EFFECTS OF NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS RATES ON THE GROWTH, YIELD

AND QUALITY OF WATERMELON [Citrullus lanatus (Thumb) Matsun and Nakai] AT

ADAMI TULU, OROMIA-ETHIOPIA

M. Sc. THESIS

AMENTI CHALI NEMERA

HAWASSA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, HAWASSA, ETHIOPIA

SEPTEMBER 2011
EFFECTS OF NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS RATES ON THE GROWTH, YIELD

AND QUALITY OF WATERMELON [Citrullus lanatus (Thumb) Matsun and Nakai] AT

ADAMI TULU, EAST SHEWA ZONE

AMENTI CHALI NEMERA

A THESIS SUBMITED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANT AND

HORTICULTURAL SCIENCES, HAWASSA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF

AGRICULTURE, HAWASSA, ETHIOPIA

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN PLANT SCIENCES (SPECIALIZATION: AGRONOMY)

SEPTEMBER 2011
 EVALUATION SHEET -I-

As Thesis Research advisor, I hereby certify that I have read and evaluated this thesis
prepared, under my guidance, by Mr. Amenti Chali, entitled EFFECTS OF NITROGEN AND
PHOSPHORUS RATES ON THE GROWTH, YIELD AND QUALITY OF
WATERMELON AT ADAMI TULU, EAST SHEWA ZONE.

The assistance and help received during the course of this investigation have been duly
acknowledged. Therefore, I recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the Thesis
requirements.

BIZUAYEHU TESFAYE (PhD) ______________ ___________

Name of Major advisor Signature Date

MULUGETA TAYE (PhD) _______________ ___________

Name of co-advisor Signature Date

i
 APPROVAL SHEET-2
We, the undersigned, members of the board of examiners of the final open defense by

AMENTI CHALI NEMERA have read and evaluated his thesis entitled “EFFECTS OF

NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS RATES ON THE GROWTH, YIELD AND

QUALITY OF WATERMELON AT ADAMI TULU, EAST SHEWA ZONE”, and

examined the candidate. This is therefore to certify that the thesis has been accepted in partial

fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN PLANT

SCIENCES (SPECIALIZATION: AGRONOMY).

_________________________________ ________________ ________________

Name of Chairperson Signature Date

_________________________________ ________________ ________________

Name of Major Advisor Signature Date

_________________________________ ________________ ________________

Name of Internal Examiner Signature Date

_________________________________ ________________ ________________

Name of External Examiner Signature Date

Final approval and acceptance of the thesis is contingent upon the submission of the final copy

of the thesis to the SGS through the DGC of the candidate’s department.

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGENTS

Above all, I would like to thank the almighty God for his perfect protection and guidance

during my course studies and thesis work.

I am sincerely grateful to Dr. Bizuayehu Tesfaye, my major research advisor, for his sustained

and educated guidance, unreserved advice, and wholehearted collaboration. His constructive

comments and professional involvement immensely contributed to the accomplishment of the

research work and write-up of this thesis. I also extend my heart-felt thanks to Dr. Mulugeta

Taye, my co-advisor, for his encouragement and exemplary advice.

Finally, I am very grateful to Oromia Agricultural Research Institute (OARI) for granting me

a full scholarship throughout my study period. I also wish to thank all Adami Tulu

Agricultural Research Center staffs for their assistance during my thesis research work.

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGENTS .......................................................................................................................... iii

DEDICATION .........................................................................................................................................vi

STATEMENT OF AUTHOR .................................................................................................................vii

ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................................... viii

LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................................ix

LIST OF PLATE...................................................................................................................................... x

LIST OF TABLES IN APPENDICES .....................................................................................................xi

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................................ xii

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1

2. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................................ 5

2.1. Watermelon Botany and Ecology .................................................................................... 5

2.2. Watermelon Production in Ethiopia ................................................................................. 6
2.3. Nitrogen and Phosphorus Requirements of Watermelon ................................................. 8
2.4. Influences of N and P on Growth Parameters and Yield Components of Watermelon . 10
2.5. Influences of N and P on Watermelon Fruit Yield and Quality ..................................... 12

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS ...................................................................................... 14

3.1. Experimental Site Description ....................................................................................... 14

3.2. Treatment and Design .................................................................................................... 14
3.3. Experimental Procedures ............................................................................................... 15
3.4. Data Collection and Procedure....................................................................................... 17
3.4.1. Growth parameters ......................................................................................................... 17
3.4.2. Fruit yield components, fruit yield and quality .............................................................. 18

iv
 3.5. Soil Sampling and Analysis ........................................................................................... 19
3.6. Plant Tissue Sampling and Analysis .............................................................................. 20
3.7. Statistical Analysis ......................................................................................................... 20
3.8. Economic Analysis ........................................................................................................ 21

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .................................................................................................... 23

4.1. Main Vine Length .......................................................................................................... 23

4.2. Number of Branches per Plant ....................................................................................... 24
4.3. Number of Leaves per Plant ........................................................................................... 25
4.4 Leaf Area Index ............................................................................................................. 28
4.5 Above Ground Dry Weight per Plant............................................................................. 29
4.6 Days to 50% Flowering.................................................................................................. 31
4.7 Number of Fruits per Plant............................................................................................. 33
4.8 Fruit Diameter ................................................................................................................ 35
4.9 Fruit Length.................................................................................................................... 37
4.10 Average Fruit Weight..................................................................................................... 38
4.11 Total Fruit Yield............................................................................................................. 40
4.12 Marketable and Unmarketable Fruit Yield .................................................................... 43
4.13 TSS % ............................................................................................................................ 45
4.14 Soil Nutrient Analysis .................................................................................................... 46
4.15 Nutrient Tissue Concentrations ...................................................................................... 48
4.16 Economic Analysis ........................................................................................................ 50

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ............................................................................................... 52

6. REFERENCES............................................................................................................................... 55

7. APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................... 60

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................................................................................................. xiii

v
 DEDICATION

Dedicated to my parents who brought me up through all aspects of life

vi
 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 fulfillments

of the requirements for M.Sc. degree at Hawassa University and is deposited at the University

Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. I solemnly declare that

this thesis is not submitted to any other institution anywhere for the reward 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 from this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of

the major 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: Amenti Chali Signature:________________________

Place: Hawassa University, Hawassa

Date of Submission: _________________________

vii
 ABBREVIATIONS

ATARC Adami Tulu Agricultural Research Center

CEC Cation Exchange Capacity

CV Coefficient of Variation

DAP Diammonium Phosphate

FGD Focus Group Discussion

LSD Least Significance Difference

TSP Triple Super Phosphate

TSS % Total Soluble Solids percentage

w/v weight by volume

viii
 LIST OF TABLES

Page

1. Interaction effect of N and P on main vine length of watermelon at Adami Tulu ............... 24
2. Mean number of branches and leaves per plant as influenced by N and P interaction at
Adami Tulu ............................................................................................................................... 27
3. Leaf area index of watermelon as influenced by main effects of N and P at Adami Tulu ... 29
4. Interaction effect of N and P on above ground dry weight of watermelon at Adami Tulu .. 31
5. Interaction effect of N and P on days to flowering of watermelon at Adami Tulu .............. 33
6. Nitrogen and phosphorus interaction effect on mean total fruit number per plant at Adami
Tulu ........................................................................................................................................... 35
7. Mean fruit diameter as affected by main effects of N and P at Adami Tulu ........................ 36
8. Interaction effect of N and P on mean fruit length of watermelon at Adami Tulu ............... 38
9. Interaction effect of N and P on mean fruit weight of watermelon at Adami Tulu .............. 40
10. Interaction effect of N and P on total fruit yield of watermelon at Adami Tulu ................ 42
11. Interaction effect of N and P on mean marketable and unmarketable fruit yield of
watermelon at Adami Tulu ....................................................................................................... 44
12. Interaction effect of N and P on TSS% of watermelon at Adami Tulu .............................. 46
13. Influence of main effects of N and P on mean soil total N and available P concentration at
harvest at Adami Tulu............................................................................................................... 48
14. Main effects of N and P on mean leaf N and P content at Adami Tulu ............................. 49
15. Interaction effect N and P on economic analysis of marketable fruit yield of watermelon at
Adami Tulu ............................................................................................................................... 51

ix
 LIST OF PLATE
Page

Charleston Gray 33 in the field three weeks before harvest ..................................................... 16

x
 LIST OF TABLES IN APPENDICES

Page

1. Physico-chemical properties of soil at experimental site before planting ............................ 61

2. Weather data of Adami Tulu Agricultural Research Center (2010) ..................................... 61

3. Analysis of variance for growth attributes of watermelon as affected by N and P fertilizers

.................................................................................................................................................. 62

4. Analyses of variance for yield, yield components and quality of watermelon as influenced
by N and P fertilizers ................................................................................................................ 63

5. Analysis of variance for Soil total N, soil available P, leaf total N, and leaf total P as
affected by interaction of N and P ............................................................................................ 64

6. Mean total leaf area per plant as influenced by interaction of N and P at Adami Tulu........ 64

7. Simple correlation coefficients among different parameters ................................................ 65

8. Nitrogen and phosphorus interaction effect on mean marketable and unmarketable fruit
number per plant at Adami Tulu ............................................................................................... 66

9. Main effects of N and P on mean main vine length, leaf number per plant and branch
number per plant at Adami Tulu ............................................................................................... 67

xi
Title: EFFECTS OF NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS RATES ON GROWTH, YIELD
AND QUALITY OF WATERMELON [Citrullus lanatus (Thumb) Matsun and Nakai] AT
ADAMI TULU, EAST SHEWA ZONE

Name of student and degree: Amenti Chali/Agronomy

Name of Advisor and Title: Bizuayehu Tesfaye (PhD)
Name of Co-Advisor and Title: Mulugeta Taye (PhD)

ABSTRACT

A field study was conducted to determine the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus application on
fruit yield and quality of watermelon [Citrullus lanatus (Thumb) Matsun and Nakai] at Adami
Tulu in 2010. The experiment consisted of factorial combinations of four levels of N (0, 60,
120 and 180 N kg/ha) and three levels of P (0, 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha). The experiment was
laid out in a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. Interaction
between N and P had significant effect on average main vine length, branch number per plant,
leaf number per plant, above ground dry weight per plant, days to 50 % flowering, fruit
number per plant, fruit length, fruit weight, total fruit yield per hectare, marketable fruit yield
per hectare, and TSS%. Interaction of N and P had non significant effect on leaf area index,
fruit diameter, and unmarketable fruit yield per hectare. However, main effect of N rates
significantly affected leaf area index and fruit diameter while P levels remained non
significant. Nitrogen and phosphorus interaction had no significant effect on soil total N, soil
available P, leaf total N and P concentrations. However, main effects of N and P had
significant effect on their respective concentrations in soil as well as in leaf with the exception
that main effects of N significantly influenced leaf total P content. Total and marketable fruit
yield correlated positively and highly significantly (p ≤ 0.01) with number of marketable fruit
per plant (r = 0.95 and r = 0.97, respectively), number of branches per plant (r = 0.94), total
fruit number per plant (r = 0.91 and r = 0.93), average fruit weight (r = 0.88 and r = 0.90),
above ground dry weight per plant (r = 0.85 and r = 0.87),mean main vine length (r = 0.81
and r = 0.83), number of leaves per plant (r = 0.74 and r = 0.76) and leaf area index per
plant (r = 0.71). The highest total fruit yield (27.14 t/ha) and marketable fruit yield (26.12
t/ha) were obtained using a combination of 120 kg N/ha and 50 kg P2O5/ha with interaction
effect of 7.62 and 7.22 t/ha, respectively. Economic analysis showed that NP combination at
120 kg N/ha and 50 kg P2O5/ha gave the highest net benefit of Birr 68501.31/ha. Hence,
watermelon growers in Adami Tulu area can maximize the yield and quality of the crop as
well as the return from it if they apply 120 kg N/ha and 50 kg P2O5/ha. However, since this is
a single study, the experiment should be repeated at least for one more season at same
location to come up with more reliable recommendation.

