Field experiment characterizes agronomic traits of coffee landraces, suggesting potential for improvement.
Coffee is produced for home consumption and as income sources for many farmers and commercial growers in the lowland southern zone of Tigray. In this area there are a lot of landraces which have different agronomic and quality characters. However, those landraces have not been fully characterized in terms of morphology (quantitative traits), and their genetic potential is not well known. Therefore, a field experiment was conducted in Alamata Agricultural Research Center during 2012 with the objective of characterizing the agronomic characters of different land races at field condition. The experiment was laid out in single row design with two replications. The highest number of primary branches was observed in accessions 11 (150.5), 24 (126.5), 39 (119), 31 (115), 1 (114), and 35 (105), while the lowest one in 18 (38.5), 15 (43.5), 12 (44), and 4 (45.5). Accessions 3 (16.1 g/plant), 2 (14 g/plant), 7 (13.95 g/plant), 22 (13.3 g/plant), 39 (13.25 g/plant), 35, 34, and 21 had the highest mean values in 100 bean weight. The lowest values were obtained from accessions 13 (10.1 g/plant), 19 (10.15 g/plant), 23 (10.5 g/plant), 26 (10.45 g/plant), 4 (10.6 g/plant), 28 (10.75 g/plant), and 36 (10.95 g/plant). The highest yield was recorded from accessions 6 (1335 kg/ha), 39 (1303.8 kg/ha), 36 (1253.5 kg/ha), 29 (1142.8 kg/ha), 35 (1055.5 kg/ha), and 2 (1052.2 kg/ha), while the lowest yield was obtained from accessions 13 (188 kg/ha), 14 (152 kg/ha), 20 (156.5 kg/ha), 12 (218.1 kg/ha), 4 (237.8 kg/ha), 26 (276.4 kg/ha), 27 (286.8 kg/ha), 11 (293.9 kg/ha), 3 (332.1 kg/ha), and 373.9 kg/ha. It is encouraging to promote accessions 6, 39, 36, 29, 35, and 2 in the lowland southern zone of Tigray and other similar agroecologies. However, since the experiment was conducted for only one season and at a single location, it should be repeated across multiple seasons and locations to make a conclusive recommendation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Megena et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: