THE EFFECTS OF NITROGEN, PHOSPHORUS, AND

POTASSIUM FERTILIZATION ON THE YIELD AND

YIELD COMPONENTS OF POTATO (Solanum tuberosum L.)
GROWN ON VERTISOLS OF MEKELLE AREA, ETHIOPIA






A Thesis
Submitted to the School o f Graduate Studies of the
Alemaya University




In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Science in Agriculture (Horticulture)




By
Mulubrhan Haile G/Selassie
December, 2004

Alemaya University
School of Graduate Studies




THE EFFECTS OF NITROGEN, PHOSPHORUS, AND POTASSIUM
FERTILIZATION ON THE YIELD AND YIELD COMPONENTS OF
POTATO (Solanum tuberosum L.) GROWN ON VERTISOLS OF
MEKELLE AREA, ETHIOPIA




By
Mulubrhan Haile G/Selassie





Approved by Board of Examiners:


Chairman Signature


Major advisor Signature


Co-advisor Signature


Internal examiner Signature


External examiner Signature


iii













DEDICATION

This work is dedicated to the memory of Haleka Haile G/Selassie
(1906-1987 E.C.)



iv
STATEMENT OF AUTHOR

First, I declare that this thesis is my bonafide work and that all sources of materials used for
this thesis have been duly acknowledged. This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for a M.Sc. Degree at the Alemaya University. I solemnly declare that this
thesis is not submitted to any other institution anywhere for the award of any academic degree,
diploma, or certificate.

Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission provided that
accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation
from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the
Plant Science department or the Dean of the School of Graduate Studies when in his or her
judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other
instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.

Name: Mulubrhan Haile Signature: -------------------
Place: Alemaya University, Alemaya
Date of Submission: --------------------


v
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

The author was born in 1972 in Shire-Endaslelassie, North Western Zone, Tigray Regional
State, Ethiopia. He attended elementary and junior secondary school at Endaslelassie
Elementary and Junior School from 1980 to 1988. He then attended high school at Bole Senior
Secondary School from 1989 to 1992. In 1993, he joined Mekelle University and graduated in
August 1997 with B.Sc. degree in Dryland Crop Science. After graduattion he was employed
by Mekelle Agricultural Research Center in December 1997. He worked in the Horticulture
Research Division at Mekelle Agricultural Research Center from 1997 to 2003 in different
positions, until he joined the School of Graduate Studies at Alemaya University. He joined the
School of Graduate Studies at Alemaya University to do his postgraduate study in the field of
Horticulture.











vi
ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The author would like to express his heartfelt appreciation and special gratitude to all persons
who, in one way or the other contributed to the accomplishment of this study. Special
appreciation and deepest thanks go to the thesis research advisors Dr. Nigussie Dechassa
(Alemaya University) and Professor Tekalign Mamo (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development) for their continued guidance, inspiration, encouragement and support
throughout the study period which made the completion of this study smooth and successful.
The visit made by Dr. Nigussie Dechassa to the study field is highly appreciable and never to
be forgotten. The author would also like to express his heartfelt and special gratitude to
Professor Tekalign Mamo for his persistent support in the course of the study period.

The welcome and kind-hearted treatment offered from the staff of the Plant Science
Department especially the Horticulture Section of Alemaya University is sincerely
acknowledged. The author would like to thank Mekelle Agricultural Research Center staff
members for their dedicated help in mobilizing and organizing all the necessary facilities that
enabled him to accomplish this work successfully. He would like to extend his thanks to
Tigray Agricultural Research Institute (TARI) for providing the training opportunity and
Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization (EARO), Agricultural Research training project
(ARTP), for support of the research project. His deepest thanks are extended to G/Hiwot
H/Mariam, H/Selassie Amare and Degol Fissehaye, for their incontestable attitude and kind
collaboration in every aspect of the study and data analysis until the completion of the work.

The author is also thankful to the following colleagues: Ato Daniel G/Kidan, Ato Abrahaley
G/Libanos, Ato Bereket H/Selassie, Ato Kidane Gidey, Ato Mikel Tesfaye and Ato Berhan
Asmamaw for their honest support, advice and idea exchange during the entire study period.
Due appreciation and thanks would also go to Horticulture Research Division staff members
of Mekelle Agricultural Research Center: Ato Mehari Asfaw and Ato Kidanu Miruts for their
assistance, collaboration, organizing and mobilizing all the necessary facilities during the
study period.


vii
Last, but not least, the author remains sincere, grateful, and indebted to his beloved wife,
Regbe Hagos, his daughters, Delina Mulubrhan and Eyoba Mulubrhan, and his mother, W/o
Hiwot G/Hiwot whose words of encouragement, affection and prayer served me as a source of
strength, inspiration and impetus throughout the study.


viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
DEDICATION iii
STATEMENT OF AUTHOR iv
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH v
ACKNOWLEDGMENT vi
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF APPENDICES xi
ABSTRACT xii
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 4
2.1. Nitrogen in Soils and Plants 4
2.2. Phosphorus in Soils and Plants 5
2.3. Potassium in Soils and Plants 6
2.4. Yield Components of Potato 7
2.4.1. Stem Number 7
2.4.2. Number of Tubers 9
2.4.3. Average Tuber Weight 10
2.5. Effect of N, P and K on Potato Tuber Yields 11
2.6. Effect of N, P, and K on Specific Gravity of Potato Tubers 13
2.7. Effect of N, P, and K on Dry Matter Content of Tubers 14
2.8. Potato Tuber Size Categories 15
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS 17
3.1. Description of the Study Site 17
3.2. Field Experiment 17
3.2.1. Experimental Materials 17
3.2.2. Experimental Design 18
3.2.3. Cultural Practices 18


ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Page

3.2.4. Method and Time of Fertilizer Application 18
3.2.5. Soil Sampling 19
3.3. Data Collection 19
3.3.1. Data collected 19
3.3.2. Soil Analysis 20
3.4. Data Analysis 21
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 22
4.1. Effect of N, P and K on Tuber Yields 22
4.1.1. Total Tuber Yield 22
4.1.2. Marketable Tuber Yield 24
4.1.3. Unmarketable Tuber Yield 24
4.2. Major Yield Components in Potato 28
4.2.1. Tuber Number 28
4.2.2. Average Tuber Weight 33
4.2.3. Stem Number 34
4.3. Potato Tuber Size Categories 37
4.4. Specific Gravity 43
4.5. Dry Matter Content of Potato Cubers 44
4.6. Potato Plant Growth Parameters 45
4.6.1. Plant Height 45
4.6.2. Days to Flowering and Days to Maturity 48
4.6.3. Plant Biomass Yield 49
4.6.4. Harvest Index 51
4.7. Potato Tuber Nitrogen Content 54
4.8. Selected Post Harvest Soil Chemical Properties 54
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 57
6. REFERENCES 59
7. APPENDICES 67


x

LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1. Potato tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N, P and K application 25
Table 2. Total tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x K and P x K interactions 26
Table 3. Total tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x P interactions 26
Table 4. Potato tuber number per hill as influenced by N, P and K applications 31
Table 5. Total tuber number per hill as influenced by N x K and P x K interactions 32
Table 6. Total tuber number per hill as influenced by N x P interactions 32
Table 7. Average tuber weight and stem number per hill as influenced by N, P and K
application 35
Table 8. Average tuber weight (g) as influenced by N x K and P x K interactions 36
Table 9. Stem number per hill as influenced by N x P interactions 36
Table 10. Potato tuber size categories (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N, P and K application 39
Table 11. Small sized potato tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x P interactions 40
Table 13. Large sized tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x K and P x K interactions 41
Table 14. Large sized potato tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x P interactions 42
Table 15. Potato specific gravity, percent dry matter, harvest index and plant height as
influenced by N, P and K application 46
Table 16. Potato specific gravity as influenced by N x P interactions 47
Table 17. Days to flowering, days to maturity, above ground dry matter yield, underground
dry matter yield and tuber nitrogen concentration as influenced by N, P and K application
52
Table 18. Underground dry matter yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x P interactions 53
Table 19. Selected Post-Harvest Soil Chemical Properties as Influenced by N, P and K
Application 56



xi
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
Appendix table 1. Soil chemical properties of the study area prior to fertilization 68
Appendix table 2. Simple correlation coefficient of different parameters with K, N and P
treatments 69
Appendix table 3. Simple correlation coefficients among different parameters 70

xii
THE EFFECTS OF NITROGEN, PHOSPHORUS, AND POTASSIUM
FERTILIZATION ON THE YIELD AND YIELD COMPONENTS OF POTATO
(Solanum tuberosumL.) GROWN ON THE VERTISOLS OF MEKELLE AREA,
ETHIOPIA

ABSTRACT

By
Mulubrhan Haile G/Selassie (B.Sc. Mekelle University)

Advisors
Dr. Nigussie Dechassa (Alemaya University, P.O. Box 138, Diredawa)
Professor Tekalign Mamo (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Addis
Ababa)

A study was conducted to determine the effects of N, P and K application on yield and yield
components of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) using two levels of K (0 and 93.5 kg K ha
-1
) and
four levels of N (0, 55, 110 and 165 kg N ha
-1
) and four levels of P (0, 13.2, 26.4 and 39.6 kg P
ha
-1
). A split plot design with three replications was employed. The two levels of K and the N
and P treatment combinations were assigned as the main plot and sub-plot treatments,
respectively. Results of the experiment showed that application of K did not significantly
influence total tuber yield, marketable tuber yield, total and marketable tuber numbers, size
categories of tubers, aboveground and underground dry matter yields and days to flowering,
but significantly affected days to maturity and specific gravity of potato tubers. Application of
N and P on the other hand significantly affected total and marketable tuber yields (t ha-1) but
not unmarketable tuber yield. Total and marketable tuber yields positively and significantly
correlated with applied N (r = 0.86** and r = 0.84**, respectively) and with applied P (r =
0.30** and r = 0.33**, respectively). The correlations of total and marketable tuber yield with
applied K (r = 0.10 and r = 0.02, respectively) were not significant, which were in agreement
with the analysis of variance. The highest total tuber yield (40.86 t ha
-1
) was recorded at the
treatment combination of 93.5 kg K ha
-1
, 165 kg N ha
-1
and 39.6 kg P

ha
-1
. The lowest total

xiii
tuber yield (14.93 t ha
-1
), on the other hand, was recorded at the treatment combination with
no fertilizer application (control treatment). Tuber number per hill (total and marketable)
significantly responded to the application of N and P, but not to applied K. With respect to the
distribution of potato size categories, N increased the yield of medium and large sized potato
tubers, while P increased the yield of large, medium and small sized tubers. K did not
influence either of the size categories. Analysis of post-harvest soil samples collected from 0 to
30 cm depth revealed that applied N significantly decreased soil pH, while P and K did not
significantly affect it. Post harvest level of soil available P was significantly increased in
response to applied P. The levels of soil NH
4
-N and NO
3
-N after harvest were increased
significantly due to application of N. Applied P on the other hand, reduced the post harvest
level of soil NH
4
-N and NO
3
-N. The three-way interaction was non-significant in influencing
most of the parameters. The limited response of yield and yield components to applied K in
this study should not preclude further research especially dealing with rapidly available soil K
and plant tissue K analysis on major soil types.


1. INTRODUCTION

Potato (Solanum tuberosum L) is one of the most important food crops in the world. In volume
of world crop production, potato ranks fourth following wheat, maize, and rice (FAO, 1995).
Among the root and tuber crops potato ranks top followed by cassava, sweet potato and yams
in that order (Hawkes, 1990). As a crop in the developing world, potato also ranks fifth in
money value (Horton, 1987).

Potato has been identified as a cheap source of human diet, since it produces more food value
per unit time, land and water than any other major crops. The nutritional value of the potato
crop has been well appreciated and documented (FAO, 1980; Horton, 1987). The tuber
supplies carbohydrates, quality protein (lysine), minerals, nutrient salts, and several vitamins
from group B and large amount of vitamin C. Due to these merits, potato ranks first in the
expansion area of production in the developing world (Horton, 1987). Given that agriculture
is the mainstay of the Ethiopian economy, horticultural crops production is one of the
components of the Ethiopian agriculture. It includes different types of fruit and vegetable crop
husbandry, of which potato crop production is a major activity.

The potato crop was introduced to Ethiopia around 1858 by Schimper, a German botanist
(Berga et al., 1994b). Ethiopia is endowed with suitable climatic and edaphic conditions for
potato production. However, land acreage under potato production is estimated to be about
49,000 hectares and the national average yield is about 7 - 8 tons/ha, which is very low as
compared to the worlds average production of 15 tons per hectare (FAO, 2000). The crop
yield in Ethiopia is lower than that of most potato producing countries in Africa like Egypt and
Zimbabwe, which produce 21 and 16 tons per hectare, respectively (FAO, 1995). Many
diverse and complex biotic, abiotic, and human factors have contributed to the existing low
productivity of potato. Some of the production constraints which have contributed to the
limited production or expansion of potato in Ethiopia include: lack of good quality planting
materials, diseases, weeds and insect pests, improper time of planting and harvesting, rigid
traditional food habit of the Ethiopian population and poor soil management practices (Berga
et al., 1994a). Like other crops, low soil fertility is one of the critical factors limiting

2
productivity of the potato crop (Berga et al., 1994a). Traditionally, farmers maintain or
improve farmland soil fertility using different management practices such as fallowing, use of
farm yard manure, intercropping and crop rotation. The use of some of these cultural practices
as a means of maintaining or improving soil fertility is limited to a great extent due to small
land holding of farmers. Available statistical data indicate that the average household land
holdings in the country in general and in Tigray region in particular are about 1.09 and 0.98
hectares respectively (CSA, 1995). Farmers with small plots of land are unable to maintain the
farmland soil fertility through cultural practices, as they are using their land exhaustively.
Under such situations, therefore, the use of inorganic fertilizers to optimize productivity
becomes indisputable in crop production, and hence potato cannot be an exception (Reijnties
et al., 1992).

Plants require a variety of elements for growth and development. Nitrogen, phosphorus, and
potassium are the most important among the elements that are essential to plants. Plants utilize
these nutrients in large quantities. The deficiency of these elements is manifested in the
detrimental effects on the growth and development of the plants (Tisdale et al., 1995).
Furthermore, high mobility of N and high affinity of P and K for chemical reactions and
fixation in the soils put these plant nutrients on the priority list in soil fertility management
studies.

It has been reported that most tropical soils are deficient in N and P (Raheja, 1966; Chien and
Menon, 1995; Sanchez, 1976). Soil fertility studies conducted at different locations in Ethiopia
for different crops have shown good yield responses to applied N and P fertilizers, indicating
low N and P status of these soils (Berga et al., 1994a; Yohannes, 1994). Although the total
potassium content of soils is usually many times greater than the amount taken up by crops in
a growing season, in most cases only a small fraction is available to plants (Tisdale et al.,
1995). Potash deficiency is more localized than that of the other two primary nutrients (N and
P), so that in some areas there is no response, whereas on other soils large potash responses are
obtained (Anderson, 1973). There are instances when certain soils showed response to the
application of potassium fertilizers (IAR, 1974/75).


