Squash (Cucurbita pepo L.

) Growth and Yield in Response to

Different Types of Fertilizers

(Farmyard, Chicken Manures, Urea and NPK Granules)

By
Sara Mohamed Khalid
B.Sc. (Hon.) Agriculture
University of Khartoum
November 2003

A Thesis Submitted to the University of Khartoum in Partial

Fulfillment of Requirement for the Degree of Master of Science
(Agric)

Supervisor

Prof. AbdelRahman ElTayib AbdelHafeez

Faculty of Agriculture

University of Khartoum

November 2006
 Dedication

Knowledge is power; because of that I would like to

dedicate this work to every one who is looking for
Knowledge, Experience and Discovery.
 Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my family, every lecturer, colleague,

and labourer, who helped me in this research work; also I would like to
give special gratefulness to my supervisor Prof:
AbdelRahman ElTayib AbdelHafeez for his continuous supervision,
supportable feeling and right guidance.
 List of Contents

page
English Abstract
Arabic Abstract
Chapter One Introduction 1
Chapter Two Literature Review 3
Chapter Three Materials and Methods 9
3.1 Growth Measurements 10
3.2 Flowering Measurements 10
3.3 Yield Measurements 11
Chapter Four Results 13
4.1 Growth Measurements 13
4.2 Growth Measurements for 25
Labelled Plants
4.3 Flowering Measurements 35
4.4 Yield Measurements 39
Chapter Five Discussion 52
References 55
Appendices
 List of Figures

Page
Fig.1 Number of Leaves/plant 15
Fig.2 Plant Height/cm 16
Fig.3 Root Length/cm 17
Fig.4 Leaf Area/cm2 18
Fig.5 Shoot Fresh Weight/g 20
Fig.6 Shoot Dry Weight/g 21
Fig.7 Root Fresh Weight/g 23
Fig.8 Root Dry Weight/g 24
Fig.9 Number of Leaves/plant 26
Fig.10 Plant Height/cm 27
Fig.11 Root Length/cm 28
Fig.12 Shoot Fresh Weight/g 29
Fig.13 Shoot Dry Weight/g 30
Fig.14 Root Fresh Weight/g 31
Fig.15 Root Dry Weight/g 32
Fig.16 Plant Fresh weight/g 33
Fig.17 Plant Dry Weight/g 34
Fig.18 Number of Fruits/plant 40
Fig.19 Fruit Length/cm 42
Fig.20 Fruit Diameter/cm 44
Fig.21 Fruit Dry Weight/g 45
Fig.22 Fruit Yield/plant 47
 List of Tables

Page
Table 1 Day to Flowering 36
Table 2 50% of Flowering 37
Table 3 Staminate, Pistillate and ♂/♀Flowers/Plant 38
Table 4 Total Number of Fruits/plant 41
Table 5 Total Fruit Yield/plant , kg/ha 48
Table 6 Fruit Yield/m2, kg/ha 50
Table 7 Percentage of Abnormal Fruits 51
 ABSTRACT

A field experiment was carried out in the Demonstration Farm of the

Horticultural Department-Faculty of Agriculture at Shambat in the winter of
2006, to evaluate Squash Growth and Yield in response to different types of
fertilizers using a Randomized Complete Block Design with four
replications.

Levels of fertilizers included Farmyard manure (FYM) and Chicken

manure at rate of 10m3/fed, urea at rate of 17, 34 kg N/fed and NPK granules
at rate of 17kgN/fed, 17kgP/fed, and 17kgK/fed

The parameters measured represented:

1. Growth attributes which included (number of leaves/plant, plant
height, root length, leaf area, shoot and root fresh and dry weights).
2. Flowering attributes such as days to flowering, days to 50%
flowering, mean number of staminate, pistillate and ♂/♀ flowers/plant.
3. Yield components presented as number of fruits/plant, fruit length,
fruit diameter, fruit dry weight, fruit yield/plant, Fruit Yield/m2, and
percentage of abnormal fruits.
As results indicated, there were virtually significant differences
among fertilizer treatments.
All applied fertilizer treatments had significantly higher mean than
control in all growth and yield measurements. On the other hand 2N
fertilizer treatment gave significantly higher mean for growth and yield
parameters compared to the other fertilizers treatments that showed no
significant differences between them for the same parameters.

1
 ‫ ا
و‬

‫أ     ا

ر ا
    ا
 –  "ء ‪  
, 2006‬ا) ('‬
‫وا( ‪';<-‬ل ا
‪'(9 )'.‬اع ‪ - 74-‬ا‪3)6‬ة )‪34‬ام (‪2‬م ا
‪0‬ت ا
‪ -.‬ا
‪'+,‬ا*‬
‫ر‪.- ,‬رات ‪.‬‬
‫‪'- @A‬ت ا
د )د ا‪ 6‬ر وا
‪3‬وا ‪3,‬ل ‪37
D,.- -10‬ان ‪',‬ر ‪3,‬ل‪17,34‬‬
‫آ (و
‪37‬ان ‪.‬‬
‫‪   NPK‬ت ‪3,‬ل ‪ 17‬آ (و‪ 17 ,‬آ ‪'7‬ر‪ 17 ,‬آ ')'م
‪37‬ان ‪.‬‬
‫ا
‪ ,‬ا
 ‪: I J‬‬
‫‪ ,- .1‬ا
@' وا
‪3)@A L‬د ا‪6‬وراق ( ت‪ ,‬ار‪7‬ع ا
@ ت‪'P ,‬ل ا
‪O‬ور‪Q0) - ,‬‬
‫ا
'ر‪, J‬ا
'زن ا
ف وا
‪'
DP‬ع ا
‪A4‬ى وا
‪O‬رى(‪.‬‬
‫‪ ,- .2‬ا‪6‬زهر ‪3 L I-‬د ا‪6‬م
‪W‬زهر‪3 ,‬د ا‪6‬م ل ‪ - % 50‬ا‪6‬زهر‪Z)'-,‬‬
‫ا‪6‬زهر ا
‪O‬آة وا
[(‪ I‬وا
@  ا
@ ‪.‬‬
‫‪('.- .3‬ت ا‪(6‬ج ‪3  I-‬د ا
‪I‬ر ( ت‪'P,‬ل ا
‪I‬ة‪ 0J,‬ا
‪I‬ة ‪,‬ا
'زن ا
ف‬
‫
‪I‬ة‪,‬ا‪ @
(6‬ت ‪,‬ا‪
(6‬ا
] ‪  (,‬ا
‪I‬ر ا
^ ‪. , P‬‬
‫أو‪ <a‬ا
@*` ا_‪W‬ت ‪W_ '@,-‬ل ‪W-,-‬ت ا‪3)6‬ة ا
‪ 74‬آ ان آ‪W-,- b‬ت ا‪3)6‬ة‬
‫ا
‪  '@,- 74- A‬ا
‪@.‬ول  ‪ '@
 c,‬وا
@ ‪.‬‬
‫ا‪ '@,- 2N 0‬ا‪ '@
Z)'- L‬وا‪ - (6‬ر(   ‪W-,-‬ت ا‪3)6‬ة وا
‪d2 
L‬‬
‫ا_‪W‬ت ‪ e7@
d@ '@,-‬ا
 ‪. e‬‬

