COMPARISON OF METHODS FOR ESTIMATING THE OPTIMUM PLOT SIZE FOR PEARL MILLET, SLENDER LEAF RATTLEBOX, AND SHOWY RATTLEBOX

CARGNELUTTI FILHO, ALBERTO; LOREGIAN, MARCOS VINÍCIUS; BUBANS, VALÉRIA ESCAIO; SOMAVILLA, FELIPE MANFIO; COSTA, SAMANTA LUIZA DA

doi:10.1590/1983-21252021v34n201rc

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Agronomy • Rev. Caatinga 34 (2) • Apr-Jun 2021 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252021v34n201rc copy

COMPARISON OF METHODS FOR ESTIMATING THE OPTIMUM PLOT SIZE FOR PEARL MILLET, SLENDER LEAF RATTLEBOX, AND SHOWY RATTLEBOX

COMPARAÇÃO DE MÉTODOS DE ESTIMAÇÃO DO TAMANHO ÓTIMO DE PARCELA EM MILHETO, CROTALÁRIA OCHROLEUCA E CROTALÁRIA SPECTABILIS

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to compare three methods of estimating the optimum plot size to evaluate the fresh matter productivity of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum L.), slender leaf rattlebox (Crotalaria ochroleuca), and showy rattlebox (Crotalaria spectabilis). Twenty-seven uniformity trials were carried out with pearl millet, slender leaf rattlebox, and showy rattlebox cultivated alone and intercropped. Fresh matter productivity was evaluated in 972 basic experimental units (BEU) of 1 m × 1 m (36 BEU per trial). The optimum plot size was determined using the methods modified maximum curvature, linear response with plateau model, and quadratic response with plateau model. The optimum plot size differs between methods and decreases in the following order: quadratic response with plateau model (9.94 m²), linear response with plateau model (7.41 m²), and modified maximum curvature (3.49 m²). The optimum plot size to evaluate the fresh matter productivity of pearl millet, slender leaf rattlebox, and showy rattlebox cultivated alone or intercropped is 7.41 m². This size could be used as a reference for future experiments.