3
The requirement of crops for nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium is known to increase with
the introduction and adoption of improved varieties, better cultivation, irrigation facilities and
better control of pests and diseases (Raheja, 1966). This situation would become more critical
in potato production in view of the fact that the potato crop is known to be a heavy feeder of
plant nutrients (Harris, 1978; Sikka, 1982; Horton, 1987).

A lot is known about soil potassium in different parts of the world. However, little is known
about the status of this nutrient in Ethiopian soils (Tekalign Mamo and Haque, 1988). Early
indications of favorable potassium supply except in a few acutely deficient soils have led
researchers and farmers to ignore needs for potassium in many parts of East Africa (Anderson,
1973). Experiments in the past few years have indicated potassium deficiency to be much
more widespread than hitherto known and the need for potassium application increases in
proportion to the intensity of cropping even in semi-arid areas where potassium applications
traditionally have given least response (Anderson, 1973; Tekalign Mamo, personal
communication).

Hence, considering that Ethiopian soils are deficient in fertility, and realizing the importance
of fertilizers in potato production, the use of inorganic fertilizers in potato production is
indisputable. However, available information regarding soil fertility studies with regard to
potato production in Tigray region is limited. Fertilizer practices in the region have been
mainly based on the experience of other regions. Moreover, very little information is available
in the country with regard to the influence of potassium fertilizers on the growth, yield, and
quality of potato. Thus, systematic investigations into the response of potato to applied NPK
fertilizers under specific agro-ecologies is very important to come up with relevant
recommendations in order to help farmers to increase the productivity of the potato crop.

With this background the proposed study was conducted at Mekelle Research Center of the
Tigray Agricultural Research Institute (TARI), with the following specific objective:

Objective: To elucidate the effect of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium and their
interactions on the yield and yield components of potato.

4
2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Nitrogen in Soils and Plants

Nitrogen has been identified as being the most limiting nutrient in plant growth. Plants absorb
nitrogen in the cation form (NH
4
+
) or the anionic form (NO
3
-
). Plants obtain readily available
N forms from different sources. The major forms include: biological nitrogen fixation by soil
microorganisms, mineralization of organic N, industrial fixation of nitrogen gas and fixation
as oxides of nitrogen by atmospheric electrical discharge (Tisdale et al., 1995). The
availability of nitrogen through biological N fixation is influenced by soil pH, and its mineral
nutrient status, photosynthesis, climate and crop management (Miller and Donanue, 1995;
Tisdale et al., 1995). Similarly, mineralization of organic nitrogen to inorganic forms depends
on temperature, level of soil moisture and supply of oxygen (Tisdale et al., 1995).

The available nitrogen form can be made unavailable or lost via plant uptake, denitrification,
volatilization, leaching, and ammonium fixation (Tisdale et al., 1995). The loss of available
nitrogen through natural processes is believed to surpass the gain (Miller and Donahue, 1995;
Tisdale et al., 1995). This fact has made fertilizer management an important aspect of crop
production practices (Kleinkopf et al., 1987). Consequently, nitrogen is applied relatively in
large quantities all over the world (Sanchez, 1976; Miller and Donanue, 1995). The deficiency
of nitrogen has an overriding control on plant growth and dominates the effect of other plant
nutrients. The deficiency symptoms of nitrogen in plants generally include stunted plant
growth, spindly appearance of plants, reduced growth of leaves, chlorosis and premature
senescence of older leaves and restricted root growth and branching (Miller and Donanue,
1995; Tisdale et al., 1995).



5

2.2. Phosphorus in Soils and Plants

Phosphorus is claimed to be the second most often limiting plant nutrient (Tisdale et al.,
1995). Plants absorb phosphorus in the from of HPO
4
-2
and H
2
PO
4
-
(Tisdale et al., 1995). The
physical and chemical properties of soils were reported to influence the solubility of
phosphorus and it adsorption reactions in soils. These include the nature and amount of soil
minerals, soil pH, cation effect, anion effect, extent of phosphorus saturation, reaction time
and temperature, flooding and fertilizer management (Tisdale et al., 1995). Moreover,
availability of phosphorus from fertilizers may be affected by the soil reaction, the degree of
soil phosphorus deficiency, rate and method of application, needs of the specific crops, certain
soil differences. The maximum availability of phosphorus for plant utilization is known to
occur at soil pH between 6.5 and 7.5 (Mengel and Kirkby, 1987).

According to Miller and Donanue (1995), the original source of soil phosphorus is the mineral
apatite. They indicated that soil microorganisms and organic matter including plant residue,
animal excretion and remains are known to contribute to the phosphorus pool upon
mineralization.

The use of phosphorus fertilizers becomes imperative because the concentration of phosphorus
in many soils is reported to be very low and it is also liable to different chemical reactions that
make it unavailable to plants (Bisawas and Mukherjee, 1993; Miller and Donanue, 1995;
Tisdale et al., 1995)

Plants provided with adequate amount of phosphorus have been reported to form good root
system, strong stem, mature early and give high yield. On the other hand, plants grown on
phosphorus deficient soils show stunted growth, low shoot to root ratio, poor fruit and seed
formation, purple colored leaves with reddish discoloration of the stem. Biochemically,
phosphorus deficiency causes changes in functions of the plant including accumulation of
sucrose and reducing sugars and sometimes of starch (Rending and Taylor, 1989).



6
2.3. Potassium in Soils and Plants

Potassium occupies a very important position among those nutrients essential for plant growth
and crop quality. Potassium is present in relatively large quantities in most soils (Tisdale et al.,
1995).

The water soluble and exchangeable forms of potassium present in the soil are the sources of
easily available potassium to plants (Aqcuye et al., 1967). The potassium in exchangeable
from is only a small part is the soils total supply (Tisdale et al., 1995). The unavailable form
accounts for 90-98 per cent of the total soil potassium, the slowly available from 1-10 per cent,
and readily available form 1-2 per cent (Tisdale et al., 1975).

The amount of available potassium must always be high enough to satisfy peak requirements,
if maximum crop yields are aimed at. However, maximum uses of the potassium reserves, the
low flux rate of potassium from these reserves could sometimes limit yield (Beringer et al.,
1990). Moreover, intensive cultivation is reported to hasten the loss of potassium through crop
removal, leaching, and erosion (Westermann et al., 1994a).

Potassium acts as an osmoticum in plants and is important for the translocation of sugars and
synthesis of starches in potatoes (Westermann et al., 1994a). Potassium may also influence
resistance of potato plants to certain diseases, besides its contribution to increased tuber yield
and the ascorbic acid content of the tubers (Winston, 1966). In the absence of potassium, the
incidence of sheath blight of rice caused by Rhizoctonia solani was 96 per cent, where as by
fertilization management (K and N) the incidence was reduced considerably (Westremann et
al., 1994a). Potassium expedites the transport of carbohydrates from the leaves to the tubers
and with adequate K, over two-thirds of
14
C labeled photosynthate moved from leaves into the
tubers within 24 hours, while only half was translocated when K was deficient (Westermann et
al., 1994b).


7
As yields increase and cropping of potatoes is continued the application of proper rates of
potassium might be needed to compensate for the relatively high amount of potassium
removed by the potato crop.

2.4. Yield Components of Potato

Yield development in potato is known to be the result of three physiological processes leading
to the formation of yield components (Lynch and Tai, 1989). These are stem numbers per
plant or per unit area, tuber numbers per plant or per unit area, and average tuber weight. The
yield components in potato have been reported to develop sequentially. The sequential system
of yield development of the potato involves interactions among individual yield components,
in which later developing components are found to be dependent upon earlier developing ones
(De la Morena et al., 1994).

2.4.1. Stem Number

The potato crop is usually propagated by using underground storage organs known as tubers.
Potato tubers show a wide range of variation and possess a variable number of growing points
(buds) arranged in groups (eyes) over their surface (Allen, 1978). According to Allen (1978)
potato tubers contain two types of buds, namely apical and lateral buds.

The number of eyes per tuber was reported to be dependent on the size of tubers (Allen, 1978).
Varietal difference was also reported to influence eye number per tuber (Lynch and Tai, 1989).
Although variety, tuber size or other factors exert their influence on the number of eyes on
tuber surface, there seems to be only one eye on a tuber that develops into stems and also no
difference exists between eye types (apical or lateral) in their yield potential (Allen, 1978).
Allen (1978) confirmed this by examining the performance of different eyes within tubers of
the same size and total eye number by dissecting out the eyes to produce single eye tubers. He,
therefore, revealed that differences between eye positions caused small differences in numbers
of stems and tubers, and tuber yield. The study also showed that single eye tubers did not

8
differ significantly from intact tubers in number of stems, suggesting that few or indeed only
one eye develop into stems in the intact tubers.
The number of stems per plant is reported to be under the influence of variety, seed (tuber)
size, physiological age of the seed, storage condition, number of viable sprouts at planting,
sprout damage at the time of planting and growing conditions (Iritani, 1968; Allen, 1978;
Horton, 1987; Peter and Hruska, 1988; Lynch and Tai, 1989; De la Morena et al., 1994). Allen
(1978) reported that the number of sprouts, which develop per seed tuber, is principally
determined by the temperature and duration of storage.

Allen (1978) reported the importance of increasing the stem number per plant for increased
graded and total tuber yield. Similarly, Gray and Hughes (1978) observed close relationships
between the number of main stems or aboveground stems and total yields and graded tuber
yields. These investigators claimed that high stem number per plant favored high tuber yield
through effect on haulm growth and tuber number per plant.

Many investigators reported the absence of close relationship between mineral nutrition and
the number of stems per plant (Lynch and Rowberry, 1997; Lynch and Tai, 1989; De la
Morena et al., 1994). Lynch and Rowberry (1997) and De la Morena et al. (1994) from their
studies on yield development of potato as influenced by nitrogen fertilizer, observed that the
yield difference due to nitrogen treatment was not attributed to its effect on stem density as the
number of stems was not significantly influenced by nitrogen nutrition. Similarly, Widdowson
and Penny (1975) observed non-significant difference in plant establishment as a result of
increased application of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium fertilizers. However Panique et
al. (1997) observed fewer stems per seed piece as the potassium rate was increased.



9
2.4.2. Number of Tubers

According to Allen (1978) number of tubers set per potato plant (hill) largely governs the total
tuber yield as well as the size categories of potato tubers. He showed that the number of tubers
set by plants was determined by stem density, spatial arrangement, variety, season and crop
management. He further indicated any increase in the stem density over the economical range
(which varies with the soil type, climate, management etc.) resulted in a reduction in the
number of tubers set per stem. He also noted that increasing the stem density by planting
larger seed tubers would result in increased tuber number per plant despite the reduction in the
number of tubers per stem. Increasing stem density over a wide range either by planting larger
seed tubers or more seed tubers for most varieties resulted in increased number of tubers per
unit area (Allen, 1972; Gray and Hughes, 1978). According to Allen (1972) spatial
arrangement affected the number of tubers in a similar manner to that of density, since
increasing rectangularity reduced number of tubers set per stem, while increasing tuber
number per plant.

Contradicting results have also been reported by different investigators regarding the effect of
mineral nutrition on the number of tubers set per plant. Thus, Sharma and Arora (1987)
reported no significant difference in the total number of tubers per square meter of land area as
a result of N, P, and K fertilizer application while Gunasena and Harries (1969) and Lynch and
Rowberry (1997) reported significant difference in tuber numbers due to nitrogen fertilization.
Similarly, Sommerfeld and Knutson (1965) and Maier et al. (1994a) noted that the application
of P increased the number of tubers set per unit area, while Sharma and Arora (1987) observed
the absence of strong association between tuber number and increased application rates of
phosphorus.

Hanley et al. (1965) and Herlihy and Carroll (1969) observed that application of potassium
did not have a significant effect on the total number of tubers, while affecting the number of
tubers in different weight grades significantly.

10
2.4.3. Average Tuber Weight

Average tuber weight has been reported to be the third most important yield component
contributing to the total tuber yield (Lynch and Tai, 1989; De la Morena et al., 1994). The
growth of tuber tissue is reported to occur both by cell division as well as expansion (Plaisted,
1957; Reeve et al., 1973). Plaisted (1957) showed that as tubers increased in weight from 37
mg to 200 g , the number of cells increased 500 folds, whereas the mean cell volume increased
only by 10 folds. From this, he concluded that cell division is more important than cell
expansion for tuber growth. However, Reeve et al. (1973) were able to show that tuber
growth, after the tubers had reached 30-40g, was by cell enlargement while cell division had
more contribution in earlier stages.

Tuber weight is reported to be affected by variety and growth conditions. Environmental
factors that favor cell division and cell expansion such as mineral nutrition, optimum water
supply, etc. were reported to enhance tuber size (Reeve et al., 1973). The result of a study
conducted by De la Morena et al. (1994) showed that variation in tuber yield due to nitrogen
treatments were related to the tuber weight increment. Similarly other studies indicated that
the potato yield component most affected by nitrogen and potassium application was the mean
tuber weight (Harries, 1978; Giardini, 1992). Sharma and Arora (1987) from their
investigations on the effect of mineral nutrition on size categories of the potato tuber, showed
that increase in the yield of tubers with applied nutrients (N and K) was associated with
increase in the number of tubers in the medium and large grades at the expense of small
tubers. This was attributed to the increase in the weight of individual tubers. Similarly,
Panique et al. (1997) noted that total yield increases due to potassium application were due
primarily to the increase in tuber size in larger grades (170 to 370 g and above) at the expense
of the small grades (below 170g). Sharma and Arora (1987) indicated that the increase in the
weight of tubers with the supply of fertilizer nutrients could be due to more luxurious growth,
more foliage and leaf area and higher supply of phtosynthates that helped in producing bigger
tubers resulting in higher yields. Nitrogen and potassium application were also noted to extend
the canopy life thereby prolonging the duration of tuber bulking (Harris, 1978; Peter and
Hruska, 1988).

11
2.5. Effect of N, P and K on Potato Tuber Yields

Several factors limiting crop yields have been reported by many workers. According to Downs
and Hellmers (1975) and Tisdale et al. (1995), factors limiting crop yield (both in quantity as
well as quality) can be categorized into four major headings: the soil upon which the crop
grows, the genetic make-up of the crop, the climatic conditions during the growth of the crop,
and the management practices, mainly soil fertility. Maintaining adequate levels of soil
fertility has been recognized as one of the management practices that affect growth,
development and yield of plants (Tisdale et al., 1995).

