Comparison of Teff (Eragrostis teff (Zucc.) Trotter) Varieties in Response to Blended NPSZnB Fertilizer On-Farm and on Research Station
Table 5
Physiological maturity and height of teff as influenced by the interaction effects of location, variety, and NPSZnB fertilizer rates.
Treatments
90% physiological maturity (days)
Teff height (cm)
Varieties
Fertilizer (kg ha−1)
On-farm
On-station
On-farm
On-station
Dagim
0
123.00a
93.67h
77.33k
82.67ijk
50
118.33c
91.67i
101.63bcd
86.33hijk
100
115.00d
88.33j
97.37cdefg
97.33cdefg
150
110.00f
85.33kl
104.63bc
106.00bc
200
110.00f
82.67mn
97.33cdefg
119.33a
Kora
0
120.33b
89.67j
65.47l
93.33defghi
50
117.33c
86.67k
90.50efghij
97.00cdefgh
100
113.33e
84.00lm
89.40efghij
103.00bcd
150
110.00f
81.33no
98.93bcde
108.33b
200
106.00g
80.00o
98.70bcdef
122.67a
Nigus
0
118.00c
77.67p
78.27k
64.67l
50
115.00d
75.67q
87.63ghijk
80.67jk
100
110.67f
74.33b
90.67efghij
86.67ghijk
150
105.00g
72.67r
88.03fghijk
93.00defghi
200
105.00g
70.67s
90.60efghij
105.33bc
Mean
113.13
82.29
90.43
96.42
LSD (0.05)
1.63
10.88
CV (%)
1.02
7.13
Where LSD (0.05) = least significant difference at 5% level; CV = coefficient of variation. Means in column and row of the same parameter followed by the same letters are not significantly differed at 95% significance.