‫‪2‬‬
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

The Sudan is the largest country in Africa with great diversity of

climatic and agro-ecological zones. The main features comprise vast plains
interrupted by few hills or mountains, extended River Nile from south to
north and dominant central clay plain soils. The climate; characterized by
hot dry summer, warm winter and rainy season, such climate helps in
growing various types of horticultural crops, field crops, forest trees.
Vegetables as a major part of horticulture, are usually produced, in the
Sudan, by small farmers in rain-fed areas, irrigated private farms or the big
Government Schemes. Compared with cash crops like cotton and with staple
food grains, little attention has been paid, so far, to vegetable production.
This is attributed to many difficulties related to their perishable nature, soil,
seeds, weather problems, pests and diseases and high cost of pesticides.
Because of all these reasons; vegetable crops must receive more
attention in research and investigations.
On the other hand vegetable crops require many different nutrient
elements, therefore adding fertilizers is an important mean by which poor
growth can be eliminated and high yield can be achieved. In Addition to that
fertilizer use has allowed farmers to continuous planting on the same land
for many years, and eliminates the need for new lands.
Generally the amount of fertilizer which is expected to be applied
depends on the natural fertility of the soil, amount of organic matter, type of
fertilizer, and the vegetables being grown.
Squash (Cucurbita pepo .L) is one of related species of genus cucurbita
which consists of about 30 species of annual, tendril-bearing plants of the

3
family cucurbitaceae (Hutchinson 1967). Four species are commonly
cultivated: Cucurbita maxima, Cucurbita mixta, Cucurbita moschata, and
Cucurbita pepo (Kernick, 1961).
Various cultivars of Cucurbita pepo are called summer squash,
pumpkin, vegetable marrow, zucchini, and spaghetti squash (Purseglove,
1968), which are eaten as a vegetable, fed to live stock, or used for ornament
(Cobley, 1976).
In the Sudan squash is grown in many parts including; Khartoum, New
Halfa, Blue Nile, Gezira, Northern State, River Nile State and Kassala (Seed
Ahmed et al., 2003). Estimation of FAO in 2005 indicated that squash yield
was 17439.5 Kg/ha but in spite of this, it has limited uses, also it received
little physiological studies, so that squash needs more work concerning its
physiology and production. However, there are evidences indicating that
increasing in yield of squash (Iskandarani cultivar) depends on type of
fertilizer used (Abdel Samie 1958).
Therefore this work is based on studying squash growth and yield in
response to different types of fertilizers to enable knowing when and how
much fertilizer to be applied to give the maximum yield quantitatively and
qualitatively.

4
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

The uses of manure, soil amendments, and fertilizer recently have

been given greater emphasis. Consequently enormous researches were
allotted for fertilizers effect on growth, quality and yield.

Plants require essential nutrients or building materials for proper

growth and development. In most cases soil contains sufficient nutrients to
support plant growth. However, some nutrients were removed from the soil
quickly especially primary nutrients and therefore, the reason to fertilize is
to re supply nutrients which are removed from the soil by plants or leached
by water.

Fertilizer is a substance that provides nutrients to plants, some, are

natural; while others are human-made or synthetic. Organic fertilizers come
from natural sources, such as animals or plant substances. They are
characterize by high moisture holding capacity, reduce soil erosion, and
improve soil structure. Bationo and Mokwunye, 1991, reported that addition
of organic materials either in the form of manures or crop residue have
beneficial effects on the soils chemical and physical properties.
Chemical fertilizer includes any chemical used to improve soil and
promote plant growth. Complete fertilizer is a plant food consisting all three
primary nutrient elements namely nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium, or
(NPK).

5
Nitrogen:
Nitrogen is essential for protein synthesis, plant cell division. It is involved
in photosynthesis and thus aids in production and use of carbohydrates and
ultimately energy reactions in the plant. Nitrogen also is a necessary
component of vitamins.
Phosphorous:
Phosphorous is involved in photosynthesis, respiration, energy storage and
transfer, cell division, and enlargement. Promotes early root formation and
growth. Improves quality of fruits, vegetables, and grains. It is also vital to
seed formation and hastens maturity.
Potassium:
Potassium is important for break down and translocation of starches,
increases photosynthesis, water-use efficiency essential synthesis, activates
enzymes and controls their reaction rates and improves quality of seeds and
fruit.
Farmyard manure:
Farmyard manure is partially rottened straw containing animals, urine and
feces and feed residues (Hall, 1953)
Farmyard manure supplies major and minor plant nutrients, and it is effect
on crops are due to it is physical effect on soil condition. An average
dressing of 25t/ha of FYM gives about 125KgN, 75Kg P2O5 and
125KgK2O. These quantities are not completely available to crops in the
year of application, thus FYM has a residual effect (Awadallah and Basioni,
1993).
The quality of FYM depend upon it is content of plant food, and these
depend on the way manure was made and how it was looked after most of
the plant foods in manure come from the feed given to the stock.

6
Chicken manure:
Chicken manure production and decomposition are influenced by chicken
type, age, sort and amount of feed and even the climatic conditions during
collection, accumulation and storage management (Elagib, 1997).
Chicken manure contain twice as much nitrogen as FYM, they are richer in
phosphorus and contain about as much potassium as FYM.
Chicken manure is valuable and known to improve the physical properties
such as porosity, pore shape and pore size distribution, organic matter of soil
(Eltilib et al, 1994), hence better growth of plants and more production will
be obtained.

Sutton (1965) reported that nitrogen had the most significant effect on yield
and plant growth of squash. Mohamed (2004) found that squash shoot dry
matter and yields were increased by all fertilization N rates and by the soil
application treatment.

Working with tomato Moursi (1957) showed that N application

increased the number of leaves and dry weight of plants. Also Eguchi et al
(1958), reported that fertilizer level affects the growth of tomato, eggplant
and pepper growth as measured by fresh weight, height of the plant,
diameter of the stem and number of leaves. In sweet potato Kim (1980)
studied the effect of N application on the leaf area, and the result showed
that high N levels caused an increase in leaf area (LA), but delayed
enlargement of the root. Also Chauhan, (1971) and Gupta, (1973) found that
in okra plant height, number of leaves and yield of green pods were
increased by increasing of application of N, from 22.5, 45.0 to 67.5 Kg/ha. P
at 22.5 or 45.0 Kg/ha and K at 22.5 Kg/ha had no effect on growth or yield

7
of plant. In another study concerning inorganic nutrition of okra Chankar
and Singh (1965) found that N and P applications significantly increased the
plant height, stem diameter, leaf number, size and color of leaves, and root
development. While Eltilib et al (1994) reported that plant height and leaves
number of okra significantly increased by the application of chicken manure.
Mohammed in (1993) also stated that addition of manure significantly
increased plant height and fresh weight of wheat shoots. Working with
watermelon, Attia (1958) reported that no significant difference was found
in yield by application of manure and chemical fertilizers.

Tewari (1965) reported obtained a delay in flowering process, in

tomato, by application of complete fertilizers. This evidence was supported
by Fisher (1969) when reported that NPK application delayed time to 50%
flowering of tomato. On the other hand Salih (1981) found that days to first
flowering in okra, when fertilizers were used are constant.

