stafen Gronberg, Asella,August, 1974*

CADU Work Programs & Budget 1975/7 6 (Revised), Asella,April, 1975*

Home-Economics Extension Study, by Hanna Kebede, Asella,April, 1975*

Crop Sampling Survey 1973/74 > Planning & Evaluati on aAsella, April, 1975*Health Services in Arssi, 1966 (^*C*) A IPollow-up Survey and Supplement to CADU Publication No. 57» by Stig Lunding, M.D* and Rune Torniquist, Asella, June, 1975*

Prospects for Development of Livestock and Related Industries in Chilalo, by Habte Gebre Selassie, Planning & Evaluation Section, Asella, December 1974*Report on Surveys and Experiments Carried out in 1974j Crop & Pasture Section, Asella, October 1975*Grassland Condition in the Chilalo Awrgja, Arssi Province,Ethiopia — An Ecological Study, by Alemayehu Mengistu,Crop & Pasture Section, Asella, December, 1975*

D. PERIOD OF SOUTH E a ST^RN AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENTZONE

1. Annual Report 19 8 5 /8 6 SEaD Publ. No* 1 Planning and Programming Service.Asella, l>ec. 1 9 8 6.

2. Agricultural Survey in Dodota Vfereda,Genale Avraja, Bale, SEa D Pu b l . No, 2.May, 1987.

3 . Seed Survey of \lieat in Arssi SlvAli Publ, No.3 M a y , 1987*

4. DWT a in Agriculture SEa D Publ. No. 4.

MINOR RESEARCH TASKSlm Farm Management Studies of Model Farmers in the CADU Project Area>

By Snsanne Bergholta, July, 19^9*

2* The Munessa Forest; A Plant Ecological Study, by Lill and Bjorn Lundgren,June, 1969#

3* Credit Situation in Chilalo Awraja (Base-line Study) by Goran Bergman and Hakan Lindiquist, July, 1969*

4* &ocal Varieties of Wheat in the Chilalo Awraja, by G*G* Winderstrom, November — December, 196^*

An Inventory of Feeding System and Feed Stuff, Chilalo Awraja*Ethiopia, by Osoar Evaldsson*

6* Crop Production and Animal Production; Comparative Study on thePossibilities for Different Farm Produce in the Chilalo Area in Ethiopia, By Bo Anselmsson, Februaryt 1972*

7* An Agrobotanlcal Investigation of Leguminous Speoi.es in Chilalo Awraja, Especially at Higher Attitudes, by Mats Thu. 1 in, May, 1972#

8® Mobilizing Savings in Chilalo by Martin Iundquist, Asella, April, 1973*

9* On the Occurrences of Septoria Spp»' and Holminfchosporiniin supp*as Parasites of VJheat and Barley at Three Altitudes in Central T?fcTnop-inf By Ake Wellving, Asella, August, 1973*

10# Inventory of Indigenous Ecotypes of Some Species in the Chilalo Awraja Ethiopia, by Joel Carlsson*

11* Inventory of Soils in the Rift Valley Region of Chilalo Awraja, by Ca^olin Trapp* Asella, April, 1974#

12* The Grain Marketing System of Chilalo - A Descriptive and Normative Analysis - By lars Haglund, Assella, July, 1974*

13* Study of Traditional Medicine in Chilalo Awraja, by Kerstin Gustafsson Asella, June, 1975*

SPECIAL STUDIES

S*S#1« A Preliminary Survey of Soil Erosion in tb<* <Thil^lo Awaja, By Kebede Tato, Asella, September, 197^*

S.S.2# Decision Making in the Family, (A Preliminary Interview Study with the Aim of Throwing Light on the Relationship between Husband and Wife when it conies to Decision Making inthe Family) by Pia Bergman, Asella, July, 1971#

S*S.3> The Innovation — Diffusion Prooess, By ^ohan Toborhf Asella, March, 1971® ‘

S*S*4* Sociological Profils of Provincial Elites in Chilalo Avn?ajat By John M. Coh«sn, Addis Ababa, 1972.

S.S#5* Rural Housing in Chilalo on the Eastern Plateau, Ethiopia, by Elizabeth Hanson, July, 19T3»

AsebeTeferi Zl ^jspedreZeyt . Nazre. W elkite jtaJira A d a m i ...

Documents

Transcript of AsebeTeferi Zl ^jspedreZeyt . Nazre. W elkite jtaJira A d a m i ...