Potato plants have been reported to have high requirement for mineral nutrition (Harris, 1978).
Depending on conditions, a normal potato crop has been found to remove 90 to 190 kg
nitrogen and 30 to 50 kg P
2
O
5
ha
-1
(Sikka, 1982). The potassium requirement of the potato
crop has been found to be much higher than that of other irrigated crops (Lin, 1966; Winston,
1966; Westermann et al., 1994a). According to Panique et al. (1997), a 13.6 Mg crop of potato
removes 113 kg of K
2
O for vines and tubers, with about 66% removed by tubers and 34% by
vines.

The yield increment of potato due to nitrogen fertilizers was found to be positive up to a
certain level beyond which yield reduction was observed (Wilcox and Hoff, 1970; Robert and
Cheng, 1988; Westermann et al., 1994a). Nitrogen fertilizer is reported to affect yield by its
effect on the number of tubers produced per plant, the average weight of tubers, the
establishment and leaf area duration (Wilcox and Hoff, 1970).

Timm and Flockner (1966) observed optimum tuber yield when nitrogen fertilizer was applied
at the rate of 204 kg ha
-1
. They also noted a reduction in tuber yield when nitrogen was applied
above the aforementioned rates. The yield reduction due to excess rates of nitrogen may be
explained by the fact that high amount of this nutrient stimulates shoot growth more than tuber
growth which may result in deterioration of canopy structure and physiological conditions
(Sommerfeld and Knutson, 1968). Berga et al. (1994a) observed significant and consistent
yield increment with an increase in the level of nitrogen. Kleinkopf et al. (1981) studied the

12
response of six potato cultivars to different levels of nitrogen fertilizer and observed
significant yield difference among the different cultivars.

Potato tuber yield is also known to be influenced by phosphorus fertilizers through its effect
on the number of tubers produced, the size of the tubers and the time at which maximum yield
is obtained (Sommerfeld and Knutson, 1965; Sharma and Arora, 1987). They showed that
yield response to increasing levels of phosphorus fertilizer was generally positive up to a
particular level, above which the response became negative. According to these investigators,
excess use of phosphorus fertilizers is usually associated with reduced tuber weight by
hastening the maturation period and reducing tuber size. Fertilizer recommendations for
potassium in potato production are high. The amount of potassium needed by the potato crop
is observed to be directly proportional to tuber yield (Panique et al., 1997).

Many investigators reported that on potassium responsive soils there was a significant tuber
yield response to potassium fertilization (Downs and Hellmers, 1975; McDole et. al., 1978;
Sharma and Arora, 1987; Westermann et al., 1994a). Conversely, other workers found no
response to K fertilization (Berga et al., 1994). This is usually true on soils testing high for
available potassium.

According to Hanley et al. (1965), there seemed to exist a positive interaction between
nitrogen and phosphorus on potato tuber yield. They observed significantly positive
interaction between nitrogen and phosphorus indicating these fertilizers increase yield when
applied together than singly. Similarly, Westermann et al. (1994a) reported that when
potassium was applied with nitrogen, yields were higher than with nitrogen alone, indicating a
positive interaction between nitrogen and potassium. They observed that yields from applying
112 kg nitrogen per hectare were among the highest when combined with either 112 or 448 kg
potassium per hectare. Maier et al. (1994a) reported a significant interaction between nitrogen,
phosphorus and potassium on tuber yield and tuber chemical composition for cultivar
Kennebec. According to Westermann et al. (1994a) a three-way interaction involving nitrogen
and potassium rate and source was observed in potato at low available soil nitrogen.

13
Similarly, Maier et al. (1994a) noted a significant N x K and P x K interaction on potato tuber
yields in some sites, while there was no interaction in other sites.

2.6. Effect of N, P, and K on Specific Gravity of Potato Tubers

According to Lujan and Smith (1964), specific gravity has been found to be accurate index of
mealiness in potatoes. It is useful in predicting suitability of potatoes for cooking, canning or
dehydrating in addition to its use to predict the yield of potato chips. Many studies conducted
on the texture of cooked potato tubers have shown the relationship, which exists between
texture and specific gravity of row tubers. Tubers with high specific gravity were noted to
have high starch contents and they tend to be mealy in texture and to slough when cooked
(Nelson and Shaw, 1976).

Timm and Flockner (1966) reported a reduced specific gravity of tubers when nitrogen level
was increased above 136 kg ha
-1
. Kleikopf et al. (1981) found the specific gravity of tubers
decreased with increasing rates of nitrogen. Contrary to this Robert and Cheng (1988) noted
non-significant difference in specific gravity of tubers due to nitrogen treatment.

Westermann et al. (1994a) reported that the effect of potassium on specific gravity depended
on the potassium source. They showed that potassium at 224 kg ha
-1
as potassium chloride
lowered specific gravity while potassium sulfate did not. Similarly McDole et al. (1978)
observed that potassium chloride applications above recommended rate decreased specific
gravity more than potassium sulfate rates. Contrary to these findings Chapman et al., (1992)
found increases in specific gravity due to optimum potassium fertilization (KCl) rate. There is
considerable evidence, however, that potassium fertilization reduces specific gravity if applied
in excess rates needed for maturity (McDole et al., 1978; Locascio et al., 1992). Maier et al.
(1994a) reported a significant positive interaction between nitrogen, phosphorus and
potassium on the specific gravity for the cultivar Kennebec. Westermann et al. (1994a)
observed a three-way interaction involving nitrogen and potassium rate and source on potato
specific gravity, and showed that without nitrogen KCl reduced specific gravity, while K
2
SO
4
did not. Similarly Maier et al. (1994a) showed that without phosphorus increasing the

14
potassium rate from 0 to 480 kg K ha
-1
did not significantly affect specific gravity; in contrast
at 100 kg P ha
-1
specific gravity increased from 1.078 to 1.086. In a 12 year experiment Black
and White (1973) observed significant N x K interactions on percentage starch of potato
tubers.

These relationships show the significant effects that interactions between nutrients can have on
specific gravity and therefore on the recommendations that may come from fertilizer
experiments (Maier et al., 1994a).

Conflicting results have been reported regarding the effect of phosphorus on the specific
gravity of potato tubers. Zandstra et al. (1969) and Dubetz (1975) reported a reduction in
specific gravity as the rate of phosphorus fertilizer increased. However, Human (1961)
observed increased specific gravity with increased phosphorus application. As opposed to the
above findings, Lujan and Smith (1964) reported non-significant effect of phosphorus on the
specific gravity of tubers.

2.7. Effect of N, P, and K on Dry Matter Content of tubers

It is often necessary to know the dry matter content of potato tubers since this largely governs
the weight of processed products, which can be obtained from a given weight of raw tubers. It
is also one of the determinants of tuber quality, both for processing as well as cooking. High
dry matter has been reported to be desirable because of less sugar content and water
accumulation (Nelson and Shaw, 1976). Painter and Augustine (1976) reported a reduced
percent dry matter of potato tubers as nitrogen rates increased. Similar findings were reported
by Wilcox and Hoff (1970). This might be because high rates of nitrogen delay tuber initiation
and maturity, as a result tubers tend to be harvested immature with low dry matter percentages.
Similarly, Maier et al. (1994a) found reductions in dry matter content from 20.8 to 18.8 per
cent, when nitrogen and pot assium fertilization increased. They attributed the decrease in dry
matter to the greater efficiency of the plant in concentrating more dry matter in tubers when
there is nutrient deficiency, and therefore, less efficient water accumulation. Contrary to this,
Patricia and Bansal (1999) reported that nitrogen and potassium application had no effect on

15
tuber dry matter and specific gravity of potato tubers. Regarding phosphorus Sparrow et al.
(1992) reported non-significant difference in dry matter contents due to increased phosphorus
application.

2.8. Potato Tuber Size Categories

Tuber size is reported to be an important aspect of potato production (Mass, 1963; Gray and
Hughes, 1978). The production of potato tuber of a requisite size may be of much economic
value both for seed and human consumption. The market demand for shapes and sizes of
tubers varies. The size of tubers required by consumers depends upon the ease of handling for
household purposes and also upon the acceptable level of peeling loss (Gray and Hughes,
1978).

The application of mineral nutrients has been found to affect the size of potato tubers by
affecting the plant establishment, number of tubers produced, growth rate of tubers and
duration of bulking (Harrison, 1982; Sommerfeld and Knut son, 1965; Kleinkopf et al., 1981;
Sharma and Arora, 1987).

Nitrogen and potassium application were been frequently reported to increase the proportion
of medium and large sized tubers (Reddy and Rao, 1968; Sharma and Arora, 1987). Sharma
and Arora (1987) observed decreased number of small (less than 25 g), and increased number
of medium (25-75 g) and large (above 75 g) grade tubers with an increase in the level of
nitrogen from 0 to 250 kg ha
-1
. According to Hanley et al. (1965), an increase in potassium
application increased the yield and proportion of large tubers. They reported that the mean
number of tubers per square meter decreased in the small and increased in the medium and
large grade when applied potassium was increased from 0 to 200 kg ha
-1
. Herlihy and Carroll
(1969) also showed that the increase in the total yield of tubers was brought about by an
increase in the number of tubers in the medium and large grades at the expense of tubers in the
small grade up to a level of 150 kg K
2
O ha
-1
.


16
Several researchers have indicated that phosphorus also affects the size categories of potato
tubers (Birch et al., 1967; Hanley et al., 1965; Sharma and Arora, 1987). Sharma and Arora
(1987) observed an increase in medium (25-75 g) and small (less than 25 g) grades and
decrease in large (above 75 g) with an increase in applied phosphorus. Excessively high rates
of phosphorus fertilizer resulted in reduced yields of U.S. Grade 1 tubers over 283 g, and
increased the yields of undersized potatoes (Sommerfeld and Knutson, 1965).

17
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1. Description of the Study Site

The experiment was conducted at Mekelle Research Center of the Tigray Agricultural
Research Institute, which is located at an elevation of 1970 meters above sea level. The
experimental site lies at 13
o
39
i
N latitude and 39
o
43
i
E longitude. The soil type is fine textured
Pellic Vertisol with a pH of 7.5. The average annual rainfall of the study area is 500 mm per
annuum which is essentially unimodal with about 80% of the precipitation falling in a two and
half months

period. The average daily temperature ranges from 9 28

o
C. Although the
temperature falls during the cool season, the radiation and wind speed remain at a relatively
high level, which result in high evapotranspiration. (Mekelle Research Center, 1994).

3.2. Field Experiment

3.2.1. Experimental Materials

Plant material

A standard potato variety Tolcha was used as planting material. The planting material was
obtained from Holleta Agricultural Research Center, where the variety had been developed
through selection.


18
Fertilizer treatments

Urea (46% N), Triple Super Phosphate, TSP (46% P
2
O
5
), and Potassium Chloride (KCl) (60%
K
2
O) were used as fertilizer sources for nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, respectively.
The fertilizer treatments consisted of four levels of nitrogen, four levels of phosphorus and two
levels of potassium. The levels were 0, 55, 110 and 165 kg N ha
-1
; 0, 13.2, 26.4, and 39.6 kg P
ha
-1
; and 0 and 93.5 kg K ha
-1
.

3.2.2. Experimental Design

The experimental plots were arranged in a split plot design with three replications. The
potassium fertilizer levels were assigned to the main plots and the nitrogen and phosphorus
factorial combinations to the sub-plots. The size of the main plots was 186 m
2
and sub-plots 9
m
2
. A distance of 1 meter was maintained between the main plots and within the sub-plot and
2 meters between replications. There were four rows in each plot each with 10 plants.

3.2.3. Cultural Practices

Land was prepared in accordance with a standard practice locally used. Medium size and well-
sprouted potato tubers were planted at a spacing of 75 cm between rows and 30 cm between
plants. Weeding, cultivation, and ridging were done at the appropriate time to facilitate root,
stolon and tuber growth. The crop was grown with supplementary irrigation.

3.2.4. Method and Time of Fertilizer Application

The entire rate of phosphorus and potassium and the half rate of the nitrogen fertilizers were
applied at the time of planting. The remaining half of the nitrogen was applied as two-side
dressing at 50% flowering stage (55 days after planting).

19
3.2.5. Soil Sampling

Soil samples were randomly taken from the experimental field to a depth of 0-30 cm using an
auger and ten composite soil samples prepared from the collected samples. Soil samples were
collected from each plot after harvest in the way similar to collecting them before planting.
The collected samples were air -dried and ground to pass through 2 mm sieve for chemical
analysis.

3.3. Data Collection
3.3.1. Data collected

Days to emergence: recorded when 50% of the plants in each plot sprouted and emerged.
Days to flowering: noted when 50% of the plant population in each plot produced flowers.
Plant height (cm): measured by harvesting plants after about 6 weeks from pollination
(Sikka, 1982). At this stage, the vines were still green but had practically ceased growth.
Days to maturity: was recorded when the haulms (vines) of 50% of the plant population have
yellowed or in each plot they showed senescence
Shoot biomass (g): fresh biomass of the haulm was recorded; and dry weight was noted after
air drying the samples and further oven-drying at 65
0
C for 72 hours
Root biomass (g): fresh biomass of roots and withered stolons were recorded; and dry weight
was noted after air drying the samples and further oven-drying at 65
0
C for 72 hours
Stem number per plant: was recorded as average stem count of three hills per plot
Specific gravity of tubers: was determined using the weight in air-weight in water method
where Specific Gravity = weight in air/ (weight in air- weight in water.) (Kleinkopf et al.,
1987).
Weight and number of marketable tubers: recorded as weight and number of healthy and
marketable tubers.
Weight and number of unmarketable tubers: were recorded as weight and number of tubers
that are rotten, green, and undesized tubers.
Total tuber yield: the sum of marketable and unmarketable tuber yields

20
Harvest index: was determined as the ratio of fresh weight of tubers to the total biomass fresh
weight. This was taken at harvest.
Dry weight of tubers: Five fresh tubers were selected from each plot and weighed, then
sliced, and dried in oven at 65
0
C for 72 hours to a constant weight. Their dry weight was
recorded. Dry matter percentage was calculated from this value.
Size categories of tubers: Size categories of tubers (based on weight of tubers) were set after
undertaking a survey at the Mekelle market (small = <50 g; medium = 50 75 g; large =
>75 g).
Tuber nitrogen content: Three sample tubers were peeled and cut to small pieces. These
were first air dried and then oven dried at 65
0
C for 24 hours. Then, tuber N concentration
was determined using Kjeldal digestion method (Dewis and Freitas, 1970).
3.3.2. Soil analysis

Soil pH: was determined in 1:2.5 soil to water ratio using a glass electrode attached to a
digital pH meter (Page, 1982).
Organic matter: was recorded based on the oxidation of organic carbon with acid potassium
di-Chromate (K
2
C
2
O
7
-2
) medium using the Walkley and Black method as described by
Dewis and Freitas (1970).
Total nitrogen: was determined using Kjeldal method (Dewis and Freitas, 1970)
Mineral nitrogen: NH
4
+
-N and NO
3
-
-N were determined according to the methods of Pawels
et al. (1992) as described by Bernard et al. (1992).
Exchangeable potassium, calcium and magnesium: were extracted using 1N neutral
ammonium acetate at pH 7 (Pratt, 1965), and determined by atomic absorption
spectrophotometer
Available phosphorus: Determined according to the methods of Olsen and Dean (1965).

