Response of Yield and Yield Components of Tef [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter] to Tillage, Nutrient, and Weed Management Practices in Dura Area, Northern Ethiopia
Table 3
Main and interaction effects of tillage, fertilizer, and weed control practices on yield and yield components of tef crop in 2009 crop season.
Treatment
TL
PH (cm)
PL (cm)
GY (t ha−1)
AGB (t ha−1)
HI
Tillage (T)
Conventional tillage (6 times passes) = T1
4.2c
81c
13c
1.1c
4.8c
0.23b
Four times tillage passes = T2
6.2a
101a
24a
1.7a
6.2a
0.27a
Reduced tillage (single tillage pass) = T3
5.0b
94b
17b
1.4b
5.8b
0.24b
Fertilizer (F)
No fertilizer = F1
4.0d
63d
12c
0.79d
3.7d
0.21bc
23 kg N ha−1 = F2
6.5b
88c
19b
1.1c
6.0c
0.18d
23 kg N ha−1 and 10 kg P ha−1 = F3
6.9a
104a
23a
1.7a
7.5a
0.23a
23 kg N ha−1 and 2.5 t ha−1 manure = F4
6.8a
105a
22a
1.5b
6.8b
0.22ab
2.5 t ha−1 manure = F5
6.6b
98b
20b
1.2c
6.1c
0.20c
Weed control practices (W)
Hand weeding = W1
6.7a
95a
21a
1.7a
5.6a
0.30a
2,4D at 0.75 kg ha−1 at five-leaf stage = W2
6.2b
86b
17b
1.2b
4.3b
0.28b
2,4D at 0.75 kg ha−1 at six-leaf stage = W3
5.3c
78d
14c
0.98c
3.9c
0.25c
2,4D at 150 kg ha−1 at five-leaf stage = W4
5.1c
82c
13c
1.0c
3.7c
0.27b
2,4D at 150 kg ha−1 at six-leaf stage = W5
4.5d
75e
11d
0.96c
3.5d
0.27b
Interaction
T × F
*
*
**
**
**
*
T × W
*
*
*
*
*
*
F × W
*
*
ns
**
*
ns
T × F × W
**
**
**
**
**
*
Means within columns with different letters are significantly different at . Significant at the 0.05 probability level; significant at the 0.01 probability level; ns: nonsignificant at . × indicates interaction; TL: tiller number per plant; PH: plant height; PL: panicle length; GY: grain yield; AGB: above ground biomass yield; HI: harvest index.