Abstract
The interactive effects of genotypes, plant population densities, and harvest methods on snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) yield evaluation were investigated using a split-split plot factorial arrangement of treatments at two locations Six snap bean processing cultivars were grown at 5.5, 11, and 22 plants/m 2 and harvested either by machine or by hand. Each' of three commercial seed companies provided two cultivars, one of which was described as “good” and the other as “poor” for machine harvesting. Genotype × harvest method interactions were not significant for pod count, but were significant when yield was evaluated as pod weight. This latter interaction was explained by a single-degree-of-freedom contrast of genotypes × (“good” vs. “poor” harvestability). Genotype × density and genotype × density × location interactions were significant for both pod count and weight. The density × harvest method interaction was nonsignificant for both yield variables. These results suggest that breeders can evaluate yield of genotypes using either hand or machine harvest but should use plant population densities appropriate to commercial production. Optimum plot size for snap bean yield evaluations at these locations under the various conditions imposed were estimated.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 9
Claim · model-written summary
The genotype × harvest method interaction was not significant for pod count of snap bean.
Verbatim
e0“Six snap bean processing cultivars were grown at 5.5, 11, and 22 plants/m 2 and harvested either by machine or by hand”
e1“arrangement of treatments at two locations”
e2“Genotype × harvest method interactions were not significant for pod count”
Claim · model-written summary
The genotype × harvest method interaction was significant for pod weight of snap bean.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“Six snap bean processing cultivars were grown at 5.5, 11, and 22 plants/m 2 and harvested either by machine or by hand”
e2“Genotype × harvest method interactions were not significant for pod count”
e3“but were significant when yield was evaluated as pod weight”
Claim · model-written summary
The genotype × harvest method interaction for pod weight was explained by a single-degree-of-freedom contrast of genotypes for good versus poor harvestability.
Verbatim
e0“Six snap bean processing cultivars were grown at 5.5, 11, and 22 plants/m 2 and harvested either by machine or by hand”
e3“but were significant when yield was evaluated as pod weight”
e4“This latter interaction was explained by a single-degree-of-freedom contrast of genotypes”
Claim · model-written summary
The genotype × density interaction was significant for pod count and pod weight of snap bean.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“Six snap bean processing cultivars were grown at 5.5, 11, and 22 plants/m 2 and harvested either by machine or by hand”
e5“Genotype × density and genotype × density × location interactions were significant for both pod count and weight”
Claim · model-written summary
The genotype × density × location interaction was significant for pod count and pod weight of snap bean.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“Six snap bean processing cultivars were grown at 5.5, 11, and 22 plants/m 2 and harvested either by machine or by hand”
e5“Genotype × density and genotype × density × location interactions were significant for both pod count and weight”
Claim · model-written summary
The density × harvest method interaction was not significant for either yield variable of snap bean.
Verbatim
e0“Six snap bean processing cultivars were grown at 5.5, 11, and 22 plants/m 2 and harvested either by machine or by hand”
e6“The density × harvest method interaction was nonsignificant for both yield variables”
Claim · model-written summary
Breeders can evaluate snap bean yield of genotypes using either hand or machine harvest.
Verbatim
e0“Six snap bean processing cultivars were grown at 5.5, 11, and 22 plants/m 2 and harvested either by machine or by hand”
e7“These results suggest that breeders can evaluate yield of genotypes using either hand or machine harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
Snap bean plant population densities should be chosen to be appropriate to commercial production.
Verbatim
e0“Six snap bean processing cultivars were grown at 5.5, 11, and 22 plants/m 2 and harvested either by machine or by hand”
e1“but should use plant population densities appropriate to commercial production”
Claim · model-written summary
Optimum plot size for snap bean yield evaluations at these locations was estimated.
Not reportedComparatorValue
Verbatim
e1“Optimum plot size for snap bean yield evaluations at these locations under the various conditions imposed were estimated”