21
3.4. Data analysis

Analysis of Variance and correlation analyses were performed on computers using M- STAT
software (M-STAT, 1990). The correlation analysis was performed to determine simple
correlation coefficient between yield and yield components as affected by N, P, and K
application. Whenever the treatment differences were found significant, mean differences
were tested using Least Significant Difference (LSD) test procedure.



22
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The present study was aimed at understanding the response of potato yield and yield components
to different rates of N, P and K fertilization. A factorial combination of four rates of N and P
were tested using two levels of K fertilizer. The plots were arranged in split plot design with
three replications. The two K levels and the N and P treatment combinations were assigned to
the main plot and the sub-plot, respectively. Yield parameters, yield components, growth
parameters and some soil characteristics were recorded during the course of the study. The
results of the investigation are discussed as follows.

4.1. Effect of N, P and K on Tuber Yields
4.1.1. Total Tuber Yield

Application of N and P highly significantly increased total tuber yield (Table 1). Increasing the
level of applied N from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
, increased total tuber yield by 94.13%. Similarly,
increasing P application from 0 to 39.6 kg P

ha
-1
highly significantly increased total tuber yield
by 24.27%. This indicates the existence of a room for further increases in tuber yield through
application of more N and P fertilizers beyond 165 kg N ha
-1
and 39.6 kg P

ha
-1
, respectively.
Application of K did not result in statistically significant increase in total tuber yield, though
the absolute total tuber yield increased from 27.91 to 29.81 t ha
-1
.

The interaction effect of N with K on total tuber yield was found to be significant (Table 2).
The N x K interaction effect was significant above the rate of 55 kg N ha
-1
. The positive N x
K interaction expressed in total tuber yield might probably be attributed to a possible function
of K in increasing nitrogen use efficiency (Patricia and Bansal, 1999). The results of the
present study support the findings of Maier et al. (1994b) who noted a significant N x K
interaction on potato tuber yield. Similarly, Westermann et al. (1994a) reported that when K
was applied with N, yields were significantly higher than with N alone, indicating a positive
interaction between N and K.


23
The N x P interaction effect was also highly significant in increasing total tuber yield (Table
3). This may be due to the fact that these two important plant nutrients have complementary
physiological functions in plants. Moreover, they are the major constituents of physiologically
active organic compounds in the plant system, leading to a combined increase in tuber yield.

The highest total tuber yield (40.86 t ha
-1
) was recorded in the treatment combination of 93.5
kg K, 165 kg N and 39.6 kg P

ha
-1
. The lowest total tuber yield (14.93 t ha
-1
) on the other hand
was recorded in the treatment combination with no fertilizer application (control treatment).

The observed non-significant increase in total tuber yield due to the application of K fertilizer
seemed to prove that the soil of the present experimental site is rich in this nutrient. Various
investigators reported contradictory results with regard to the effect of K on tuber yield. Berga
et al. (1994a) observed the absence of a significant yield response to K fertilization.. On the
other hand, other workers (Downs and Hellmers., 1975; McDole et al., 1978; Westermann et
al., 1994a) reported a significant increment in yield due to K application only on K responsive
soils.

The positive effect of N and P applications on total tuber yield was further indicated by the
observed positive and highly significant correlation values between applied N and P, and total
tuber yield (r = 0.86
**
and r = 0.30
**
respectively) (Appendix Table 2).

24
4.1.2. Marketable Tuber Yield

Highly significant difference in marketable tuber yield was observed due to increase in the
application rates of N and P (Table 1). However, the main effect of K on marketable tuber
yield was observed to be non-significant. Similarly, the K x N, K x P, N x P and K x N x P
interaction effects were statistically non-significant, which might probably indicate that the
mineral nutrients were probably acting independently in affecting marketable tuber yield.

Increasing N application from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
highly significantly increased marketable
tuber yield from 11.84 to 25.67 t ha
-1
(Table 1). Similarly, increasing P application from 0 to
39.6 kg P

ha
-1
increased marketable tuber yield from 16.44 to 21.55 t ha
-1
. The yield increment
in marketable tubers due to N and P application was found to be consistently significant up to
the highest rate (165 kg N ha
-1
and 39.6 kg P

ha
-1
) showing that these mineral nutrients can
contribute much to obtain healthy and marketable size tubers. Similarly, the correlation values
between marketable tuber yield and applied N and P were positive and significant (r = 0.84
*
and r = 0.33
**
).

4.1.3. Unmarketable Tuber Yield

The unmarketable tuber yield was not significantly affected by the different N, P and K rates
(Table 1). All interaction effects were also statistically non-significant in affecting the yield of
unmarketable tubers. This finding suggests that unmarketable tuber yield might be controlled
more importantly by manipulating other factors such as disease incidence, harvesting practice,
etc. rather than mineral nutrition (Berga et al., 1994a).




25

Table 1. Potato tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N, P and K application

Characters considered

Source of
variation
TTY (t ha
-1
) MTY(t ha
-1
) UTY(t ha
-1
)
K (K kg ha
-1
) NS NS NS
0
93.5
28.17
29.81
18.59
18.73
9.57
10.97
N (N kg ha
-1
) ** ** NS
0
55
110
165
19.19
d
26.47
c
33.07
b
37.28
a
11.84
d
16.51
c
20.63
b
25.67
a
7.31
9.96
12.44
11.38
P (P kg ha
-1
) ** ** NS
0
13.2
26.4
39.6
25.76
d
27.92
c
30.27
b
32. 00
a
16.44
d
17.11
c
19.55
b
21.55
a
9.32
10.82
10.72
10.65
Means followed by the same letter within a column are not significantly different at 5% level of significance.
**,

* = indicate significant difference at 5% and 1% level of significance respectively. NS= non-significant TTY=
total tuber yield; MTY= marketable tuber yield; UTY= unmarketable tuber yield. LSD
(0.05)
= 1.22 t ha
-1
to
compare N and P main effects on total tuber yield. LSD
(0.05)
= 1.58 t ha
-1
to compare N and P main effects on
marketable tuber yield.


26
Table 2. Total tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x K and P x K interaction

TTY TTY
K (K

kg ha
-1
) K (K

kg ha
-1
)
N
(N kg ha
-1
)
0 93.5

D/f
P (P kg
ha
-1
)
0 93.5

D/f
0 25.03
d
26.48
d
1.45
NS
0 18.73 19.56 0.83
NS
55 27.50
c
28.34
c
0.84
NS
13.2 27.26 28.48 1.22
NS
110 29.27
b
31.28
b
2.01
*
26.4 32.52 33.61 1.09
NS
165 30.88
a
33.13
a
2.25
*
39.6 36.96 37.58 0.62
NS
N x K interaction* P x K interaction
NS

Means followed by the same letter within the same column are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance. LSD
(0.05)
= 1. 74 t ha
-1
to compare N x K interaction. *

= indicates significant difference at 5%
level of significance. NS = non- significant. TTY= total tuber yield. D/f = difference

Table 3. Total tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x P interaction

P (P kg ha
-1
) N
(N kg ha
-1
)
0 13.2 26.4 39.6 Mean
0 14.93
i
17.39
h
20.52
g
23.75
f
19.19
d
55 23.21
f
25.45
ef
27.49
de
29.70
cd
26.46
c
110 30.71
c
34.26
b
33.59
b
33.71
b
33.07
b
165 34.17
b
34.58
b
39.49
a
40.85
a
37.27
a
Mean 25.75
d
27.92
c
30.27
b
32.00
a

N x P interaction*

Means followed by the same letter within a column or row are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance. LSD
(0.05)
= 2.45 t ha
-1
to compare N x P interaction. *= indicates significant difference at 5% level
of significance.






27
According to Millard and Marshall (1986) the increase in tuber yield as a result of N
fertilization could be attributed to increased radiation interception during the first part of the
season, and lower rates of decline in photosynthetic efficiency of the canopy during the later
part. The same phenomenon may have contributed to the increase in tuber yield due to N
fertilization in this study. An increase in tuber yield by the addition of N fertilizer could also
be achieved by the effect on leaf area duration, more photosynthate production and its partition
to the tubers. Although no direct measurements were taken with respect to the amount of
radiation and leaf area duration, the results from this study seemed to indicate that both of
these could have contributed to the observed yield increment in response to N fertilization.

Though P had a positive effect on tuber yield, the percentage of yield increment due to P was
smaller than the yield increment due to N. This could probably be explained due to the fact
that P was earlier reported to lead to faster closure of canopy and shorten the growing period
(Sommerfeld and Knutson, 1965). The yield response to P application was lower than the
response to N per haps due to the fact that part of the applied P would not be available to the
plants, rather it is fixed by the soil, thereby first filling the exchange sites.


28
4.2. Major Yield Components in Potato
4.2.1. Tuber Number

The main effects of N, P and K on total, marketable and unmarketable tuber numbers per hill
are shown in Table 4. Highly significant differences in total tuber number were observed due
to the increased application of N and P. Increasing the application of Nincreased highly
significantly total tuber number per hill from 8.44 to 9.84 (Table 4). Similarly, increasing the
level of applied P highly significantly increased total tuber number per hill (Table 4). The
increase in total tuber number per hill due to applied P was statistically significant only up to
the rate of 26.4 kg P kg ha
-1
, beyond which non-significant difference was observed. The mean
total tuber number per hill for K averaged over all treatment combinations and replications
showed that total tuber number tended to increase due to potassium application, even though
the increment was statistically non-significant.

The N x K interaction effect was found to be significant for total tuber number (Table 5).
Nitrogen application at the rate of 0 and 110 kg N ha
-1
with K

produced a statistically
significant difference in total tuber number. The interaction effect between P and K in
affecting total tuber number was non-significant. Significant N x P interaction effect was
observed for total tuber number (Table 6). As shown in Table 6, the effect of N on total tuber
number was enhanced due to the presence of P. This may probably be due to the fact that
these two important plant nutrients have complementary metabolic and physiological
functions, thereby affecting the yield and yield components of the potato plant. The N x P x K
interaction effect was, however, found to be statistically non-significant. But, K fertilization
produced more number of tubers than the control treatment for most treatment combinations.

The observed interaction effect in some of the three factors and in all of the two sub-plot
treatments appeared to indicate that N, P and K were acting jointly in affecting the number of
tubers that could be set by the potato plants. Thus, to maximize the number of tubers that
could be set by the plant, it is important that due attention be given to the level of N and P
applied in general and the level of K used in certain circumstances.


29
As shown in Table 4, the main effects of N and P on marketable tuber number were observed
to be highly significant. However the main effect of K and all interaction effects were non-
significant.

Increasing the level of applied N from 0 to 165 N kg ha
-1
highly significantly increased

marketable tuber number (Table 4). In general, N treatment increased the marketable tuber
number per hill by 23% over the control. Similarly, increasing the application of P from 0 to
39.6 P kg ha
-1
increased

marketable tuber number by 24%.

The main effects of N, P and K on the number of unmarketable tubers per hill were non-
significant (Table 4). Similarly, all interaction effects were found to be statistically non-
significant. The observed non-significant and inconsistent effect of the three nutrients on
unmarketable tuber number might probably indicate the difficulties of manipulating this plant
parameter by the use of mineral nutrients.

The positive effects of N and P on tuber number was further indicated by the observed positive
and highly significant correlation values between total tube number per hill and applied N (r =
0.31
**
), and between total tuber number and P (r = 0.54
**
). Positive and highly significant
correlation values were also found between marketable tuber number and applied N (r =
0.31
**
) and P (r = 0.30
**
), and non-significant but positive correlation value (r =0.02) between
applied K and marketable tuber number per hill (Appendix Table 2).

The present finding is in agreement with those of Sommerfeld and Knutson (1965), Gunasena
and Harris (1969), Lynch and Rowberry (1997) and Sparrow et al. (1992) who reported a
significant tuber number increment in response to N application. However, others (Sharma and
Arora, 1987; De La Morena et al., 1994) observed the absence of strong relationship between
rates of N application and tuber number.

Similar to N effects, contradicting results have been reported due to the effects of K and P on
the tuber number. Sharma and Arora (1987) reported that tuber number and K application are
very rarely correlated. However, Herlihy and Carrol (1969) noted that K significantly affected

30
the number of tubers. The observed conflicting results may be explained by the fact that
season, inherent nutrient status of a soil and location could have exerted their effects in
determining the number of tubers that could be set by the potato plant. Despite these
conflicting results, however, Lynch and Rowberry (1997), Sharma and Arora (1987) and De
La Morena et al. (1994) confirmed that tuber number is not an important yield limiting
component while studying mineral nutrition. This could be due to the inverse association
between tuber number and average tuber weight (De La Morena et al., 1994). Thus, for
different tuber number, similar yield plateaus might be obtained through a corresponding
change in average tuber weight.


31
Table 4. Potato tuber number per hill as influenced by N, P and K application

Characters considered

Source of
variation
TTN (per hill) MTN (per hill) UTN (per hill)
K (K kg ha
-1
) NS NS NS
0
93.5
8.42
9.69
4.71
4.77
3.71
4.92
N (N kg ha
-1
) ** ** NS
0
55
110
165
8.44
b
8.59
b
9.36
ab
9.84
a
4.26
c
4.57
bc
4.88
ab
5.24
a
4.18
4.01
4.38
4.56
P (P kg ha
-1
) ** ** NS
0
13.2
26.4
39.6
7.89
b
8.38
b
9.58
a
10.38
a
4.29
b
4.60
b
4.76
ab
5.31
a
3.60
3.78
4.52
5.07
Means followed by the same letter within a column are not significantly different at 5% level of significance.
**

= indicates significant difference at 1% level of significance respectively. NS= non-significant TTN= total
tuber number; MTN= marketable tuber number; UTN= unmarketable tuber number. LSD
(0.05)
= 0.56 marketable
tuber number per hill to compare N and P main effects on MTN. LSD
(0.05)
= 1.01 total tuber number per hill to
compare N and P main effects on TTN.


