NAOL Beyene THESIS Edited Final M

GROWTH AND YIELD RESPONSE OF EFFECT OF VARIETIES AND
INTRA -ROW SPACING ON YIELD AND YIELD COMPONENTS OF

ONION (Allium cepa L.) VARIETIES TO INTERA-ROW SPACING AT
SOUTH BENCH DISTRICT OF BENCH SHEKO ZONE, SOUTH-
WESTERN ETHIOPIA
MSc THESIS
NAOL BEYENE BARSHIAB
JUNE, 2023
MIZAN-AMAN, ETHIOPIA
0
EFFECT OF VARIETIES AND INTRA -ROW SPACING ON YIELD AND
YIELD COMPONENTS OF ONION (Allium cepa L.) AT SOUTH BENCH
DISTRICT OF BENCH SHEKO ZONE, SOUTH-WESTERN ETHIOPIA
A Thesis Submitted to Department of Plant Science,

College of Agriculture and Natural Resources,
School of Graduate Studies,
MIZAN-TEPI UNIVERSITY
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN AGRICULTURE (AGRONOMY)
NAOL BEYENE BARSHIAB
JUNE, 2023
Mizan-Aman, Ethiopia.
i
APPROVAL SHEET
MIZAN-TEPI UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF STUDIES
As research Advisors, we hereby certify that we have read and evaluated this Thesis prepared
under our guidance by Noal Beyene entitled “Effect of Varieties and Intra -Row Spacing on
Yield and Yield Components of Onion (Allium Cepa L.) At South Bench District of Bench
Sheko Zone, South-Western Ethiopia” and we recommended that it be submitted as fulfilling
the Thesis requirements.
Bewuketu Haile (PhD) _______________ _______________
Major-Advisor Signature Date
WondsonWondimu(Assistant professor) _______________ _______________
Co-advisor Signature Date
As members of the Board of Examiners of the MSc Thesis Open Defense Examination, we
certify that we have read and evaluated the Thesis prepared by Noal Beyene and examined the
candidate. We recommend that the Thesis be accepted as fulfilling the Thesis requirement for the
degree of Master of Science in Agriculture (Agronomy).
________________________ _______________ _______________
Chairperson Signature Date
________________________ _______________ _______________
Internal examiner Signature Date
_______________________ _______________ _______________
External examiner Signature Date
Final approval and acceptance of the Thesis is contingent upon the submission of its final copy
to the Council of Graduate Studies (CGS) through the candidate’s Department or School
Graduate Committee (DGC or SGC).
i
DEDICATION
This piece of work is dedicated to the memory of my father, BEYENE BARSHIAB, who was
responsible for laying a great foundation in my life.
i
STATEMENT OF THE AUTHOR
Through my signature below, I declare and confirm that the study is a result of my honest
work and that I have accordingly acknowledged all sources of materials used for writing it. I
hereby submit this thesis to Mizan-Tepi University in requirements for the Degree of Master
of Science in Agriculture (Agronomy). The thesis is placed at the library of the University to
be completed open to mortgagors for reference. I soberly declare that the thesis has not been
so far acquiesced to any other institution wherever for the honor of any academic degree,
diploma, or certificate.
Brief citations from this study are allowed without requiring singular consent if an accurate
acknowledgement of the source is made. Requests for extended quotations from or imitation
of the thesis in part may be granted by the Department head of Plant Sciences or by the Dean
of the Graduate School of Studies of Mizan-Tepi University when, in his or her judgment, the
planned use of the document is for a scholarly interest. In all other occurrences, yet,
permission must be obtained from the author.
Name Naol Beyene Signature: _________________

Place: Mizan-Tepi University Date: _________________
ii
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
The author was born on September 7, 1987E.C in South District, BenchShako Zone of SNNP
Region. He attended the elementary and junior secondary education at Aman elementary and
secondary school and his senior secondary and preparatory at Mizan secondary and preparatory
school from 2005 to 2007 E.C.
After successfully passing the Ethiopian School Leaving Examination, he joined Mizan-Tepi
University College of Agriculture in September 2007 and graduated with B.Sc. degree in
Horticulture in June 2009 E.C.
Immediately after graduation, he was employed by Corporative union, the lower cost of living
for everyone and gives opportunity to save and have a better life and started his work in SNNP
Region as an expert of Agronomist, production, quality and processing worker at Bench Shako
Zone Mizan-Aman city administration Site Since June 2003 E.C.
He joined the school of graduate studies at Mizan-Tepi University in September 2021 to pursue
his study for Master of Science degree in Agronomy.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Foremost, my gratefulness belongs to the absolute Almighty GOD for providing me the health,
persistence, and endurance to complete the study and to achieve this level of education.
I feel great pleasure to place on record my deep sense of appreciation and heartfelt thanks to my
major advisor Bewuketu Haile (PhD), for his intense interest, valuable guidance, kindness,
encouragement, and constructive idea from the initial stage of thesis research proposal
development to the completion of the write-up of the thesis. I am also greatly indebted to my co-
advisor,WondsonWondimu(Assistant professor), for his guidance, professional assistance,
valuable comments, suggestions, and support starting from the design of the experiment up to the
final thesis write-up.
I would like also to express my sincere gratitude to my parents; father, mother, brothers and
sisters for their dedication in bringing me up and for their strong support throughout my life and
my academic career. I would like to express my deepest gratefulness for the constant support, for
her understanding in the difficult times we had, and love that I received from my dear beloved
one AKilile kassahun , she has been the source of my strength and encouragement. I consider
this academic achievement as a success to her as well. Finally, I owe an enormous thank to my
fantastic friends. Your support and encouragement has been invaluable; and I am forever
grateful.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL SHEET.................................................................................................................................i
DEDICATION............................................................................................................................................i
STATEMENT OF THE AUTHOR..........................................................................................................ii
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH...................................................................................................................iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS........................................................................................................................iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS..........................................................................................................................v
ABBRIVATIONS....................................................................................................................................vii
LISTS OF TABLES...............................................................................................................................viii
LISTS OF TABLES IN THE APPENDIX.............................................................................................ix
ABSTRACT...............................................................................................................................................x
1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................1
General objective.....................................................................................................................................4
2.LITERATURE REVIEW......................................................................................................................5
2.1. Description of Onion........................................................................................................................5
2.2. Importance and Production Status of Onion in Ethiopia...................................................................5
2.3. Environmental Requirements of Onion............................................................................................7
2.4. Agronomic Practices.........................................................................................................................8
2.5. Water Requirement for Onion Yield.................................................................................................9
2.6. Effect of Plant Spacing on Onion Yield and Yield Component........................................................9
3.MATERIALS AND METHODS.........................................................................................................12
3.1. Description of the Study Area.........................................................................................................12
3.2 Experimental Materials....................................................................................................................12
3.3 Experimental treatment and Design.................................................................................................13
3.4 Experimental Management and Procedure......................................................................................14
3.5. Agronomic Data Collection............................................................................................................15
3.5.1. Phonological parameters..........................................................................................................15
3.5.2. Growth parameters...................................................................................................................15
3.5.3. Yield and yield components.....................................................................................................16
3.6. Data Analysis..................................................................................................................................17
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION..........................................................................................................18
4.1. Phenological Parameter..................................................................................................................18
4.1.1 Days to 90% physiological maturity.........................................................................................18
v
4.2 Growth Parameters..........................................................................................................................19
4.2.1. Plant height..............................................................................................................................19
4.2.2. Number of leaf.........................................................................................................................21
4.2.3. Leaf Length..............................................................................................................................22
4.2.4. Leaf width................................................................................................................................23
4.3. Yield and Yield Components.......................................................................................................25
4.3.1. Bulb Length (cm).....................................................................................................................25
4.3.2. Bulb Diameter..........................................................................................................................26
4.3.3. Mean bulb weight....................................................................................................................27
4.3.4. Total bulb yield........................................................................................................................29
4.3.5. Marketable bulb yield..............................................................................................................30
4.3.6. Unmarketable bulb yield..........................................................................................................31
4.3.7. Biomass yield..........................................................................................................................33
4.3.8. Harvest index...........................................................................................................................34
4.4. Correlation Analysis.......................................................................................................................35
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION.....................................................................................................40
6. REFERENCES....................................................................................................................................42
7. APPENDIX..........................................................................................................................................50
vi
ABBRIVATIONS
ANOVA Analysis of Variance
CSA Central Statistical Agency
DZARC Debrezeit Agricultural Research Centre
EIAR Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
MoANR Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources
MoARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
MTU Mizan-Tepi University
NPS Nitrogen, Phosphorus and sulfur
RCBD Randomized Complete Block Design
SWE South West Ethiopia
SNNPR South Notation Nationalities and Peoples Region
vii
LISTS OF TABLES
Table pages
Table 1: Description of onion verities used for the experiment.................................................................19