Key words: Watermelon, nitrogen, phosphorus, yield, quality

xii
1. INTRODUCTION

Watermelon [Citrullus lanatus (Thumb) Matsun and Nakai] is an important horticultural crop

growing in many regions of the world with a long, warm growing season (Robinson and

Decker-Walters, 1997). The crop is originated primarily in central and southern Africa

(Wehner and Maynard, 2003) where it was domesticated as a source of water, a staple food,

and animal feed having a long history of cultivation in Egypt and other African countries.

Fruits of watermelon constitute a delicious and refreshing dessert in hot weather serving as an

important source of water especially in Kalahari Desert and other arid areas of Africa.

Watermelons are mostly known for their sweet and juicy fruit and consumed fresh, but cooked

watermelons are also eaten in Africa. In India, seeds of watermelon are powdered and baked

while roasted seeds are eaten in Middle East (Robinson and Decker-Walters, 1997).

Watermelon fruits and seeds consumption is considerably high compared to other cucurbit

(Robinson and Decker-Walters, 1997).

Watermelons are excellent sources of antioxidants such as lycopene, vitamin A and vitamin C

that help in preventing cell damage, neutralizing and removing free radicals (USDA, 2009). It

is rich in potassium that maintains blood pressure to prevent diseases such as stroke and heart

disease and might decrease the size of the kidney stone (USDA, 2009). Edible parts (100 g) of

watermelons contain 40% more lycopene than raw red ripe tomatoes (USDA, 2009).

Lycopene is a carotenoid that provides the red color to watermelons, tomatoes, and other fruits

1
and vegetable. It is a strong antioxidant and quenches free radicals which avoid oxidative

damage and subsequently prevents many cancers in addition to its function against heart

disease (Rao and Agarwal, 1999). Apart from lycopene content, watermelons are also a

potential source of vitamin C and a cup (226.8g) of watermelon juice provides 20 % of the

daily value for vitamin C. A cup of watermelon juice provides 10 mg of lycopene and 19 mg

of vitamin C along with beta-carotene, potassium, and vitamin A (USDA, 2009). In addition,

watermelon juice can also serve as a feedstock for ethanol biofuel production (Wayne et al.,

2009). About 60 % of watermelon is flesh and 90 % of the flesh is juice with 7 to 10 % (w/v)

sugars (Wayne et al., 2009). As a result, over 50 % of a watermelon is readily fermentable

liquid and about 220 lit/ha of ethanol can be produced from 8.4 t/ha of unmarketable

watermelons left in the field at harvest which is an additional revenue stream for the grower

(Wayne et al., 2009). Whole watermelons used for the production of lycopene,

neutraceuticals, and L-citrulline produce a waste stream of sugar-containing juice. This juice

would serve as diluent, supplemental feedstock and nitrogen supplement in ethanol biofuel

production after being integrated with other more concentrated feedstock (Wayne et al.,

2009).

Watermelon accounts for 6.8% of the world area devoted to vegetable production (Guner and

Wehner, 2004; Goreta et al., 2005). China is the leading country in the production of

watermelon followed by Turkey, United States, Iran and Republic of Korea (Wehner and

Maynard, 2003). There are over 1,200 varieties of watermelon worldwide (Miles, 2004) and a

wide variety of watermelons have been cultivated in Africa (Zohary and Hopf, 2000). At

2
present, about 3 thousand hectares (ha) of land is under watermelon cultivation in Eastern

Africa and more than 3.7 million ha of land is allocated for watermelon worldwide

(FAOSTAT, 2009). Though the productivity of watermelon is not determined in Ethiopia yet,

the average fruit yield for Eastern Africa and World is 12.9 t/ha and 26.4 t/ha, respectively

(FAOSTAT, 2009). According to Simonne et al (2005, as cited by Fatondji et al., 2008)

reported that the fruit yield of watermelon under irrigation can be as high as 72.0 t/ha.

Watermelon production in Ethiopia is under expansion especially in the central parts of the

country and is becoming a very important source of income for small scale farmers in mid rift

valley of Ethiopia (Amenti et al., 2009; unpublished). Its major production is restricted to

limited areas in Oromia region of east Shewa zone. Though watermelon demand is highly

increasing from time to time especially in big cities (Addis Ababa, Adama, etc) as the volume

of the fruit in every supermarket is rising in addition to road side marketing, the yield and

quality of watermelon currently under production is very poor (Amenti et al., 2009;

unpublished).

Farmers follow traditional way of cultivation where they do not apply fertilizers, plant 4-5

seeds per hill without thinning, no/little application of pesticides and/or fungicides to control

pests and diseases. In addition, they use wider spacing, no vine management, allow all female

flowers to set fruits beyond capacity of the vines, harvest all fruits at same time though female

flowers appear at different time and such operation leads to harvesting immature fruits before

3
attaining full size and required sugar content (Amenti et al., 2009; unpublished). All these

production constraints are the major causes for low yield and poor fruit quality in Ethiopia.

Yield and fruit quality of watermelon depends on agronomic practices such as fertilization,

spacing, planting date and crop protection (Uwah and Solomon, 1998). Fertilizer greatly

contribute to watermelon fruit yield and quality as it increases number of leaves and leaf area

which are directly proportional to the amount of assimilate prepared and finally stored in the

fruit (Uwah and Solomon, 1998). Application of optimum fertilizers improve watermelon fruit

yield and quality as it has positive effect on growth and yield components. Experiment on

fertilizer rate conducted in Nigeria revealed that 120 kg N/ha gave highest fruit yield and

increased sugar content of the fruit by 58 % compared to zero application (Uwah and

Solomon, 1998). Similar study indicated that phosphorus at rates of 17 kg/ha and 34 kg/ha

increased total fruit yield by 32 % and 39 %, respectively, compared to zero application.