32
Table 5. Total tuber number per hill as influenced by N x K and P x K interaction

TTN TTN
K (K

kg ha
-1
) K (K

kg ha
-1
)
N
(N kg ha
-1
)
0 93.5

D/f
P (P kg
ha
-1
)
0 93.5

D/f
0 7.69
d
9.19
abc
1.5
*
0 6.75

9.02

2.27
ns
55 8.29
cd
8.89
bcd
0.6
ns
13.2 8.02

8.74

0.72
ns
110 8.18
cd
10.54
a
2.36* 26.4 9.20

9.95

0.75
ns
165 9.52
abc
10.15
ab
0.63
ns
39.6 9.71

11.05

1.34
ns
N x K interaction*


P x K interaction
NS

Means followed by the same letter within the same column are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance. LSD
(0.05)
= 1.43 tubers per hill to compare N x K interaction effect on TTN. * = indicates
significant difference at 5% level of significance. TTN= total tuber number per hill. D/f = difference

Table 6. Total tuber number per hill as influenced by N x P interaction

P (P kg ha
-1
) N
(N kg ha
-1
)
0 13.2 26.4 39.6 Mean
0 8.03
fghi
7.77
hi
8.66
efgh
9.28
cdefg
8.44
b
55 6.74
i
8.15
fghi
9.10
cdefgh
10.37
abc
8.59
b
110 7.94
ghi
8.15
fghi
9.63
bcde
11.72
a
9.36
ab
165 8.83
defgh
9.45
cdef
10.92
ab
10.15
bcd
9.84
a
Mean 7.88
b
8.38
b
9.58
a
10.38
a

N x P interaction*

Means followed by the same letter within a column or row are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance. LSD
(0.05)
= 1.43 tubers per hill to compare N x P interaction. LSD
(0.05)
= 1.01 tubers per hill to
compare N and P main effects. *= Indicates significant difference at 5% level of significance.


33

4.2.2. Average Tuber Weight

The main effects of N, P and K on the average tuber weight of potato plants are shown on
Table 7. Application of N significantly increased average tuber weight. Average tuber weight
increased by 62% as N application increased from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
. Similarly applied P
highly increased average tuber weight except at the rate of 26.4 kg P ha
-1
. For instance
increasing the application of P from 0 to 39.6 kg P ha
-1
increased average tuber weight of the
potato plants by 70% over the control.

The interaction effect of the nutrients on average tuber weight was statistically non-significant
except for N x K (Table 7). There was no increment in mean tuber weight at the two levels of
K application at the same level of N, except for N rate of 165 kg N ha
-1
. Maximum (123.78 g)
and minimum (41.11 g) average tuber weights were observed in the treatment combinations of
93.5 kg K ha
-1
, 165 kg N ha
-1
, 39.6 kg P ha
-1
and the control treatment, respectively. According
to the present finding K alone did not increase average tuber weight, but it was effective when
applied in combination with N. The results of the present finding also indicated that
appropriate levels of N, P and K are required to improve average tuber weight of the potato
plant and hence to increase tuber yield.

Similar to the present finding, Sharma and Arora (1987) and De La Morena et al. (1994)
reported a significant increase in average tuber weight in response to N application. Similarly
average tuber weight was reported to increase in response to the application of K (Panique et
al., 1997), which was not evident in the current investigation.

The positive and highly significant correlation value between applied N and average tuber
weight (r = 0.69
**
), and yield and average tuber weight (r = 0.75
**
) indicated a closer
relationship between applied N and average tuber weight (Appendix Table 2 and Appendix
Table3), and also the yield advantage obtained due to N treatment could be attributed to its
effect on potato tuber weight increment. Similar Correlation results were also evident between
average tuber weight and P (Appendix Table2).

34

In the same manner, Harris (1978), Giardini. (1992) and De La Morena et al. (1994) reported
that yield increment due to mineral nutrition was attributed to its effect on average tuber
weight. The increase in average tuber weight of tubers with the supply of fertilizer nutrients
could be due to more luxuriant growth, more foliage and leaf area and higher supply of
photosynthates which helped in producing bigger tubers, hence resulting in higher yields
(Patricia and Bansal, 1999). In other words, the increased size and duration of the haulm
stemming from improved supply of nutrients favored the tuber weight (Peter and Hruska,
1988).

4.2.3. Stem Number

The main effects of N, P and K did not result in any significant difference in stem number
(Table 7). Similarly, all interaction effects except N x P (Table 8) were statistically non-
significant. Although stem density is one of the most important yield components in potato,
the results of the present study showed that the influences of N, P and K on stem number were
non-significant. This result is consistent with the findings of different authors (Lynch and
Rowberry, 1997; De La Morena et al., 1994). This could be due to the fact that stem number is
determined very early in the ontogeny of yield (Lynch and Tai, 1989) and as a result, at least
in this study, the fertilizer effects may not have occurred sufficiently early to influence such a
yield trait. This trait was not significantly influenced much by mineral nutrients, possibly
because stem number may be influence by other factors such as condition of seed tubers
(Allen, 1978), physiological age of the seed tuber (Iritani, 1968), variety (Lynch and Tai,
1989) and tuber size (Harris, 1978).



35
Table 7. Average tuber weight and stem number per hill as influenced by N, P and K
application

Characters considered

Source of
Variation
ATW (g) SN (per hill)
K (K kg ha
-1
) NS NS
0
93.5
66.40
67.42
3.86
3.97
N (N kg ha
-1
) ** NS
0
55
110
165
52.88
d
59.94
c
69.16
b
85.65
a
3.77
4.12
3.88
3.90
P (P kg ha
-1
) ** NS
0
13.2
26.4
39.6
50.73
c
62.11
bc
68.50
b
86.29
a
4.08
3.88
3.69
4.02
Means followed by the same letter within the same column are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance; LSD
(0.05)
= 6.44 g per hill to compare the main effects of N and P on average tuber weight; **=
indicates significant difference at 1% level of significance; NS = non- significant; ATW= average tuber weight in
grams; SN = stem number per hill.


36
Table 8. Average tuber weight (g) as influenced by N x K and P x K interaction

ATW ATW
K (K

kg ha
-1
) K (K

kg ha
-1
)
N
(N kg ha
-1
)
0 93.5

D/f
P (P kg
ha
-1
)
0 93.5

D/f
0 52.93
d
59.22
d
6.29
NS
0 51.10 50.36 -0.74
Ns
55 74.40
c
79.03
c
4.63
NS
13.2 60.38 63.84 3.46
NS
110 52.83
b
60.66
bc
7.83
NS
26.4 66.92 70.08 3.16
NS
165 63.92
b
92.26
a
28.34*

39.6 87.19 85.38 -1.81
NS
N x K interaction*


P x K interaction
NS

Means followed by the same letter within the same column are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance; LSD
(0.05)
= 9.10 g to compare N x K interaction; *= indicates significant difference at 5% level of
significance; NS = non- significant; ATW= average tuber weight in grams. D/f = difference


Table 9. Stem number per hill as influenced by N x P interaction

P (P kg ha
-1
) N
(N kg ha
-1
)
0 13.2 26.4 39.6 Mean
0 4.58
a
2.92
e
3.83
abcde
3.75
abcde
3.77

55 4.08
abcd
4.50
ab
3.83
abcde
4.08
abcd
4.13

110 3.25
de
4.17
abcd
3.50
cde
4.58
a
3.88

165 4.42
abc
3.92
abcd
3.58
bcde
3.67
abcde
3.90

Mean 4.08

3.88

3.69

4.02


N x P interaction*

Means followed by the same letter within a column or row are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance. LSD
(0.05)
= 0.93 stems per hill to compare N x P interaction. *= Indicates significant difference at
5% level of significance.


37
4.3. Potato Tuber Size categories

The main effects of N, P and K on yields of various tuber size categories are presented in
Table 9. Nitrogen highly significantly decreased the yield of small sized tubers (Table 10).
However, highly significant increment in the yield of medium and large sized tubers were
observed in response to N application. Increase in applied N from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
decreased
the yield of small sized tubers from 6.22 t ha
-1
to 5.33 t ha
-1
and it increased the yield of
medium and large sized tubers from 12.92 to 16.81 t ha
-1
and from 4.56 to 6.26 t ha
-1
,
respectively. The reduction in small sized tuber yield due to N treatment was significant up to
the rate of 110 kg N ha
-1
. At 165 kg N ha
-1
nitrogen highly significantly increased the yield of
small sized tubers. The increase in the medium and large sized tuber yield was significant only
at the rates of 110 kg N ha
-1
and 165 kg N ha
-1
. These results are in agreement with those of
Sharma and Arora (1987), who found a significant increase in the yield of medium and large
sized tubers due to N application. These workers observed a significant reduction in the yield
of small sized tubers with N application.

Contrary to the N effect, increase in P application highly significantly increased the yield of
small sized tubers (Table 10). Similarly, in contrast to the findings of different workers
(Herlihy, 1965; Sommerfeld and Knutson, 1968), who reported a significant decrease in the
yield of large sized tubers, P application in the present study tended to increase the yield of
large sized tubers.

The increase in the yield of small sized tubers, medium and large sized tubers due to applied K
were found to be non-significant (Table 10). This contrasts the results obtained by various
authors (Reddy and Rao, 1968; Sharma and Arora, 1987), who reported a significant increase
in the proportion of medium and large sized tubers due to K application. But, K seemed to
increase the yield of large sized tubers when combined with N fertilizer (Table 13).

Highly significant difference in small sized tuber yield was observed for N x P interaction
(Table 10). All other interaction effects were found to be statistically non-significant.


38
The reduction effect of N on the small sized tuber yield was decreased due to the presence of
P. This could be attributed to the counter (increasing) effect of P on the yield of small sized
tubers. Similarly, the increase in the small sized tuber yield due to P effect was reduced due to
the counter (reduction) effect of N.

The highest yield (9.24 t ha
-1
) in small sized tubers was recorded in the 93.5 kg K ha
-1
, 165 kg
N ha
-1
and 0 kg P ha
-1
treatment combination. In the case of medium sized tuber yield the
highest yield (24.30 t ha
-1
) was obtained in the treatment combination of 93.5 kg K ha
-1
, 165
kg N ha
-1
and 39.6 kg P ha
-1.

Significant and highly significant differences in the yield of large sized tubers were observed for
N x K (Table 13) and N x P (Table 14) interaction effects, respectively. In the K fertilized
treatments, N fertilization increased large sized tuber yield only at the level of 55 and 110 kg N
ha
-1
; non- significant difference in the yield of large sized tubers was observed at the rate of 165
kg N ha
-1
in the K fertilized plots. The increase in the yield of large sized tubers due to N x P
interaction effect was consistent at 165 kg N ha
-1
and 39.6 kg P ha
-1
for N and P, respectively.
The highest large sized tuber yield (6.85 t ha
-1
) was obtained for the 93.5 kg K ha
-1
, 165 kg N ha
-
1
and 39.6 kg P ha
-1
treatment combination.

The results of this investigation clearly indicated that the levels of N and P application largely
affected potato tuber size distribution. Applied K did not significantly affect the distribution of
tuber sizes, except in some of the interactions with N and P. Thus, based on market and
consumers demand, it is possible to produce either seed potato or ware potato of required size
through the selection of appropriate mineral nutrient to be applied.


39
Table 10. Potato tuber size categories (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N, P and K application

Characters considered

Source of
Variation
STY METY LTY
K (K kg ha
-1
) NS NS NS
0
93.5
5.05
6.03
14.87
15.10
5.01
5.56
N (N kg ha
-1
) ** ** **
0
55
110
165
6.22
a
5.82
a
4.77
b

5.33
ab
12.92
d
14.46
c
15.75
b
16.81
a
4.56
c
5.14
b
5.20
b
6.26
a
P (P kg ha
-1
) ** ** **
0
13.2
26.4
39.6
3.97
d
4.92
c
5.86
b
7.39
a
9.31
c
15.46
b
15.38
b
19.79
a
4.51
c
5.04
b
5.62
a
5.99
a
Means followed by the same letter within a column are not significantly different at 5% level of significance;
**,

*= indicate significant difference at 5% and 1% level of significance respectively; NS= non-significant STY=
yield of small sized tubers (t ha
-1
); METY= yield of medium sized tubers (t ha
-1
); LTY= yield of large sized
tubers (t ha
-1
); LSD
(0.05)
= 0.57 t ha
-1
to compare main effect of N and P on STY; LSD
(0.05)
= 1.04 t ha
1
to
compare N and P main effects on METY; LSD
(0.05)
= 0.51 t ha
1
to compare N and P main effects on LTY.




40
Table 11. Small sized potato tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x P interaction

P (P kg ha
-1
) N
(N kg ha
-1
)
0 13.2 26.4 39.6 Mean
0 4.77
efg
5.37
cdef
6.10
bcde
8.62
a
6.22
a
55 4.74
efg
5.27
def
6.14
bcde
7.14
abc
5.82
a
110 3.11
g
3.80
fg
5.58
bcde
6.60
bcd
4.77
b
165 3.24
g
5.23
def
5.63
bcde
7.22
ab
5.33
ab
Mean 3.97
d
4.92
c
5.86
b
7.39
a

N x P interaction**

Means followed by the same letter within a column or row are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance; LSD
(0.05)
= 1.14 t ha
-1
to compare N x P interaction; LSD
(0.05)
= 0.57 t ha
-1
to compare N and P
main effects; **= indicates significant difference at 1% level of significance; STY= yield of small sized tubers (t
ha
-1
).

41
Table 12. Medium sized potato tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x P interaction


P (P kg ha
-1
) N
(N kg ha
-1
)
0 13.2 26.4 39.6 Mean
0 6.14
j
14.92
efgh
14.32
fgh
16.28
cdef
12.92
c

55 8.47
i
16.09
def
14.76
fgh
18.54
bc
14.46
b

110 9.96
i
17.19
cde
15.78
defg
20.09
b
15.75
b

165 12.67
h
13.65
gh
16.64
cd
24.26
a
16.81
a

Mean 9.31
d
15.46
c
15.34
b
19.79
a

N x P interaction**

Means followed by the same letter within a column or row are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance; LSD
(0.05)
= 2.08 t ha
-1
to compare N x P interaction; LSD
(0.05)
= 1.04 t ha
-1
to compare N and P main
effects; **= indicates significant difference at 1% level of significance.

Table 13. Large sized tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x K and P x K interaction

LTY LTY
K (K

kg ha
-1
) K (K

kg ha
-1
) N
(N kg ha
-1
)
0 93.5

D/f
P (P kg
ha
-1
)
0 93.5

D/f
0 4.60
b
4.61
b
0.01
NS
0 4.02 4.99 0.97
NS
55 4.60
b
6.24
a
1.64* 13.2 5.53 5.54 0.01
NS
110 4.52
b
5.67
a
1.15* 26.4 5.40 5.83 0.43
NS
165 5.79
a
6.27
a
0.48
NS
39.6 6.10 5.88 -0.22
NS
N x K interaction*


P x K interaction
NS

Means followed by the same letter within the same a column are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance; LSD
(0.05)
= 0.71 t ha
-1
to compare N x K and P x K interaction; *= indicates significant difference at
5% level of significance; NS = non- significant; LTY = Large sized tuber yield. D/f = difference

42
Table 14. Large sized potato tuber yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x P interaction

P (P kg ha
-1
) N
(N kg ha
-1
)
0 13.2 26.4 39.6 Mean
0 4.18
f
4.53
def
5.37
cd
4.14
f
4.56
c
55 4.92
cdef
5.04
cdef
5.22
cde
5.39
cd
5.14
b
110 4.27
ef
4.86
cdef
5.15
cdef
6.50
b
5.20
b
165 4.63
def
5.71
bc
6.73
b
7.95
a
6.26
a
Mean 4.51
c
5.04
b
5.62
a
5.99
a

N x P interaction**

Means followed by the same letter within a column or row are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance; LSD
(0.05)
= 1.01t ha
-1
to compare N x P interaction; LSD
(0.05)
= 0.51 t ha
-1
to compare N and P main
effects; **= indicates significant difference at 1% level of significance; LTY = Large sized tuber yield.