Table 2: Treatment combinations used for the experimentExperimental treatment, treatment combination
and treatment codes...................................................................................................................................20
Table 3: The main effects of onion varieties and row spacing on physiological maturity and plant height
give full captions.......................................................................................................................................25
Table 4: interaction effect of onion varieties and row spacing on number of leaf per plant.......................27
Table 5: The main effect of onion varieties and row spacing on leaf length and leaf width......................29
Table 6: The main effect of onion varieties and row spacing on bulb diameter, and mean bulb weight....31
Table 7: Interaction Effect of variety and intra row spacing marketable, un-marketable, and total bulb
yield...........................................................................................................................................................35
Table 8: The main effect of onion varieties and row spacing biomass yield and harvest index.................37
Table 9: Correlation result of yield and yield related variables.................................................................39
viii
LISTS OF TABLES IN THE APPENDIX
Appendix page
Appendix table 1: Days to physiological maturity.....................................................................................50
Appendix table 2: plant height...................................................................................................................50
Appendix table 3: number of leaf..............................................................................................................50
Appendix table 4: leaf length.....................................................................................................................51
Appendix table 5: Leaf width....................................................................................................................51
Appendix table 6: Bulb Length..................................................................................................................51
Appendix table 7: Bulb diameter...............................................................................................................52
Appendix table 8: Mean bulb weight.........................................................................................................52
Appendix table 9: Total bulb yield............................................................................................................52
Appendix table 10: Marketable bulb yield.................................................................................................53
Appendix table 11: Marketable bulb yield.................................................................................................53
Appendix table 12: Biomass yield.............................................................................................................53
Appendix table 13: Harvest index.............................................................................................................54
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: study area map................................................................................................................12
x
Thesis Title?
ABSTRACT
lack of high-yielding varieties and inappropriate spacing/sowing strategyIn appropriate use of
plant spacing and lack of evaluation of improved varieties across agro ecologies are the major
bottlenecks for onion production predominant agronomic practices that reduce the productivity
of onion in south Bench district. The present study was, therefore, has been designed to
investigate growth and yield the response of onion varietiesy to different intra- raw spacing on
growth and yield of onion. Four onion varieties (Bombay Red, Nafis, Red Cereole and Nasik
Red) and four intra-row spacing (5, 7.5, 10 and 12.5cm) with inter-row spacing of 20 cm were
arranged in factorial in RCBD design with three replications. The results of the study showed
that both the main effects of variety and intra-row spacing,and or their interaction had a
significant effect (P˂0.05) effects on the growth performance, and bulb yield and yield related
traits of onion. Leaf number per plant was significantly affected by interaction of variety and
intra-row spacing. The highest leaf number (14.667) obtained from variety Bombay Red with
intra-row spacing of 12.5cm. In general, leaf number per plant, leaf length, plant height and leaf
diameter were higher at wider intra-row spacing (12.5 cm). Bombay Red variety was superior in
terms of leaf number per plant (14.667), bulb diameter (5.735cm), average bulb weight (72.317),
marketable yield (34.33 t ha-1) and total bulb yield (35.450 t ha-1). Onion plant grown at closer
intra-row spacing (5 cm) showed very promising result for average bulb weight, marketable
yield and total tuber yield. Moreover, the closest intra-row spacing (5 cm) gave higher
marketable and total bulb yield than the wider intra-row spacing. Thus, growers in the study
area can be benefited from closer sowing Bombay red intra-row spacing of 5cm. However, to
come with compressive recommendation, it is worthy to repeat the experiment over locations and
seasons by including more variety and intra-row spacing narrower than 5cm with combination
of different inter-row spacing.
Keywords: Bulb, Cultivar, Growth, Marketable, mean bulb Weight, Spacing
xi
xii
1. INTRODUCTION
Onion (Allium cepa L.) is member of the family Alliaceae and the most widely grown
herbaceous biennial vegetable crop with cross pollinated and monocotyledonous behavior having
diploid chromosome number (2n = 16) (Hanelt, 1990). Onion is different from the other edible
species of Allium for its single bulb and is usually propagated by true botanical seed. It is
believed to have originated in Afghanistan, the area of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, western Tien
Shan and India while western Asia and the areas around the Mediterranean Sea are secondary
centers of diversity (Saud et al., 2013).
The onion is recognized as one of the most important vegetable crops that cultivated throughout
the world since its introduction to the worlds. It has grown mainly as a food source and used as
cousins and value addition for different dishes. In Ethiopia, the consumption of the crop is very
important in the food seasoning and in daily stews as well as in different vegetable food
preparation uses. The mature bulb contains some starch, appreciable quantities of sugars, some
protein, and vitamins A, B, and C ( Elhag and Osman, 2013;Opara, 2003). It is also one of the
richest sources of flavonoid in the human diet and flavonoid consumption has been associated
with a reduced risk of cancer, heart disease and diabetes. Also, the chemical flavonoids,
anthocyanins, fructooligo saccharides and organosulphur compounds found in the onion is
considered as medicinal and health benefits to fight different diseases including cancer, heart and
diabetic diseases (Goldman, 2011).In addition, it is known for anti-bacterial, antiviral, anti-
allergenic and anti-inflammatory potential and used as preservative and medicinal plant
(MoARD, 2009).
1
It is grown in more than 175countries in the world. In the 2020/2021 production year; the total
area of 5,778,769 ha land was under onion production in the world, with a total of 93,226,400
tons and an average yield of 18.845 t ha -1 (FAOSTAT, 2021). According to this report, China
and India are the world’s largest producers of onion, followed by the USA, Pakistan, Turkey, and
Iran. According to CSA in 2020/2021, the total area of 38,952.58ha, with a total production of
3,460,480.08 tons with productivity of 8.84 t ha-1 was under onion production in Ethiopia.
The total land area of the Woreda is 255,099 ha. Out of this total land area, 46,378.25 ha were covered by
agricultural land, 9375 ha were covered by pastoralist, 15,243 ha were covered by natural forest, 47,176
ha were covered by fruit and other crop and 385.5 ha were covered by onion crop (zeleke ,2021).
Due to this considerable benefits, the onion production is become increasing in different agro-
ecologies of the country in small-scale production systems being as one component of
commercialization for rural and urban peoples as sources of daily income. However, the
productivity of onions in Ethiopia (8.89 t ha-1) is far below the world average (19.32 t ha-1)
(FAOSTAT, 2020).This low yield results indicate that the presence of a huge yield gap in
production and productivity at the country because of the absence of improved cultivars, poor
application of inappropriate agronomic practices and limited attention/awareness on the benefits
of intensive production.
One of the major problems associated with its production is inappropriate agronomic practices
used by farmers which have quite a great contribution to lowering crop yields. Yemane et al.
(2016) also reported the limited use of improved seeds and fertilizers by small scale farmers.
Moreover, quality and yield of particular onion variety greatly affected by planting density even
if grown in the same environment (Saud S,et al., 2013).
2
Moreover, the optimum level of any agronomic practice such as plant population, planting and
harvesting date and fertilizer requirement vary with growing environment and variety. Thus, it is
very difficult to give a general recommendation for agronomic management that can be
applicable to different varieties and agro-ecological zones. Some studies indicated that varieties
responded differently to different plant spacing as the result of variation in their growth pattern
(e.g., roots, leaf and plant heights). For instance, Geremew et al., (2012 ) reported higher bulb
yield of Adama Red and Bomby Red variety at 4 cm intra- row spacing than 6 and 8 cm intra
row-spacing at Adame Tulu. However, Yemane et al. (2014) pointed out that better plant growth
and bulb yield from 10 and 7 cm intra-row spacing for four varieties of onion in Aksum area. In
another study, Belay (2015) observed bulb yield parameters response of different onion variety
to different intra row spacing. Awas (2010) also added a similar report that three onion varieties,
Bombay red, Adama red and Nasika red, responded differently to intra-row spacing on yield and
yield components at Adami Tulu.
These contradicting reports show that optimum plant density for a certain variety is highly site
specific and need further study to give concrete recommendation across locations including
district of Bench Sheko Zone, South-Western Ethiopia.
Even if, the zone is endowed with mentioned agro-ecologies and has valuable resource for onion
production. There are a number of production problems which makes the farmers not to produce
onion in advanced manner. Among those production problems the low yield because of non-
optimal agronomic practices like plant density and lack of improved varieties are the major ones.
3
Therefore, this study was undertaken with the following general and specific objectives.
General objective
To improve onion bulb yield through identification of better adaptable varieties and optimum
intra-row spacing at South Bench district of Bench Sheko Zone, South-Western Ethiopia
Specific objectives
 To investigate growth and yield responses of the effects of differentonion varieties to
varyingand intra row spacing on growth, yield and yield components of onion
 To determine the optimal intra row spacing and better performing onion variety for
maximum bulb yield
General Comments
The problem explored was not clearly stated, and its impact on onion productivity not well mentioned
Past research efforts were not exhaustively reviewed, and/or to what extent the conventional farmers’
varieties/sowing strategy affected onion productivity
How this study contributes to the body of knowledge already available regarding the potential interaction
b/n plant population and env’t
4
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Onion: its botany and ecologyDescription of Onion
Onion (Allium cepa L.) belongs to the family Alliaceae or Amaryllidaceae which is one of the
most important monocotyledonous crops. It belongs to the genus Allium and recent estimations
accept about 750 species in the genus Allium, among which onion, Japanese bunching onion,
leeks, and garlic are the most important edible Allium crops. And about 60 taxonomic groups at
sub-generic, sectional, and sub-sectional ranks (Baloch, 1994; Rabinowitch and Currah,
2002).Onion from central Asia, the supposed onion ancestor had probably migrated to the Near
East. Then it was introduced to India and South-East Asia; into the Mediterranean area and from
there to all of the Roman Empire (Grubben and Denton, 2004; Bagali et al. 2012). Onion is
widely grown as an herbaceous biennial vegetable crop. It has a diploid chromosome number
(2n=16) (Bassett, 1986). Onion is among the most popular vegetables in the world. Onion is a
crop that is classified as a cool-season crop. However, it can be grown in a wide range of
climatic conditions. It is grown mainly for its bulb, which is used in every home, almost daily,
across Ethiopia (AgroBIG, 2016). Onion is one of the most important vegetable crops cultivated
in Ethiopia. The crop is produced as a cash crop and it is widely used to increase the taste of the
different types of food. Onion is cultivated by smallholder farmers and commercial growers both
under irrigation and rain feed conditions where the larger area is covered under irrigation
(Asfaw, 2015).
2.2. Onion production and productivity Importance and Production Status of Onion
in Ethiopia
The production of vegetables is becoming important with the expanding irrigated agriculture and
with the growing awareness of the importance of the sector as a source of income, improved
5
food security, sources of raw materials for industries, and employment opportunities because it
demands a large labor force. The expansion of water harvest schemes in the small farmers' sector
and irrigated agricultural development projects have made a significant contribution to the
development of the sector. The success of a production depends on the adoption of improved
technologies such as cultivars that have acceptable standards and high value in the local use and
export markets (Lemma et al., 2006).
Ethiopia has a great potential to produce onion throughout the year both for local consumption
and for export. It grows best at an altitude of between 700-2200 meters above sea level. Onion is
rapidly becoming popular among producers and consumers. Its popularity among producers is
because of the advantage of high yield potential, availability of desirable cultivars for various
uses, ease of propagation by seed, high domestic (bulb and seed), and markets in fresh and
processed forms (Lemma and Shimeles, 2003).
Onion contributes substantially to the national economy, apart from overcoming local demands.
With the growing irrigate agriculture in the country, there is a great potential for extensive onion
seed and dry bulb production in the different production belts of the country. Specifically to
onion production and improvement, the Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute has made
efforts to generate different improved varieties. As a result of this effort the varieties Adama
Red, Bombay Red, Red Creole, Melkam, Mermiru Brown, Nasik Red, and Nafis are made
available to farmers (Lemma and Shimelis, 2003; MoARD, 2010). Onion is considered one of
the most important vegetable crops produced on large scale in Ethiopia. It also occupies an
economically important place among vegetables in the country. The area under onion is
increasing from time to time mainly due to its high profitability per unit area and ease of
6
production, and the increases in small– scale irrigation areas. The crop is produced both under
rain-fed in the “Meher” season and under irrigation in the off– season. In many areas of the
country, the off– season crop (under irrigation) constitutes much of the area under onion
production. Despite areas increasing, the productivity of onions is much lower than in other
African countries. Despite low productivity, onion is becoming the source of livelihood for many
people who have engaged in production and trading. This has led to increased demand for onion
production and marketing in Ethiopia (Gebrselassie, 2013).
2.3. Environmental Requirements of Onion
Onion can be grown in a wide range of climatic environments, but it thrives best in a mild
climate without excessive rainfall or extremes of heat and cold. Onion is a cool– season crop that
has some frost tolerance but is best adapted to a temperatures range between 13 and 24 0C.
Optimum temperatures for early seedling growth are between 23 and 27 0C; growth is slowed at
temperatures above 30 0C. Acclimatized plants are able to tolerate some freezing temperature.
Best production is obtained when cool temperature prevails over an extended period of time,
permitting considerable foliage and root development before bulb formation starts. After bulb
formation begins, high temperature and low relative humidity extending into the harvest and
curing period are desirable (Purseglove, 1985; Rubatzky and Yamaguchi, 1997; Jilani et al.,
2010). Light and temperature influence the process of blubbing. Both factors must be at the
optimum for the initiation of the bulbs. Cool conditions with long days are normally important
for production, although there are cultivars that tolerate warm conditions and short day lengths.
Cool conditions are usually required during the first part of the season when the plants start to
form bulbs. Warm and dry weather is needed for harvesting and curing. Each cultivar differs in
its sensitivity to day length (Savva and Frenken, 2002).
7
The onions are grouped into short-days and long days depending on the day length requirements.
The bulbs that acquire a day length of 11.5 hours are categorized into short day group and those
that take 14 hours or more for bulb formation fell into the long-day group. Onion also requires
varying day lengths and temperature for the purpose they produced. A relatively high
temperatures and long photoperiod are required for bulb formation, and for seed production,
temperature is of immense importance to day length. Onion bulbs have specific the temperature
requirements for seed and bulb production (Baloch, 1994).
2.4. Agronomic Practices
Onions like any other crop have agronomic and management practices to be observed. Various
crop management practices such as mulching, shelters, and raised beds help to conserve soil
moisture, prevent soil degradation, and protect vegetables from heavy rains, high temperatures,
and flooding (Hughes, 2007). The nursery beds should be well-tilled to enhance proper seed
germination. For good germination in the nursery, a well-tilled seed bed with a loose surface is
necessary (Sani and Jaliya, 2012). The seed bed should be moist and fowl dropping or compost
worked into the seedbed before sowing (Sani and Jaliya, 2012). The nursery bed is then covered
with light mulch. Fields for transplants should have good drainage and excellent soil texture and
must be free of roots or clods (Randall et al., 1999).
At the nursery, the seedlings are often hardened-up for quicker establishment in the field after
transplanting. Water supply should be reduced about 7-10 days before transplanting takes place
to harden the seedlings (Randall et al., 1999). Water transplanted onions soon establish good
contact between the soil and roots, and assure a good stand (Boyhan and Kelley, 2007).The
8
required amount and frequency of irrigation will depend on the irrigation method, soil type and
conditions, and weather. Additionally, the optimal time for irrigation is when 25% of the
available moisture in the 60cm has been depleted (Ronald et al., 2013).
2.5. Water Requirement for Onion Yield
Water availability is the main limiting factor of crop productivity than all of the rest due to its
paramount importance for normal plant growth and development. Hence, due to its shallow root
system and need for frequent irrigation water after a short interval, onion is susceptible to water
stress as compared to other crops (Fitsum et al., 2016). Currently, from the recommended onion
cultivars by Melkassa agricultural research center, Bombay red is the most widely grown onion
variety under irrigation water in the country due to its higher bulb yield, earliness, and
susceptibility to the rotting disease under rain-fed conditions at the maturity stage (Nikus and
Mulugeta, 2013). As a result, knowing the individual crop water requirements help to produce
more than two times per annum to ensure the year-round production of onion in order to get a
high return as well as to reduce the susceptibility of the crop to various diseases and insect pests.
Knowing the water requirements of onion based on the specific area is basically important to
produce the optimum onion yields. Bossie (2009) elaborated that, knowing the water requirement
and the coefficient values of the crop can help to accurately plan and manage the irrigation water
for onion production at different locations even in areas where a water shortage is very critical.
Therefore, assuming high irrigation frequency and a better scheduling method may be expected
to increase the applied fertilizer use efficiency, reduces leaching effects, and improves onion
yields by increasing bulb sizes (Serra and Currah, 2002).
9
2.6. Effect of Plant Spacing on Onion Yield and Yield Component
Plant population refers to the number of plants per square meter (plants m-2) or hectare (plants
per ha-1) and is important in onion production since it has an influence on the growth, yield and
quality of onion bulbs (Brewster, 1994). Plant and row spacing are considered important to the
optimum plant population which may be reflected in higher yield, and quality. Onion bulb size
can be controlled to a certain extent by plant population. In order to produce large bulbs (> 70
mm in diameter) a plant population of between 25 and 50 plants m-2 is required, for medium
bulbs (25-50 mm) between 50 and 100 plants m-2 and for small bulbs (< 50 mm) more than 100
plants m-2 are required (Brewster, 1994).
Onions are grown in the dry season at a seeding rate of 2-3 g seeds/m 2 seedbed, transplanted
after 5-7 weeks at a spacing of 30 cm x 15 cm, and finally harvested after 14-18 weeks from the
time of sowing (Abbey, 1997). Plant density plays an important role in onion production. Plant
population is important in onion production since it has an influence on the growth, yield and
quality of bulbs (Brewster, 1994). Similarly, Dawar et al. (2007) reported that interaction
between planting densities and variety was significant only for bulb yield and that planting
density greatly influenced the quality, texture, taste, and yield of onion even within a particular
variety.
Spacing has an effect on varieties as their root and leaf growth habits differ. Higher yield and
better control over bulb size could be obtained if plants are grown at optimum density (Yemane
et al., 2013). Additionally, total bulb yield increases significantly as population density increases
and the number of marketable bulbs increases significantly with higher planting density.
Pakyurek et al. (1994), Rizk (1997), and Dawar et al. (2007) observed that the highest sowing
rate (planting density) produced a noticeably higher yield of good quality bulbs than the lower
10
sowing rate. The optimum use of spacing or plant population has dual advantages. It avoids
strong competition between plants for growth factors such as water, nutrient, and light (Geremew
et al., 2010). In addition, optimum plant population enables efficient use of available cropland
without wastage.
Different cultural practices and growing environments are known to influence the growth and
yield of onions (Yemane et al., 2014). Geremew et al. (2010) recommended intra– row spacing
of 4 cm for ‘Nasik’ Red and ‘Adama’ Red varieties, and 6 cm for ‘Bombay’ Red variety, both of
which gave the highest marketable yield and reduced unmarketable bulb yield in central rift
valley areas of Ethiopia.
General comments
The literature section is not comprehensive enough (I would suggest that it should include a detailed
information with respect to the problem explored, farmers conventional practices, planting density with
respect to variety, soil fertility and agro-ecology, and the research/knowledge gaps to be addressed?
What has been done/known so far…..what remains to be studied or discovered…should be central in the
Literature review
11
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1. Description of the Study Area
The study was conducted in the South Bench Woreda in Bench sheko Zone, Southern Ethiopia.
South Bench Woreda is located in the South West– central part of Ethiopia about a distance of
592.5 Km south of Addis Ababa, and 27.5 km from the Zonal Town, Mizan-Aman, and
geographically located between 6.730 -7.010 N latitude and 35.37.36.70 E longitudes. The
Woreda has three ecological zones, Kolla (5%), Woynadega (80%), and Dega (15%). The
amount of annual rainfall ranges from 1,801 up to 2000 mm and the number of temperature
ranges between 15.100c - 250c. Soil data? Among the vegetable crop onion contribute the largest
share and is used for both generations of income and household consumption purpose. The total
land area of the Woreda is 255,099 ha. Out of this total land area, and 46,378.25 ha were
covered by agricultural land, 9375 ha were covered by pastoralists, 15,243 ha were covered by
natural forest, 47,176 ha were covered by fruit and other crop and 385.5 ha were covered by
onion crop (Zeleke ,2021).
Figure 1: study area map
12
3.2 Experimental Materials
Four improved onion varieties (Bombe red, Red cereole 1afis, and Nasik Red) were used in the
study (Table 1).
Table 1: Description onion verities used for the experiment

