Evaluation of growth and yield of soybean accessions in the autumn winter season 2021 in gia lam

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE FACULTY OF AGRONOMY UNDERGRADUATE THESIS TITLE: EVALUATION OF GROWTH AND YIELD OF SOYBEAN ACCESSIONS IN THE AUTUMN-WINTER SEASON 2021 IN GIA LAM Instructor : PhD LE THI TUYET CHAM Department : PLANT GENETICS AND BREEDING Student : PHUNG THI HAI YEN Student code : 611661 Class : K61KHCTT HANOI – 2022 COMMITMENT I hereby declare that this paper is my own work All of the results and data in this thesis are completely accurate and have never been submitted to any institution for evaluation In the references, all of the sources used in this paper were recognized Hanoi, 22nd February 2022 Student Yen Phung Thi Hai Yen i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT To complete this thesis, I am deeply indebted to people who have been providing me with precious support and advice Firstly, I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor, PhD Le Thi Tuyet Cham, Department of Plant Genetics and Breeding, Faculty of Agronomy, Vietnam National University of Agriculture, for her enthusiastic support, helpful advice and significant encouragement in the completion of my thesis Secondly, I would also like to express sincere thanks to the professors from the Faculty of Agronomy in general, and the lecturers from the Department of Plant Genetics and Breeding in particular, who taught and established the best conditions for students during the learning process and research Last but not least, I would want to express gratitude to my family and friends, who have always been by my side, giving me support and strength to complete this graduation thesis I sincerely thank you Hanoi, 22nd February 2022 Student Yen Phung Thi Hai Yen ii CONTENT COMMITMENT i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ii CONTENT iii LIST OF ABBREVIATION vi LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF FIGURES ix ABSTRACT x CHAPTER INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background 1.2 Objectives and requirements 1.2.1 Objectives 1.2.2 Requirements CHAPTER LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Origin, classification and distribution of soybeans 2.1.1 Origin of soybeans 2.1.2 Classification of soybeans 2.1.3 Distribution of soybeans 2.2 Ecological requirements of soybean plants 2.2.1 Light requirements 2.2.2 Temperature requirements 2.2.3 Water requirements 2.2.4 Soil requirements 2.2.5 Nutritional requirements 10 2.3 Botanical characteristics of the soybean plant 11 2.3.1 Root 11 2.3.2 Stem 13 2.3.3 Leave 14 iii 2.3.4 Flower 15 2.3.5 Fruit 16 2.3.6 Seed 16 2.4 Soybean growth and development characteristics 17 2.4.1 Vegetative stage (V) 17 2.4.2 Reproductive stage (R) 18 2.5 Values of soybeans 20 2.5.1 Nutritional value 20 2.5.2 Economic value 22 2.6 Soybean production in the world and in Vietnam 25 2.6.1 Soybean production in the world 25 2.6.2 Soybean production in Vietnam 29 2.7 Soybean research and breeding in the world and in Vietnam 32 2.7.1 Soybean research and breeding in the world 32 2.7.2 Soybean research and breeding in Vietnam 35 CHAPTER MATERIALS AND METHODS 39 3.1 Plant materials 39 3.2 Time and location of research 40 3.3 Research methods 40 3.4 Technical procedures applied in the experiment 40 3.4.1 Tillage, Furrow 40 3.4.2 Fertilizer 40 3.4.3 Take care 40 3.5 Trait measurements 41 3.5.1 Qualitative traits 41 3.5.2 Quantitative traits 43 3.6 Evaluation of pest damage, pods shattered and lodging resistance of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 45 iv 3.7 Data analysis 46 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 47 4.1 Phenological characteristics of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 47 4.2 Morphological characteristics of soybean varieties in the in autumnwinter season 2021 50 4.3 Pod and seed characteristics of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 53 4.4 Vegetative and morphological traits of soybean varieties in the autumnwinter season 2021 57 4.4.1 Plant height, number of leaves and number of nodes at the flowering and harvesting stage of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 57 4.4.2 Other vegetative and