Keywords:
Uniformity trial; Intercropping; Estimation models

T⁽¹⁾ (1) Each uniformity trial with an area size of 6 m × 6 m (36 m2) was divided into 36 BEU of a size of 1 m × 1 m (1 m2), forming a matrix of six rows and six columns.	X_R	X_C	X	n	100% M	75% M + 25% CO	50% M + 50% CO	25% M + 75% CO	100% CO	75% M + 25% CS	50% M + 50% CS	25% M + 75% CS	100% CS
1	1	1	1	36	12.14	11.08	14.85	15.44	17.67	15.89	18.51	13.27	17.07
1	1	2	2	18	9.38	7.64	12.51	12.38	11.85	12.25	11.50	10.04	13.01
1	1	3	3	12	6.23	6.54	11.28	10.58	10.95	8.75	7.55	8.51	11.77
1	1	6	6	6	1.98	5.57	8.14	9.29	7.60	5.98	6.31	6.02	11.26
1	2	1	2	18	10.17	7.15	10.10	10.84	13.51	10.47	11.30	8.55	12.76
1	2	2	4	9	8.10	4.33	8.54	9.93	8.24	8.07	8.33	5.20	11.55
1	2	3	6	6	4.91	2.30	6.10	9.02	8.63	5.51	5.61	4.76	10.68
1	2	6	12	3	1.50	0.23	2.81	9.00	5.74	5.82	3.41	4.08	10.95
1	3	1	3	12	7.62	5.88	9.19	10.25	12.27	8.91	9.57	5.95	12.30
1	3	2	6	6	6.29	3.67	8.65	8.55	7.05	7.74	5.61	4.91	11.30
1	3	3	9	4	4.77	1.08	7.53	8.37	7.37	4.50	4.64	3.88	11.57
1	3	6	18	2	0.61	0.02	5.60	9.27	3.88	4.97	0.78	4.04	13.52
1	6	1	6	6	7.48	5.72	8.21	6.06	9.49	6.29	5.21	3.16	4.30
1	6	2	12	3	6.84	3.90	8.17	4.97	3.52	4.97	3.09	2.70	3.05
1	6	3	18	2	5.69	0.40	7.08	4.37	8.11	1.30	5.06	2.06	1.66
2	1	1	1	36	10.93	12.75	13.78	13.89	12.18	16.30	13.90	13.53	12.28
2	1	2	2	18	8.18	6.25	9.98	9.83	7.49	12.38	9.66	9.26	8.74
2	1	3	3	12	7.96	3.83	7.29	6.40	7.75	10.59	9.79	9.74	6.63
2	1	6	6	6	5.12	2.92	5.67	5.54	3.65	8.41	6.83	6.34	1.74
2	2	1	2	18	6.93	10.99	11.09	9.69	9.85	12.20	10.19	7.60	9.68
2	2	2	4	9	5.21	5.34	8.41	8.36	4.97	9.69	8.04	5.72	6.29
2	2	3	6	6	4.15	1.92	5.67	5.19	6.03	7.30	8.21	3.52	5.46
2	2	6	12	3	1.68	1.30	3.78	4.95	3.08	3.35	4.73	2.84	1.18
2	3	1	3	12	5.90	8.75	8.66	7.74	9.91	12.05	5.71	4.61	9.13
2	3	2	6	6	3.93	4.03	7.63	7.00	5.59	9.54	4.77	3.89	6.12
2	3	3	9	4	2.43	2.93	4.34	4.07	7.02	6.83	4.96	2.45	5.56
2	3	6	18	2	1.84	3.11	5.27	3.53	2.86	1.42	2.30	2.78	1.50
2	6	1	6	6	4.52	5.34	7.07	5.53	8.60	10.72	4.45	3.37	6.37
2	6	2	12	3	1.43	2.30	6.95	5.81	1.22	9.43	4.14	2.98	4.88
2	6	3	18	2	2.31	0.85	0.33	3.33	5.70	8.17	3.94	1.06	6.52
3	1	1	1	36	14.68	12.89	16.52	17.84	14.38	12.26	15.14	17.76	9.87
3	1	2	2	18	10.89	9.79	13.17	13.17	11.06	8.02	12.69	14.55	7.09
3	1	3	3	12	8.81	7.10	11.52	11.61	9.63	7.17	11.21	8.56	4.96
3	1	6	6	6	8.21	5.18	10.35	10.68	5.25	4.77	9.72	5.13	3.06
3	2	1	2	18	11.71	8.48	11.06	11.46	8.54	8.02	12.44	12.48	7.82
3	2	2	4	9	9.52	7.15	7.05	8.04	7.14	6.12	11.61	10.49	5.03
3	2	3	6	6	8.47	4.22	6.30	6.57	4.81	4.49	10.42	5.61	3.89
3	2	6	12	3	9.05	2.28	4.83	4.33	2.77	3.66	10.23	4.18	3.42
3	3	1	3	12	8.39	8.04	9.17	7.83	4.67	6.11	9.39	7.63	6.55
3	3	2	6	6	7.14	7.48	6.04	5.45	4.39	3.92	8.81	7.08	3.66
3	3	3	9	4	5.68	2.35	5.65	4.57	1.49	3.91	7.11	3.28	2.86
3	3	6	18	2	6.70	1.57	3.02	4.82	1.01	2.08	7.58	2.30	1.55
3	6	1	6	6	5.53	5.15	6.05	6.03	2.31	4.95	7.01	5.12	5.64
3	6	2	12	3	4.05	5.22	3.48	2.09	1.25	3.88	6.75	4.44	3.41
3	6	3	18	2	1.37	1.43	4.08	0.62	1.20	3.88	2.15	3.13	1.00