Characteristics of Cultivars Red Cereole Bombay Red Nasika Red Nafis
Leaf Color Light Green Dark Green Dark Green Deep green
Leaf Arrangement Medium Medium Erect Erect
Bulb Size 80-100 85-100 85-100 100-130
Bulb Shape Thick Flat Flat Globe Globe Globe
Bulb Skin Color Medium Red Light Red Medium Red Medium Red
Bulb Flesh Color Reddish white Reddish white Reddish white Reddish white
Maturity (Days) 130-145 <120 90-110 90-110
Tss (%) 11 -14 9-11 10-18 10-18
Dry Bulb (T/Ha) 30 30 30 40
Seed Set Medium High High High
Types OPV OPV OPV OPV
Year release 2010 2010 2004 2004
Released by MARC/EIAR MARC/EIAR MARC/EIAR MARC/EIAR
Source: Zeleke and Derso, (2015) and Source: MoANR, 2018.OPV=Open Pollinated Variety
3.3 Experimental treatments and Exp’tal Design
The treatment consisted of four onion varieties (Bombay red, red cerole, Nafis, Nasik red) and
four intra– row spacing (5, 7.5, 10, 12.5cm), and inter-row spacing was maintained at 20 cm
(Table 2). A total of sixteen treatment combinationss were arranged in 4 × 4 factorial
combination in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications.The total
experimental area was 310.5 m2 (L x W) 33.75m x 9.2m with individual plots of 3.6m2(Lx W)
1.5m x2.4 m for all plots. A distance of 0.5 m was maintained between plots within a block and a
1 m distance was maintained between blocks.
13
Table 2: Experimental treatment, treatment combination and treatment codes
Treatment plant population density