Interaction effect of nitrogen and phosphorus resulted in higher fruit yield at combination of

120 kg N/ha and 34 kg P/ha (Uwah and Solomon, 1998).

Despite the economic importance of this crop and favorable edaphic and climatic condition of

Ethiopia for its production, no effort has been made to test the response of watermelon to

fertilizer application in the country to improve its yield and fruit quality. This study was

therefore initiated to evaluate the response of watermelon to different levels of N and P at

Adami Tulu.

4
2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Watermelon Botany and Ecology

Watermelons belong to the family Cucurbitaceae which includes cucumber, squash, pumpkin,

bottle gourd and others (Crase, 2011). Robinson and Decker-Walters (1997) characterized

watermelons as follows: watermelon leaves are pinnatifid which makes it unique from other

economically important cucurbits; stems are hairy and thin with branched tendrils; vines are

highly branched with length up to 10 m and internodes are reduced or elongated; roots are

relatively extensive but shallow. Watermelons bear separate male and female flowers on the

same plant (monoecious) and only the female flowers set fruit. Male flowers are produced

initially followed by appearance of both sexes usually at a ratio of 1 female to 7 males.

Watermelon develops from pistillate (female) flowers which are pollinated mainly by

honeybees. Botanically, the fruit is the ripened ovary with large, round to oblong or

cylindrical and measures as long as 60 cm. Similar to other cucurbits like cucumbers,

pumpkins and squash, watermelons have leathery rinds with 1 – 4 cm thick. The fleshy inner

fruit is usually red, but may be yellow, green, orange or white and has many seeds. The seeds

of watermelon differ in color (e.g. brown, black, green, red or white), shape, and size.

Watermelons as well as other cucurbits are generally planted after danger of a late frost has

passed since low temperatures cause growth abnormalities, poor setting and hollow fruit

(Robinson and Decker-Walters, 1997). Dry and sunny periods are ideal for watermelon to

grow and produce fruits as the crop require long, warm growing periods. High humidity and

5
excessive rainfall greatly decrease productivity of the crop by affecting flowering and

encouraging the development of leaf diseases. Elevations up to 1000 m normally provide

appropriate conditions for growth although temperature greater than 300C may be harmful to

the physical condition of the crop and reduce the degree of fertilization. Stable diurnal

temperatures promote a rapid growth rate. Watermelons perform well under soils that are well

drained and high in organic matter with a good moisture retaining capacity. Crops are also

frequently grown in low rainfall areas on soils which are relatively low in fertility. Well

drained sandy loams are considered ideal for watermelon with pH value not less than 5.5.

2.2. Watermelon Production in Ethiopia

Ethiopia has got ideal environment for the production of watermelon. According to survey

report conducted by horticulture research team from Adami Tulu Agricultural Research

Center on assessment of watermelon production and utilization in major producing areas of

Ethiopia, the exact time for introduction of watermelon to Ethiopia is not known (Amenti et

al., 2009; unpublished). However, different groups of farmers from one of the major

watermelon producing Zone (East Shewa) suggested different periods. Accordingly, older

farmers responded that watermelon was introduced to the area approximately in 1950’s by a

foreigner (an Italian) who lived in Koka town during that time. Some of the young farmers

said that they started growing the crop since their childhood and the time of immemorial.

The production trend in terms of number of producers and land allocation for the crop was

increasing from 1950’s up to 1980’s (Amenti et al., 2009; unpublished). However, starting
6
from 1980’s, the number of producers tended to decrease while land allocated for the crop is

increasing due to market problem-the negative brokers involvement, shift of production to

onion and tomato because of technological advancement and access to market information for

these crops, disease outbreak and pest occurrences, and the crop needs relatively more land as

it grows horizontally and not suitable for intercropping. Its production is limited to lake shore

areas on land previously occupied by water as it retains enough moisture that supports the

crop throughout its growing period. Cultivating the crop using irrigation is not a common

practice among farmers of the country.

Watermelon is considered as one of the cash crops along with onion and tomato in surveyed

area (Amenti et al., 2009; unpublished). Farmers use imported seed of watermelon mostly

through brokers and the major varieties under cultivation are Charleston Gray 33, Sugar Baby

and Crimson Sweet. Both Charleston Gray 33 and Crimson Sweet are more productive than

Sugar Baby having a yield advantage up to 8 t/ha. Total fruit yield of Charleston Gray 33 and

Crimson Sweet varies from 13 t/ha to 17 t/ha under farmers management while Sugar Baby

ranges from 10 t/ha to 14 t/ha.

Watermelon growers follow traditional way of farming in assessed areas of major producing

zone (Amenti et al., 2009; unpublished) and it is the major causes for low yield and poor fruit

quality. Lack of fertilizer application, poor disease/pest control mechanisms and untimely

harvest are among the major production constraints followed by farmers of the area. Plant

spacing of 2m X 2m is used by farmers in Ethiopia while in Kenya spacing recommendation

for watermelon is 1.5m X 1.5m (Gichimu et al., 2008) and experience of West Africa
7
(Nigeria) shows 1.2 m X 1.2 m (Uwah and Solomon, 1998). Fruit management is not a

common practice and watermelon growers of the area let all fertilized fruit to mature which

reduce amount of sugar to be stored in fruits (Amenti et al., 2009; unpublished). In addition,

farmers sell the fruits to brokers at farm gate and brokers immediately sell to traders thus

harvesting is made at once irrespective of pollination time resulting in decreased fruit yield

and lower sugar content of fruits from late pollinated female flowers. Relatively, fruits with

good quality are sold to Addis Ababa where it can be distributed to big supermarkets, hotels,

airlines, etc while poor quality fruits such (immature ones) are sold at road side market.