Erwin and Habor (1929) found that the increase in number of both
pistillate and staminate flowers of squash varied according to the type of
fertilizer applied. Also Erwin and Habor (1929), Scott (1939), Whitaker
(1931), and Lana (1950) reported that the average number of squash flowers
per plant varied according to sowing date, but there was no constant
variation in the average sex ratios of the different plantings. They also
showed that the varieties of squash differed in number of flowers of both
sexes and in average sex ratio. In (1969) Rekhi et al reported that soil
application of P and K had no effect on sex expression in musk melon. But
the increase in N level from 120 to180 Kg/ha raised the number of both
perfect and staminate flowers.

8
 Dufault (1986) studied the effect of different levels of NPK ranging
from low (10 N, 5 P, 10 K mg/l) to high (250 N, 125 P, 250 K mg/l) on
musk melon seedling and concluded that seedlings which were given high
levels of fertilizers resulted in greater number of female flowers than those
given low levels. Similarly Abdel Samie (1958) concluded that application
of N reduced male flowers and total flowers in cucumber plants.

Whitaker (1931) found that number of staminate flowers produced,

always exceed that of pistillaste ones, while Contliffe (1974) stated that high
temperature, high light intensity, high rate of nitrogen fertilization and high
moisture resulted in high number of male flowers on monoecious plants of
cucumber.

In an N, K experiment on summer squash, Venturi and Piazza (1974)

found that both fruit number and mean weight could be increased by using
150 Kg/ha of N and K. In another finding Fisher (1969) reported that high
levels of N increased number of fruits in tomato.

In study yield response to different plant nutrition management (2002)

for buttercup squash Cucurbita maxima presented in the effects of different
rates of N (0, 50, 100 and 200 Kg N/ha), P (0, 75,150AND300 Kg P/ha), and
K (0,100 and 200 Kg K/ha) the results indicated that growth rate and
marketable yield of squash increased with the increase in N rates while
increase in P rates associated with the increase in vine length, and there were
no significant differences among K treatments.

Padda et al (1969) investigated the effect of N, P and K Fertilizers on

musk melon for two years, he found response to N was significant in, only

9
one year, and application of 56 Kg N/ha proved to be the most profitable
level. While yield response to P and K was not significant, this result was
also confirmed by Jassal et al (1970) who study the effect of irrigation and
NPK fertilizer on yield of musk melon. When they applied N at the rate of 0,
55, 110, and 165 Kg/ha, K and P each at 0and 55 Kg/ha, they concluded that
Fruit weight and yield were significantly increased by N. but P application
had no significant effect on fruit weight and yield.

In an experiment carried out at Shambat Research Farm when two

varieties snake cucumber and Beit-Alpha were treated with granular, soil-
applied urea and ammonium sulphate and with the liquid foliar fertilizer
nitrophoska one month after sowing, the results showed that there was no
significant variation observed among treatments with respect total yield.

Also Elsheikh and Elzidany (1997) reported that in an experiment

carried out to investigate the effect of Rhizobium inoculation, sulphur,
nitrogen and chicken manure on yield of faba bean, the results showed that
sulphur, nitrogen and chicken manure treatments significantly increased
yield. While in okra Bhadoria et al (2002) found that farmyard manure gave
high quality fruits.

Also Mukhtar and Genif (1989) reported that manure at 40t/ha

significantly increased yield of potato especially when N was added.
Supportable information from Ahmed et al (1992) demonstrated that,
organic manure resulted in higher yield significantly than the control by
21.7%.

10
 CHAPTER THREE

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An experiment was conducted in the Demonstration Farm of the

Horticultural Department- Faculty of Agriculture at Shambat (latitude 15
o
40N, longitude 32○ 32 E and altitude 280 m above sea level) in the winter
of 2006. The cultivated area was about 260 m2.
The land was ploughed, levelled, and then divided by ridger into plots.
Total number of plots was 24 and the area of the plot was 3×3.5 m. The plot
contained two mastabas in an east – west direction. The length of mastaba
was 2 meters.
The fertilizers were added at the beginning of January 2006 at the rate
of 10 m3/fed (chicken and farm yard manure) 17, 34 kg N/fed (urea) and 17
kg N/fed NPK granules using a Randomized Complete Block Design with
four replications.
Seeds of Iskandarani cultivar were sown on the two sides of the
mastaba on the fifth of January 2006. Total number of holes in the plot was
20 with spacing of 40 cm apart. The first irrigation was given directly after
sowing, and then it was given at 7 days interval and after 3 days interval
after fruits setting. In the second week of sowing thinning was done by
leaving the best one or two plants per hole. Weeding was done manually in
the third and six weeks after sowing by cultivator.
Control of pests and diseases was carried out by regular spraying with
Pirimor at the rate of 5g/L, Danitol at the rate of 2cc/L and Pyrethroid at the
rate of 3cc/L in order to control the spreading of aphids and white fly, and
by Devicyprin at the rate of 2cc/L to control the spreading of cucurbit fruit

11
fly. Foliar fertilizer was given at regular interval, six week after sowing of
the experiment, till the end of it.
The harvest started in the sixth week of planting every 3 days; and the
total number of harvests was six pickings.
The parameters which were measured were:
3.1 Growth Measurements
Number of leaves/plant, plant height, root length, shoot and root fresh
and dry weights and leaf area.
These measurements were recorded at 20, 40, and 55days after sowing
from sample of three plants each.
Shoot and root dry weights were recorded after oven drying at 65 °C
for 72 hours.
Leaf area was determined, drying them in an oven at 65 °C for 72 hours and
then leaf area was measured according to the Loomis (1958) Equation
Leaf area (cm) 2 : = total area of leaf disc × total weight of leaves
Total weight of leaf disc
3.2 Flowering measurements
i. Days to Flowering :
Number of days of appearance of first flower in the different
treatments.
ii. Percentage of flowering:
Number of days for reaching 50% of plants to flower opening in
different treatments.
iii. Sex ratio:
Number of ♂/♀ flowers in different treatments.

12
3.3 Yield measurements
The yield was obtained from 10 labelled plants in each plot.
i. Number of fruits /plant:
Fruits number was determined by counting total number of fruits in
different treatments.
ii. Fruit length (cm):
Fruits length was determined by measuring 10 fruits taken as samples
from the different treatments.
iii. Fruit diameter (cm):
Fruits diameter was determined by vernier from 10 fruits taken as
samples in the different treatments.
iv. Fruit dry weight (g):
Fruits dry weight was taken at second, third and four pickings from
five fruits which were cut into slides, exposed to air drying, oven
dried, and then measured by weighing them.
v. Fruit yield/plant (fresh weight) (g):
Fresh weight of harvested fruits was obtained by weighing fresh fruits
of different treatments.
vi. Fruit yield/m2(fresh weight) (g):
Fruit yield was obtained by weighing fruits from plants within 1m2
area of the different treatments.
vii. Percentage of abnormal fruits (%):
Abnormal fruits included misshaped, infected, rotted and injured fruits
which were determined from the different treatments.

13
 At the end of the experiment the 10 labelled plants were cut, and
measurements of growth such as number of leaves/plant, plant height, root
length, shoot fresh and dry weights, root fresh and dry weights, plant fresh
and dry weights were recorded.
Analysis of data was done using Randomized Complete Block Design
(Gomez and Gomez, 1984) while means separation was done by least
significant difference (L.S.D) for all data.