Variety Spacing
No intra row inter row per plot per hectare
1 Bombay red 5 20 340 944,444.44
2 7.5 20 240 666,667
3 10 20 180 500,000.00
4 12.5 20 144 400,000.00
5 Red cerole 5 20 340 944,444.44
6 7.5 20 240 666,667
7 10 20 180 500,000.00
8 12.5 20 144 400,000.00
9 Nasika Red 5 20 340 944,444.44
10 7.5 20 240 666,667
11 10 20 180 500,000.00
12 12.5 20 144 400,000.00
13 Nasik 5 20 340 944,444.44
14 7.5 20 240 666,667
15 10 20 180 500,000.00
16 12.5 20 144 400,000.00
3.4 Experimental Management and Procedure and crop managemnt
The experimental field was prepared by using oxen driven local plow (Maresha) in accordance
with conventional farming practices followed by the farming community in the area and made
into fine tilt and leveled manually by using spade and fork. The field was ploughed three times.
When seedlings attained proper stage for transplanting at 3 or 4 leaves stage estimated around 12
to 15 cm height, transplanted to the experimental field and cured and medium to large-sized
cloves of 1.05-2.25 g of the four test varieties which are not diseased, damaged, soft, and
discoloured, was planted at a depth of 2.5-3 cm
NPS and Urea fertilizers were applied uniformly to each plot at the rate of 100kg/ha and 150kg/h
respectively. Furthermore, all necessary cultural, crop protection and agronomic practices
14
(weeding, watering, recommended fertilizer application, application of chemicals as per as
required and etc.) were carried out uniformly for all plots as per the requirement for the onion
production at all stages of growth and development. Furthermore, all necessary cultural, crop
protection and agronomic practices was carried out uniformly for all plots as per the
recommendation for the onion production at all stages of growth and development.
3.5. Agronomic Data Collection
Data on growth, yield and yield components of onion wereas recorded from the six central rows
plants which were selected randomly in each plot as specified in each plant characters below.
However, data for phenology of crop was collected from the entire plot.
3.5.1. Phonological parameters
Days to 90% maturity: was recorded by counting the number of days elapsed from the date of
planting to the date when 90% of the plants in the plot changed their leaves to yellowish and the
plants started to senescence be recorded accordingly.
3.5.2. Growth parameters
Plant height (cm): The plant heights of ten randomly selected plants from the net plot at full
blooming was measured from the ground level to the tip of the main stem using the measuring
tape.
Number of leaves per plant: The number of fully developed leaves of ten randomly selected
plants was counted at the active green leaf stages and the average was computed to obtain a
number of leaves per plant.
Leaf length (cm): was recorded as the average length of the longest leaves in ten randomly
selected plants at maturity
15
Leaf diameter (cm): was taken from ten randomly selected plants by using Vernier caliper at
physiological maturity and the average value was calculated.
3.5.3. Yield and yield components
Bulb diameter (cm): Bulb diameter was measured at right angles to the longitudinal axis at the
widest circumference of the bulb of ten randomly selected plants in each plot using a veneer
caliper (Saud et al., 2013) at harvest.
Bulb length (cm): Bulb length was the vertical average length of the matured bulb of ten
randomly selected plants in each plot which was measured by a veneer caliper.
Marketable bulb yield (t /ha): Bulbs that were free of mechanical, disease and insect pest
damages, uniform in color, and medium to large in size (20 -160 g) was considered as
marketable. The weight of such bulbs obtained from the net plot area of each plot was measured
in kilograms using scaled balance and expressed as a ton per hectare (Lemma and Shimeles,
2003).
Unmarketable bulb yield (t /ha): Harvested bulbs that were under (less than 20 g) as well as
oversized (160g), misshapen, decayed, discolored, diseased, and physiologically disordered was
considered unmarketable according to Lemma and Shimeles (2003). The weight of such bulbs
obtained from the net plot area of each plot was measured in kilograms using scaled balance and
expressed as a ton per hectare.
Total bulb yield (t /ha): Total yield of onion was obtained by adding marketable and
unmarketable bulb yields and expressed as a ton per ha (Tekle, 2015).
Harvest index (%): This was expressed as the ratio of total bulb dry weight to the total biomass
dry weight and expressed in percentage
16
Quality is much more important than yield for onion…Why did not you consider at least
some quality attributes?
Different varieties/row spacing may have effect on disease/weed/insect infestations….Why
did not you score at least for common diseases and weeds in your study area
17
3.6. Data Analysis
The data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) which was appropriate for the design
of the experiment using statistical software of SAS version 9.3 (SAS Institute Inc, 2012). Least
significant differences at 5% level of probability were computed to delineate the significances
between and/or among the treatment means.
Which model have used for analysis
Why did not you perform correlation analysis?
Economic benefit of using differen row-spacing (seeding rate) should have been taken into
account?
18
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Phenological Parameter
4.1.1 Days to 90% physiological maturity
The analysis of variancetion result revealed that the main effects of intra-row spacing and variety
had a highly significantly (p <0.001) influence on days to 90% physiological maturity, but the
interaction was not statistically significant (Appendix Table 1).
Days to maturity ranges from 87.667 for Bombay red to 102.75 days for Nafis (Table 2).The
variation of maturity date between improved onion varieties might be due to their inherent
genetic difference. In line with the current result Kahsay et al. (2017) and Gebretsadkan et al.
(2018) reported a significant difference among onion varieties for maturity date.
Regarding, intra-row spacing, wider intra raw spacing with 12.5 cm required 99.667days to reach
physiological maturity while the shortest days (86.91) to reach physiological maturity was
observed at 5cm intra row spacing (Table 3). The study result showed that as the intra-row
spacing increased from 5 cm to 12.5 cm, the days to maturity also increased linearly from 86.91
days to 99.667days the variation in maturity might be due to the fact that the growth rate is faster
in closely spaced crops than widely spaced ones. This is because of high inter specific
competition for growth factors, where plants get stressed and strive to set the bulb as early as
possible. In line with the current result Ahmed et al., 2017 also reported who reported a
significant difference among tasted intra row spacing for days to maturity in garlic.
19
4.2 Growth Parameters
4.2.1. Plant height
The result of the study revealed that the main effect of variety and intra-row spacing had
significantly (p <0.05) effect on affected plant height of onion while their interaction effect did
not (Appendix Table 1).
The tallest plant height (63.583cm) was observed for variety Red Cereaole and the shortest
height (54.08cm) was recorded for local Nafis (Table 3). The variation in plant height could be
attributed to genetic differences between the cultivars and their reaction to the prevailing
environmental conditions. Similar findings were also reported by Simon et al.(2014) and study
Demisie and Tolessa (2018) who found the highest plant height from variety Nafis. The presence
of significant difference between improved onion varieties in plant height was also reported by
Gebretsadkan et al. (2018)
With respect to the effect of intra-row spacing, the longest plant height (64.917 cm) was attained
from the intra-row spacing of 12.5cm which was statistically in parity with 10cm intra raw
spacing while the shortest plant height (51.33 cm) was recorded from intra-row spacing of
5cm.The increase in plant height at the medium intra-row spacing may be due to less interplant
competition for the growth factors like water, nutrient and light, which may lead to better growth
and significantly taller plant height as compared to narrow intra-row as explained by Khan et al.
(2002).Corroborating the results of this study, Gessesew et al.(2015) and Belay et al.(2015) also
showed that plant heights of onion plants increased in response to increasing intra-row spacing.
Table 3: The main effect of onion varieties and row spacing on physiological maturity and plant
height
Treatment Days to Maturity Plant height
Variety
20
Red Cereole 95.58b 63.583a
Bombay Red 87.667b 60.667ab
Nasika Red 89.25c 57.250bc
Nafis 102.75a 54.083c
Intra row spacing(cm)
5 86.917 c
51.533c
7.5 92.667 b
57.750b
10 96.00ab 61.083ab
12.5 99.667 a
64.917a
LSD (0.05) 4.753 4.691
CV (%) 5.40 8.70
LSD (5%) = Least significant difference at P= 0.05, CV (%)= Coefficient of variation in percent.
Means with the same letter(s) within a column are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance.
21
4.2.2. Number of leaf
The analysis of variance showed that the main effect of variety and intra row spacing and their
interaction were significant (p<0.05) influence on number of leaf per plant (Appendix table 2).
The highest leaf number per plant (14.667) was recorded from Bombay red variety sown at intra
raw spacing of 12.5cm which is followed by Red Cereole sown at intra raw spacing of 12.5cm,
while the minimum number of leaf per plant (6.33) was observed from variety Nafis and Red
Cereole sown at 5cm intra row spacing (Table 4).
The increase in leaf number along wider intra-row spacing than closer intra-row spacing might
be due to less competition of onion plants for growth factors and abundant utilization of
resources which accelerate leaf initiation. Pervious study also revealed that plants grown at wider
spacing produced more leaf number than at closer intra-row spacing (Habtamu et al.2015)
The increase in the number of leaves produced per plant in response to decreasing plant
population density, could be partly ascribed to less concurrence among the widely spaced plants
for growth factors such as light, moisture and nutrients. This may have resulted in higher leaf
number per plant. The same result with the current study was also reported by Tekle (2015);
Gebretsadik (2016); Gebretsadik and Dechassa(2018). In contrary to the current study result
Belay et al. (2015) reported that leaf number was not significantly affected by intra row spacing.
22
Table 4: interaction effect of onion varieties and row spacing on number of leaf per plant
Treatment Number of leaf per plant
Variety Inter-Row spacing
5 6.333g
Red Cereole 7.5 7.667fg
10 12.000cd
12.5 14.333ab
5 7.33fg
Bombay 7.5 10.667de
Red 10 11.000de
12.5 14.667a
5 7.00fg
Nasika Red 7.5 7.667fg
10 10.333e
12.5 13.000bc
5 6.333g
Nafis 7.5 8.000f
10 8.333f
12.5 11.333de
LSD(5%) 1.566
CV(%) 9.63
significance
4.2.3. Leaf Length
The main effect of variety and intra-row plant spacing significantly influenced the leaf length
(p<0.05) however, interaction effects of intra-row spacing and variety did not significantly affect
the leaf length (Appendix Table 2). The results of the analysis of variance indicated that variety
Nafis gave a longer leaf length of 48.00cm which was statistically at par with variety Bombey
Red with a leaf length 46.08cm while variety Nasika Red gave the shortest leaf length of 39.08
cm (Table 5).The difference in leaf length of the cultivars could be attributed to mere differences
in the genetic constitution of the plants. In line with the current study Mekdes (2012) reported
the highest leaf length (43.24 cm) from variety Nasik Red compared to other varieties.
23
With respect to the effect of intra-row spacing, the longest leaf length (48.33 cm) was attained
from the intra-row spacing of 12.5cm, while the shortest leaf length (38.91cm) was recorded
from intra-row spacing of 5cm (Table 5). The increment in leaf length at low population density
might be due to the availability of more nutrient and moisture at wider intra-row spacing whereas
the closest intra-row spacing leads to strong competition for nutrient and moisture and thereby
cause shorter plant. In line with the current study result Yemane (2011) and Tesfalegn (2015)
reported similar results in which the highest leaf length was obtained from wider intra-row
spacing. Similarly Belay et al.(2015) and Tekle(2015) also reported the longest leaf length at
wider intra raw spacing. But, Gebretsadik and Dechassa (2018) reported a non-significant effect
of intra row spacing on leaf length of onion.
4.2.4. Leaf width
The analysis variance for leaf width revealed a significant (p<0.05) difference among the main
effects of variety and inter row spacing however, interaction effects of intra-row spacing and
variety did not significantly affect the number of leaf length (Appendix Table 2).The widest leaf
width (10.833cm) was recorded from varietyBombay Red; however the lowest leaf width
(8.50cm) was recorded from Nasika red (Table 3).
A significant difference among onion cultivars in their leaf width might be attributed due to
inherent and genetic variation among garlic varieties in their growth habit like plant height, leaf
length, leaf width, leaf number, leaf shape and vigour. Similarly Ahmed EN et al (2010) also
observed highly significant differences of leaf width in their study among cultivar. However
Demisie and Tolessa (2018) reported a non-significant effect among tasted onion cultivars for
leaf width.
24
From the intra raw spacing, the widest leaf width of 13.33 cm was obtained at intra-row spacing
of 12.5 cm, while the narrowest leaf width of 6.75 cm was obtained at 5 cm intra-row spacing
(Table 5). The wider leaf diameter produced at wider intra- row spacing might be due to wider
spaced plants get proper light intensity which is very important for photosynthesis and nutrient as
compared to the closely spaced plants. Similar result was reported by recorded. Concurrent with
the results of this study, Seid et al. (2014) and Yemane et al. (2013) also showed that the lowest
leaf diameter was recorded for narrow intra-row spacing of garlic and onion respectively
25
Table 5: The main effect of onion varieties and row spacing on leaf length and leaf width
Treatment Leaf length Leaf width
Variety
Red Cereole 39.083c 10.167ab
Bombay Red 46.083 a
10.833a
Nasika Red 42.250b 8.500c
Nafis 48.00 a
9.500b
5 38.917d 6.75d
7.5 42.083c 8.500c
10 45.583 b
10.417b
12.5 48.833a 13.33a
LSD (0.05) 2.3129 0.783
CV (%) 6.33 4.19
significance
4.3. Yield and Yield Components
4.3.1. Bulb Length (cm)
The analysis of variance showed that the main effect of variety and intra-row plant spacing
significantly (p<0.05) influenced the bulb length however, interaction effects of intra-row
spacing and variety did not significantly affect the number of bulb length (p<0.05) (Appendix
Table 3).
The largest bulb length (5.30cm) was obtained from variety Bombay Red; however, Nasika red
gave the shortest with 4.36 cm (Table 6). This variation might be due to the reality that varieties
can have different genetic makeup that makes them vary for bulb length. In line with the current
study result Similarly, Jilani et al.(2009) and Yemane (2015) reported variation among onion
varieties for bulb length. Lemma (2004) andJ ilani et al. (2009) also found difference among
cultivars in bulb length due to genetic inheritance.
The wider intra-row spacing of 12.5cm gave the highest bulb length of 4.7992cmwhile the
narrower intra-row spacing of 5cm gave the minimum of 4.74 cm (Table 6). The increment in
26