morphological traits of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 60 4.5 Evaluation of pest damage, pod shattering and lodging resistance of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 64 4.6 Yield related traits of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 68 4.7 Individual yield, actual yield and harvest index of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 72 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 75 5.1 Conclusions 75 5.2 Suggestions 76 REFERENCES 77 SOME PICTURES ABOUT PROCESS CONDUCTED UNDERGRADUATE THESIS 84 DATA ANALYSIS 85 v LIST OF ABBREVIATION AVRDC Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center FAO Food and Agriculture Organization GCO General Department of Customs GSO General Statistics Office of Vietnam USDA United States Department of Agriculture vi LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Nutritional value of soybean per 100g 20 Table 2.2 Status of soybean production in the world in the period 2011-2021 26 Table 2.3 Area, yield and production of soybeans of some countries in the period 2016-2021 27 Table 2.4 Area, yield and production of soybean in Vietnam during 2010-2020 30 Table 3.1 Soybean varieties evaluated in the autumn-winter season 2021 39 Table 3.2 Qualitative morphological and seed traits observed in soybean 42 Table 3.3 Phenological traits observed in soybean 43 Table 3.4 Morphological and yield related traits observed soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 44 Table 3.5 Evaluation of pest damage, pods shattered and lodging resistance of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 45 Table 4.1 Means for phenological phases of soybean varieties in the autumnwinter season 2021 (days) 48 Table 4.2 Morphological characteristics of soybean varieties in the autumnwinter season 2021 50 Table 4.3 Morphological characteristics of soybean varieties in the autumnwinter season 2021 52 Table 4.4 Pod and seed characteristics of soybean varieties in the autumnwinter season 2021 55 Table 4.5 Plant height, number of leaves and number of nodes at the flowering and harvesting stages of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 59 Table 4.6 Vegetative and morphological traits of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 61 Table 4.7 Pest damage, pod shatter and lodging resistance of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 67 vii Table 4.8 Yield related traits of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 69 Table 4.9 Individual yield, actual yield and harvest index of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 74 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 Vegetative stage of soybean 17 Figure 2.2 Reproductive stages of soybean 18 Figure 4.1 Leaf and flower characteristics of soybean varieties in the autumnwinter season 2021 53 Figure 4.2 Pod characteristics of some soybean varieties 56 Figure 4.3 Seed characteristics of some soybean varieties 56 Figure 4.4 Leaf folder and Pod borer of soybean varieties in the autumn-winter season 2021 68 ix Foreign references: Agarwal, A P., Salimath, P M., & Patil, S A (2003) Inheritance of pod shattering in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill] Indian J Genet, 63, 265266 Antwi-Boasiako, A (2017) Screening of soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merrill) genotypes for resistance to lodging and pod shattering International Journal of Agronomy and Agricultural Science, 10, 1-8 Bara, N., Khare, D., & Srivastava, A N (2013) Studies on the factors affecting pod shattering in soybean Indian J Genet, 73(3), 270-277 Beaver, J S., & Johnson, R R (1981) Yield Stability of Determinate and Indeterminate Soybeans Adapted to the Northern United States Crop Science, 21(3), 449-454 Chung G Singh RJ (2008) Broadening the genetic base of soybean: A multidisciplinary approach Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 27: 295341 doi:10.1080/07352680802333904 Corpuz RLC San Mateo MM Valencia JR (2005) Production of Soybean Oil Soy Lecithin and Soy Meal School of Chemical Engineering and Chemistry Mapúa Institute of Technology Fehr W.R C.E Caviness D.T Burmood and J.S Pennington 1971 Stage of development descriptions for soybeans Glycine