<b>Evaluation of sweet potato yield in function of organic fertilization levels</b> - doi: 10.4025/actasciagron.v32i4.4150
Keywords:
Ipomoea batatas, poultry litter, yeld
Abstract
The present study evaluated the effect of organic fertilization in the total production of sweet potato. The experiment was performed in the period between July and November 2007, at the Lagoa Seca Experimental Station, Paraíba, Brazil. The experimental design was randomized blocks with five treatments (0, 3, 6, 9 and 12 t ha-1), in four replications. The plot consisted of four 3.6 m long ridges, spaced of 0.80 m between ridges and 0.30 m between plants; the two central ridges were harvested. The variables studied were: total yield, large and small sweet potato roots. The production of large and small roots, total yield per plant (14.20, 3.84 and 18.03 t ha-1) of sweet potato, responded positively in a linear fashion to increasing doses of poultry litter. The fertilization with poultry litter increased the yield of large, small and total roots of sweet potato.Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Published
2010-11-29
How to Cite
Santos, J. F. dos, Brito, C. H., & Santos, M. do C. C. A. dos. (2010). <b>Evaluation of sweet potato yield in function of organic fertilization levels</b> - doi: 10.4025/actasciagron.v32i4.4150. Acta Scientiarum. Agronomy, 32(4), 663-666. https://doi.org/10.4025/actasciagron.v32i4.4150
Issue
Section
Crop Production
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY AND COPYRIGHTS
I Declare that current article is original and has not been submitted for publication, in part or in whole, to any other national or international journal.
The copyrights belong exclusively to the authors. Published content is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) guidelines, which allows sharing (copy and distribution of the material in any medium or format) and adaptation (remix, transform, and build upon the material) for any purpose, even commercially, under the terms of attribution.
2.0
2019CiteScore
60th percentile
Powered by 
2.0
2019CiteScore
60th percentile
Powered by 