Composition	Trial ⁽¹⁾ (1) Each uniformity trial with an area size of 6 m × 6 m (36 m2) was divided into 36 BEU of a size of 1 m × 1 m (1 m2), forming a matrix of six rows and six columns.	FM, g m^-2⁽²⁾ (2) Averages that are not followed by the same letter in the column (comparison of averages of the compositions) differ at 5% significance by the Scott Knott's test via bootstrap with 10,000 resamples.	CV, %	MMC			LRP			QRP
Composition			CV, %	R²	Xo	CV_Xo	R²	Xo	CV_Xo	R²	Xo	CV_Xo
100% M	1	7299	12.14	0.64	3.32	6.81	0.62	6.95	3.88	0.64	9.01	3.94
100% M	2	7142	10.93	0.89	3.17	5.81	0.91	8.21	1.94	0.95	11.93	1.86
100% M	3	7534	14.68	0.79	3.27	9.02	0.65	7.51	5.37	0.67	9.97	5.43
	Average	7325 a	12.58	0.77	3.25	7.21	0.73	7.56	3.73	0.75	10.31	3.74
75% M + 25% CO	1	7349	11.08	0.63	3.67	4.18	0.80	8.78	1.13	0.82	12.64	1.05
75% M + 25% CO	2	8042	12.75	0.78	3.61	5.08	0.75	6.73	2.10	0.74	8.09	2.27
75% M + 25% CO	3	8044	12.89	0.86	3.45	6.69	0.84	8.38	2.57	0.84	11.56	2.60
	Average	7812 a	12.24	0.76	3.58	5.32	0.80	7.97	1.93	0.80	10.76	1.97
50% M + 50% CO	1	8747	14.85	0.79	3.07	9.79	0.71	7.11	6.24	0.79	9.17	6.31
50% M + 50% CO	2	8618	13.78	0.71	3.44	7.79	0.74	7.85	4.13	0.76	10.75	4.16
50% M + 50% CO	3	8034	16.52	0.90	3.90	8.40	0.82	7.64	4.21	0.78	10.86	4.11
	Average	8466 a	15.05	0.80	3.47	8.66	0.76	7.53	4.86	0.77	10.26	4.86
25% M + 75% CO	1	7843	15.44	0.83	2.93	10.56	0.66	6.73	7.19	0.77	8.09	7.31
25% M + 75% CO	2	8594	13.89	0.91	3.24	7.75	0.80	6.99	4.34	0.87	5.83	5.05
25% M + 75% CO	3	9077	17.84	0.82	4.33	7.43	0.79	8.09	3.29	0.63	11.67	3.15
	Average	8505 a	15.72	0.86	3.50	8.58	0.75	7.27	4.94	0.76	8.53	5.17
100% CO	1	4453	17.67	0.90	3.83	9.65	0.80	7.34	5.72	0.78	10.07	5.70
100% CO	2	4665	12.18	0.66	3.05	7.35	0.60	7.67	3.98	0.68	12.86	3.58
100% CO	3	4413	14.38	0.84	4.01	5.21	0.85	7.44	1.54	0.79	9.98	1.61
	Average	4511 b	14.74	0.80	3.63	7.41	0.75	7.49	3.75	0.75	10.97	3.63
75% M + 25% CS	1	6993	15.89	0.91	3.78	8.00	0.83	7.12	4.31	0.83	8.93	4.47
75% M + 25% CS	2	7181	16.30	0.75	3.46	10.16	0.68	8.58	5.84	0.60	14.52	5.31
75% M + 25% CS	3	8151	12.26	0.96	3.09	6.62	0.86	6.65	3.48	0.94	5.93	3.98
	Average	7442 a	14.82	0.87	3.44	8.26	0.79	7.45	4.54	0.79	9.79	4.59
50% M + 50% CS	1	8276	18.51	0.93	4.35	6.84	0.83	6.94	3.40	0.76	5.79	4.48
50% M + 50% CS	2	7465	13.90	0.83	3.31	7.74	0.76	7.49	4.01	0.80	10.31	4.00
50% M + 50% CS	3	7843	15.14	0.75	2.90	10.99	0.64	8.15	6.76	0.68	19.96	5.33
	Average	7861 a	15.85	0.83	3.52	8.53	0.74	7.53	4.72	0.75	12.02	4.60
25% M + 75% CS	1	7827	13.27	0.90	3.46	6.51	0.82	6.65	3.35	0.89	5.77	3.96
25% M + 75% CS	2	8234	13.53	0.85	3.60	5.76	0.78	7.08	2.42	0.79	8.90	2.55
25% M + 75% CS	3	7804	17.76	0.91	4.36	7.28	0.87	6.96	3.47	0.80	8.82	3.62
	Average	7955 a	14.85	0.89	3.81	6.52	0.83	6.90	3.08	0.83	7.83	3.38
100% CS	1	4382	17.07	0.54	3.41	11.00	0.35	6.90	8.15	-0.08	8.79	8.22
100% CS	2	4656	12.28	0.66	3.32	6.71	0.66	6.60	3.93	0.71	8.16	4.00
100% CS	3	4742	9.87	0.89	2.85	5.87	0.83	7.44	2.45	0.91	10.05	2.47
	Average	4593 b	13.07	0.69	3.19	7.86	0.61	6.98	4.84	0.51	9.00	4.90
Overall average		7163	14.33	0.81	3.49	7.59	0.75	7.41	4.04	0.75	9.94	4.09
F-test		45.482	1.004	0.924	0.467	1.152	0.718	0.730	1.044	0.621	0.481	1.145
p-value ⁽³⁾ (3) p-value > 0.05 means that averages of the compositions do not differ.		0.000	0.461	0.514	0.868	0.380	0.693	0.662	0.443	0.818	0.871	0.397