max (L.) Merrill Crop Science 11:929-931 Gibson L Benson G (2005) Origin History and Uses of Soybean (Glycine max) Iowa State University Department of Agronomy Harrigan T (2014) Soybean facts - Reducing Soybean Harvest Losses Soybean Management and Research Technology Michigan University Extension 79 10 Hartman G Pawlowski M Herman T Eastburn D (2016) Organically Grown Soybean Production in the USA: Constraints and Management of Pathogens and Insect Pests Agronomy 16 11 Hymowitz T (1988) Soybeans: The success story In: J Janick and J E Simon editors Advances in new crops: proceedings of the First national Symposium New Crops 12 Hymowitz T Singh RJ Kollipara KP (1998) The genomes of the Glycine In 'Plant Breeding Reviews.' (Ed J Janick.) Vol 16 pp 289 - 311 (John Wiley & Sons: Canada) 13 Hymowitz, T (2004) Speciation and cytogenetics Soybeans: Improvement, production, and uses, 16, 97-136 14 Jong S K Kim H.S Woo S.H Lee Y.H (2004) "Genetic base of Korean soybean varieties released from 1913 to 2002." Korean Journal of Breeding 36: 90-94 15 Juwattanasomran, R., Somta, P., Chankaew, S., Shimizu, T., Wongpornchai, S., Kaga, A., & Srinives, P (2011) A SNP in GmBADH2 gene associates with fragrance in vegetable soybean variety “Kaori” and SNAP marker development for the fragrance Theoretical and applied genetics, 122(3), 533-541 16 Kang B-K H-T Kim M-S Choi S-C Koo S J-H Seo H-S Kim S-O Shin H-T Yun I-S Oh PK Kulkami and J-D Lee (2017) Genetic and Environmental variation of first pod height in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] Plant Breeding Biotech pp 36-44 17 Karasu, A., Oz, M E H M E T., Göksoy, A T., & Turan, Z M (2009) Genotype by environment interactions, stability, and heritability of seed yield and certain agronomical traits in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] African Journal of Biotechnology, 8(4) 80 18 Khan, A Z., Shah, P., Khalil, S K., & Ahmad, B (2020) Yield of soybean cultivars as affected by planting date under Peshawar vally conditions The nucleus, 41(1-4), 93-95 19 Krisnawati, A., & Adie, M M (2017) Identification of soybean genotypes for pod shattering resistance associated with agronomical and morphological characters Biosaintifika: Journal of Biology & Biology Education, 9(2), 193-200 20 Lee, J S., Kim, K R., Ha, B K., & Kang, S (2017) Identification of SNPs tightly linked to the QTL for pod shattering in soybean Molecular breeding, 37(4), 1-10 21 Li- Juan Qiu and Ru-Zhen Chang (2010) The origin and history of soybean In G Singh (Ed.) The soybean (pp 1-7) CABI 22 Lingxiao, Z., & Nacer, B (2011) Effects of planting and maturity dates on shattering patterns under early soybean production system American Journal of Plant Sciences, 2012 23 Mai Quang Vinh D K Thinh D T Bang D H At and L.H Ham (2009) Current status and research directions of induced mutation application to seed crops improvement in Vietnam” In Induced Plant Mutations in the Genomics Era Proceedings of an International Joint FAO/IAEA Symposium pp 341–345 International Atomic Energy Agency 24 Mangang, C N J S., Devi, K N., Singh, K L., & Singh, A D (2017) Seasonal incidence of insect pests on soybean in relation to weather parameters Legume Research-An International Journal, (6), 1139-1140 25 Masuda, T., & Goldsmith, P D (2009) World soybean production: area harvested, yield, and long-term projections International food and agribusiness management review, 12(1030-2016-82753), 1-20 81 26 Musoni S Nazare RM Mukosera L (2013) Mechanisation of Soya Bean Harvesting for Small and Medium Scale Farmers in Zimbabwe IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science 4: 51-57 27 Nathanson, K., Lawn, R J., De Jabrun, P L M., & Byth, D E (1984) Growth, nodulation and nitrogen accumulation by soybean in saturated soil culture Field Crops Research, 8, 73-92 28 Ohyama, T., Minagawa, R., Ishikawa, S., Yamamoto, M., Hung, N V P., Ohtake, N., & Takahashi, Y (2013) Soybean seed production and nitrogen nutrition A comprehensive survey of international soybean research-Genetics, physiology, agronomy and nitrogen relationships, 115157 29 Orf J (2010) Introduction In “Genetics genomics and breeding of soybean” K Bilyeu MB Ratnaparkhe C Kole (Eds) CRC Press pg 1-18 30 Ramteke