14
 CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS

4. 1 Growth Measurements
The following growth measurements were taken:
4.1.1 Number of leaves /Plant:
Analysis of variance of the data (Appendix 1), (Appendix 2) and
(Appendix 3) showed that there were highly significant differences for the
number of leaves /plant among fertilizer treatments at all readings. All
applied fertilizer treatments had significantly higher mean number of leaves
/plant than the control (Figure 1) at all readings too. Among fertilizer
treatments the highest number of leaves/plant was obtained with the
application of 2N. Also the significant differences were found among them
in 2N treatment compared to other fertilizers treatments in first and third
readings while in second reading the significant difference was related to 2N
treatment compared to (1N, NPK) treatments.

4.1.2 Plant Height (cm):

The results of analysis of variance for plant height indicated that there
were highly significant differences among fertilizer treatments in all
samplings (Appendix 1), (Appendix 2) and (Appendix 3). All fertilizer
treatments had significantly higher mean plant height than that of the control
(Figure 2). On the other hand, among fertilizer treatments the highest mean,
though not significant was given with the application of 2N.

15
4.1.3 Root Length (cm):

Analysis of variance for the root length (Appendix 1), (Appendix 2)

and (Appendix 3)revealed that there were highly significant differences
between fertilizer treatments in all samplings, and all the fertilizer treatment
had significantly higher mean root length than the control (Figure 3) at all
readings. With respect to fertilizer treatments the highest mean root length
was achieved with the application of 2N treatment also the significant
differences were found in 2N compared to: (FYM, 1N, NPK) in first
reading, (FYM, NPK) in second reading, and (Chicken, 1N, FYM, NPK)
treatments in third reading.

4.1.4 Leaf Area (cm) 2:

With respect to leaf area there were highly significant differences

among fertilizer treatments in first reading and significant differences in
second and third readings (Appendix 1), (Appendix 2) and (Appendix 3).
Each of the applied fertilizers had significantly higher mean leaf area than
the control (Figure 4) at all readings. There was no significant difference
among fertilizer treatments except in third reading for 2N treatment
compared to other fertilizer treatments and Chicken, FYM treatments
compared to NPK treatment.

16
 Fig.1 Effect of N,NPK,farmyard manure and chicken
manure on the number of leaves/plant of squash

30

25
Mean number of leaves/plant

20

15

10

0
20 40 55
Days after sowing

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

17
 Fig.2 Effect of N,NPK,farmyard manure and chicken
manure on the plant height (cm) of squash

40

35

30
Mean plant height(cm)

25

20

15

10

0
20 40 55
Days after sowing

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

18
 Fig.3 Effect of N,NPK,farmyard manure and chicken
manure on the root length (cm) of squash

25

20
Mean root length (cm)

15

10

0
20 40 55
Days after sowing

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

19
 Fig.4 Effect of N ,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on the leaf area(cm2) of squash

70

60

50
Mean leaf area (cm2)

40

30

20

10

0
20 40 55
Days after sowing

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

20
4.1.5 Shoot Fresh Weight (g):

Analysis of variance revealed that there were highly significant

differences among fertilizer treatments in all readings (Appendix 1),
(Appendix 2) and (Appendix 3). All applied fertilizers treatments had
significantly higher mean shoot fresh weight than the control (Figure 5) at
all readings. Among fertilizer treatments the highest shoot fresh weight was
given with the application of 2N. However, no significant difference was
found among fertilizer treatments except in second reading in 2N treatment
compared to (NPK and 1N) treatments.

4.1.6 Shoot Dry Weight (g):

Results obtained from the analysis of variance (Appendix 1),

(Appendix 2) and (Appendix 3) demonstrated that there were highly
significant differences between fertilizer treatments in the three samplings.
All applied fertilizer treatments had significantly higher mean shoot dry
weight than the control (Figure 6) at all readings. As in previous findings,
the highest mean shoot dry weight was obtained with the application of 2N.
As related to fertilizer treatments no significant differences were observed
among them in first and third readings but in second reading the significant
difference was found in 2N treatment compared to (NPK and 1N)
treatments.

21
 Fig.5 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on the shoot fresh weight (g) of squash
Mean shoot fresh weight(g)

600

500

400

300

200

100

0
20 40 55
Days after sowing

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

22
 Fig. 6 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on the shoot dry weight (g) of squash

70

60
Mean shoot dry weight(g)

50

40

30

20

10

0
20 40 55
Days after sowing

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

23
4.1.7 Root Fresh Weight (g):
Analysis of variance of the data (Appendix 1), (Appendix 2) and
(Appendix 3) revealed a statistical difference among fertilizer treatments in
the three samplings. All applied fertilizer treatments had significantly higher
mean root fresh weight than the control at all readings (Figure 7). The
highest mean root fresh weight obtained with the application of 2N, though
not statistically significant.

4.1.8 Root Dry Weight (g):

Analysis of variance of the data (Appendix 1), (Appendix 2) and (Appendix
3) indicated that there were highly significant differences among fertilizer
treatments at all readings. All applied fertilizer treatments had significantly
higher mean root dry weight than the control (Figure 8) at all readings.
Among fertilizer treatments the highest root dry weight was scored for 2N.

24
 Fig.7 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on the root fresh weight (g) of squash

14

12
Mean root fresh weight(g)

10

0
20 40 55
Days after sowing

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

25
 Fig.8 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on the root dry weight (g) of squash

1.4

1.2
Mean root dry weight(g)

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
20 40 55
Days after sowing

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

26
 4. 2 Growth Measurement

At the end of the experiment ten labelled plants were subjected to the
measurements of the number of leaves/plant, plant height, root length, shoot
fresh and dry weight, and root fresh and dry weight, plant fresh and dry
weight in order to evaluate their potentiality for production.

Statistically, results showed that there were significant differences

between fertilizer treatments in all measurements (Appendix 4). All
fertilizer treatments had significantly higher means for all growth
measurements than the control. 2N gave the highest mean in all
measurements.

2N treatment gave higher number of leaves/plant (Figure 9) compared to

1N, FYM, Chicken and NPK treatments. On the other hand plant height and
root length gave significant difference just between 2N and 1N treatments
(figure 10 and 11), but in statement of shoot and root dry weight the
significant difference occurred in 2N treatment compared to (NPK and 1N)
treatments (figure 13 and 15). Regarding shoot and root fresh weight no
significant differences were found among all fertilizer treatments (Figure 12
and 14). Also in plant fresh and dry weight no significant differences were
found among all fertilizer treatments (Figure 16 and 17).