43
4.4. Specific Gravity

The main effects of N, P and K on the specific gravity of potato tubers are shown in Table 15.
Application of nitrogen highly significantly reduced the specific gravity of potato tubers (Table
15). Increasing the application of N from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
reduced specific gravity from 1.076
to 1.069 (Table 15). These results are in agreement with those of Painter and Augustin (1976)
and Kleinkopf et al. (1981), where N application was reported to be associated with reduced
specific gravity of potato tubers.

The main effect of P on the specific gravity of tubers was found to be highly significant, though
the results were inconsistent (Table 15). The highest specific gravity due to applied P was
associated with the P rate of 26.4 kg P ha
-1
. In previous studies, conflicting conclusions were
reported with respect to the effect of applied P on the specific gravity of potato tubers. Human
(1961) noted an increase in specific gravity in response to an increase in applied P. Results by
Zandstra et al. (1969) and Dubetz (1975), however, showed the absence of strong relationship
between P application and specific gravity.

There was a significant decrease in the specific gravity due to the application of potassium.
Increase in the rate of applied K from 0 to 93.5 kg K

ha
-1
signifiicantly decreased the specific
gravity of tubers from 1.074 to 1.072. Similarly, Wetermann et al. (1994a) observed that K
applications above the recommended rate decreased specific gravity, whereas results of the
present study contrast with the findings of Chapman et al. (1992), who reported an increase in
specific gravity due to K application.

Contrary to the effect of P, the reduction in specific gravity due to N and K treatments is a
common phenomenon (Kleinkopf et al., 1981; Westermann et al., 1994a). Thus, when quality is
a requirement, special consideration should be given to the application nutrients, as specific
gravity is a good indicator of potato tuber quality.

The N x K, P x K and N x P x K interaction effects were found to be statistically non-significant.
However, the N x P interaction effect was highly significant (Table 16).


44
4.5. Dry Matter Content of Potato tubers

The main effects of N, P and K on dry matter percentage of potato tubers are shown on Table
15. Increasing the application of N from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
decreased the mean dry matter
percent of tubers from 19.482 to 17.707% (Table 15). In agreement with the present results
Painter and Augustin (1976) reported a significant reduction in percent dry matter content due to
an increase in the application rate of N. The depressive effect of applied N on tuber dry matter
also conforms to the observations of Kanzikwera et al. (2001), whereby tuber dry matter fell
with increased N application. This may be attributed to the fact that high rates of N stimulate top
growth more than tuber growth thereby delaying tuber formation and maturity. Hence, tubers
tend to be harvested immature with low dry matter percentages (Westermann et al., 1994b).

Increasing the applied P from 0 to 39.6 kg P ha
-1
decreased dry matter percentage of potato
tubers from 19.005 to 18.483% (Table 15). However, Sparrow et al. (1992) observed non-
significant reduction in percent dry matter of tubers due to increased P application.

Application of K did not produce statistically significant effect on percent dry matter of tubers.
Moreover, the interaction effects of K with N and P on percent dry matter of potato tubers were
found to be non-significant. Contrasting results were reported by different authors with regard to
the effect of K on percent dry matter of potato tubers In agreement with the present finding,
Patricia and Bansal (1999) reported that application of K had no effect on tuber dry matter and
specific gravity of potato tubers. However, Maier et al. (1994a) and Kanzikwera et al. (2001)
found reductions in dry matter content when nitrogen and potassium fertilization increased. The
decrease in percent dry matter could be attributed to the lower efficiency of the plant in
concentrating more dry matter in tubers when there is high K nutrient, because of higher water
accumulation Maier et al. (1994a). Contrary to these, Tawfik (2001) reported potato plants
fertilized with high K rate had significantly higher dry matter content than those of low ones.

45
4.6. Potato Plant Growth Parameters
4.6.1. Plant Height

Application of N and P highly significantly increased the height of potato plant. However, the
difference in mean plant height between the two K levels was not statistically significant (Table
15).

Increasing application of N from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
increased plant height from 48.19 cm to
61.88 cm. Similarly, increasing the rate of P application from 0 to 39.6 kg P

ha
-1
increased plant
height from 54.02 cm to 57.48 cm. However, the effect of P was significant only at the rate of
39.6 kg Pha
-1
, below which no significant difference in plant height was observed. Yohannes
(1994), working on enset, also observed a significant increment in the height of enset plants as
the rates of N and P applications were increased. The positive and highly significant correlation
value (r = 0.77
**
) between applied N and plant height further corroborates the present finding.
Similarly, a significant and positive correlation (r = 0.21
*
) was observed between applied P and
plant height (Appendix Table 2).

The positive and highly significant correlation value between plant height and total tuber yield (r
= 0.79
**
) might suggest the existence of positive association between these two parameters
(Appendix Table 3).

46
Table 15. Potato specific gravity, percent dry matter, harvest index and plant height as
influenced by N, P and K application

Characters considered Source of
Variation SG DM (%) HI PLH (cm)
K (K kg ha
-1
) ** NS NS NS
0
93.5
1.074
a
1.072
b
18.753
18.649
0.724
0.724
54.79
55.78
N (N kg ha
-1
) ** ** ** **
0
55
110
165
1.076
a
1.074
ab
1.072
ab
1.069
b
19.482
a
19.013
b
18.603
c
17.707
d
0.748
a
0.749

0.718
b
0.681
c
48.19
d
53.67
c
57.42
b
61.88
a
P (P kg ha
-1
) ** ** ** **
0
13.2
26.4
39.6
1.073
b
1.071
c
1.074
a
1.073
b
19.005
a
18.750
b
18.566
c
18.483
d
0.735
a
0.723
a
0.717
b
0.722
c
54.02
b
54.08
b

55.56
b
57.48
a
Means followed by the same letter within a column are not significantly different at 5% level of significance;

**,

*= indicate significant difference at 5% and 1% level of significance, respectively; NS= non-significant SG=
specific gravity; DM= dry matter (%); HI= harvest index; PLH = plant height (cm). LSD
0.05
= 0.0006, LSD
0.05
=
0.006, LSD
0.05
= 0.0018, LSD
0.05
= 1.860, to compare the main effects of N and P on SG, DM, HI and PLH;
LSD
0.05
= 0.001 to compare main effect of K on SG.



47
Table 16. Potato specific gravity as influenced by N x P interaction

P (P kg ha
-1
)
N
(N kg ha
-1
)
0 13.2 26.4 39.6 Mean
0 1.074
ba
1.074
ba
1.080
a
1.077
ab
1.076
a
55 1.075
ba
1.069
def
1.076
ba
1.075
ba
1.074
ab
110 1.073
bc
1.072
bcd
1.072
bcd
1.071
bcd
1.0720
ab
165 1.070
cde
1.070
cde
1.068
defg
1.069
def
1.069
b
Mean 1.073
b
1.071
c
1.074
a
1.073
b

N x P interaction**

Means followed by the same letter within a column or row are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance; LSD
(0.05)
= 0.0012 to compare N x P interaction. LSD
(0.05)
= 0.0006 to compare N and P main
effects. **= Indicates significant difference at 1% level of significance.



48
4.6.2. Days to Flowering and Days to Maturity

The main effects of N, P and K on days to flowering and days to maturity are shown in Table
17. The main effects of N and P on days to flowering were highly significant, while all the
interaction effects were statistically non-significant. Contrary to the effects of N and P, there
was no significant difference in days to 50 % flowering between the two K levels.

Increasing N application from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
prolonged the time required by the potato
plants to attain 50% flowering from 54.25 to 60.25 days (Table 17). Similar to the effect of
increased N application, increasing P application from 0 to 39.6 kg P

ha
-1
prolonged the days
to 50% flowering stage from 56.5 to 58 days (Table 17).

Regarding the time required by the potato crop to reach physiological maturity, nitrogen
treatment highly significantly prolonged the time required by the potato crop to reach
physiological maturity from 106.38 to 110.92 days (Table 17). The increased yield obtained
due to N fertilizer may be attributed to the prolonged canopy life of the potato plant in
response to N treatment, which enabled the potato plant to maintain physiological activity for
an extended period, thereby continuing photosynthesis.

On the other hand, P application highly significantly reduced the days to maturity. The
reduction in days to maturity due to applied P was significant only at the level of 26.4 kg P

ha
-1

(Table 17). There was a significant difference in days to maturity between the two K levels.
The delay in maturity (from 107.29 to 111.38 days), due to K application did not seem to
contribute much to total tuber yield. However, the higher K level produced more tuber yield
(29.81 t ha
-1
), and the yield increment was statistically non-significant.

The observations of the current investigation support previous studies on the effect of N and P
on days to maturity (Wilcox, 1970; Kleinkopf et al., 1987) where N and P nutrients were
respectively reported to be associated with delaying and shortening maturity. In agreement
with the findings of the present investigation, K application had been found to prolong the leaf
area duration and, thus the days required to reach physiological maturity (Harris, 1978).

49
4.6.3. Plant Biomass Yield

The main effects of N, P and K on the underground and aboveground dry matter yield are
shown on Table 17. The main effects of N and P on underground and aboveground dry matter
yield were highly significant. Increasing the application of N from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
highly
significant

increased the underground dry matter yield (0.19 to 0.31 t ha
-1
). Application of P
increased the underground dry matter yield by 23% over the control (Table 17). Although the
difference in underground dry matter yield between the K levels was statistically non-
significant, a slight increment (from 0.24 to 0.25 t ha
-1
) in underground dry matter yield was
recorded due to applied K. Similarly, the main effect of K on the aboveground dry matter yield
was non-significant (Table 17).

Regarding the interaction effect of the three nutrients, only the N x P interaction was found to
be significant in increasing the underground dry matter yield (Table 18). The effect of N on
the underground dry matter yield appeared to improve due to the presence of P (the same
holds for P).

The main effects of N and P on the aboveground dry matter yield were highly significant
(Table 17). In general, N and P treatment increased the aboveground dry matter yield from
1.26 to 2.90 t ha
-1
and from 1.82 to 2.20 t ha
-1
, respectively.

The results obtained in this study support the findings of Millard and Marshall (1986) where a
significant increment in canopy dry matter yield of potato was reported as N application
increased. Similarly Yohannes (1994) reported a significant increase in dry matter yield of
ensete as the rates of N and P increased. The observed positive and highly significant
correlation values between aboveground dry matter yield and total tuber yield (r = 0.88
**
) and,
above ground dry matter yield and marketable tuber yield (r = 0.88
**
) indicated the existence
of close association among these parameters (Appendix Table 2). Similar trends were
observed for underground dry matter yield.


50
These results appeared to support the general view that yield is a function of the amount of
carbon assimilates produced (Millard and Marshall, 1986). The concomitant increment in yield
with the increase in dry matter yield of a plant may be explained by the fact that as more dry
matter is produced by the plant more assimilates would be partitioned to harvestable parts,
hence increasing yield.


51
4.6.4. Harvest Index

The main effects of N and P were highly significant. However, the main effect of applied K on
harvest index was found to be non-significant (Table 15).

Increasing the application of N from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
decreased harvest index from 0.75 to
0.68. Similarly, application of P highly significantly reduced harvest index from 0.74 to 0.72.
The reduction in harvest index due to N and P did not appear to be associated with a decrease
in total tuber yield. This is because the total biomass increased more than the harvestable
portion in response to the application of N and P. Therefore, the yield advantage obtained
through the use of N and P fertilizers might not be attributed to its effect on increment of
harvest index; rather a parallel increase in both harvestable and non-harvestable parts was
apparent. In general although harvest index is commonly used as a key plant parameter it may
not necessarily correlate with high yield (Gawronska et al., 1984). This is possible where the
application of mineral nutrients enables a potato crop to exhibit a high rate of assimilate
production (high total biomass) and maintain active growth later in the season (Gawronska et
al., 1984).


52
Table 17. Days to flowering, days to maturity, above ground dry matter yield,
underground dry matter yield and tuber nitrogen concentration as influenced by N, P and
K application

Characters considered Source of
Variation DTF (Days) DTM (Days) AGDM
(t ha
-1
)
UGDM
(t ha
-1
)
TNC
K (K kg ha
-1
) NS ** NS NS NS
0
93.5
56.88
57.56
107.29
b
111.38
a

1.99
2.04
0.24
0.25
0.52
0.56
N (N kg ha
-1
) ** ** ** ** **
0
55
110
165
54.25
d
56.00
c
58.38
b
60.25
a
106.38
c

111.12
a

108.92
b

110.92
a

1.26
d
1.62
c
2.27
b
2.90
a
0.19
d

0.24
c

0.26
b

0.31
a

0.43
d
0.50
c
0.58
b
0.64
a
P (P kg ha
-1
) ** ** ** ** **
0
13.2
26.4
39.6
56.50
c
56.96
bc

57.42
b

58.00
a
109.38
a

109.46
a

108.38
b

110.13
a

1.82
d
1.97
c
2.06
b
2.20
a
0.22
c
0.24
b
0.25
b
0.27
a
0.51
b
0.53
b
0.54
a
0.56
a
Means followed by the same letter within a column are not significantly different at 5% level of significance;
**
,
*
= indicate significant difference at 5% and 1% level of significance, respectively; NS= non-significant DTF=
days to 50% flowering; DTM= days to 50% maturity; AGDM= above ground dry matter yield (g per hill) LSD
0.05

= 0.072 t ha
-1
; UGDM = underground dry matter yield; LSD
0.05
= 0.018 t ha
-1
to compare main effects of N and P
on UGDM; TNC = tuber nitrogen concentration; LSD
0.05
= 0.018 to compare main effects of N and P on TNC.