R S Singh and P Murlidharan (2012) Selecting soybean (Glycine max) genotypes for insertion height of the lowest pod the useful trait for combine harvester Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences pp 511-515 31 Sun, M., Li, N., Yu, K., Zhan, Y., Yuan, M., Teng, W., & Han, Y (2021) QTL mapping of lodging tolerance in soybean Crop and Pasture Science, 72(6), 426-433 32 Talekar, N S., & Pin Lin, C (1994) Characterization of resistance to limabean pod borer (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in soybean Journal of economic entomology, 87(3), 821-825 33 Tiwari, S P., & Bhatnagar, P S (1991) Pod shattering as related to other agronomic attributes in soybean Trop Agric.(Trinidad), 68(1), 102-103 34 Tukamuhabwa, P., Dashiell, K E., Rubaihayo, P., & Nabasirye, M (2002) Determination of field yield loss and effect of environment on pod shattering in soybean 82 35 Wang L X Guan R.X Li Y.H Lin F.Y Luan W.J Li W Ma YS Liu Z.X Chang R.Z Qiu L.J (2008) "Genetic diversity of Chinese spring soybean germplasm revealed by SSR markers." Plant Breeding 127(1): 56-61 36 Yamada, T., Funatsuki, H., Hagihara, S., Fujita, S., Tanaka, Y., Tsuji, H., & Hajika, M (2009) A major QTL, qPDH1, is commonly involved in shattering resistance of soybean cultivars Breeding science, 59(4), 435-440 37 Yamaguchi, N., Sato, Y., Taguchi-Shiobara, F., Kousaka, F., Ishimoto, M., Senda, M., & Francia, E (2021) Development of high-yielding soybean lines by using marker-assisted selection for seed yield and lodging tolerance Crop and Pasture Science, 72(11), 891-898 38 Yamaguchi, N., Sayama, T., Yamazaki, H., Miyoshi, T., Ishimoto, M., & Funatsuki, H (2014) Quantitative trait loci associated with lodging tolerance in soybean cultivar ‘Toyoharuka’ Breeding Science, 64(4), 300-308 39 Yang, M., Song, L., Mao, J., Shi, Y., Wu, C., Zhang, Y., & Liu, X (2018) Complete mitochondrial genome of the soybean leaffolder, Omiodes indicata (Lepidoptera: Pyraloidea: Crambidae), and phylogenetic analysis for Pyraloidea International journal of biological macromolecules, 115, 53-60 40 Yang, M., Wang, Z., Wang, R., Zhang, X., Li, M., Xin, J., & Meng, F (2020) Transcriptomic and proteomic analyses of the mechanisms of overwintering diapause in soybean pod borer (Leguminivora glycinivorella) Pest Management Science, 76(12), 4248-4257 Websites http://www.fao.org/statistics/en/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soybean https://www.gso.gov.vn/ https://www.usda.gov/ 83 SOME PICTURES ABOUT PROCESS CONDUCTED UNDERGRADUATE THESIS 84 DATA ANALYSIS BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE CHIEUCAO FILE RA HOA 10/ 2/22 11:57 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu chieu cao cay, so la, so dot hoa VARIATE V003 CHIEUCAO LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 676585 676585 2.33 0.134 GIONG 29 598.737 20.6461 71.16 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 8.41402 290138 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 607.827 10.3022 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE SO LA FILE RA HOA 10/ 2/22 11:57 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu chieu cao cay, so la, so dot hoa VARIATE V004 SO LA LA LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 166667E-01 166667E-01 0.09 0.758 GIONG 29 27.0915 934189 5.30 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 5.11599 176413 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 32.2241 546172 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE SO DOT FILE RA HOA 10/ 2/22 11:57 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu chieu cao cay, so la, so dot hoa VARIATE V005 SO DOT DOT LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 136055E-02 136055E-02 0.01 0.922 GIONG 29 28.4272 980249 6.51 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 4.36599 150551 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 32.7946 555840 TABLE OF MEANS FOR FACTORIAL EFFECTS FILE RA HOA 10/ 2/22 11:57 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu chieu cao cay, so la, so dot hoa MEANS FOR EFFECT NL NL NOS 30 30 CHIEUCAO 27.2595 27.0471 SO LA 5.43810 5.47143 SO DOT 6.40476 6.41429 SE(N= 30) 0.983427E-01 0.766841E-01 0.708405E-01 5%LSD 29DF 