Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation of Data A. Yield/Treatment/Plot Table 1. Anova For Yield of Pechay/treatment/plot

Republic of the Philippine
CARAGA STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Ampayon Butuan City, Philippines
CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
A. Yield/Treatment/Plot
Table 1. Anova for yield of pechay/treatment/plot
Source DF SS MS F P
Treatment 3 93230 31077 23.48NS 0.000
Error 12 15881 1323
Total 15 109111
CV=26.32 *Not Significant
S- Significant
Table 1 shows the result of ANOVA for the yield per treatment per plot. The
statistical analyses reveal that there is No significant difference in yield among
treatment per plot as explained by P-value of probability. This result directly rejected the
null hypothesis. In order to determine the extent of variation in yield of pechay per plot
across treatment.
Figure 1. Graph of Comparison of Means of yield per treatment per plot.
250
200
150
236.25 232.5 236.25

100
50
58.75
0
T3 T2 T1 T0
Figure 1 shows that the Bar represent the Means in which letter placed on
the top of each bar means having common letter is/are not significant at 0.01 level of
significance.
Table 2. Anova for average yield of Pechay/treatment/hill
Source DF SS MS F P
Treatment 3 902.0 300.7 15.50** 0.000
Error 12 232.8 19.4
Total 15 1134.9
CV= 8.74 * Significant
NS-not significant
Table 2 shows the result of ANOVA for the yield per treatment per hill. The
Statistical result analyses reveal that there is significant difference in yield among
treatment per hill as explained by P- value of probability. These results are not rejected
in null hypothesis. In order to determined the extent of variation in yield of pechay per
hill across treatment.
Figure 2. Graph of Comparison of means yield per treatment per hill.
23.63 23.63
25 22.25
20
15
10
5.88
0
T3 T2 T1 T0
Figure 2 graphically exhibit the the dissimilarities in yield of pechay among
treatment per hill. The Bar represent having common letter is/are not significantly
difference at 0.01 of significance.

Table 3. Anova for Average number of Insect Present in Pechay 3 days after first
spray
Source DF SS MS F P
Treatment 3 155.25 51.75 49.68** 0.000
Error 12 12.50 1.04
Total 15 167.75
CV=4.81 * Significant
NS- Not Significant
Table 3 shows the result of ANOVA for the average of insects present after
treatment. The statistical analyses reveal that there is a significant difference in average
number of insects present after treatment as explained by P-value which is highly
Significant.
Figure 3. Graph of Comparison average number of insect present 3 days after
first spray.
T0 10
T1 3
T2 2
T3 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Figure 3 shows the difference among treatments. Figure 3 has been dominated
by T0 constituting the highest level followed by T 1 that compresses a higher level than T 3
while T2 has the lowest value in terms of average number of insects present after first
spray.
Table 4. Anova for Average number of Insect present in pechay 3 days after
second spray
Source DF SS MS F P
Treatment 3 102.25 34.08 20.97** 0.000
Error 12 19.50 1.63
Total 15 121.75
NS- Not Significant
Table 4 shows the result of ANOVA for the average number of insects present
after treatments. The statisitical analyses revealed that there is a significant difference
in average number of insects among treatments as explained by P-value in which it was
highly significance level of probability.

Figure 4. Graph on the Average number of insects present 3 days after second
spray.
8
8
7
6
5
4
3
3 3
2 2
1
0
T3
T2
T1
T0
Figure 4 was the graph on average number of insects present after second
spray. In the diagram, the T2 embraces the lowest level followed by T3 and T1
compressing equal value, while T0 has the highest value among the other treatments.
Table 5. Anova for Average number of insect present in pechay 3 days after third
spray
Source DF SS MS F P
Treatment 3 85.250 28.417 40.12** 0.000
Error 12 8.500 0.708
Total 15 93.750
NS- Not Significant

Table 5 shows the result of ANOVA for the Average number of insects present
after treatment. The statistical analyses revealed that there is a significant difference in
average number of insects among treatments explained by P-value of treatments is
equal to 0.00 and obviously lower than 0.01 level of probability.
Figure 5. Graph on Average number of insects present after third spray.
8
8
7
6
5
4 3
3 2
2 1
1
0
T3 T2 T1 T0
Figure 5 was the the graph on average number of insects present after third
spray. The T0 constantly showing the highest level in terms of insects occurrence while
T2 has the second average number followed by T1 having the second lowest next to T3
that compresses the smallest value among all other treatments.
Interpretation of the Results