bulb length at increased intra-row spacing might be attributed to the adequate availability of
growth resources at a wider spacing that allows the bulbs to have more assimilates available for
storage. Dawar et al.(2009) also reported that high planting density results in less availability of
resources and due these bulbs do not attain their potential sizes. In agreement with present result,
Dereje et al.(2017) found higher bulb length (6.02 cm) from planted grown in wider spacing of
(15 cm) followed by those planted at (12.5 cm) while significantly smaller bulb length (5.48 cm)
was obtained from closer spacing (7.5 cm), which was also statistically similar to those planted
at 10cm spacing.
4.3.2. Bulb Diameter
significantly influenced the bulb diameter however, interaction effects of intra-row spacing and
variety did not significantly affect the bulb diameter (p<0.05) (Appendix Table 3). The largest
bulb diameter (5.735cm) was obtained from Variety Bombay while, Red Cereole variety gave
the shortest bulb diameter with 5.36cm (Table 6). The variation for bulb diameter could be due to
variations among varieties in their bulb character, such as bulb size. A significant difference in
bulb diameter among onion varieties was also reported by Similarly Getahun et al., (2020)
reported that the largest bulb diameter was recorded for variety Bombay Red among the tasted
cultivar.
An increment in bulb diameter was observed with increasing intra-row spacing, and 12.5cm gave
the highest (5.58cm). However, 5 cm intra-row spacing gave the minimum bulb diameter of
5.46cm (Table 6).
The increased in bulb diameter at wider plant spacing could be probably attributed to more
nutrients, space, moisture availability and resulting in enlargement of their bulb size. Similarly,
27
high plant density implies closer spacing and ultimate reduction in space available per plant, and
then the tendency is real that bulb expansion might be limited due to smaller space for bulbing.
The present finding is in line with Nigulle and Biwas(2017) who found the highest bulb diameter
from wider intra-row spacing. The current results are also supported by the findings of Jilani et
al. (2009), Akoun (2005) and Muhammad et al. (2011) who stated that higher bulb diameter was
achieved for the wider plant spacing as compared to the closer spacing of onion.
4.3.3. Mean bulb weight
significantly (p<0.05) influenced the mean bulb weight; however, interaction effects of intra-
rowspacing and variety did not significantly affect the bulb diameter (p<0.05) (Appendix Table
3). The highest Mean bulb weight (73.883g) was recorded for variety Nafis which was
statistically at par with that of the Bombay Red (72.317g) while the lowest mean bulb weight
(65.697g) was recorded for variety Red Cereole(Table 6). Difference in average bulb weight
within varieties was due to their genetic variability. This finding is in concurrence with the
findings of Jilani and Ghaffoor (2003) and Jilani et al. (2009) who reported the variation among
onion cultivars in average bulb weight. Similarly significant variation among tasted cultivars for
average bulb weight was also reported by Geremew et al.(2014) and Simon et al.(2014).
Regarding intra raw spacing plots planted at a wider intra row spacing of 12.5cm gave the
highest mean bulb weight of 74.665g, while those planted at intra row spacing of 5cm gave the
lowest (65.697g) average bulb weight (Table 6). The mean heavier bulbs in wider spacing might
be attributed to the lower competition of plants for limited resources as compared to plants in
narrower spacing which allowed higher assimilation and accumulate more dry matter in the
28
bulbs. Gessesew et al.(2015) also reported that increase of mean fresh bulb weight from 41.97 to
92.2 g as an intra-row spacing increase from 10 to 15 cm.
In harmony with this result, Muhammad et al. (2011), Mahadeen, (2008), Dorcas et al. (2012)
and Jilani et al. (2010) found that the lowest average bulb weight was obtained for narrowly
spaced onion plants.
Production of heavier bulbs in wider spacing might also be attributed to the fact that, widely
spaced plants experienced little or no competition for limited environmental resources compared
to closely spaced plants. This result is in agreement with observation by Derejeet al., (2012) who
reported that plants spaced at 9cm gave the lowest average weight for a single onion bulb while
in 15 cm spaced plants, and the weight of the bulbs was maximum. Similar result was also
reported by Kahsay et al., (2013) where bulbs of “Huruta” shallot planted at 20cm intra-row
spacing produced the highest bulb weight per plant while those planted at 10cm intra-row
spacing produced the lowest bulb weight per plant.
Table 6: The main effect of onion varieties and row spacing on bulb diameter, and mean bulb
weight
Treatment Bulb length(cm) Bulb diameter(cm) Mean bulb weight (g)
Variety
Red Cereole 4.364c 5.3642c 65.697c
Bombay Red 5.30 a
5.7350 a
72.317ab
Nasika Red 4.365c 5.3608c 71.282b
Nafis 5.253 b
5.6017 b
73.883a
5 4.7442 d
5.4650c 67.510c
7.5 4.7917 c
5.4958 bc
70.391b
10 4.8475 b
5.5200 b
70.613b
12.5 4.7992a 5.5808a 74.665a
LSD (0.05) 0.0290 0.0476 2.3973
CV (%) 0.72 1.03 4.06
significance
29
4.3.4. Total bulb yield
The analysis of variance indicated that the main effects of variety and intra row spacing as well
as the interaction of both factors had a highly significant (p<0.001) effect on total bulb yield of
onion(Appendix Table 4).The maximum total bulb yield (35.450t ha-1) was obtained from
Bombey red sown in interaction with 5cm intra row spacing which was followed by Nafis
variety sown at intra row spacing 5cm which gave (34.117t ha-1) of total bulb weight and the
minimum average total bulb yield of (26.750t ha-1) was observed in Red Cereola and Nasika red
variety sown at intra row spacing of 12.5cm (Table 7).
The study result indicated an increase in total bulb weight of onion as intra raw spacing
decreases irrespective of the cultivars The main difference of average total bulb weight of the
interaction effect might be due to response of different varieties of the same crop to different
plant spacing because of their growth habit, number of branches per plant and plant height
affected by intra row spacing.
The increased total bulb yield by high plant population might be due to increased plant stand and
consequently, a higher number of bulbs produced per unit area. However, the weight of bulbs
reduced due to higher competition among plants for growth factors. This result is in agreement
with findings of Nigullie and Biawas (2017) who found the highest total bulb yield from densely
populated onion plants than sparsely planted ones.
The enhancement of total bulb yield in response to the treatment combination of 5 cm intra-row
spacing with the cultivars might be due to the higher number of harvestable bulbs per unit area as
described by Latif et al. (2010). Hence, onion plants planted at the optimum intra row spacing
helps for attaining their optimum bulb size (Rumpel et al., 2000). This result agrees with the
30
finding of Khan et al. (2003), Muhammad et al. (2011), Latif et al. (2010), Yemane et al. (2013)
and Jan et al. (2003) who reported that the highest onion bulb yields were observed at the closest
spacing.
The study result revealed a positive increase in total bulb yield at higher plant population density
could be ascribed to an increased in plant population per unit land area. However, resulted in
lower yield per plant due to reduce size of individual bulbs emerged from increased competition
growth factors. Therefore, this study confirms that the total yield per unit area depends not only
on the performance of individual plants but also the number of plants per unit area. In addition,
the yield difference between the highest and the lowest plant population densities could be due to
increased leaf area index at high plant population density, which in turn improved radiation
interception. Derejeet al. (2012) also indicated that total bulb yield decreased with increase in the
intra-row spacing of shallot.
4.3.5. Marketable bulb yield
as the interaction of both factors had a highly significant (p<0.001) effect on marketable bulb
yield of onion(Appendix Table 4).The maximum marketable bulb yield(34.333t ha-1) was
obtained from Bombey red sown in interaction with 5cm intra row spacing which was followed
by Nafis variety sown at intra row spacing 5cm which gave (32.933t ha-1) of marketable bulb
yield and the minimum marketable bulb yield of (25.667t ha-1) was observed in Nasika red
variety sown at intra row spacing of 12.5cm which was statistically at par with Red Cereola
sown at 5cm intra raw spacing which gave (25.700t ha-1) of marketable bulb yield(Table 7).
The variation observed among onion varieties might be due to capacity to perform under the
different agro-climatic condition and genetic makeup. In agreement with present result, Simon et
31
al. (2014) reported a significant difference among onion variety for marketable bulb yield and
the increased marketable yield at the closest intra-row spacing might be due to high plant
population thus, plants produced more bulb yields. Hailu et al.(2015) found the highest
marketable yield (34.49 t ha-1) from the closest (5 cm) intra-row spacing. Russo (2008) also
reported 97% of marketable onion bulbs from densely populated plant.
The increments in marketable bulb yield at closer density may be explained as although plant
height, number of leaves per plant and leaf length increased with increasing spacing, it could not
be compensated for the yield of closely spaced plants due to higher plant population. Thus, the
marketable bulb yield of onion per unit area does not completely depend up on the performance
of individual plants but also related with the total number of plants per unit area and yield
contributing parameters (Latif et al., 2010; Aliyu et al., 2008). Similar observations were
reported by Kahsay et al.(2013); Tekle(2015). The decrease in marketable bulb yield, at higher
plant density were also reported (Kahsay et al.2013; Tekle 2015; Gebretsadik and Dechassa,
2018; Demisie and Tolessa, 2018).
4.3.6. Unmarketable bulb yield
as the interaction of both factors had a highly significant (p<0.001) effect on unmarketable bulb
yield of onion(Appendix Table 4).
The maximum unmarketable bulb yield (2.3167t ha-1) was obtained from Nasika red sown in
interaction with 5cm intra row spacing which was followed by Red Cereola sown at intra row
spacing 5cm which gave (2.183t ha-1) of unmarketable bulb yield and the minimum
unmarketable bulb yield of (0.556t ha-1) was observed in Bombay Red variety sown at intra row
spacing of 12.5cm (Table 7).
32
High unmarketable yield in closely spaced plants revealed in the study could be due to inter-
plant competition resulting in a fewer large sized bulbs than wider spacing that negatively
affected the marketable yield and favored the production of small sized bulbs which are
unmarketable. This finding is in agreement with other related reports. Seck and Baldeh (2009)
concluded that plant density has an impact on marketable bulb size. The study results are in
accord with those of Seck and Baldeh (2009), Yemane et al. (2013) and Dereje et al. (2012) who
mentioned that narrow intra-row spacing increased unmarketable bulb yield of onion. Similar
with the current study result Kahsay et al. (2013); Tekle (2015); Gebretsadik and
Dechassa(2018) were reported a significant increase in unmarketable yield at closer inter raw
spacing than wider intra row spacing.
Table 7: Interaction Effect of variety and intra row spacing marketable, un-marketable, and total
bulb yield
Treatment Unmarketable bulb Marketable Total bulb yield
yield (t/ha) bulb yield (t/ha) (t/ha)
Variety Inter-Row spacing
5 2.1833b 30.933c 33.117bc
Red Cereole 7.5 1.5833 c
29.533 d
31.117de
10 1.2333d 26.883gh 28.117h
12.5 1.0500 fg
25.700 h
26.750i
5 1.1167ef 34.333a 35.450a
Bombay 7.5 0.8667 hi
30.917 c
31.783d
Red 10 0.7000j 28.750de 29.450fg
12.5 0.5500 k
27.533 efg
28.083h
5 2.3167a 29.800cd 32.117cd
Nasika Red 7.5 1.5833 c
28.533 def
30.117ef
10 0.8167i 26.933gh 28.083h
12.5 1.0833 ef
25.667 h
26.750i
5 1.1833de 32.933b 34.117b
Nafis 7.5 0.9500 gh
27.500 efg
28.450gh
10 1.1833de 27.300fg 28.117h
12.5 0.68 j
26.733 gh
27.417hi
LSD(5%) 0.1154 1.3035 1.2909
CV(%) 2.6 3.04 5.80
33
significance
4.3.7. Biomass yield
The main effect of variety and intra-row plant spacing significantly influenced the biomass
(p<0.05) however, interaction effects of intra-row spacing and variety did not significantly affect
the number of leaf length (Appendix Table 4). The results of the analysis of variance indicated
that maximum biomass yield (66.072) was recorded from variety Red Cereole which was
statistically at par with variety Bombey Red with 65.351t ha-1while variety Nasika Red gave the
minimum biomass yield of 62.175t ha-1(Table 7). The difference in average bulb dry weight
between cultivars evaluated may be commensurate with the size and weight of individual bulbs.
The result is consistent with the findings of Islam et al. (2007), Magdi et al. (2009), Mousa and
Mohamed (2009) who reported significant difference among onion genotypes in dry matter
content.
The study result showed an increment on biomass yield as intra raw spacing decrease which
might be due to the fact that closer spacing between plants resulted in competition for nutrients,
moisture and light, thus reducing amount of assimilate produced and stored in the bulbs which
reduced their bulb weight. Result of this study is in agreement with Kahsay et al., (2013) who
reported that shallot bulbs planted at 20cm intra-row spacing grow more vigorously and obtained
more biological yield per plant than those planted at 10cm spacing. Many other authors Akuon
(2004) and Abubaker (2008) also reported that the increased bulb weight and above ground
vegetative parts of onion were obtained from plants grown in wider spacing and higher rates of
nitrogen application which ultimately increased the fresh biomass yield of onion. These results
34
are in conformity with the findings of Dereje et al. (2012) and Sikder et al. (2010) who explained
that higher bulb dry weight was achieved in wider spacing in shallot and onion respectively.
4.3.8. Harvest index
The main effect of intra row spacing significantly affected the harvest index of onion plants,
while the main effect of variety and its interaction with intra-row spacing did not (Appendix
Table 4).
Intra row spacing at 5 cm gave the highest harvest index of 55.51% while, the lowest harvest
index of 38.30% was obtained at the wider intra-row spacing of 12.5 (Table 8). Higher harvest
index recorded at narrow spacing’s might be due to the presence of shortest leaf length, plant
height and leaf diameter, which reduced above-ground biomass and resulted in a higher harvest
index. On the other hand, the lowest harvest indices at the wider spacing could also be attributed
to excessive vegetative growth that has a detrimental effect on the partitioning of assimilates
towards the bulbs. Moreover, the lowest harvest index at a wider intra-row spacing of 12.5 might
also be due to the existence of a higher number of leaves, wider leaf length and diameter at wider
intra-row spacing.Similarly, Yemaneet al. (2013) for onion and Derejeet al. (2012) for shallot
reported that wider intra-row spacing resulted in lower harvest indices. Highest values of harvest
index of mungbean was recorded from closer spacing probably due to the reduced vegetative
biomass (Kabir and Sarkar, 2008)
35
Table 8: The main effect of onion varieties and row spacing biomass yield and harvest index
Treatment Total biomass yield Harvest index (%)

Variety
Red Cereole 66.072c 45.452a
Bombay Red 65.351a 45.325a
Nasika Red 62.175 c
45.648a
Nafis 65.901 b
45.328a
5 60.805d 55.51a
7.5 61.036 c
49.867b
10 66.416 b
43.104c
12.5 71.242a 38.303d
LSD (0.05) 3.0588 1.8177
CV (%) 5.66 4.67
significance.
4.4. Correlation Analysis
Correlation coefficient was calculated for the different response variables which help to show
how the yield components and growth characters affecting the marketable bulb yield of onion.
Thus, it was observed that marketable bulb yield was highly significantly and positively
correlated with total bulb yield (0.948**), harvest index (r=0.804**), bulb length (r=232) and
unmarketable yield (r=0.263) (Table 9). This shows that the use of different combination of
intra-row spacing and variety for increasing of vegetative growth, results to the indirect selection
of intra-row spacing and variety combinations for increasing onion yield. However, marketable
yield was highly statistically and negatively correlated to number of leaf (r=--0.647**) and plant
height (r=-0.432**). In contrary to the current study result Hyder et al. (2007) showed that plant
height has positive indirect effect on marketable bulb yield and bulb sizes.
Similarly, average bulb weight was positively correlated and highly significant with marketable
bulb yield (r=948**), harvest index (r=0.867 and unmarketable bulb yield (r=0.446**),
36
indicating that variety and intra-row spacing increased bulb weight by improving these
parameters.
Similarly, harvest index positively and significantly influenced by plant height (0.63***), leaf
number(r=0.572**), leaf length(r=0.547**), number of leaf (r=0.760**), total bulb
weight(r=0.867**), and marketable bulb yield(r=0.806**) (Table 9). Similar findings were
reported by Ademe et al. (2012) and Kahsay et al. (2013) on onion and shallot, respectively.
37
Table 9: Correlation result of yield and yield related variables
LL PH DTM NL LD BD BL BW MY TBY UMY AGBM HI

LL 1.00 0.803** 0.207 0.769* -0.038 0.214 0.012 0.090 -0.379* -0.414** -0.416** 0.539** 0.547**
0.536*
PH 1.00 * 0.733** -0.127 -0.026 -0.148 0.025 -0.419** -0.452** -0.301* 0.528* 0.572**
DTM 1.00 0.3632* 0.363* 0.018 0.155 0.264 -0.432** -0.515** -0.41* 0.481** -0.583**
NL 1.00 0.179 0.252 0.084 0.374* -0.647** -0.711** -0.558** 0.599** 0.760**
0.795*
LD 1.00 0.759** * 0.624** -0.112 -0.259 -0.740** -0.361* -0.356*
BD 1.00 0.907* 0.528* 0.163 0.004 -0.769** 0.246 -0.131
BL 1.00 0.550** 0.232 0.050 -0.753** 0.208 -0.0875
BW 1.00 -0.341* -0.422** 0.661** 0.307 -0.418**
MY 1.00 0.948** 0.263 -0.431** 0.806**
TBY 1.00 0.446** -0.468** 0.867**
UMY 1.00 -0.454** 0.524**
AGB
M 1 -0.847**
HI 1
DM = Days to maturity; PH = plant height; LN = leaf number; LL= leaf length; LW = leaf width; BD = bulb diameter; BL = bulb length; NL=leaf
number, BD=bulb diameter; MY = marketable bulb yield; MC = marketable yield; UMy = unmarketable bulb yield; TBY = Total bulb yield; HI =
harvest index
39
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
Onion (Allium cepa L.) is one of the most important vegetable crops commercially grown in the
world. It is a high value and high income generating vegetable crops for most farmers in Ethiopia
which is widely produced in small scales and by commercial growers. Onion is considerably
important in the daily Ethiopian diet which the bulbs and the lower stem sections are the most
popular as seasonings or as vegetables in stews.
The enhancement of onion production and productivity can be related with different growth
factors. Thus, the use of appropriate agronomic management has an undoubted contribution to
increased crop yields. Although several constraints are associated with onion production;
improper agronomic practice used by farmers are among the major problems to onion production
and productivity improvement in the study area. Hence, lack of information on intra-row spacing
and lack of improved variety are among the key agronomic practices which affect yield and
quality of onion bulbs.
Add just 2-3 lines as a rationale for the study The study was, therefore, conducted to assess the
responses of onion varieties to different intra row spacing at south Bench District of Bench
Sheko Zone, South Western Ethiopia. The evaluated treatments consisted of factorial
combination of four onion varieties (Bombay red, Red Cereole, Nasika red and Nasifl) with four
intra row spacing (5cm, 7.5cm, 10 cm, and 12.5 cm) which was laid out in RCBD with three
replications
The agronomic data results revealed that almost all recorded parameters had significant
differences due to either of the main or the interaction effect of both varieties and row spacing.
Highly significant difference was observed on 90% physiological maturity, plant height, leaf
length, leaf width, bulb length, bulb diameter, mean bulb weight, harvest index and biomass
40
yield due to the main effect of varieties and intra row spacing. Similarly the interaction effect of
variety and intra row spacing revealed highly significant effect on number of leaf per plant, total
bulb yield, unmarketable and marketable bulb yield.
In general, the overall results of this study revealed that Bombay red variety performed better
and gave the highest total bulb yield and marketable yield than the other varieties when planted
at 5 cm intra row spacing in the study area. Therefore, according to the current study, 5 cm intra-
row spacing and Bombay red onion variety can be used for better and improved marketable bulb
yield at South Bench area.
However, this intra-row spacing cannot be generalized for different locations in Bench Sheko
zone. Since, the present study was done only for one season at one location; it would be
advisable to repeat the experiment at different years and locations to come up with
comprehensive recommendations. It appears to be worthy to repeat the experiment over locations
and seasons by including more variety and intra-row spacing narrower than 5cm with
combination of different inter-row spacing.
How does your study contribute to existing knowledge?
How do you convince farmers to use both tseday and kuriftu…and 20cm
What do you suggest for further studies?
41
6. REFERENCES
Assefa A.G., Mesgina S.H., Abriha Y.W., 2015. Effect of inorganic and organic fertilizers on
the growth and yield of garlic crop (Allium sativum L.) in Northern Ethiopia, J. Agric.
Sci. 7 (4): 80–86.
Abubaker S., 2008. Effect of plant density on flowering date, yield and quality attribute of Bush
Beans (Phaseolus Vulgaris L.) under Center Pivot Irrigation System. Amer. J. Agri. and
Biol. Sci., 3(4): 666-668.
Agro BIG.,2016. Onions value chain analysis. Agro Big program for agribusiness induced
growth in the Amhara region
Akuon J., 2004. Effect of plant density and manure on yield and yield components of common
onion (Allium cepa L.)Var. Nsukka Red. Nigerian J. Hort. Sci., 9: 43–48.
AsfawZeleke and EshetuDerso.,. 2015. Production and management of significant vegetable
Crops in Ethiopia, Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia;
Assefa AG, SH Magana and YW Abraham, 2015. Effects of inorganic and organic fertilizers on
the growth and yield of garlic crop (Allium sativum L.) in Northern Ethiopia.
Awas G, T Abdisa, K Tolesa and AChali, 2010. Effect of intra-row spacing on a yield of three
onion (Allium cepa L.) varieties at Adami Tulu agricultural research center (mid-rift
valley of Ethiopia). J Hortic For, 2: 7- 11.
Belay S, D Mideksa, S Gebrezgiabher and W Seifu, 2015 Yield components of adama red onion
(Allium cepa L.) cultivar as affected by intra-row spacing under irrigation in fiche
condition. Department of Horticulture, College of Veterinary Medicine and Agriculture,
Addis Ababa University, Fiche, Ethiopia
42
Belay S, D Mideksa, S Gebrezgiabher, and W Seifu, 2015 Yield components of Adama red
onion (Allium cepa L.) cultivar as affected by intra-row spacing under irrigation in fiche
condition
Brewster JL, 2008. Onions and another vegetable (No 15).CABI. Inter J AgriBiosci, 2017.
Central Statistical Agency (CSA).Agricultural sample survey report on area and production of
major crops, Addis Abeba, Vol (I) Ethiopia. 2017.
CSA (Central Statistical Agency) 2020, Agricultural Sample Survey, Volume I. Report on Area
and Production of major crops, Meher season. Statistical Bulletin 587. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia. Department of Horticulture, College of Veterinary Medicine and Agriculture,
Addis Ababa University, Fiche, Ethiopia
Dawar MN, Wazir KFs, Dawar MD, Dawar HS ., 2007. Effect of planting density on growth and
yield of onion varieties under climatic condition of peshawar. Journal of Agriculture 23:
911-918.
Demisie R and Tolessa K (2018) Growth and Bulb Yield of Onion (Allium cepa L.) in Response
to Plant Density and Variety in Jimma, South Western Ethiopia.Adv Crop Sci Tech 6:
357. doi:10.4172/2329-8863.1000357
Dereje A, Derbew B, Getachew T., 2012. Influence of bulb topping and intra row spacing on
yield and quality of some shallot (Allium Cepa Var. Aggregatum) varieties at
Anededworeda, western Amhara. Afri. J. Plant Sci., 6(6): 190-202.
Dereje A, Fikreyohannes G, Kebede W.,2017. Farmyard manure and intra-row spacing on yield
and yield components of Adama Red onion (Allium cepa L.) cultivar under irrigation in
Gewane District, Afar Region, Ethiopia. Journal of Horticulture and Forestry 9: 40-48
43
DessieGetahun, MulatGetaneh, Birhanu Habte and Tesfa Binalfew.,2020. Participatory Onion
Variety Evaluation at Fogera District of South Gondar Zone, Ethiopia. Journal of Plant
Genetics and Breeding.an open access journal.
Elhag, A.Z. and H.M. Osman, 2013.Effect of Plant Spacing on Onion (Allium cepa L.)Seeds
Quality.Universal Journal of Applied Science, 1(2): 52-55.
FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations], 2021 (accessed April 26,
2021).
FAOSTAT (Food and Agriculture Organization), Agriculture in the world top country of onion
producer area and production of major tables of Central Statistical Agency, 2020.
Fitsum G., Woldetsadik K.,and Alemayehu Y., 2016. Effects of the Irrigation Depth and
Nitrogen Levels on Growth and Bulbs Yield of Onion (Allium cepa L.) at the Algae,
Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia.
Food and Agriculture Organization Statistics of the United Nations (FAOSTAT).Food and
Agriculture Organization Statistics Data base, Agricultural production indices. 2017.
Gebremedhn G., Yohanes G., Kiros A., Eyasu A., Woldegerima G., and YrgalemT., 2018.
Enhancing Productivity and Production of Onion (Allium cepaL.) Through the use of
Improved Varieties at North Western Zoze of Tigray, Ethiopia.International Journal of
Environment, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 3 (3).
Gebrselassie, S., 2013.Helping small farmers to commercialize: Evidence from growing onion
and tomatoes for sale in central Ethiopia.A research update of the future agricultures’
consortium.
44
Geremew A, Tesheme A, Kassaye T, Amenti C., 2010. Effecst of intra–row spacing on yield of
three onion (Allium cepa L) varieties at Adamitulu Agricultural research center (Mid rift
valley of Ethiopia). J. Hortic. 2(1):7-11.
Geremew A, Teshome A, Kasaye T, Amenti C., 2010 Effect of intra row spacing on yield of
three onions (allium cepa L.) varieties at adamitulu agricultural research center (mid riі
valley of ethiopia). Journal of Horticulture and Forestry 2: 7-11
Gesesew S, Welsetsadik K, Wassu W, Mohammed W., 2015 Growth parameters of onion
(Allium CepaL. Var. Cepa) as affected by nitrogen fertilizer rates and intra-row spacing
under irrigation in gode, southeastern Ethiopia. Forestry and Fisheries 4: 239-245.
Goldman IL, 2011. Molecular breeding of healthy vegetables. EMBO Rep 12: 96-102
Grubben, J.H. and Denton, D.A. 2004. Plant Resources of Tropical Africa,PROTA Foundation,
Wageningen; Backhuys, Leiden, CTA, Netherlands.
Habtamu T, Minuyelet J, Esmelealem M, Alebachew E., 2016 ,influences of inter and intra row
spacing on yield, yield component and morphological characteristics of onion (Allium
cepa L.) at Western Amhara region. African Journal of Agricultural Research 11: 1797-
1804.
Hailu D, Aklilu M, Mekonnen M., 2015. An investigation on the influence of intra-row spacing
and variety on yield and shelf life of onion. International Journal of Agricultural Science
5: 559-567.
Hailu DK, Aklilu MM, Mikael TY., 2015. An investigation on the influence of intra-row spacing
and variety on onions yield, and shelf life of onions. Int. J. Agric. SCI. 5(3):559-567
Hanelt, P., 1990. "Taxonomy, Evolution, and History."In Onions and Allied Crops, edited by
D.Haim, L. Rabinowitch and L. James Brewster, 1-26. Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press.
45
Kahsay Y, F Belay & A Embaye, 2013 Enhancing onion production and productivity through the
introduction of seed production techniques in the central zone of Tigray, Ethiopia.
Kahsay Y, Fetien A, and Derbew B., 2013.Intra-row spacing effect on shelf life of onion
varieties (Allium cepa L.) at Aksum, Northern Ethiopia. J. Plant breeding and crop Sci.,
5(6): 127-136.
Kahsay Y, Fetien A, and Derbew B., 2013.Intra-row spacing effect on shelf life of onion
varieties (Allium cepa L.) at Aksum, Northern Ethiopia. J. Plant breeding and crop Sci.,
5(6): 127-136.
Kanton, R.A.L.L, Abbey, R.G, Hilla, M.A. and Tabil, N.D, 2003. Jane. Density Affects Plant
Development and Yield of Bulb Onion (Allium cepa L.) in Northern Ghana.
Kumilachew A., Mengistu K., and Fekadu G., 2014. Risks in vegetable production from the
perspective of smallholder armers: The case of KombolchaWoreda, Oromia region,
Ethiopia. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries 2014
Lemma D., and shimelisA., 2003. Research experience in onion production. Research report No.
55, EARO, Ethiopia.
Mekdes A., 2012. Influence of intra-row spacing on plant growth, yield and quality of onion
(Allium cepa L.) varieties at Dawro, Southwestern Ethiopia. MSc Нesis, School of
Graduate Studies, Jimma University College of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine.
MoANR (Ministry of Agriculture and natural resource). 2016. Crop Variety Register, Issue No.
19. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
MoARD (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development). 2010. Crop variety register.Ministry
of Agriculture and Rural Developments. Issue no.13, Addis Ababa.
46
MoARD (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development). 2009. Animal and Plant Health
Regulatory Directorate: Crop Variety Register. Issue No. 12, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Nigullie R, Biawas P., 2017. Effect of plant and row spacing on growth and yield of onion under
mokokchung district of nagaland. International Journal of Plant Science 12: 28-35
NikusO.andFikreM., 2010.Onion Seed Production Techniques: A Manual for extension agents
and seed producers, FAO‐CDMDP, Asella, Ethiopia.
Noggle GR, Fritz GR., 1983. Introductory Plant Physiology 2nd edition. Prentice Hall Inc. Engle
Wood Cliffs New Jersey, p. 625.
Opara, L.U., 2003. Onion: Post-Harvest Operation. Massey University, Palmerstone North, New
Zealand.
Patel IJ, Patel AT., 1990. Effect of nitrogen and phosphorus levels on growth and yield of onion.
(Allium cepa L.) Cultivar Pusa Red Res. Gujarat Agric. Univ. 15: 1-heikh Univ., 38(1):
171-187.
Russo MV., 2008 Plant density and nitrogen fertilizer rate on yield and nutrient content of onion
developed from green house transplants. Hort Science 43: 1759-1764.
Saud S, Yajun C, Razaq M, Luqman M, Fahad S, et al,. 2013 Effect of Potash levels and row
spacings on onion yield. Journal of Biology Agriculture and Healthcare 3: 118-126.
Saud, S., C. Yajun, M. Razaq, M. Luqman, S. Fahad, M. Abdullah, and A. Sadiq, 2013. Effect of
potash levels and row spacing on onion yield. Journal of Biology Agriculture and Health
care, 3(16): 2013-2118.
SelamawitKetema, Lemma Dessalegn, BuzuayehuTesfaye. 2013. Effect of Planting Methods on
Maturity and Yield of Onion (Allium cepavarcepa) in the Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia.
Serra ADB and L Currah.2002. Agronomy of Onions.Allium crop.
47
Shaikh MA, Ansari AH, Qayyum SM, Baloch MB, Qayyum SA, Hassan AM .,1987. Technical
report on effect of nitrogen doses on the growth and crop yield of onion. Pak. Agri., 9:
35- 47.
Simon T, Tora M, Shumbulo A, Urkato S., 2014.effect variety, Nitrogen and Phosphorous
fertilization on growth and bulb yield of Onion (Allium CepaL.) at wolaita, southern
Ethiopia. Journal of Biology Agriculture and Healthcare 4: 89-96.
Tesfalegn J., 2015. Response of onion (Allium Cepa L.) varieties to intrarow spacing at kobo,
northern ethiopia. MscНesis, School of Graduate Studies of Alemaya University.
Yemane K.,2011 Effects of intra-row spacing on plant growth, yield, quality and shelf life of
onion varieties (allium cepa L.) at Aksum, Northern Ethiopia. MSc thesis, Graduate
school of Jimma University, College of Agriculture and veterinary Medicine.
Yemane K, Derbew B, Fetein A., 2014. Effects of intra-row spacing on plant growth and yield of
onion varieties. African Journal of Agricultural Research 9: 932-940.
Yemane K, Fasigaw E, Alemat E., 2016 Enhancing onion production and productivity through
introduction of seed production techniques in central zone of tigray region, Ethiopia.
Acadamic Journal of Agricultural Research 4: 188-192. 9.
YemaneKahsay, DerbewBelew and FetienAabay., 2014. Effects of intra-row spacing on plant
growth and yield of onion varieties (Allium cepa L.) at Aksum, Northern Ethiopia.
African Journal of Agricultural Research, 9 (10), pp. 931-940.
Zeleke A and DersoE, 2015.Production and management of major vegetable crops in Ethiopia,
Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research Addis Abeba, Ethiopia.
Zeleke T., 2021. Analysis Of Onion Market Value Chain. Smart Economic Growth ,Issn: 2537-
141x.
48
Zurihun, Z., 2013.The effects of bulb size and plant density on yield and quality of onion (Allium
cepa L.) seed at Ziway, Central Ethiopia.
49
7. APPENDIX
Appendix table 1: Days to physiological maturity
Source of variation DF SS MS F Value Pr>F