53
Table 18. Underground dry matter yield (t ha
-1
) as influenced by N x P interaction

P (P kg ha
-1
) N
(N kg ha
-1
)
0 13.2 26.4 39.6 Mean
0 0.13
g
0.19
f
0.20
f
0.22
ef
0.19
d
55 0.22
ef
0.24
de
0.24
de
0.25
de
0.24
c
110 0.25
cde
0.25
cde
0.26
bcd
0.27
bcd
0.26
b
165 0.28
bcd
0.29
bc
0.29
b
0.38
a
0.31
a
Mean 0.22
d
0.24
c
0.25
b
0.28
a

N x P interaction**

Means followed by the same letter within a column or row are not significantly different at 5% level of
significance; LSD
(0.05)
= 0.036 t ha
-1
to compare N x P interaction; LSD
(0.05
) = 0.018 t ha
-1
to compare N and P
main effects on UGDM; **= indicates significant difference at 1% level of significance.


54

4.7. Potato Tuber Nitrogen Content

The effects of applied N, P and K on tuber N concentration are shown in Table 15. Increasing
the application of N from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
increased the tuber N concentration from 0.43 to
0.64 (%). Increase in applied P also highly significantly increased the N concentration of
potato tubers from 0.51 to 0.57 (%). In agreement with the results of the present study
different workers (Widdowson and Penny, 1975; Millard and Marshall, 1986; Sharma and
Arora, 1987) have observed a rise in the N concentration of potato tubers as the N and P
applications were increased.

The difference in tuber N concentration between the two K levels and all interaction effects
were also statistically non-significant. Similar to the findings of the present investigation
Kanzikwera et al. (2001) reported that K application as KCl had no significant effect on tuber
N concentration.


4.8. Selected Post-Harvest Soil Chemical Properties

Analysis of the post harvest soil samples collected at the depth of 0 30 cm revealed that the
applied N highly significantly decreased soil pH (Table 19). However the decline in soil pH
due to applied N was significant only up to the rate of 55 kg N ha
-1
. The main effects of P and
K and all interactions among the three nutrients were statistically non-significant in affecting
soil pH. In agreement with the results of the current study, research conducted elsewhere had
also revealed a soil acidifying effect of urea, even at relatively low rates of N on vertisols
(Amsal and Tanner, 2001).

With respect to mineral N the levels of soil NH
4
-N were highly significantly increased due to
the application of N and decreased due to the application of P. The applied N raised the level
of soil NH
4
-N from 0.072 to 0.417 mg kg
-1
soil (Table 19). Contrary to the effect of N, P
lowered the level of soil NH
4
-N from 0.27 to 0.21 mg kg
-1
soil. The effect of K on soil NH
4
-N
was found to be statistically non-significant

55

The effect of applied K on soil NO
3
-N was unclear. However, similar to that of NH
4
-N,
applied P highly significantly reduced the level of post-harvest NO
3
-N (from 0.282 to 0.18 mg
kg
-1
soil).

Increasing the application of N from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
increased the level of post-harvest soil
NO
3
-N from 0.048 to 0.379 mg kg
-1
soil.

The difference in soil available P between the two levels of K was statistically non-significant.
However, applied N and P highly significantly affected soil available P (Table 19). Increasing
the application of N from 0 to 165 kg N ha
-1
decreased soil available P from 1.574 to 1.046 mg
kg
-1
soil. Similarly, Yohannes (1994) noted a reduction in soil P as the rates of N application
were increased. This may be attributed to the fact that increase in applied N might have
improved the P nutrition of the potato plants as these two nutrients have interrelated metabolic
functions.

An increase in applied P from 0 to 39.6 kg P ha
-1
highly significantly increased the level of soil
available P from 1.224 to 1.422 mg kg
-1
soil (Table 19). The observed increment in soil
available P in response to the increase in applied P could be explained by the fact that some of
the applied P in the soil has not been utilized by the plant and hence remained in the soil.

The effects of application of N, P and K on the level of soil organic matter have been found to be
inconsistent (Table 19). However, the highest post harvest soil organic matter was recorded in
the control treatment. Previous studies on wheat in Ethiopia reported increases in soil organic
matter levels due to fertilizer N application (Amsal and Tanner, 2001).

56
Table 19. Selected Post-Harvest Soil Chemical Properties as Influenced by N, P and K
Application

Characters considered Source of
Variation Soil pH NH
4
-N (mg
kg
-1
soil)
N0
3
-N (mg
kg
-1
soil)
SAP
(mg kg ha
-1)
SOM (%)
K (K kg ha
-1
) NS ** NS NS NS
0
93.5
7.835
7.835
0.190
0.226
0.178
0.223
1.280
1.322
0.663
0.802
N (N kg ha
-1
) ** ** ** ** **
0
55
110
165
7.883
a
7.848
b
7.821
ab
7.787
ab
0.072
c
0.094
c
0.249
b
0.417
a
0.048
d
0.123
c
0.252
b
0.379
a
1.574
a
1.382
b
1.200
c
1.046
d
0.815
b
0.882
a
0.662
c
0.569
d
P (P kg ha
-1
) NS ** ** ** **
0
13.2
26.4
39.6
7.813
7.864
7.841
7.821
0.274
a
0.155
c
0.193
b
0.211
b
0.282
a
0.149
d
0.191
b
0.180
c
1.224
d
1.266
c
1.290
b
1.422
a
0.939
a
0.638
b
0.700
b
0.652
b
Means followed by the same letter within a column are not significantly different at 5% level of significance;

**,

*= indicate significant difference at 5% and 1% level of significance respectively; NS= non-significant pH=
soil pH; SAP= soil available P (mg kg
-1
soil); SOM = soil organic matter (%).








57
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Documentation of information on fertility status of soils and crop response to different soil
fertility amendments is one of the most important factors for profitable crop production. To
this effect a study was conducted to investigate the effect of N, P and K application on the
yield and yield components of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). The study was carried out at
Mekelle Agricultural Research Center, North Ethiopia, which lies at an elevation of 1970
meters above sea level. A split plot design was employed with three replications, which
constituted two levels of K (0 and 93.5 kg K ha
-1
) as main plot and factorial combinations of
four levels of N (0, 55, 110 and 165 kg N ha
-1
) and four levels of P (0, 13.2, 26.4 and 39.4 kg
P ha
-1
) as sub-plot treatments.

Generally, it was observed that the main effects of applied N and P and their interaction effects
were found to be highly significant on average tuber weight (g), total and marketable tuber
yields (t ha
-1
) and tuber numbers (per hill). Stem number per hill and unmarketable tuber
weight (t ha
-1
) were, however, affected neither by N nor P. It was also noted in this study that,
among the yield components, increases in both tuber number and average tuber weight were
responsible for the observed yield advantage.

On the other hand, the application of K did not produce substantial effect on most of the
important parameters such as average tuber weight (g), total and marketable tuber yield (t ha
-1
)
and tuber number (per hill). However, the interaction of K with the other two nutrients (N and
P) resulted in significant differences in some of the parameters such as total tuber yield (N x
K), total tuber number per hill (N x K), average tuber weight (N x K), the yield of small sized
tubers (P x K) and the yield of large sized tubers (N x K).

The distribution of tuber size categories was significantly affected due to the application of N
and P fertilizers. As the rates of N increased the yields of medium sized and large sized tubers
(t ha
-1
) were increased, and the yield of small sized tubers (t ha
-1
) decreased. Contrary to the
effect of N, applied P increased the yield of small sized tubers (t ha
-1
).


58
The application of N, P and K were found responsible for the significant reduction in specific
gravity and dry matter content of potato tubers. Increases in applied N and P affected both
growth parameters significantly. Applied K did not, however, have a marked influence on
most of the potato growth parameters.

Results from the correlation analysis showed that N and P associated significantly positively
with all of the yield and yield components of potato. The observed non-significant correlation of
K and total tuber yield is not a common phenomenon in other areas, because most studies
showed significant and positive correlation between yield and applied K.

Although significant (due to N and P) and non-significant (due to K) responses in yield were
observed, it is too early to reach a conclusive recommendation since the experiment was
conducted only in one location for one season. Hence, studies involving more levels of K
under various levels of soil fertility should be conducted. Moreover, studies on the effect of
different fertilizer sources of K should be conducted, as the alkalinity/acidity of soils is
important in determining the effect of K.

59
6. REFERENCES

Allen, E.J. 1978. Plant density. In: The potato Crop: The Scientific Basis for Improvement
(P.M. Harris, Ed.). pp. 279-324
Allen, E.J. 1972. The effect of row width on the yield of three potato varieties. Journal of
Agricultural Sciences, Cambridge. 79: 315-321.
Amsal Tarekegne and D. Tanner. 2001. Effects of fertilization on N and P uptake, recovery and
use efficiency of bread wheat grown on two soil types in Central Ethiopia. Ethiopian
Journal of Natural Resources. 3:219-244.
Anderson, G.D. 1973. Potassium response of various crops in East Africa. In: Potassium in
Tropical Crops and Soils. pp. 413 435.
Aqcuaye, T.M. A.J. Maclean, and H.M. Rie. 1967. Potential and capacity of potassium in some
representative soils of Ghana. Soil Science. 103: 79 - 89
Berga Lemaga, Gebremedhin W/Georgis, Terrisa Jalleta and Bereke-Tsehai Tuku. 1994a.
Potato Agronomy Research. In: Edward Herath and Lemma Dessalegn (Eds.).
Proceedings of the Second National Horticultural Workshop of Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, 1-
3 December 1992. Institute of Agricultural Research and Food and Agriculture
Organization, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Berga Lemaga, Gebremedhin W/Georgis, Terrisa Jalleta and Bereke-Tsehai Tuku, and Yaynu
Hiskias. 1994b. Potato Improvement Research. In: Edward Herath and Lemma Dessalegn
(Eds.). Proceedings of the Second National Horticultural Workshop of Ethiopia. Addis
Ababa, 1-3 December 1992. Institute of Agricultural Research and Food and Agriculture
Organization, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Beringer, H., K. Koch, and M.G. Lindhauer. 1990. Source-sink relationships in potato
(Solanum tuberosum L.) as influenced by potassium chloride and potassium sulfate
nutrition. Plant and Soil. 124: 287 290.
Bernard, P.K., Sahlemedhin Sertsu, and Teklu Baisa. 1992. Soil Chemical Analysis Volume I.
In: Manual for Soil Analysis. Part 1. pp. 6-15. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

60
Birch, T.D., J.R. Divine, M.R.J Holmes, and J.D. Whitear. 1967. Field experiments on the
fertilizer requirements of main crop potatoes. Journal of Agricultural Sciences,
Cambridge. 69. 13-24.
Biswas, T.D., and S.K. Mukherjee. 1993. Text Book of Soil Science. (5
th
ed.). Tata McGraw
Hill, New Delhi. pp. 170- 197.
Black, W.N. and R.P. White. (1973) Effects of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and manure
factorially applied to potatoes in a long-term study. Canadian Journal of Soil Science. 53:
205-211
Central Statistical Authority (CSA). 1995. Report on Land Utilization. Statistical Bulletin, Vol.
10. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Chapman, K.S.R., L.A., Sparrow, P.R., Hardman, D.N. Wright and J.R.A Thorp. 1992.
Potassium nutrition of Kennebec and Russet Burbank potatoes in Tasmania: Effect of soil
and fertilizer potassium on yield, petiole and tuber potassium concentrations, and tuber
quality. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture. 32:521-527
Chien, S.H., and G. Menon. 1995. Agronomic evaluation of modified phosphate rock products.
Fertilizer Research. 41: 197-205.
De la Morena, I.A. Guillen, and L.F. Garcia del Morel. 1994. Yield development in potatoes as
influenced by cultivar and the timing and level of nitrogen fertilizer. American Potato
Journal. 71:165-173.
Dessalegne, L. Edward Herath, Terefe Belehu, Berga Lemaga, and Seifu G/Mariam. 1994.
Horticultural Research. Past, Present, and Future Trends. In: Edward Herath and Lemma
Dessalegn (Eds.). Proceedings of the Second National Horticultural Workshop of Ethiopia.
Addis Ababa, 1-3 December 1992. Institute of Agricultural Research and Food and
Agriculture Organization, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Dewis, J. and P. Freitas. 1970. Physical and chemical methods of soil and analysis. FAO
Bulletin No. 10. Rome. p. 275.
Downs, R.J. and H. Hellmers. 1975. Experiment and the experimental control of plant growth.
Academic Press, New York.

61
Dubetz, S. 1975. Effect of two depth of seed bed preparation and fertilizer on netted gem
potatoes. American Potato Journal. 52: 263-267.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 1980. Production Year Book. Rome,
Italy
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 1995. Production Year Book. Rome,
Italy
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2000. Production Year Book. Rome,
Italy.
Gawronska, H., R.B. Duelle, J.J. Pavek, and P. Rowe. 1984. Partitioning of photo-assimilates
by four potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) clones. Crop Science. 24: 1031 1036.
Giardini, L. 1992. Effects of poultry manure and mineral fertilizers on the yield of crops.
Journal of Agricultural Sciences, Cambridge. 118: 207-213.
Gray, D., and J.C. Hughes. 1978. Tuber Quality. In: The potato Crop: The Scientific Basis for
Improvement (P.M. Harris, Ed.).
Gunasena, H.P.M., and P.M. Harris. 1969. The effects of CCC and nitrogen on the growth and
yield of the second early potato variety, Craigs Royal. Journal of Agricultural Sciences,
Cambridge. 73: 245-259.
Hawkes, J.C. 1990. The Potato: Evolution, Biodiversity, and Genetic Resources. Belhaven
Press, London. pp. 259
Hanley, F., R.H. Jarvis, and W.J. Ridgman. 1965. The effects of fertilizers on the bulking of
Majestic Potatoes. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, Cambridge. 65: 159-169.
Harris, P.M. 1978. Mineral Nutrition. In: The potato Crop: The Scientific Basis for
Improvement (P.M. Harris, Ed.). Champman and Hall. London. pp. 195-243.
Harrison, H.C., E.L. Bergman, and R.H. Cole. 1982. Growth response, cooking quality
determinations and leaf nutrient concentrations of potatoes as related to exchangeable
calcium, magnesium, and potassium in the soil. American Potato Journal. 59: 113-124.
Herlihy, M. and P.J. Carroll. 1969. Effects of N, P, and K and their interactions on yield, tuber
blight and quality of potatoes. Journal of Food Science and Agriculture. 20: 513 517.

