Abstract
The experiment was conducted by using seven released coffee varieties at three locations in southern Ethiopia, Halaba, Loka Abaya and Dilla, to select coffee varieties with higher yield and tolerant to low soil moisture stress. It was arranged in RCBD having three replications. The result indicated that the varieties showed significant difference on main stem diameter, plant height at harvesting, plant height up to the first branch, number of primary branches, number of secondary branches, number of tertiary branches, number of main stems, fruiting nodes per branch (FNPB), number of beans per cherry (NBPC), canopy diameter, leaf area, number of leaves per branch, number of leaves per tree (NLPT), hundred bean weight (HBW), weight of fresh husk (WHF), weight of dried husk (WHD), weight of fresh husked bean (WHBF), and weight of dried husked bean (WHBD). Stand count at harvest (STCNT), leaf length (LL), leaf width (LW), bean thickness (BTH), bean length (BL), bean yield per tree (YPT), bean yield per plot (YPP), bean yield per hectare (YPHA) and weight of husked clean coffee (WHCC) were not statistically significant. Location specific significant variations were observed on some of the variables such as stand count, leaf length, and leaf width at Halaba; yield per tree, yield per plot, yield per hectare and weight of husked clean coffee were significant at all the three locations despite their non-significant value while combined. The coffee variety Catimor J-19 performed best at all location with respect to fresh bean yield and dried clean coffee followed by Angafa. Thus they can be promoted for larger commercial production at tested locations and locations with similar agro-ecological conditions. Key words: Coffea arabica, husked coffee, clean coffee, agroecology.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 17
Claim · model-written summary
Coffee varieties differed significantly in stem diameter and plant heights.
- Outcome
- main stem diameter, plant height at harvesting, plant height up to the first branche0
CoffeaOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the varieties showed significant difference on main stem diameter, plant height at harvesting, plant height up to the first branch”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Coffee varieties differed significantly in primary, secondary and tertiary branch counts.
- Outcome
- number of primary branches, number of secondary branches, number of tertiary branchese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“number of primary branches, number of secondary branches, number of tertiary branches”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Coffee varieties differed significantly in main stems, fruiting nodes and beans per cherry.
- Outcome
- number of main stems, fruiting nodes per branch (FNPB), number of beans per cherry (NBPC)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“number of main stems, fruiting nodes per branch (FNPB), number of beans per cherry (NBPC)”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Coffee varieties differed significantly in canopy diameter, leaf area and leaves per branch.
- Outcome
- canopy diameter, leaf area, number of leaves per branche0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“canopy diameter, leaf area, number of leaves per branch”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Coffee varieties differed significantly in leaves per tree and hundred bean weight.
- Outcome
- number of leaves per tree (NLPT), hundred bean weight (HBW)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“number of leaves per tree (NLPT), hundred bean weight (HBW)”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Coffee varieties differed significantly in fresh and dried husk weights.
- Outcome
- weight of fresh husk (WHF), weight of dried husk (WHD)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“weight of fresh husk (WHF), weight of dried husk (WHD)”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Coffee varieties differed significantly in fresh and dried husked bean weights.
- Outcome
- weight of fresh husked bean (WHBF), and weight of dried husked bean (WHBD)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“weight of fresh husked bean (WHBF), and weight of dried husked bean (WHBD)”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Stand count and leaf length and width did not differ significantly in the combined analysis.
- Outcome
- Stand count at harvest (STCNT), leaf length (LL), leaf width (LW)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Stand count at harvest (STCNT), leaf length (LL), leaf width (LW), bean thickness (BTH), bean length (BL), bean yield per tree (YPT), bean yield per plot (YPP), bean yield per hectare (YPHA) and weight of husked clean coffee (WHCC) were not statistically significant.”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Bean thickness and length did not differ significantly in the combined analysis.
- Outcome
- bean thickness (BTH), bean length (BL)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bean thickness (BTH), bean length (BL), bean yield per tree (YPT)”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Bean yields per tree, plot and hectare did not differ significantly in the combined analysis.
- Outcome
- bean yield per tree (YPT), bean yield per plot (YPP), bean yield per hectare (YPHA)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“bean yield per tree (YPT), bean yield per plot (YPP), bean yield per hectare (YPHA) and weight of husked clean coffee (WHCC) were not statistically significant.”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Husked clean coffee weight did not differ significantly in the combined analysis.
- Outcome
- weight of husked clean coffee (WHCC)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“weight of husked clean coffee (WHCC) were not statistically significant.”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
At Halaba, stand count and leaf dimensions varied significantly.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Location specific significant variations were observed on some of the variables such as stand count, leaf length, and leaf width at Halaba”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield per tree, plot and hectare varied significantly at all three locations.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“yield per tree, yield per plot, yield per hectare and weight of husked clean coffee were significant at all the three locations despite their non-significant value while combined.”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Clean coffee weight varied significantly at all three locations.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“weight of husked clean coffee were significant at all the three locations despite their non-significant value while combined.”
t0“coffee varieties”
Claim · model-written summary
Catimor J-19 had the best fresh bean yield across locations, followed by Angafa.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The coffee variety Catimor J-19 performed best at all location with respect to fresh bean yield and dried clean coffee followed by Angafa.”
Claim · model-written summary
Catimor J-19 had the best dried clean coffee across locations, followed by Angafa.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The coffee variety Catimor J-19 performed best at all location with respect to fresh bean yield and dried clean coffee followed by Angafa.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend Catimor J-19 and Angafa for commercial production in comparable locations.
- Outcome
- promoted for larger commercial productione0
- Setting
- tested locations and locations with similar agro-ecological conditionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Thus they can be promoted for larger commercial production at tested locations and locations with similar agro-ecological conditions.”
t0“coffee varieties”