27
 Fig.9 Effect of N, NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on the number of leaves/plant of squash

30

25
Mean number of leaves /plant

20

15

10

0
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

Treatments
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

28
Fig.10 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on Plant Height (cm) of squash

45

40

35
Mean plant height(cm)

30

25

20

15

10

0
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

Treatments
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

29
 Fig.11 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on root length (cm) of squash

25

20
Mean root length(cm)

15

10

0
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

Treatments
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

30
 Fig.12 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure of shoot fresh weight (g) of squash

700

600
Mean shoot fresh weight(g)

500

400

300

200

100

0
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

Treatments
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

31
 Fig.13 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on shoot dry weight (g) of squash

70

60
Mean shoot dry weight(g)

50

40

30

20

10

0
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

Treatments
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

32
 Fig.14 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manureand chicken
manure on root fresh weight (g) of squash

14

12
Mean root fresh weight(g)

10

0
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

Treatments
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

33
Fig.15 Effect of N, NPK, farnmyard manure and chicken
manure on the root dry weight (g) of squash

1.6

1.4

1.2
Mean root dry weight(g)

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

Treatments
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

34
Fig.16 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on the Plant Fresh Weight(g) of squash

700

600
Mean plant fresh weight(g)

500

400

300

200

100

0
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

Treatments

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

35
 Fig.17 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on plant dry weight(g) of squash

70

60
Mean plant dry weight(g)

50

40

30

20

10

0
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control
Treatments

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

36
4.3 Flowering Measurements

Analysis of variance of data (Appendix 5) revealed that there were

highly significant differences between fertilizer treatments for all flowering
measurement except sex ratio.
Application of the different fertilizers (1N, 2N, NPK and Chicken)
gave significantly higher mean number of days to flowering than FYM and
control (Table 1). Fertilizer treatments gave the highest mean number of
days to flowering with the application of 2Nand NPK.
For days to 50% flowering 1N, 2N, NPK treatments gave significantly
higher mean days to 50% flowering compared to Chicken, FYM and
control (Table 2).
All applied fertilizer treatments had significantly higher mean
number of staminate and pistillate flowers/plant than control (Table 3).
Statistical analysis revealed that no significant differences between the
means for number of staminate flowers/plant but the mean number of
pistillate flowers/plant significantly higher for 2N treatment compared to
1N, NPK, and Chicken.
As shown in (Table 3), no significant differences were observed
among fertilizer treatments with respect of mean male to female
flowers/plant. However, the highest mean male to female flowers/plant was
obtained with the application of 1N and NPK treatments.

37
Table: 1 Effect of N, NPK, farmyard manure and chicken manure
on the mean of days to flowering of squash

Fertilizer Days to Flowering

Treatment
1N 31.3
2N 32.5
NPK 32.3
FYM 28.8
Chicken 30.3
Control 28.8
Over all 30.7
mean
LSD (5%) 0.8

LSD: Least Significant Difference

38
Table: 2 Effect of N, NPK, farmyard manure and chicken manure
on mean of days to 50% flowering of squash

Fertilizer Days to50% of

Treatment Flowering
1N 39.3
2N 39.8
NPK 39.8
FYM 34
Chicken 34.8
Control 34.5
Over all 37
mean
LSD (5%) 0.92

LSD: Least Significant Difference

39
Table: 3 Effect of N, NPK, farmyard manure and chicken manure on
mean number of staminate, pistillate and male to female
flowers/plant of squash

Fertilizer Mean of Mean of Mean of

Treatment Staminate Pistillate ♂/♀
Flowers/plant Flowers/plant Flowers/plant

1N 12.5 7.4 1.7

2N 13.0 9.1 1.4
NPK 12.0 7.3 1.7
FYM 12.6 8.1 1.5
Chicken 12.9 7.8 1.6
Control 6.4 4.9 1.4
Over all 11.6 7.4 1.6
mean
LSD (5%) 2.24 1.13 -

LSD: Least Significant Difference

40
4.4 Yield measurements

4.4.1 Number of Fruits/plant:

Analysis of variance of the number of fruits/plant (Appendix 6)

demonstrated that there were highly significant differences for the effect of
fertilizer treatments on all pickings; all applied fertilizer treatments had
significantly higher mean number of fruits/plant than control (Figure 18).
Among fertilizer treatments the highest mean was given with application of
2N. However there were no significant differences for the effect of fertilizer
treatment on the first and final harvests; while for the rest of harvests there
were significant differences for the effect of 2N compared to other fertilizer
treatments. All applied fertilizer treatments had significantly higher mean
number of fruits/plant than control (Table 4). Application of 2N scored the
highest mean also the significant differences occurred in 2N compared to the
rest of fertilizer treatments.

4.4.2 Fruit Length (cm):

Analysis of variance (Appendix 7) indicated that there were highly

significant differences within fertilizer treatments at all samplings .Each of
the applied fertilizer had significantly higher effect on the mean fruit length
than control (Figure 19). The highest mean was recorded for 2N fertilizer
treatment.

41
 Fig.18 Effect of N, NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on number of fruits/plant of squash

6
Mean number of fruits/plant

0
1 2 3 4 5 6

Harvest

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

42
Table. 4 Effect of N, NPK, farmyard manure and chicken manure
on total number of fruits/plant of squash

Fertilizer Total Number of Fruits

Treatment /plant

1N 24.8
2N 30.1
NPK 26.5
FYM 24.8
Chicken 23.9
Control 13.1
Over all 23.9
mean
LSD (5%) 3.35

LSD: Least Significant Difference

43
 Fig.19 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on fruit length (cm) of squash

16

14
Mean fruit length(cm)

12

10

0
1 2 3

Samples

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

44
4.4.3 Fruit Diameter (cm):

Fertilizer treatments had significantly higher effect on the mean fruit

diameter than control (Figure 20).The highest mean was recorded for 2N
fertilizer level.

4.4.4 Fruit Dry Weight (g):

Regarding fruits dry weight results from analysis of variance

(Appendix 9) revealed that in all samplings there were highly significant
differences for the effect of fertilizer treatments. Each of the applied
fertilizer treatment had significantly higher effect on the mean fruit dry
weight than control (Figure 21). In all samplings the highest mean was
recorded with application of 2N fertilizer level.

45
 Fig.20 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on fruit diameter(cm)of squash

4.5

4
Mean fruit diameter(cm)

3.5

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
1 2 3

Samples

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

46
 Fig.21 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on fruit dry weight (g) of squash

4.5

4
Mean fruit dry weight(g)

3.5

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
1 2 3

samples

1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

47
4.4.5 Fruit Yield/plant (fresh weight) (g):

All applied fertilizer treatments had significantly higher effect on

the mean fruit yield/plant than control (Figure 22) while there were no
significant differences observed among fertilizer treatments. All applied
fertilizer treatments had significantly higher mean fruit yield/plant than
control (Table 5). Among fertilizer treatments the highest fruit yield/plant
occurred with the application of 2N additional to that there was statistical
difference between 2N and NPK.

48
 Fig.22 Effect of N,NPK, farmyard manure and chicken
manure on fruit yield /plant (fresh weight)(g)of squash

300

250
Mean fruit yield/plant(g)

200

150

100

50

0
1 2 3 4 5 6

Haervest
1N 2N NPK FYM Chicken Control

49
Table. 5 Effect of N, NPK, farmyard manure and chicken manure
on total fruits weight/plant/g, kg/ha of squash

Fertilizer Total Fruits Total Fruits Weight

Treatment Weight/plant/g kg/ha

1N 1295 1233.4
2N 1480 1409.5
NPK 1260 1200.0
FYM 1365 1300.0
Chicken 1347.5 1283.4
Control 612.5 583.3
Over all 1840 1168.26
mean
LSD (5%) 207.0 420.16

LSD: Least Significant Difference

50
4.4.6 Fruit Yield/m2

All applied fertilizer treatments had significantly higher effect on

mean yield/m2 than control (Table 6), the highest yield/m2 was achieved
with the application of 2N fertilizer treatment. No significant differences
were found among fertilizer treatments.