0.284434 0.221791 0.204890 MEANS FOR EFFECT GIONG GIONG NOS 2 2 2 CHIEUCAO 27.1143 26.6571 27.7429 25.2214 25.4571 23.1071 23.5571 SO LA 5.42857 5.42857 5.28571 5.92857 6.57143 5.57143 3.85714 SO DOT 6.42857 6.42857 6.28571 6.92857 7.50000 6.57143 4.85714 85 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 33.4857 25.4786 26.8571 28.2714 23.9214 27.3571 28.1357 33.4714 27.5214 23.3071 32.3786 26.7714 21.9286 30.2571 30.1643 26.2571 23.3143 30.4714 24.1571 23.9071 30.2071 31.9071 26.2143 4.85714 5.14286 4.85714 5.42857 5.92857 5.07143 5.07143 5.57143 4.85714 6.07143 5.21429 4.57143 6.35714 6.35714 6.28571 6.21429 5.42857 4.07143 4.57143 5.85714 6.21429 5.85714 5.71429 5.85714 6.14286 5.85714 6.42857 6.71429 5.78571 6.00000 6.50000 5.64286 7.07143 6.14286 5.07143 7.35714 7.28571 7.14286 7.21429 6.42857 4.92857 6.21429 6.85714 7.14286 6.85714 6.64286 SE(N= 2) 0.380880 0.296996 0.274364 5%LSD 29DF 1.10161 0.858994 0.793536 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY TABLE FILE RA HOA 10/ 2/22 11:57 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu chieu cao cay, so la, so dot hoa F-PROBABLIITY VALUES FOR EACH EFFECT IN THE MODEL SECTION - VARIATE CHIEUCAO SO LA SO DOT GRAND MEAN (N= 60) NO OBS 60 27.153 60 5.4548 60 6.4095 STANDARD DEVIATION C OF V |NL SD/MEAN | BASED ON BASED ON % | TOTAL SS RESID SS | 3.2097 0.53865 2.0 0.1338 0.73903 0.42002 7.7 0.7584 0.74555 0.38801 6.1 0.9220 |GIONG | | | 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE CHIEUCAO FILE THUHOACH 10/ 2/22 15: :PAGE Phan tich so lieu chieu cao cay, so la, so dot thu hoach | | | | VARIATE V003 CHIEUCAO LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 264764 264764 0.92 0.346 GIONG 29 1973.21 68.0417 237.53 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 8.30731 286459 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 1981.78 33.5895 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE SO LA FILE THUHOACH 10/ 2/22 15: :PAGE Phan tich so lieu chieu cao cay, so la, so dot thu hoach VARIATE V004 SO LA LA LA LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 537820E-13 537820E-13 0.00 0.996 GIONG 29 72.9537 2.51565 9.48 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 7.69388 265306 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 80.6476 1.36691 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE SO DOT FILE THUHOACH 10/ 2/22 15: 86 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu chieu cao cay, so la, so dot thu hoach VARIATE V005 SO DOT LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 136052E-02 136052E-02 0.01 0.938 GIONG 29 73.1211 2.52142 10.73 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 6.81496 234999 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 79.9374 1.35487 TABLE OF MEANS FOR FACTORIAL EFFECTS FILE THUHOACH 10/ 2/22 15: :PAGE Phan tich so lieu chieu cao cay, so la, so dot thu hoach MEANS FOR EFFECT NL NL NOS 30 30 CHIEUCAO 43.5686 43.4357 SO LA 11.1333 11.1333 SO DOT 12.1571 12.1667 SE(N= 30) 0.977171E-01 0.940401E-01 0.885059E-01 5%LSD 29DF 0.282625 0.271990 0.255983 MEANS FOR EFFECT GIONG GIONG 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NOS 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 CHIEUCAO 41.5429 42.0571 44.2357 32.6643 42.1071 43.7929 37.0714 48.9286 41.2071 47.1643 50.7071 33.3857 43.1571 37.5214 51.4357 43.7286 31.9571 47.3143 42.8429 45.6214 43.7143 51.3143 50.6714 37.0714 47.6286 38.7286 37.9929 51.3071 52.0786 46.1143 SO LA 11.7143 12.4286 10.7143 10.8571 11.8571 11.2143 9.07143 10.2857 10.8571 11.5714 11.6429 10.2857 9.78571 11.0714 10.3571 10.9286 10.6429 10.7143 10.8571 13.4286 11.9286 13.2857 13.1429 12.1429 8.57143 10.2857 10.1429 10.9286 11.8571 11.4286 SO DOT 12.7143 13.5000 11.7143 11.8571 12.8571 12.2143 10.1429 11.2857 12.0000 12.5000 12.8571 11.2857 10.7857 11.8571 11.5714 11.9286 11.6429 11.7143 11.8571 14.4286 13.2143 14.2857 14.1429 13.1429 9.57143 11.2857 11.2857 11.9286 12.8571 12.4286 SE(N= 2) 0.378457 0.364216 0.342782 5%LSD 29DF 1.09460 1.05341 0.991419 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY TABLE FILE THUHOACH 10/ 2/22 15: :PAGE Phan tich so lieu chieu cao cay, so la, so dot thu hoach F-PROBABLIITY VALUES FOR EACH EFFECT IN THE MODEL SECTION - VARIATE GRAND MEAN STANDARD DEVIATION C OF V |NL |GIONG | 87 CHIEUCAO SO LA SO DOT (N= 60) NO OBS 60 43.502 60 11.133 60 12.162 SD/MEAN | BASED ON BASED ON % | TOTAL SS RESID SS | 5.7956 0.53522 1.2 0.3464 1.1691 0.51508 4.6 0.9957 1.1640 0.48477 4.0 0.9378 | | | | | | 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE FPIH FILE SL HT 13/ 2/22 10:38 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu FPIH, CD&CR La, CD Dot, DK Than, Canh C1, Dot HH VARIATE V003 FPIH LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 955449E-02 955449E-02 1.86 0.180 GIONG 29 163.997 5.65507 ****** 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 148700 512759E-02 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 164.155 2.78229 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE CD LA FILE SL HT 13/ 2/22 10:38 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu FPIH, CD&CR La, CD Dot, DK Than, Canh C1, Dot HH VARIATE V004 CD LA LA LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 171462E-01 171462E-01 2.51 0.120 GIONG 29 68.5943 2.36532 345.89 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 198312 683835E-02 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 68.8098 1.16627 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE CR LA FILE SL HT 13/ 2/22 10:38 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu FPIH, CD&CR La, CD Dot, DK Than, Canh C1, Dot HH VARIATE V005 CR LA LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 229933E-02 229933E-02 0.46 0.508 GIONG 29 25.9161 893657 179.94 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 144026 496641E-02 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 26.0624 441735 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE CD DOT FILE SL HT 13/ 2/22 10:38 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu FPIH, CD&CR La, CD Dot, DK Than, Canh C1, Dot HH VARIATE V006 CD DOT LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 294184E-01 294184E-01 2.08 0.157 GIONG 29 15.4924 534221 37.74 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 410479 141544E-01 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 15.9323 270039 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE DK THAN FILE SL HT 13/ 2/22 10:38 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu FPIH, CD&CR La, CD Dot, DK Than, Canh C1, Dot HH VARIATE V007 DK THAN THAN 88 LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 850340E-04 850340E-04 3.37 0.073 GIONG 29 276425 953190E-02 377.99 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 731294E-03 252170E-04 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 277241 469901E-02 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE SO CANH FILE SL HT 13/ 2/22 10:38 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu FPIH, CD&CR La, CD Dot, DK Than, Canh C1, Dot HH VARIATE V008 SO CANH CANH LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 765305E-01 765305E-01 0.61 0.447 GIONG 29 38.3418 1.32213 10.51 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 3.64796 125792 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 42.0663 712989 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE DOT HH FILE SL HT 13/ 2/22 10:38 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu FPIH, CD&CR La, CD Dot, DK Than, Canh C1, Dot HH VARIATE V009 DOT HH LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 340137E-03 340137E-03 0.00 0.962 GIONG 29 29.9119 1.03145 6.71 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 4.45885 153753 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 34.3711 582561 TABLE OF MEANS FOR FACTORIAL EFFECTS FILE SL HT 13/ 2/22 10:38 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu FPIH, CD&CR La, CD Dot, DK Than, Canh C1, Dot HH MEANS FOR EFFECT NL NL SE(N= 5%LSD NOS 30 30 30) 29DF NL FPIH 7.43048 7.40524 CD LA 8.66881 8.63500 CR LA 4.64595 4.63357 CD DOT 3.05548 3.01119 0.130736E-01 0.150979E-01 0.128665E-01 0.217213E-01 0.378125E-01 0.436671E-01 0.372135E-01 0.628240E-01 NOS 30 30 DK THAN 0.306190 0.308571 SO CANH 2.71429 2.78571 DOT HH 7.40952 7.41428 SE(N= 30) 0.916825E-03 0.647538E-01 0.715899E-01 5%LSD 29DF 0.265171E-02 0.187286 0.207058 MEANS FOR EFFECT GIONG GIONG NOS 2 2 2 2 FPIH 7.60714 5.89286 7.00714 