2.3. Nitrogen and Phosphorus Requirements of Watermelon

Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrients carry out various functions in crop growth and

development and none of them can be substituted to act for one another in its special function

in the crop (Salisbury and Ross, 1992). In order to obtain high yield of water melon, there is a

need to augment the nutrient status of the soil to meet the crop’s need thereby maintaining the

fertility of the soil. One of the ways of increasing the nutrient status is by boosting the soil

nutrient content either with the use of organic materials such poultry manure, animal waste,

and use of compost or with the use of inorganic fertilizers (Dauda et al., 2005). Similar to

other crops, watermelon plants also benefited from combined application of nutrient elements.

Watermelon is a heavy feeder of nitrogen and therefore required a liberal application of 200

kg/ha of NPK and 30 t/ha of organic matter (Gichimu et al., 2008). Basal application of NPK

compound fertilizer was found to be crucial followed by application of nitrogenous fertilizers

at 5 weeks intervals up to flowering stage (Rice et al., 1986).

8
Nitrogen is found to be the most limiting nutrient in plant growth and it is an important

constituent of metabolically active compounds such as enzymes, amino acids, protein, co-

enzymes and some other non-protienous compounds (Biswas and Mukherjee, 1993). Shortage

of nitrogen in the soil retards crop growth while its adequate supply is essential for vigorous

vegetative growth to intercept more radiation that ultimately improve melon fruit yield.

Management of nitrogen is an important feature of crop production practices (Kleinkopf et al.,

1987) since available nitrogen can be lost through plant uptake, volatilization, denitrification,

ammonium fixation, and leaching (Tisdale et al., 1995; Miller and Donahue, 1995). Thus,

nitrogen application is relatively in large amount than other nutrient fertilizers all over the

world (Miller and Donahue, 1995). Inorganic fertilizers are the most important sources of

nitrogen. Adequate supply of nitrogen is associated with high photosynthetic activity,

vigorous vegetative growth and a dark green color of the leaves (John et al., 2004).

Phosphorus is an essential nutrient to plant growth and is found in every living plant cell. It is

involved in numerous key plant functions, including energy transfer, photosynthesis,

transformation of sugars and starches, nutrient movement within the plant and transfer of

genetic characteristics from one generation to the next. It is essential for all life, being a

structural constituent of nucleic acid as well as being involved in metabolic energy transfer via

adenosine triphosphate (Ozanne, 1980). Loss of phosphorus from soil is very minimal

compared to nitrogen since it is held tightly by soil particles and it can be found in all soils

(Miller and Donahue, 1995; Tisdale et al., 1995). However, its availability to plants in

required amount is low compared to other elements such as nitrogen and potassium since it is

liable to various chemical reactions in the soil. Though requirement of phosphorus by plants is
9
not as large as nitrogen and yet, it is very essential for plant growth and development,

breakdown of sugar and the transfer of energy (Olaniyi and Fagbayide, 2008). Deficiency of

phosphorus would be disastrous leading to severe disruptions of metabolism and plant

development since the nutrient plays a crucial role in physiology of crops.

These two macronutrients have complementary metabolic and physiological functions thereby

affecting the yield and yield components of plants (Salisbury and Ross, 1992). Grunes (1959,

as cited by Uwah and Solomon, 1998), reported the complimentary action of N and P in plants

in such a way that N enhances the uptake of P by plants while the effect of P on the plant

increases the efficiency of N utilization by plants. Combined application of N and P increases

growth attributes of watermelon and other crops to certain level known as the optimum level.

As the amounts of these essential nutrients exceed the optimum level, growth attributes start to

decline.

2.4. Influences of N and P on Growth Parameters and Yield Components of Watermelon

Main effects of N significantly influenced main vine length, leaf number, branch number,

above ground dry weight, mean number of fruits and average fruit weight of watermelon

(Uwah and Solomon, 1998). In addition, the above authors indicated that main effects of P

significantly affected watermelon main vine length, number of leaves and number of branches

per plant. On the other hand, application of nitrogen and phosphorus at a rate of 120 kg N/ha

and 34 kg P/ha resulted in increased vine length (4.42 m) and without N and P application it

was found to be 1.97 m (Uwah and Solomon, 1998). Similarly, Jilani et al (2009) also found

10
that application of 120-60-60 kg NPK/ha significantly increased vine length (3.85 m) of

cucumber compared to control (1.95 m). Aguyoh et al (2009) reported that application of

different rates of Tithonia manure (a shrub with high in NPK nutrients) at a rate of 3.6 t/ha

significantly (p ≤ 0.05) increased number of watermelon main branches (4.31); application

beyond this level resulted in reduced main branch number (3.86) at 5.4 t/ha. Study conducted

in Nigeria by Uwah and Solomon (1998) indicated that N and P at 180 kg N/ha and 34 kg P/ha

increased number of watermelon leaves per plant (235.67) compared to control (22).

According to Ogunremi (1978), application of nitrogen increased leaf area which led to

increased total yield of melon in the Southern savanna zone of South western Nigeria.

Similarly, Daniel (2006) reported maximum total leaf area of potato (6080.20 cm2) at 10 t/ha

farm yard manure and 50 % recommended dose of fertilizer (111 kg N and 90 kg P2O5/ha)

which is considerably high compared to control (2088.88 cm2). The above author indicated

that increasing the rate of application to 10 t/ha farm yard manure and 75 % recommended

dose of fertilizer decreased the total leaf area to 5656.40 cm2. Aguyoh et al (2009) reported a

maximum leaf area index of 1.3 in watermelon (Crimson Sweet) through application of 3.6

t/ha of Tithonia manure while it was only 0.9 from control plots.