Variety 3 1699.23 566.410 22.04 0.0000
Spacing 3 1055.06 351.687 13.69 0.0000
Variety*Spacing 9 249.69 27.743 1.08 0.4056
Error 30 770.83 25.694
Total 4 4049.31
R-square Coeff .Var. Root MS Mean

0.809638 5.40 5.068969 93.813
Appendix table 2: plant height

Variety 3 611.73 203.910 7.77 0.0006
Spacing 3 1106.73 368.910 14.07 0.0000
Variety*Spacing 9 234.02 26.002 0.99 0.4675
Error 30 786.83 26.228
Total 4 2970.48

0.735116 8.70 5.121306 58.896
Appendix table 3: number of leaf

Variety 3 35.667 11.8889 13.48 0.0000
Spacing 3 286.167 95.3889 108.16 0.0000
Variety*Spacing 9 27.833 3.0926 3.51 0.0045
Error 30 26.458 0.8819
Total 4 377.000

0.929819 9.63 0.939119 9.7500
50
Appendix table 4: leaf length

Variety 3 569.90 47.896 24.68 0.0000
Spacing 3 663.56 189.965 28.74 0.0000
Variety*Spacing 9 97.85 221.187 1.41 0.2268
Error 30 230.88 10.873
Total 4 1657.98 7.696

0.860749 6.33 2.774137 43.854
Appendix table 5: Leaf width

Variety 3 0.47990 0.15997 74.71 0.0000
Spacing 3 0.10984 0.03661 17.10 0.0000
Variety*Spacing 9 0.02761 0.00307 1.43 0.2187
Error 30 0.06424 0.00214
Total 4 0.76523

0.916055 4.19 0.046274 1.106
Appendix table 6: Bulb Length

Variety 3 9.9958 3.33194 2751.46 0.0000
Spacing 3 0.1629 0.05430 44.84 0.0000
Variety*Spacing 9 0.0271 0.00301 2.49 0.0296
Error 30 0.0363 0.00121
Total 4 10.3067

0.996475 0.72 0.034799 4.8206
51
Appendix table 7: Bulb diameter

Variety 3 1.22914 0.40971 125.76 0.0000
Spacing 3 0.08671 0.02890 8.87 0.0002
Variety*Spacing 9 0.03534 0.00393 1.21 0.3281
Error 30 0.09773 0.00326
Total 4 1.53139

0.936180 1.03 0.057077 5.5154
Appendix table 8: Mean bulb weight

Variety 3 456.90 152.298 18.42 0.0000
Spacing 3 311.57 103.858 12.56 0.0000
Variety*Spacing 9 3.50 0.389 0.05 1.0000
Error 30 248.02 8.267
Total 4 1105.44

0.775633 4.06 2.875319 70.795
Appendix table 9: Total bulb yield

Variety 3 26.500 8.8333 14.63 0.0000
Spacing 3 285.310 95.1033 157.53 0.0000
Variety*Spacing 9 18.333 2.0370 3.37 0.0057
Error 30 18.112 0.6037
Total 4 348.277

0.947996 2.60 0.776996 29.942
52
Appendix table 10: Marketable bulb yield

Variety 3 72.144 24.0479 31.99 0.0000
Spacing 3 263.202 87.7340 116. 70 0.0000
Variety*Spacing 9 33.862 3.7624 5.00 0.0004
Error 30 22.554 0.7518
Total 4 391.829

0.942440 3.04 0.867059 28.553
Appendix table 11: Marketable bulb yield

Variety 3 5.4318 1.81061 378.14 0.0000
Spacing 3 5.1268 1.70894 356.91 0.0000
Variety*Spacing 9 0.8763 0.09737 20.33 0.0000
Error 30 0.1436 0.00479
Total 4 11.7849

0.987811 5.801651 0.069197 1.192708
Appendix table 12: Biomass yield

Variety 3 120.03 40.011 2.97 0.0474
Spacing 3 890.52 296.839 22.05 0.0000
Variety*Spacing 9 118.69 13.187 0.98 0.4761
Error 30 403.79 13.460
Total 4 1642.51

0.987811 5.801651 0.069197 1.192708
53
Appendix table 13: Harvest index

Variety 3 84.80 28.266 5.95 0.0026
Spacing 3 2052.20 684.068 143.93 0.0000
Variety*Spacing 9 78.20 8.689 1.83 0.1040
Error 30 142.59 4.753
Total 4 2413.58

0.940923 4.668832 2.180115 46.69509
54

NAOL Beyene THESIS Edited Final M

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

NAOL Beyene THESIS Edited Final M

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GROWTH AND YIELD RESPONSE OF EFFECT OF VARIETIES AND

INTRA -ROW SPACING ON YIELD AND YIELD COMPONENTS OF

NAOL BEYENE BARSHIAB

A Thesis Submitted to Department of Plant Science,

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

NAOL BEYENE BARSHIAB

Name Naol Beyene Signature: _________________

Table 1: Description of onion verities used for the experiment.................................................................19

Figure 1: study area map................................................................................................................12

Keywords: Bulb, Cultivar, Growth, Marketable, mean bulb Weight, Spacing

centers of diversity (Saud et al., 2013).

anthocyanins, fructooligo saccharides and organosulphur compounds found in the onion is

ecologies of the country in small-scale production systems being as one component of

application of inappropriate agronomic practices and limited attention/awareness on the benefits

if grown in the same environment (Saud S,et al., 2013).

yield components at Adami Tulu.

district of Bench Sheko Zone, South-Western Ethiopia.

 To investigate growth and yield responses of the effects of differentonion varieties to

maximum bulb yield

2.1. Onion: its botany and ecologyDescription of Onion

export markets (Lemma et al., 2006).

processed forms (Lemma and Shimeles, 2003).

production and marketing in Ethiopia (Gebrselassie, 2013).

2.3. Environmental Requirements of Onion

its sensitivity to day length (Savva and Frenken, 2002).

requirements for seed and bulb production (Baloch, 1994).

2.4. Agronomic Practices

must be free of roots or clods (Randall et al., 1999).

2.5. Water Requirement for Onion Yield

yields by increasing bulb sizes (Serra and Currah, 2002).

plants m-2 are required (Brewster, 1994).

valley areas of Ethiopia.

3.1. Description of the Study Area

onion crop (Zeleke ,2021).

Figure 1: study area map

study (Table 1).

Table 1: Description onion verities used for the experiment

3.3 Experimental treatments and Exp’tal Design

(Table 2). A total of sixteen treatment combinationss were arranged in 4 × 4 factorial

1 m distance was maintained between blocks.

Treatment plant population density

3.4 Experimental Management and Procedure and crop managemnt

discoloured, was planted at a depth of 2.5-3 cm

3.5. Agronomic Data Collection

3.5.1. Phonological parameters

plants started to senescence be recorded accordingly.

3.5.2. Growth parameters

number of leaves per plant.

selected plants at maturity

physiological maturity and the average value was calculated.

3.5.3. Yield and yield components

caliper (Saud et al., 2013) at harvest.

expressed as a ton per hectare.

unmarketable bulb yields and expressed as a ton per ha (Tekle, 2015).

dry weight and expressed in percentage

some quality attributes?

Different varieties/row spacing may have effect on disease/weed/insect infestations….Why

significant differences at 5% level of probability were computed to delineate the significances

between and/or among the treatment means.

Which model have used for analysis

Why did not you perform correlation analysis?

4.1. Phenological Parameter

4.1.1 Days to 90% physiological maturity

number(r=0.572), leaf length(r=0.547), number of leaf (r=0.760**), total bulb