4.4.7 Percentage of Abnormal Fruits

Analysis of variance of data (Appendix 11) showed that there were

significant differences among fertilizer treatments. All applied fertilizer
treatments gave significantly lower Percentage of abnormal Fruits than
control (Table 7) however; the highest Percentage of abnormal Fruits was
obtained from the control treatment.

51
Table.6 Effect of N, NPK, farmyard manure and chicken manure
on fruits yield/m2 /g , kg/ha of squash

Fertilizer Fruits yield/m2/g Fruits yield/kg/ha

Treatment
1N 5907.14 59071.4
2N 6342.85 63428.5
NPK 5400 54000
FYM 5850 58500
Chicken 5775 57750
Control 2000 20000
Over all 5212.49 52124.98
mean
LSD (5%) 1460.17 19453.27

LSD: Least Significant Difference

52
Table.7 Effect of N, NPK, farmyard manure and chicken manure
on percentage of abnormal fruits of squash

Fertilizer Percentage of Abnormal

Treatment Fruits
1N 19.6
2N 18.79
NPK 19.22
FYM 18.57
Chicken 18 .9
Control 25.97
Over all 20.2
mean
LSD (5%) 4.2

LSD: Least Significant Difference

53
 CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION

This study was conducted to investigate the effect of Farmyard,

Chicken Manures, Urea and NPK Fertilizers on squash growth and yield.
The results achieved indicated that all applied fertilizer treatments had
significantly higher effect on all growth and yield parameters than control.
Sutton (1965) reported similar results which showed that nitrogen had the
most significant effect on yield and plant growth of squash. Similarly
Ahmed et al (1992) reported that organic manure resulted in significantly
higher yield than the control.

Results, obtained from this study, Concerning dry weight, fresh

weight, leaves number, plants height are similar to the findings of Mohamed
(2004) who found that squash shoot dry matter and yields were increased by
all N Fertilizer rates. Eguchi et al (1958), who reported that fertilizer level
affects the growth of tomato, eggplant and pepper growth parameters. Also
Moursi (1957) showed that N application increased the number of leaves and
dry weight of tomato plants.

Leaf area results obtained were in the same line to Kim (1980)
findings which showed that high N levels caused an increase in leaf area
(LA) in sweet potato.

Fruits number and weight obtained from this study were similar to the
results of Venturi and Piazza (1974) who demonstrated that nitrogen
application increased both fruit number and mean weight of the crop. Also
supportable findings from Fisher (1969) showed that high levels of N

54
increased number of fruits in tomato. On the other hand Attia (1958) found
no significant difference in yield of watermelon on application of manure
and chemical fertilizers.

Eltilib et al (1994) Mohammed (1993) Elsheikh and Elzidany (1997)

reported that farm yard and chicken manures significantly increased plant
height, leaves number, fresh weight and yield

As compared farm yard and chicken manure no Statistical difference

was found between them due to their similar effects. Bationo
and Mokwunye, (1991) reported that addition of organic materials either in
the form of manures or crop residue has beneficial effects on the soils
chemical and physical properties.

Growth and yield parameter gave lower response to NPK fertilizer

treatments compared to Urea fertilizer treatments because of their lower
percentage of nitrogen 17%.

Flowering results from this study revealed that fertilizer treatments

delayed flowering of squash. These results were supported by Tewari (1965)
who reported that there was delaying in flowering process due to the
application of the complete fertilizers to tomato plants. Fisher (1969)
reported similar results. On the other hand FYM as well as control treatment
showed no delaying in days to flowering in correspondence with finding of
Salih (1981) who indicated that there was no difference in days to flowering
of okra when fertilizers are used.

55
 The staminate to pistillate flowers ratio were affected by the different
fertilizer treatments. Many researchers reported similar results (Erwin and
Habor, 1929) and (Whitaker, 1931).

As for the percentage of abnormal fruits, fertilizers treatment gave the

lower percentage of abnormal fruits compared to control. Similar findings
were reported by Bhadoria, et al (2002) who was working with okra, found
that FYM gave high quality in Okra fruits. Also in another study of
buttercup squash Cucurbita maxima Lantbruksuniversitet (2002), the results
indicated that growth rate and marketable yield of squash increased with the
increase in N rates.

All previous findings and supporting reviews allowed concluding that

fertilizers and manure application significantly affected crop growth and
yield, therefore studied programs concerning chemical fertilization and
organic agriculture techniques must be followed in order to attain the best
vegetables productivity.

56
 References

Abdel Samie, A.E. (1958). Yield and Sex Expression of Cucumber

Influenced by Nutrition, date of Planting and Frequency of
Picking Cucumber. (In Arabic) Agricultural Research Review
.36 (3):480-500.

Abdel Samie, A.E. (1958). Effect of fertilization, sowing date, difference

picking methods on yield and sex expression of squash
Agricultural Research Review (3) 519-537.

Ahmed, S.H; Ali, N .A; Salih, A.A.; Abdellah, B.; Abdelrahman, B.E;
Mansi. M.G. and Abdelwahab, O.A. (1992). Effect of Organic
Fertilizer on Wheat Production under Sudan Conditions.
ICARD/NVRP.Doc-031, Annual Report, Agricultural Research
Corporation. Wadmedani, Sudan.

Attia, M.S. (1958). Effect of Local Propagation of the Chilian Black Variety
of Water melon and Some Fertilizer Treatments on the Quality
of the Fruits. Agriculture Research Review, 36 (3): 367-395.

Awadallah, E.A. and Basioni, N.H. (1993) fertilizer and fertilization (in
Arabic), 1st edition,compu. Center. Cairo University: pp140

Bationo and Mokwunye (1991). Role of Manures and Crop Residue in

Alleviating Soil Fertility Constraints to Crop production: with

57
 special reference to the Sahelian and Sudanian zones of West
Africa IFDC-Afrique, B.P. 4483, Lomé, Togo (117–125).

Bhadoria - PBs; Prakash –ys; Amitava- Rakshit; Rakshit- A(2002)-

Importance of Organic Manure in Improving Quality of Rice
and Okra-Environment – and – Ecology .2002, 20:3, 628; 11
REF

Chankar, N.S. and Singh, S.N. (1965). Studies on Inorganic Nutrition of

Okra in Sand Culture. Hort. Abst., 1964, 34 (1).

Chauhan, D.S. and Bahandari, Y.N. (1971). Pod Development and

Germination Studies on Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench
in Sand Culture Ind. j. of Hort., 20.PP.51-58.

Cobley, L. S. (1976). An Introduction to the Botany of Tropical Crops.

Second Edition. Longman, London and New York. 371 pp.

Contliffe,D.(1974).Sex Expressio in Cucumber. Fact Sheet, Ontario Ministry

of Agriculture and Food 74-107 (Hort. Abstract 45. 3204).