5.89286 7.10714 5.61429 6.81429 6.60714 5.61429 CD LA 8.78929 8.16072 9.94286 6.80357 8.66429 8.97143 8.10714 8.32857 6.50714 CR LA 5.68214 4.71071 4.39286 3.65357 4.72857 5.74643 4.96786 4.94286 3.66071 CD DOT 2.59643 2.50714 3.38929 2.70357 3.48929 3.60357 3.89286 4.20714 2.39643 89 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 SE(N= 5%LSD 2) 29DF GIONG 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 8.62143 6.69286 5.60714 7.40714 7.31429 10.8143 9.30714 4.88571 10.3214 7.00714 5.50714 8.50714 5.42143 6.60714 6.00714 9.51429 8.10714 7.40714 10.1071 10.3071 8.90714 6.87143 8.55714 7.56071 9.27143 9.01071 9.66786 8.77143 7.25357 10.8893 9.63214 8.80714 8.83571 10.1393 9.88214 6.48571 8.77500 8.62857 8.64643 9.70714 8.61071 9.27857 3.79286 4.69643 4.54643 5.31786 4.53929 4.74286 4.80714 3.25357 6.23929 4.75714 3.76786 4.74286 4.60714 4.80357 3.67143 4.05357 4.73571 4.72143 5.39286 4.66071 4.85714 2.59643 2.20357 2.60714 3.12857 3.10357 3.00357 3.01071 2.58929 3.90357 3.31429 2.70714 3.41071 2.92143 2.78214 2.42143 3.68929 2.49286 2.79643 3.30357 3.51071 2.71786 0.506339E-01 0.584737E-01 0.498318E-01 0.841262E-01 0.146447 0.169122 0.144127 0.243316 NOS 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 DK THAN 0.314286 0.310714 0.314286 0.210714 0.310714 0.310714 0.314286 0.214286 0.221429 0.214286 0.317857 0.310714 0.410714 0.310714 0.317857 0.321429 0.210714 0.410714 0.414286 0.310714 0.314286 0.414286 0.421429 0.214286 0.310714 0.214286 0.214286 0.317857 0.410714 0.317857 SO CANH 3.28571 4.07143 2.21429 1.92857 2.21429 2.64286 2.42857 2.42857 2.85714 3.64286 3.42857 1.35714 2.14286 3.07143 2.07143 2.92857 1.78571 2.57143 3.71429 4.07143 2.85714 4.14286 3.92857 3.57143 1.64286 2.07143 1.71429 1.78571 3.14286 2.78571 DOT HH 7.42857 7.42857 7.28571 7.92857 8.50000 7.57143 5.85714 6.85714 7.14286 6.85714 7.42857 7.92857 6.78571 7.00000 7.50000 6.50000 8.07143 7.14286 6.00000 8.35714 8.35714 8.14286 8.21429 7.42857 5.92857 7.21429 7.85714 8.14286 7.85714 7.64286 SE(N= 2) 0.355085E-02 0.250790 0.277266 5%LSD 29DF 0.102700E-01 0.725355 0.801930 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY TABLE FILE SL HT 13/ 2/22 10:38 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu FPIH, CD&CR La, CD Dot, DK Than, Canh C1, Dot HH F-PROBABLIITY VALUES FOR EACH EFFECT IN THE MODEL SECTION - VARIATE FPIH CD LA CR LA GRAND MEAN (N= 60) NO OBS 60 7.4179 60 8.6519 60 4.6398 STANDARD DEVIATION C OF V |NL SD/MEAN | BASED ON BASED ON % | TOTAL SS RESID SS | 1.6680 0.71607E-01 1.0 0.1796 1.0799 0.82694E-01 1.0 0.1204 0.66463 0.70473E-01 1.5 0.5085 |GIONG | | | 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 | | | | 90 CD DOT DK THAN SO CANH DOT HH 60 3.0333 60 0.30738 60 2.7500 60 7.4119 0.51965 0.11897 3.9 0.1566 0.68549E-010.50217E-02 1.6 0.0733 0.84439 0.35467 12.9 0.4474 0.76326 0.39211 5.3 0.9615 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE TONG QUA FILE QUAM100H 13/ 2/22 16:11 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu tong qua va khoi luong 100 Hat VARIATE V003 TONG QUA LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 55.7908 55.7908 11.27 0.002 GIONG 29 4317.64 148.884 30.07 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 143.607 4.95196 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 4517.04 76.5600 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE M100 HAT FILE QUAM100H 13/ 2/22 16:11 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu tong qua va khoi luong 100 Hat VARIATE V004 M100 HAT 100 HA LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 653822 653822 2.87 0.097 GIONG 29 1359.09 46.8652 205.55 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 6.61202 228001 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 1366.36 23.1586 TABLE OF MEANS FOR FACTORIAL EFFECTS FILE QUAM100H 13/ 2/22 16:11 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu tong qua va khoi luong 100 Hat MEANS FOR EFFECT NL NL NOS 30 30 TONG QUA 20.9190 18.9905 M100 HAT 15.8777 15.6689 SE(N= 30) 0.406282 0.871781E-01 5%LSD 29DF 1.17508 0.252143 MEANS FOR EFFECT GIONG GIONG 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 NOS 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 TONG QUA 20.4286 27.8571 15.8571 