Combined application of nitrogen at 120 kg N/ha and phosphorus at 34 kg P/ha increased

watermelon above ground dry weight from 9.83 g (zero application) to 84.49 g per plant

(Uwah and Solomon, 1998). Olaniyi and Fagbayide (2008) reported that increasing N and P

rates from 40 kg N/ha and 8.8 kg P/ha to 60 kg N/ha and 13.2 kg P/ha significantly (p ≤ 0.05)

decreased number of days to 50 % flowering of Egusi melon from 44.50 to 41.40. Similarly,
11
increasing N levels significantly decreased number of days to 50 % flowering and similar

trend was indicated with P levels. In addition, Jilani et al (2009) reported that increasing NPK

levels from 0-0-0 to 100-50-50 kg NPK/ha significantly (p ≤ 0.05) decreased number of days

to 50 % flowering of cucumber from 47.99 to 39.33.

According to Fatondji et al (2008), soil amendments with compost at a rate of 1.25 t/ha and 60

kg NKP/ha (15-15-15) gave significantly (p ≤ 0.05) higher number of watermelon fruits

(2,969) per hectare compared to control (2,222). Similarly, Jilani et al (2009) reported that

combined application of NPK increased number of cucumber fruits (35.5) per plant at 100-50-

50 kg/ha and increasing NPK beyond this rate reduced fruit number to 26.3 at 120-60-60

kg/ha. Olaniyi and Fagbayide (2008) found out significant (p ≤ 0.05) increase in fruit diameter

of Egusi melon from 11.1 to 12.50 cm due to increased levels of N from 0 to 60 kg N/ha.

Jilani et al (2009) reported significant increase in fruit length of cucumber due to NPK levels

with maximum fruit length (18.36 cm) at 100-50-50 kg NPK/ha and increased level of NPK

beyond this rate resulted in reduced fruit length (16.36 cm).

2.5. Influences of N and P on Watermelon Fruit Yield and Quality

Production practices are the major factors that affect watermelon both in yield and quality

(Uwah and Solomon, 1998). Optimum application of fertilizer is one of the most important

components of cultural practices in watermelon production. Research conducted in Nigeria by

the above authors indicated that NP combination at 120 kg N/ha and 17 kg P/ha gave

maximum mean total fruit yield of watermelon (16.88 t/ha); increasing the level to 180 kg
12
N/ha and 34 kg P/ha resulted in reduced fruit yield (14.47 t/ha). Similar results were reported

by Jilani et al (2009) who found that application of 100-50-50 kg NPK fertilizers gave

cucumber fruit yield of 60.02 t/ha and increased rate of NPK to 120-60-60 kg resulted in

reduced mean fruit yield of cucumber (57.12 t/ha). Uwah and Solomon (1998) also reported

that main effects of N significantly influenced mean total fruit yield of watermelon in Nigeria.

According to Uwah and Solomon (1998), application of nitrogen and phosphorus increased

mean fruit weight (3.04 kg) at combination of 120 kg N/ha and 17 kg P/ha considerably higher

than the control (1 kg) while increasing the combination to 180 kg N/ha and 34 kg P/ha

resulted in decreased fruit weight (2.60 kg). Similarly, Fatondji et al (2008) found that soil

amendments with compost (1.25 t/ha) and NPK (60 kg NKP/ha of 15-15-15) gave mean fruit

weight of 2.52 kg while it was only 1.84 kg at control.

Watermelon sweetness is determined mainly by the amount of total soluble solids present in

the fruit. A study at Washington State University showed that watermelon with TSS % from

7.8 – 8.2 is somewhat sweet, 8.3 – 9.0 is sweet, and greater than 9.0 is very sweet

(http://agsyst.wsu.edu/WatermelonPhotos2006.html, accessed on June 25, 2010). Fatondji et

al (2008) reported that application of compost (1.25 t/ha) and NPK (60 kg NKP/ha of 15-15-

15) improved fruit TSS % (9.01) content of watermelon (Kaolack) compared to control (7.49)

in Niger. Similarly, Uwah and Solomon (1998) found that main effects of nitrogen increased

sugar content of the fruit by 58 % and 62% at 120 and 180 kg N/ha, respectively, compared to

zero application.

13
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1. Experimental Site Description

The experiment was conducted at Adami Tulu Agricultural Research Center (ATARC)

located in Adami Tulu Jiddo Kombolcha district, East Shewa Zone of Oromiya. Adami Tulu

Agricultural Research Center is situated in the mid rift valley, 167 km south of Addis Ababa.

It lies at latitude 7° 9’N and 38° 7’E longitude. It has an altitude of 1650 m.a.s.l. and average

annual rainfall of the area is 760 mm. Rainfall is bimodal and unevenly distributed that

extends from February to September with a dry period in May to June, which separates the

preceding ‘’short’’ rains from the following ``long’’ rains. The soil is characterized by fine

sandy loams with pH 7.88 (ATARC, 1998).

3.2. Treatment and Design

The field experiment was carried out using a factorial experiment involving 3 x 4 treatment

combinations (three levels of P and four levels of N) which were laid down in a randomized

complete block design with three replications. Three levels of P (0 kg P2O5/ha, 50 kg P2O5/ha,

100 kg P2O5/ha) and four levels of N (0 kg N/ha, 60 kg N/ha, 120 kg N/ha, 180 kg N/ha) were

used. The total experimental area was 2016 m2 (48 m X 42 m) while gross and net plot size of

experimental plots were 40 m2 (4 m X 10 m) and 24 m2 (4 m X 6 m) (6 plants from two rows),

respectively. Space between blocks was 4 m whereas no space was used between plots.

14
3.3. Experimental Procedures

The experiment was conducted under rain fed condition with supplemental irrigation in

months with inadequate rains during the production period (Appendix Table 2). Proper site

selection was made to minimize risk of pest and disease occurrence, to reduce fertility

difference of the experimental plots, flooding, and water logging conditions. Good looking

seeds with uniform size were planted (direct seeding) at spacing of 2 m X 2 m following

farmers practice and five seeds were planted per hole and then thinned to one seedling per

hole after two - true - leaves to minimize the risk of having vacant hill.