Dufault, R.J. (1986). Influence of Nutritional Conditioning on Musk Melon

Transplant. Quality and Early Yield. Journal of American
Society for Horticultural Science, 111(5): 698-703

Elagib,M.A.(1997). Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers, and soil types

on different elements and Ca.Mg. M.sc (Agric). Thesis
University of Khartoum, Sudan.

Elsheikh, E. and Elzidany, E. (1997). Effects of Rhizobium inoculation,

58
 organic and chemical fertilizers on yield and physical properties

of faba bean seeds (137 – 144)

Eguchi,T., Matsumura T., and Ashizawa, M. (1958). The Effect of Nutrition

on Flower Formation in Veg. Crops Proc .Amer. soc. Hort.
Sci. 72: 343-352.

Eltilib, A.M.; Ali, A. /M. and Abdelallah, M.A. (1994). Effect of Chicken
Manure and Salinity on Growth and Leaf nitrogen, Phosphorus
and Potassium Contents on Okra Grown in Two Soil Types,
University of Khartoum Journal of Agric.Science.1 (2):16-36.

Erwin, A.T. and Habor, E.S. (1929). Species and Varietal Crosses in
cucurbita. Lowa Agriculture Experiment Station. Bulletin, 263.

Fisher, K.J. (1969). Effect of Nitrogen Supply during Propagation on

Flowering and Fruiting of Glasshouse Tomatoes. Journal of
Horticulture Science, 44 (4): 407-411.

Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. (1984). Statical Procedures for Agricultural
Research. John Willy and Sons, Inc. New York, USA .

Gupta, M.L. (1973). Effect of Nitrogen Phosphorous and Potash on Growth

and Development of Okra Abelmoschus esculentus (L.)
Moench Ind. j. of Hort., 30.PP.401-406.

Hall,A.D.(1953). Fertilizers and manures, 5th edition, Adco, 193217.

59
Hutchinson, J. (1967). The Genera of Flowering Plants (Angiospermae)
Dicotyledones. Volume II. Oxford at the Clarendon Press,
London ET alibi. 659 pp.

Jassal, N.S. Jandhawa, K.S. and Nandpuri, R.S. (1970).Study on the Effect
of Irrigation and Certain Doses of NPK on the Weight of Fruit
and Yield of Muskmelon. Punjab Hort. J., 10 (143-9). (Hort.
Abstract 41, 8901).

Kernick, M. D. (1961). Seed Production of Specific Crops. pp. 181-461. In

FAO. Agricultural and Horticultural Seeds. Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. 531 pp.

Kim, J.Y. (1980). Study of the Influence of Nitrogen Fertilization on the

Growth and Development of Sweet Potato .Field Crop
Abstracts 37 (4).

Lana, E.R. (1950). Reciprocal Crosses in the Squash Cucurbita Maxima.

Duch. Minnesota Agricultural Experimental Station. Techn
.bul.,

Lantbruksuniversitet, S. (2002). Yield Responses to Different Plant Nutrition

Management for Buttercup Squash, Cucurbita maxima.
Swedish University of Agricultural Science, International
Office, Box 7070, SE -750 07 Uppsala, Sweden.

Loomis, W.E. (1958).Growth and Differentiation in Plant.Lawa State

College.

60
Mohamed, A.I. Effect of Foliar and Soil-Applied Fertilizer on Cucumber
Production in the Sudan ISHS Acta Horticulturae 176:
International Symposium on Protected Cultivations in the
Mediterranean Regions.

Mohamed, M.A. (1993). Effect of Farm Yard Manure on Soil Fertility,

Microbial Activity and Wheat Grain Yield. M. Sc. thesis,
University of Gezira, Wad-Medani. Sudan.

Mohamed, M.J. (2004). Squash yield, nutrient content and soil fertility
parameters in response to methods of fertilizer application and
rates of nitrogen fertigation (99 – 108).

Moursi, M.A. (1957). Physiological Ontogeny in Tomato and its Relation to

Cultivar Procedures .I. Growth Analysis to Tomato in Relation
to Nitrogen. Ann. Agric. Sci. Cairo, 2 (1):121-129.

Mukhtar, M.O. and Genif, A.A. (1989). Effect of Cattle Manure (FYM)
+Urea Nitrogen on Growth, Development and Yield of
Potatoes. Annual Report, Gezira Research Station., Agricultural
Research Corporation ,Wad-Medani, Sudan.

Padda, D.S., Malik, D.S. and Kumarj. C. (1969). Response of Musk melon
to Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potash Fertilization. Indian J.
Hort. 26-127-6. (Hort. Abstract 41, 3910).

Purseglove, J. W. (1968). Tropical Crops: Dicotyledons.

Rekhi, S.S. and singh, A. (1969). Influence of Fertilizer Application on Sex

Expression in Musk melon .Journal of Research Punjab

61
 Agriculture University, 5-1965.Soil and Fertilizers 32 (1).
Abstract no. 853.

Salih, O.M. (1981). Some studies on the effect of nitrogenous, phosphatic

fertilizers and population density on growth and yield of okra.

Scott, G.W (1939). Ratio and Fruit Production Studies in Bush Pumpkin.
American Society of Horticulture Science practical, 30, 520 -
525.
Seed Ahmed, A.A.: Yousif, M.T. and Mohammed, A.A. (2003).Vegetable
Production in the Sudan, Principles and Applications. (In
Arabic) National Institute for Horticultural Exports
Development (NIHED), University of Gezira.

Sutton, p. (1965). Effect of NP. and K. on Squash Yield. Proc. Soil Sci. fla.,
725 (46-50) (Hort. Abstract 37-2856).

Tewari, G.P. (1965). Effect of Nitrogen, Phosphorous and Potassium on

Flowering and Yield of Soybeans in Nigeria. Journal of
Experimental Agriculture, 1(2):185-188.

Venturi, G. and Piazza R. (1974). The effect of NPK on Summer squash (C.
pepo) Riviata di Agronomica (1973) 7 (2/3)143-49. Universita
di Poligna Italy. (Hort. Abstract 44. 5656).

Whitaker, T.W. (1931). Sex Ratio and Sex Expression in the Cultivated
Cucurbits. American Journal of Botany, 18:359-366.

62
Appendix.7 Mean squares from the analysis of variance of the
effect of fertilizers on Fruit Length of squash

Source Degree Sample Sample Sample

of of 1 2 3
variation freedom
Block 3 0.3 0.1 0.1
ns ns ns
Treatment 5 9.33 8.4 8.6
** ** **
Error 15 1.15 0.59 0.82
C.V. (%) 9.3 6.1 6.8
ns : No significant difference
** : Significant difference at 0.01
C.V. : Coefficient of variation

xii.

63
Appendix.8 Mean squares from the analysis of variance of the
effect of fertilizers on Fruit Diameter of squash

Source Degree Sample Sample Sample

of of 1 2 3
variation freedom
Block 3 0.04 0.06 0.13
ns ns ns
Treatment 5 0.88 1.06 1.25
** ** **
Error 15 0.07 0.06 0.08
C.V. (%) 6.7 5.9 6.65
ns : No significant difference
** : Significant difference at 0.01
C.V. : Coefficient of variation

vii.

64
Appendix.9 Mean squares from the analysis of variance of the
effect of fertilizers on Fruit Dry Weight of squash

Source Degree Sample Sample Sample

of of 1 2 3
variation freedom
Block 3 0.096 0.12 0.42
ns ns ns
Treatment 5 5.08 5.9 6.69
** ** **
Error 15 0.87 0.82 0.83
C.V. (%) 28.8 26.1 24.9
ns : No significant difference
** : Significant difference at 0.01
C.V. : Coefficient of variation

ix.

65
Appendix.11 Mean squares from the analysis of variance of the
effect of fertilizers on Abnormal Fruits of squash

Source Degree Mean squares of

of of Abnormal Fruits
variation freedom
Block 3 0.6
ns
Treatment 5 32.7
*
Error 15 7.82

C.V. (%) 13.8

ns : No significant difference
* : Significant difference at 0.05
C.V. : Coefficient of variation

xi.

66
Appendix.12 FYM, Chicken Manures and Soil Analysis

Manures FYM Chicken Soil pH N% P ppm Organic

N% carbon
0.3 6.3 9.13 0.0896 1.74 0.7874

xii.

67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
Appendix. 1 Mean squares from the analysis of variance showing the effect of fertilizer treatments
on Growth attributes of squash at 20 days after sowing

Source Degree Number Plant Root Leaf Shoot Shoot Root Root
of of of height length area fresh dry fresh dry
variation freedom leaves (cm) (cm) (cm)2 weight weight weight weight
(g) (g) (g) (g)
Block 3 2.89 8.11 1.12 0.0033 642.70 0.51 0.04 0.006
ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
5 8.68 56.92 21.74 0.1534 4084.37 119 3.43 0.051
Treatment ** ** ** ** ** ** * **
Error 15 2.92 11.96 1.48 0.0055 307.70 25.11 0.91 0.01
C.V. (%) 15.7 20.8 12.2 13.2 10.5 21.6 32.5 31.2
ns : No significant difference
* : Only significant difference (at 0.05)
** : Highly significant difference (at 0.01)
C.V. : Coefficient of variation
Appendix. 2 Mean squares from the analysis of variance showing the effect of fertilizers on Vegetative
attributes of squash at 40 days after sowing

Source Degree Number Plant Root Leaf Shoot Shoot Root Root
of of of height length area fresh dry fresh dry
variation freedom leaves (cm) (cm) (cm)2 weight weight weight weight
(g) (g) (g) (g)
Block 3 0.32 3.57 0.20 0.013 14643.53 4.66 0.03 0.01
ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Treatment 5 72.36 94.6 42.26 0.372 55657.0 407.8 7.07 0.25
** ** ** * ** ** * **
Error 15 2.83 3.5 3.31 0.084 7792.18 30.26 1.73 0.03
C.V. (%) 9.2 7.2 11.6 28.6 20.8 13.4 27.1 23.3
ns : No significant difference
* : Only significant difference (at 0.05)
** : Highly significant difference (at 0.01)
C.V. : Coefficient of variation
Appendix. 3 Mean squares from the analysis of variance showing the effect of fertilizers on
Vegetative attributes of squash at 55 days after sowing

Source Degree Number Plant Root Leaf Shoot Shoot Root Root
of of of height length area fresh dry fresh dry
variation freedom leaves (cm) (cm) (cm)2 weight weight weight weight
(g) (g) (g) (g)
Block 0.5 2.76 0.66 0.01 1517.4 2.95 0.46 0.03
3 ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Treatment 5 85.2 126.57 24.62 0.92 47314.2 502.67 28.7 0.36
** ** ** * ** ** * **
Error 15 4.46 12.65 1.50 0.26 5500.3 34 7.33 0.03
C.V. (%) 10 11.2 6.3 33.5 15.4 11.9 29.4 18
ns : No significant difference
* : Only significant difference (at 0.05)
** : Highly significant difference (at 0.01)
C.V. : Coefficient of variation
Appendix. 4 Mean squares from the analysis of variance showing the effect of fertilizers on
Growth attributes of plants of yield of squash

Source Degree Number Plant Root Shoot Shoot Root Root plant plant
of of of height length fresh dry fresh dry fresh dry
variation freedom leaves (cm) (cm) weight weight weight weight weight weight
(g) (g) (g) (g) (g) (g)
Block 3 0.28 1.8 1.6 178.0 9.8 0.4 0.006 1049.66 2.94
ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Treatment 5 90.99 138.6 25.15 55024.8 435.9 28.64 0.45 56638.4 462.77
** ** ** ** ** * ** ** **
Error 15 3.65 8.5 3.98 7329.4 51.4 7.23 0.07 6333.16 53.7
C.V. (%) 9.1 8.8 10.2 16.3 14.1 28.6 26.9 15 14.22
ns : No significant difference
* : Only significant difference (at 0.05)
** : Highly significant difference (at 0.01)
C.V. : Coefficient of variation
Appendix. 5 Mean squares from the analysis of variance showing the effect of fertilizers on
Flowering attributes of squash

Source Degree Days to 50% of Staminate Pistillate ♂/♀

of of flowering flowering flowers flowers flowers
variation freedom
Block 3 0.15 0.11 0.05 0.16 0.003
ns ns ns ns ns
Treatment 5 10.97 32.4 26.3 10.92 0.048
** ** ** ** ns
Error 15 0.286 0.378 2.22 0.57 0.12
C.V. (%) 1.7 1.6 12.9 10.2 12.7
ns : No significant difference
* : Only significant difference (at 0.05)
** : Highly significant difference (at 0.01)
C.V. : Coefficient of variation
Appendix. 6 Mean squares from the analysis of variance showing the effect of fertilizers on
Number of fruits of squash
1 2 3 4 5 6
Source Degree Harvest Harvett Harvest Harvest Harvest Harvest Total
of of harvest
variation freedom
Block 3 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.25 0.15 0.15 3.0
ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Treatment 5 1.6 4.12 4.75 6.55 4 1.83 130.26
** ** ** ** ** ** **
Error 15 0.16 0.21 0.25 0.36 0.14 0.18 4.97
C.V. (%) 13.3 11.6 10.6 12 9.6 14.5 9.3
ns : No significant difference
* : Only significant difference (at 0.05)
** : Highly significant difference (at 0.01)
C.V. : Coefficient of variation
 Appendix. 10 Mean squares from the analysis of variance showing the effect of fertilizers on Fruit yield of
squash
1 2 3 4 5 6
Source degree Harvest Harvest Harvest Harvest Harvest Harvest Total Yield/m2 Total Yield/m2
of of harvest harvest Kg/ha
variation freedom Kg/ha
Block 3 27.8 359.7 70.8 55.5 99.0 81.9 1411.1 848.6 1280.9 6 ×107
ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Treatment 5 6966.68 51370.84 11067.5 13796.6 * 12014.16 11687.5 384716.6 96137.5 348970.29 106 ×107
* ** * * * * ** * **
Error 15 2244.44 3316.38 3147.5 3678.8 3568.52 3585.28 85714.4 31215.28 77749.9 16 ×107
C.V. (%) 26.9 28.5 27.2 27.1 28.3 28.6 23.8 26.5 23.86 24.76
ns : No significant difference
* : Only significant difference (at 0.05)
** : Highly significant difference (at 0.01)
C.V. : Coefficient of variation