The significant results of statistical analysis on the morphological structures of
pechay imply that Madre de cacao subjected to investigation have varied effect on its
yield, and pechay conversely, responds differently to each of Madre de cacao leaves
extract as insect control. To this study, Middle leaves of the Madre de cacao (T2)
appear to have better influence on the yield of pechay. These influences are observed
on the outstanding appearance to the morphological structure of pechay. This effect
could be attributed to better chemical composition of Middle part of Madre de cacao
leaves, high coumarin toxic content, presence of major and other trace elements and
even presence of beneficial organism. Collectively, these attributes of Middle leaves
form an advantages over other organic matter.
Madre de cacao is known to have highly coumarin chemical content. However, for
this study, Middle part of the Madre de cacao leaves has the better effect while apical
part same with the lower leaves has unattractive influence. This undesirable effect of
Apical leaves and lower leaves of Madre de cacao on the yield of peachy can be
likewise linked to the chemical composition.
The less appealing effect of the combined Apical, middle and lower leaves of Madre
de cacao maybe due to the contradicting chemical composition of these three organic
matters. Middle leaves has high chemical contents that are good for plant yield while
Apical and lower leaves of Madre de cacao has low chemical contents that reduce the
yield of pechay.
FINDINGS
1. The middle leaves of Madre de cacao greatly influenced the yield of pechay.
2. Pechay that is applied by Middle leaves of madre de cacao extract has the lesser
damage cause by insect.
3. Apical leaves and lower leaves of Madre de cacao have the minor effect as insect
control.
4. Different part of the leaves have different chemical composition and effect on pechay.

Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation of Data A. Yield/Treatment/Plot Table 1. Anova For Yield of Pechay/treatment/plot

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Presentation, Analysis, and Interpretation of Data A. Yield/Treatment/Plot Table 1. Anova For Yield of Pechay/treatment/plot

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippine

CARAGA STATE UNIVERSITY

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

Table 1. Anova for yield of pechay/treatment/plot

Treatment 3 93230 31077 23.48NS 0.000

Error 12 15881 1323

CV=26.32 *Not Significant

statistical analyses reveal that there is No significant difference in yield among

Figure 1. Graph of Comparison of Means of yield per treatment per plot.

236.25 232.5 236.25

Table 2. Anova for average yield of Pechay/treatment/hill

Treatment 3 902.0 300.7 15.50** 0.000

Error 12 232.8 19.4

CV= 8.74 * Significant

hill across treatment.

Figure 2. Graph of Comparison of means yield per treatment per hill.

Figure 2 graphically exhibit the the dissimilarities in yield of pechay among

difference at 0.01 of significance.

Treatment 3 155.25 51.75 49.68** 0.000

Error 12 12.50 1.04

NS- Not Significant

number of insects present after treatment as explained by P-value which is highly

Figure 3. Graph of Comparison average number of insect present 3 days after

Treatment 3 102.25 34.08 20.97** 0.000

Error 12 19.50 1.63

CV= 11.86 * Significant

NS- Not Significant

in average number of insects among treatments as explained by P-value in which it was

highly significance level of probability.

Treatment 3 85.250 28.417 40.12** 0.000

Error 12 8.500 0.708

CV= 4.5 * Significant

NS- Not Significant

average number of insects among treatments explained by P-value of treatments is

equal to 0.00 and obviously lower than 0.01 level of probability.

Figure 5. Graph on Average number of insects present after third spray.

that compresses the smallest value among all other treatments.

Interpretation of the Results

The significant results of statistical analysis on the morphological structures of

on the outstanding appearance to the morphological structure of pechay. This effect

could be attributed to better chemical composition of Middle part of Madre de cacao

even presence of beneficial organism. Collectively, these attributes of Middle leaves

form an advantages over other organic matter.

likewise linked to the chemical composition.

damage cause by insect.

You might also like