14.1429 19.5714 20.7143 14.7857 13.5000 21.3571 19.6429 22.0000 15.1429 10.9286 21.1429 13.1429 23.3571 12.9286 16.0714 18.9286 M100 HAT 22.0250 11.3983 20.7600 8.92167 15.3883 17.2967 22.3450 23.5133 9.30000 9.88000 12.7033 11.5233 19.7017 12.6283 22.1317 14.5217 8.85833 17.5033 15.4333 91 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 2 2 2 2 2 47.3571 16.6429 42.0714 36.5714 21.2857 10.7143 11.8571 14.7143 15.6429 22.8571 17.4286 8.28000 15.7967 14.4283 14.8683 9.89667 26.1717 16.1567 18.2017 18.7033 17.5217 17.3400 SE(N= 2) 1.57353 0.337639 5%LSD 29DF 4.55107 0.976545 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY TABLE FILE QUAM100H 13/ 2/22 16:11 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu tong qua va khoi luong 100 Hat F-PROBABLIITY VALUES FOR EACH EFFECT IN THE MODEL SECTION - VARIATE TONG QUA M100 HAT GRAND MEAN (N= 60) NO OBS 60 19.955 60 15.773 STANDARD DEVIATION C OF V |NL SD/MEAN | BASED ON BASED ON % | TOTAL SS RESID SS | 8.7499 2.2253 11.2 0.0023 4.8123 0.47749 3.0 0.0974 |GIONG | | | 0.0000 0.0000 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE NSCT FILE NANGSUAT 13/ 2/22 16:42 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu Nang suat ca the, HI, Nang suat thuc thu | | | | VARIATE V003 NSCT LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 2.76552 2.76552 3.20 0.081 GIONG 29 265.334 9.14947 10.59 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 25.0552 863972 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 293.155 4.96873 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE HI FILE NANGSUAT 13/ 2/22 16:42 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu Nang suat ca the, HI, Nang suat thuc thu VARIATE V004 HI LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 178005E-04 178005E-04 0.07 0.785 GIONG 29 187659E-01 647100E-03 2.64 0.006 * RESIDUAL 29 709950E-02 244810E-03 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 258832E-01 438699E-03 BALANCED ANOVA FOR VARIATE NSTT FILE NANGSUAT 13/ 2/22 16:42 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu Nang suat ca the, HI, Nang suat thuc thu VARIATE V005 NSTT LN SOURCE OF VARIATION DF SUMS OF MEAN F RATIO PROB ER SQUARES SQUARES LN ============================================================================= NL 110167 110167 0.02 0.888 GIONG 29 1390.27 47.9404 7.99 0.000 * RESIDUAL 29 174.102 6.00351 * TOTAL (CORRECTED) 59 1564.48 26.5167 92 TABLE OF MEANS FOR FACTORIAL EFFECTS FILE NANGSUAT 13/ 2/22 16:42 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu Nang suat ca the, HI, Nang suat thuc thu MEANS FOR EFFECT NL NL NOS 30 30 NSCT 5.49824 5.06886 HI 0.539542 0.540631 NSTT 11.8895 11.8038 SE(N= 30) 0.169703 0.285663E-02 0.447344 5%LSD 29DF 0.490827 0.826216E-02 1.29384 MEANS FOR EFFECT GIONG GIONG 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NOS 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 NSCT 6.41357 5.66071 6.02786 2.07143 5.28357 7.06500 4.72571 4.86214 3.26857 3.32500 5.33643 2.92786 4.21429 4.36071 5.70214 4.97286 1.98714 5.30143 5.07143 8.17714 5.03786 11.8650 10.1264 3.35143 4.25714 3.80643 4.54429 5.46643 7.99214 5.30429 HI 0.506739 0.528118 0.534884 0.544696 0.549704 0.539573 0.548929 0.516238 0.524327 0.524507 0.539853 0.568706 0.535217 0.553425 0.551743 0.550848 0.526365 0.526225 0.507164 0.575675 0.537113 0.545139 0.540301 0.524867 0.527854 0.545493 0.550418 0.536687 0.584752 0.557031 NSTT 12.8515 13.8120 12.1015 5.74450 9.23050 10.8460 9.55150 12.9460 8.02150 9.35050 11.9675 6.05650 9.40750 11.3865 13.9550 10.9105 4.38450 12.6710 11.0955 15.3490 12.5500 27.6070 23.8230 9.23900 9.45100 8.08700 8.56400 12.1550 20.4315 11.8530 SE(N= 2) 0.657257 0.110637E-01 1.73256 5%LSD 29DF 1.90097 0.319992E-01 5.01103 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY TABLE FILE NANGSUAT 13/ 2/22 16:42 :PAGE Phan tich so lieu Nang suat ca the, HI, Nang suat thuc thu F-PROBABLIITY VALUES FOR EACH EFFECT IN THE MODEL SECTION - VARIATE NSCT HI NSTT GRAND MEAN (N= 60) NO OBS 60 5.2835 60 0.54009 60 11.847 STANDARD DEVIATION C OF V |NL SD/MEAN | BASED ON BASED ON % | TOTAL SS RESID SS | 2.2291 0.92950 17.6 0.0806 0.20945E-010.15646E-01 2.9 0.7854 5.1494 2.4502 20.7 0.8885 |GIONG | | | 0.0000 0.0055 0.0000 | | | | 93