62
Horton, D. 1987. Potatoes: Production, Marketing, and Program for Developing Countries.
West vies Press. Boulder. pp. 243.
Human, J.J. 1961. The effect of fertilizer levels on yield and specific gravity of potatoes.
Biological Abstracts. 39: 278.
International Potato Center (CIP). 1984. Potato for the Developing World. Lima, Peru.
IAR. 1974/75. Holetta Guenet Research Station Progress Report. April 1974 to March 1975.
Iritani, W.M. 1968. Factors affecting physiological ageing (degeneration) of potato tubers used
as seed. . American Potato Journal. 45: 111-116.
Kanzikwera, C.R., J.S. Tenywa, D.S.O. Osiru, E. Adipala, and A.S. Bhagsari. 2001.
Interactive effect of Nitrogen and Potassium on dry matter and nutrient partitioning in true
potato seed mother plants. African Crop Science Journal. 9: 127-146.
Kleinkopf, G.E., D.T. Westermann, and R.B. Duelle. 1981. Dry matter production and nitrogen
utilization by six potato cultivars. Agronomy Journal. 73: 799-802.
Kleinkopf, G.E., D.T. Westermann, M.J. Wille, and G.D. Kleinscmidt. 1987. Specific Gravity
of Russet Burbank Potatoes. American Potato Journal. 64: 579-587.
Lin, T.C. 1966. Report on Irish Potato Potassium Test. Potash Review.
Locascio. S.J., J.A. Bartz, and B.P. Weingartner. 1992. Calcium and potassium fertilization of
potatoes grown in North Florida. American Potato Journal. 69: 95 - 104
Lujan, D.R., and O.Smith. 1964. Potato quality. XXV. Specific gravity and after -cooking
darkening of Katahdin potatoes as influenced by fertilizers. American Potato Journal. 41:
274-278.
Lynch, D.R., and G.C. Tai. 1989. Yield and yield component response of eight potato
genotypes to water stress. Crop Science. 29: 1207-1211.
Lynch, D.R., and R.G. Rowberry. 1997. Population density studies with Russet Burbank
potatoes. II. The effect of fertilization and plant density on growth, development, and
yield. American Potato Journal. 54: 57-71.

63
Maier, N.A., A.P. Dahlenburg, and C.M.J. Williams. 1994a. Effects of nitrogen, phosphorus,
and potassium on yield, specific gravity, crisp color, and tuber chemical composition of
potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) cv. Kennebec. Australian Journal of Experimental
Agriculture. 34: 813-824
Maier, N.A., A.P. Dahlenburg, and C.M.J. Williams. 1994b. Effects of nitrogen, phosphorus,
and potassium on yield and petiolar nutrient concentrations of potato (Solanum tuberosum
L.) cv. Kennebec and Atlantic. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture. 34: 825-
834.
Mass, E.F. 1963. The effects of seed spacing and N levels on the size of Netted Gem potatoes.
American Potato Journal. 40: 133 136.
McDole, R.E., G.F. Stallknecht, R.B. Dwelle, and J.J. Pavek. 1978. Response of four potato
varieties to potassium fertilization in seed growing area of Eastern Idaho. American Potato
Journal. 55: 495 504.
Mekelle Research Center. 1994. Progress Report.
Mengel, K., and E.A. Kirkby. 1987. Principles of Plant Nutrition. International Potash Institute.
Bern, Switzerland.
Millard, P., and B. Marshall. 1986. Growth, nitrogen uptake and partitioning within the potato
crop (Solanum tuberosum L.) in relation to nitrogen application. Journal of Agricultural
Sciences. Cambridge. 107: 421 - 429
Miller, R.W., and R.L. Donanue. 1995. Soils in Our Environment. (7
th
ed.). Prentice Hall,
Englewood Cliff. pp. 261- 281.
M-Stat. 1990. M-Stat Statistical Software. Users Guide. Michigan State University.
Nelson, D.C., and R. Shaw. 1976. Effects of planting and harvest dates, location in the hills and
tuber size on sugar content of Kennebec potatoes. American Potato Journal. 53: 15 20.
Olsen, S.R., and L.A. Dean. 1965. Phosphorus. In: Methods of Soil Analysis. American
Society of Agronomy. Madison, Wisconsin. 9: 920 - 926
Page, A.L. 1982. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Properties.
Madison.

64
Painter, C.G. and J. Augustine. 1976. The effects of soil moisture and nitrogen on yield and
quality of the Russet Burbank Potato. American Potato Journal. 53: 275-284.
Panique, E, K.A Kelling, E.E. Schulte, D.E Hero, W.R. Stevenson and R.V. James. 1997.
Potassium rate and source effects on potato yield, quality, and disease interaction.
American Potato Journal. 74: 379-396.
Patricia, I. And S.K. Bansal. 1999. Potassium and integrated nutrient management in potato. A
paper presented at the Global Conference on Potato, 6-11 December 1999. New Delhi,
India.
Peter, V., and C.L. Hruska. 1988. Yield Formation in Potatoes. In: Yield Formation in Main
Field Crops. Elsevier Science Publishers. B.V. Amsterdam, The Netherlands. pp. 268-330.
Plaisted, P.H. 1957. Growth of the potato tuber. Plant Physiology Journal. 32: 443-453.
Pratt, P.F. 1965. Potassium In: Methods of soil analysis. No. 9. Agronomy (C.A. Black, Ed.).
Part II, Madison. American Society of Agronomy.
Raheja, P.C. 1966. Soil Productivity and Crop Growth. Asia Publishing House, Bombay.
Reddy, S.N., and R.S Rao. 1968. Response of potato to different levels of nitrogen,
phosphorus, and potassium in a sandy- loam soil of Hyderabad. Indian Journal of
Agricultural Sciences. 38: 577-588.
Reeve, H.M., H. Timm, and M.L. Weaver. 1973. Parenchyma Cell Growth in Potato Tubers. I.
Different tuber regions. American Potato Journal. 50: 50-58.
Reijntjs, C., B. Havrkort, and A. Waters-Bayer. 1992. Farming for Future: An Introduction to
Low-External- Input and Sustainable Agriculture. The MacMillan Press Ltd. London.
Rending, V.V., and H.M. Taylor. 1989. Principles of Soil-Plant Interrelationships. McGraw
Hill Publishing Company, New York. pp. 87 95
Roberts, S., and H.H. Cheng. 1988. Estimation of crtitical nutrient range of petiole nitrate for
sprinkler irrigated potatoes. American Potato Journal. 65: 119 124.
Sanchez, P.A.1976. Properties and Management of Soils in the Tropics. John Wiley and Sons.
New York.


65
Sharma, V.C. and B.R. Arora. 1987. Effects of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium
application on the yield of potato tubers (Solanum tuberosum). Journal of Agricultural
Sciences, Cambridge. 108: 321-329.
Sikka, L 1982. Fertilizer and manure requirements of the potato. In: Potato Seed Production for
Tropical Africa. (S. Nganga and F. Shideler, Eds.). CIP. Lima, Peru.
Sommerfeld, T.G. and K.W. Knutson. 1968. Green house study of early potato growth
response to soil temperature, bulk density, and nitrogen fertilizer. American Potato
Journal. 45: 231-237.
Sommerfeld, T.G., and K.W. Knutson. 1965. Effects of nitrogen and phosphorus on the growth
and development of Russet Burbank Potatoes grown in the Southeastern Idaho. American
Potato Journal. 42: 351-360.
Sparrow, L.A., K.S.R. Chapman, D. Parsley, P.R. Hardman, and B Cullen. 1992. Response of
potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L. cv. Burbank) to band placed and broadcast high cadmium
phosphorus fertilizer on heavily cropped Krasnozems in North- Western Tasmania.
Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture. 32: 113 119.
Tawfik, A.A. 2001. Potassium and Calcium nutrition improves potato production in drip-
irrigated sandy soil. African Crop Science Journal. 9: 147-155
Tekalign Mamo and I. Haque. 1988. Potassium status of some Ethiopian soils. East African
Agriculture and Forestry. 53: 123-130.
Timm, H., and W.J. Flocker. 1966. Response of potato plants to fertilization and soil moisture
tension under induced soil compaction. Agronomy Journal. 77: 616-621.
Tisdale, S.L., W.L. Nelson, J.D. Beaton, and J.L Halvin. 1995. Soil Fertility and Fertilizers (5
th

Ed.). Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. New York. pp. 109-229
Westermann, D.T., D.W. James, T.A. Tindall, and R.L. Hurst. 1994a. Nitrogen and potassium
fertilization of potatoes: yield and specific gravity. American Potato Journal. 71: 417-431.
Westermann, D.T., D.W. James, T.A. Tindall, and R.L. Hurst. 1994b. Nitrogen and potassium
fertilization of potatoes: sugar and starch. American Potato Journal. 71: 433-453.

66
Widdowson, F.V., and A. Penny. 1975. Results from experiments measuring the effects of
large amounts of NPK fertilizers on yield, tuber size, and N, P, K contents of three potato
varieties. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, Cambridge. 85: 515-525
Wilcox, G.E., and J. Hoff. 1970. Nitrogen fertilization of potatoes for early summer harvest.
American Potato Journal. 47: 99-102
Winston, M.L. 1966. Effects of soil application of potassium, magnesium sulfate spray on
potato yield, composition, and nutrient uptake.American Potato Journal. 43: 402 411.
Yahannes Uloro. 1994. The effect of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and sulfur on the yield
and yield components of Ensete (Ensete ventricosum W.) in Southeast Ethiopia. Ph.D.
Dissertation. Institute of Plant Nutrition, Faculty of Agriculture. Justus Liebig University,
Giessen, Germany.
Zandstra, H.G., R.H. Anderson, and W.K. Daley. 1969. Effects of fertilizer on the yield and
quality of Norland Potatoes in Northeastern Saskatchewan. American Potato Journal. 46:
69-74



















67
















7. APPENDICES


68
Appendix table 1. Soil chemical properties of the study area prior to fertilization

Exchangeable Cations (cmols/kg
soil) pH

OM (%)

Total N (%)

Available P
(ppm) K
+
Ca
++
Mg
++
CEC
7.5 1.80 0.15 8.60 2.34 24.19 4.17 25.6















69
Appendix table 2. Simple correlation coefficient of different parameters with K, N and P treatments


Plant Characters Considered
TTY MTY UTY TTN MTN UTN SN PH DTF DTM ADM UDM PDM HI SG ATW TNC ST MT LT
K 0.10 0.02 0.06 0.15

0.02 0.19 0.06

0.08 0.13


0.57
**
0.01 0.08 0.07

0.01 -0.24
*
0.04 0.07 -0.20

-0.03

0.20
N 0.86
**

0.84
**

0.21

0.31
**
0.31
**

0.20

0.02

0.77
**

0.84
**
0.36
**

0.96
**

0.89
**
-0.92
**

-0.84
**
-0.70
**

0.69
**
0.91
**
0.65
**

0.75
**
0.41
**
P 0.30
**

0.33
**
0.14 0.54
**
0.30
**
0.03

-0.05

0.21
*
0.26* -0.42* 0.23
*

0.32
**
-0.28
**
-0.26
*

-0.22
*

0.30
**
0.20
*
0.39
**

0.32
**

0.40
**


TTY = total tuber yield; MTY = marketable tuber yield; UTY = unmarketable tuber yield; TTN = total tuber number; MTN = marketable tuber number; UTN =
unmarketable tuber number; SN = stem number; PH = plant height; DTF = days to flowering; DTM = days to maturity; ADM = aboveground dry matter yield;
UDM = underground dry matter yield; PDM = percent dry matter yield; HI = harvest index; SG = specific gravity; ATW = average tuber weight; TNC= tuber
nitrogen concentration; ST = yield of small sized tubers; MT= yield of medium sized tubers; LT= yield of large sized tubers.

70
Appendix table 3. Simple correlation coefficients among different parameters

Plant Characters Considered
TTY MTY UTY TTN MTN UTN SN PH DTF DTM ADM UDM PDM HI SG ATW TNC ST MT LT
TTY 1.00 0.88
**
0.19 0.46
**
0.38
**
0.21 -0.01 0.79
**
0.81
**
0.39
**
0.88
**
0.90
**
-0.84
**
-0.71
**
-0.55
**
0.75
**
0.86
**
0.50
**
0.79
**
0.51
**
MTY

1.00 0.13 0.46
**
0.38
**
0.21 0.07 0.79
**
0.77
**
0.30
**
0.88
**
0.86
**
-0.85
**
-0.76
**
-0.54
**
0.71
**
0.82
**
0.54
**
0.89
**
0.69
**
UTY

1.00 -0.01

0.02

0.16 0.08 0.18 0.16 0.10 0.17 0.10 -0.13 -0.20 -0.12 0.14

0.20 0.23
**
-0.02 0.09
TTN

1.00 0.49
**
0.34
**
0.17 0.35
**
0.49
**
0.21
*
0.42
**
0.41
**
-0.39
**
-0.37
**
-0.17 0.30
**
0.34
**
0.17 0.46
**
0.43
**
MTN



1.00 0.64
**
0.10 0.31
**
0.37
**
0.13 0.35
**
0.38
**
-0.37
**
-0.32
**
-0.19 0.19 0.38
**
0.15 0.34
**
0.31
**
UTN



1.00 0.21
*
0.22
*
0.23
*
0.10 0.21
**
0.21
*
-0.19 -0.19 -0.16 0.10 0.21
*
0.11 0.19 0.24
*
SN



1.00 0.08 0.81
**
0.37
**
0.01 0.01 0.06 -0.09

-0.04 -0.03 0.01 0.08 0.74
**
0.46
**
PH 1.00 0.81
**
0.78
**
0.80
**
0.79
**
-0.74
**
-0.62
**
0.47
**
0.69
**
0.77
**
0.49
**
0.04 0.04

DTF





1.00 0.31
**
0.81
**
0.87
**
-0.81
**
-0.70
**
-0.52
**
0.67
**
0.82
**
0.51
**
0.69
**
0.42
**
DTM





1.00 0.32
**
0.46
**
-0.30
**
-0.16 -0.12 0.39
**
0.28
*
0.37
**
0.35
**
0.20
*
AD
M





1.00 0.91
**
-0.96
**
-0.88
**
-0.68
**
0.73
**
0.91
**
0.52
**
0.79
**
0.50
**
UD
M






1.00 -0.92
**
-0.76
**
-0.50
**
0.76
**
0.87
**
0.50
**
0.85
**
0.51
**
PDM







1.00 0.72
**
0.65
**
0.76
**
-0.87
**
-0.47
**
0.85
**
0.51
**
HI



1.00 0.65
**
-0.46
**
-0.75
**
-0.81
**
-0.63
**
-0.48
**
SG







1.00 -0.52
**
-0.62
**
-0.48
**
-0.54
**
-0.27
ATW







1.00 0.66
**
0.36
**
0.66
**
0.43
**
PNC









1.00 0.50 0.72
**
0.44
**
ST









1.00 0.44
**
0.32
**
MT









1.00 0.62
**
LT









1.00

TTY=total tuber yield; MTY=marketable tuber yield; UTY=unmarketable tuber yield; TTN=total tuber number; MTN=marketable tuber number;
UTN=unmarketable tuber number; SN=stem number; PH=plant height; DTF=days to flowering; DTM=days to maturity; ADM=aboveground dry matter yield;
UDM=underground dry matter yield; PDM=percent dry matter yield; HI=harvest index; SG=specific gravity; ATW=average tuber weight; TNC= tuber nitrogen
concentration; ST=yield of small sized tubers; MT= yield of medium sized tubers; LT= yield of large sized tubers.