Composition	MMC	LRP	QRP
		Coefficient of determination (R²)
100% M	0.77 a	0.73 a	0.75 a
75% M + 25% CO	0.76 a	0.80 a	0.80 a
50% M + 50% CO	0.80 a	0.76 a	0.77 a
25% M + 75% CO	0.86 a	0.75 a	0.76 a
100% CO	0.80 a	0.75 a	0.75 a
75% M + 25% CS	0.87 a	0.79 a	0.79 a
50% M + 50% CS	0.83 a	0.74 a	0.75 a
25% M + 75% CS	0.89 a	0.83 a	0.83 a
100% CS	0.69 a	0.61 a	0.51 a
Overall average	0.81 A	0.75 B	0.75 B
		Optimum plot size (Xo, m²)
100% M	3.25 a	7.56 a	10.31 a
75% M + 25% CO	3.58 a	7.97 a	10.76 a
50% M + 50% CO	3.47 a	7.53 a	10.26 a
25% M + 75% CO	3.50 a	7.27 a	8.53 a
100% CO	3.63 a	7.49 a	10.97 a
75% M + 25% CS	3.44 a	7.45 a	9.79 a
50% M + 50% CS	3.52 a	7.53 a	12.02 a
25% M + 75% CS	3.81 a	6.90 a	7.83 a
100% CS	3.19 a	6.98 a	9.00 a
Overall average	3.49 C	7.41 B	9.94 A
		Coefficient of variation in the optimum plot size (CV_Xo, %)
100% M	7.21 a	3.73 a	3.74 a
75% M + 25% CO	5.32 a	1.93 a	1.97 a
50% M + 50% CO	8.66 a	4.86 a	4.86 a
25% M + 75% CO	8.58 a	4.94 a	5.17 a
100% CO	7.41 a	3.75 a	3.63 a
75% M + 25% CS	8.26 a	4.54 a	4.59 a
50% M + 50% CS	8.53 a	4.72 a	4.60 a
25% M + 75% CS	6.52 a	3.08 a	3.38 a
100% CS	7.86 a	4.84 a	4.90 a
Overall average	7.59 A	4.04 B	4.09 B

Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido Avenida Francisco Mota, número 572, Bairro Presidente Costa e Silva, Cep: 5962-5900, Telefone: 55 (84) 3317-8297 - Mossoró - RN - Brazil
E-mail: caatinga@ufersa.edu.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] *Corresponding author