The most popular variety (Charleston Gray 33) among watermelon growers in Ethiopia

(Amenti et al., 2009; unpublished) was used. The variety is imported from France by AJMU

import and export trading enterprise – Addis Ababa. Charleston Gray 33 is an open pollinated

variety and characterized by vigorous growth, easy to set fruits and ready for harvest within

84 – 88 days after planting, fruits are oblong in shape having bright green skin with dark green

nets, red flesh and each fruits weigh 10 – 15 kg. The variety is also resistant to Fusarium wilt

and Anthracnose, and suitable for long distance transportation

(http://www.tpseed.com.cn/en/products/watermelon.html;http://www.wvu.edu/~agexten/hortc

ult/homegard/comvarit.htm, accessed on June 24, 2010).

15
Plate 1. Charleston Gray 33 in the field three weeks before harvest

Fertilizer application was made twice; all P and half N were applied at planting while the

remained half N was top dressed six (6) weeks after sowing. Urea (46 % N) and TSP (Triple

Super Phosphate) (46 % P2O5) were used as fertilizer sources for nitrogen and phosphorus,

respectively. Grass mulching was used to control weed and protect direct contact of fruits with

ground.

Female flowers were tagged according to their appearance using different colored threads to

plan for harvesting time. This was done due to the female flowering nature of the crop which

involves at least two weeks difference on the same vine and appears in intervals of 6-8 nodes

while male flower appears at almost every node. Harvesting was made three times with ten

(10) days interval referring to their respective flowering time. Combination of maturity

indicators are important to consider before harvesting watermelon and few of them are (a)

when the light green, curly tendrils on the stem near the point of attachment of the fruit begins
16
to turn brown and shrivel; (b) when a small crack appears on the stem just above the fruit, (c)

the surface fruit color turns dull; (d) the skin becomes resistant to penetration by the thumbnail

and is rough to the touch; and (e) when the fruit turns from light green to a cream or yellow

colored at a point of ground contact (bottom), (f) counting a number of days from anthesis or

planting (http://urbanext.illinois.edu/veggies/watermelon.cfm, accessed on June 24, 2010).

3.4. Data Collection and Procedure

Plants from the net plot were used for recording observations on growth, yield components,

yield and quality parameters. The following parameters were recorded:

3.4.1. Growth parameters

Days to 50 % flowering: was recorded when flowers appear on 50 % of the plants from the

net plot.

Main vine length (cm): was recorded from six plants at last harvest. The vines were

measured from the base of its emergence to the tip of the vine.

Number of branches per plant: these are branches having well developed leaves capable of

performing photosynthetic activities and were determined from six plants at first harvest. All

vines developed from main vine were considered.

Number of leaves per plant: was determined from six plants at second harvest. All leaves

capable of photosynthetic activities were counted from those six plants.

17
Total leaf area per plant (m2): Individual leaf area was recorded from three leaves of each

six plants of the net plot using portable area meter (model: LI – 3000A). Total leaf area per

plant was calculated by multiplying number of leaves per plant with respective leaf area.

Leaf area index per plant: was computed as total leaf area per plant per ground area/cover.

Ground area covered per plant was calculated by subtracting uncovered area of the gross plot

from the total area of gross plot plus additional covered area outside the plot by plants in the

plot and then divided by twelve (number of plants in each gross plot). Total gross area was

measured by using measuring tape while uncovered area was estimated by a quadrant frame of

4 m2 (2 m X 2 m) rope marked by metal pins at a spacing of 10 cm (Groeneveld, 1997)

Above ground dry weight per plant (g): was calculated from aboveground parts (vine,

petiole, leaf) on dry weight basis (g/plant) at Animal nutrition laboratory of ATARC. The

samples were dried in oven at 700C for 72 hours. Six plants were used from net plot at third

harvest.

3.4.2. Fruit yield components, fruit yield and quality

Number of fruits per plant: was recorded from six plants at first, second, and third harvest.

Average fruit length (cm): was determined using measuring tape from six fruits per net plot

i.e. one fruit from each plant.

Average fruit diameter (cm): was measured by using caliper from six fruits of six plants per

net plot.

Average fruit weight (kg): was determined by dividing the total fruit weight to the respective

total number of fruits per plot from counts of all harvest.

18
Total fruit yield per plant (kg): was determined from six plants at first, second, and third

harvest. All fruits from those six plants were considered.

Marketable fruit yield per net plot (kg): was recorded from six plants at first, second, and

third harvest. All fruits ready for harvest were considered as marketable regardless of their

fruit length, width and weight except diseased and cracked ones.

Unmarketable fruit yield per net plot (kg): was determined from six plants at first, second,

and third harvest. This includes diseased and cracked fruits.

TSS %/brix (%): Brix is a measure of sweetness in watermelon. It was determined from six

fruits i.e. one from each plant in the net plot at first, second and third harvest. Juice extracted

from base, middle and tip part of the fruit was recorded at each measuring time using portable

brix meter with 0.2 % accuracy. Average TSS % of the three harvest time was used.

3.5. Soil Sampling and Analysis

Prior to planting (July 2010) representative soil samples were randomly taken from the

experimental site using an auger at 0 – 30cm depth and the samples were mixed thoroughly to

produce one composite sample of 1kg. Similarly, at harvest (December 2010) soil samples

were collected from each treatment plot of two replications. The collected soil samples were

air dried, ground and sieved to pass through a 1 mm sieve and analysed at National Soil

Testing Center. Necessary parameters such as soil texture, available P, total N, pH, CEC, and

organic matter were determined. Soil texture was expressed by using Bouyoucos hydrometer

method (Day, 1965). Available P was determined using Olsen method as described by Olsen

19
and Dean (1965). Total nitrogen was determined by micro-kjeldahl method (Dewis and

Freitas, 1970). The samples were analyzed for pH by using digital pH meter (Page, 1982).

Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC) was determined by using 1M-neutral ammonium acetate.

Organic carbon was determined following Walkely and Black wet oxidation method as

described by Dewis and Freitas (1970).

3.6. Plant Tissue Sampling and Analysis

Leaves were sampled from net plot of each treatment from two replications at third harvest to

form one plant tissue sample. The samples were oven dried at 70 OC for about 72 hours and

ground to less than 1mm size for determination of N and P content of the tissues at National

Soil Testing Center. Nitrogen content was estimated by micro-kjeldahl method (Dewis and

Freitas, 1970) while P was determined by wet digestion method (Bernard, 1993).

3.7. Statistical Analysis

All collected data were subjected to Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) using SAS software (The

SAS System for Windows9.0) appropriate to the design of the experiment. Mean separation

was done using LSD test at p ≤ 0.01 and 0.05. The correlation between fruit yield and related

parameters were also determined by SAS software.

20
3.8. Economic Analysis

Simple partial budget analysis was employed for economic analysis of fertilizer application

and it was carried out for combined fruit yield data. The potential response of crop towards the

added fertilizer and price of fertilizers during planting ultimately determine the economic

feasibility of fertilizer application (CIMMYT, 1988). As the rate of application increases, each

additional kg of fertilizer has effect on fruit yield. In fact, it would only have paid the farmer

to apply fertilizer up to the rate at which the marginal rate of return just equaled to the price of

fertilizer. To estimate the total costs, mean current prices of Urea and DAP were collected at

the time of planting and market price of watermelon fruit was taken at harvest. Though TSP

was used as a source of P, the price of DAP was considered for the calculation by equating the

amount of P since current price of TSP is unknown. The economic analysis was based on the

formula developed by CIMMYT (1988) and given as follows:

Gross average fruit yield (Avy) (kg/ha): is an average yield of each treatment

Adjusted yield (A. jy): is the average yield adjusted downward by a 10% to reflect the

difference between the experimental yield and yield of farmers.

Ajy = Avy - (Avy * 0.1)

Gross field benefit (GFB): was computed by multiplying field/farm gate price that farmers

receive for the crop when they sale it as adjusted yield.

21
 GFB = Ajy * field/farm gate price of a crop

Total cost: is the cost of urea and DAP used for the experiment. Their prices were based on

2010 price during planting. The costs of other inputs and production practices such as labor

cost for land preparation, planting, weeding, crop protection, and harvesting were assumed to

remain the same or were insignificant among the treatments.

Net benefit (NB): was calculated by subtracting the total costs from the gross field benefit for

each treatment.

NB = GFB – total cost

Marginal return (MR): is the measure of increase in return by increasing input.

Marginal rate of return (MRR %): was calculated by dividing change in net benefit by

change in cost.

NB
MRR = , where TC is total cost and NB is net benefit
TC

22
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. Main Vine Length

There was a significant (p < 0.05) interaction effect of N and P on average main vine length of

watermelon (Appendix Table 3). Average main vine length from 60 Kg N/ha was increased by

0.42 m (23.33 %) and 0.32 m (16.75 %) at 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha, respectively; similarly,

average main vine length of watermelon from 50 kg P2O5/ha was increased by 0.26 m (13.27

%), 0.20 m (8.55 %) and 0.29 m (12.50 %) at 60, 120, and 180 kg N/ha, respectively (Table

1). The same trend was apparent at other levels of N and P (Table 1).

The above data indicates that the response of main vine length in watermelon is dependent on

the levels of both N and P. Vine length of watermelon responded positively for NP

combination reaching a maximum value of 2.54 m at 120 kg N/ha and 50 kg P2O5/ha; the

response was negative or absent in all other combinations (Table 1). The finding supports the

results of Uwah and Solomon (1998) who reported maximum main vine length of watermelon

(4.42 m) at 120 kg N/ha and 34 kg P2O5/ha while increasing combination of NP to 180 kg

N/ha and 34 kg P/ha significantly reduced length of main vine to 3.59 m. Similarly, these

results are in agreement with the findings of Jilani et al (2009) who found that vine length of

cucumber was dependent on the levels of NPK. Increase in main vine length of watermelon

due to NP interaction effect is mainly attributed to the role of N and P in promoting vigorous

vegetative growth and higher photosynthetic activities to increase internodes length.

23
Table 1. Interaction effect of N and P on main vine length of watermelon at Adami Tulu

Average main vine length (m)

Treatments
P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means
0 50 100
N (kg/ha)

0 1.71d 1.80cd 1.91c 1.81

60 1.96c 2.22b 2.23b 2.14

120 2.34b 2.54a 2.58a 2.49

180 2.32b 2.61a 2.69a 2.54

P-Means 2.08 2.29 2.35

LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 0.18
N means = P2O5 means = 2.24
CV (%) = 4.83
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance

4.2. Number of Branches per Plant

Interaction of N and P had a highly significant (P ≤ 0.01) effect on mean branch number per

plant of watermelon (Appendix Table 3). Mean number of branches per plant from 60 kg N/ha

was increased by 3.11 (13.11 %) and 4.55 (18.91 %) at 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha, respectively;

similarly, average number of branches per plant from 50 kg P2O5/ha was increased by 4.16

(18.35 %), 5.05 (17.55 %) and 6.78 (24.21 %) at 60, 120, and 180 kg N/ha, respectively

(Table 2). Likewise, average number of branches per plant from 120 Kg N/ha was increased

24
by 10.11 (42.62 %) and 10.66 (44.31 %) at 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha, respectively. Similar trend

was apparent at other levels of N and P (Table 2).

The data presented above showed that branch number in watermelon depends on the levels of

both N and P. Maximum branch number was achieved at 180 kg N/ha and 100 kg P2O5/ha,

which however was not significantly different from 180/50 and 120/100 NP levels,

respectively (Table 2). Increasing NP combination beyond 180 kg N/ha and 50 kg P2O5/ha or

120 kg N/ha and 100 kg P2O5/ha did not significantly increase number of branches (Table 2).

These results are in agreement with the findings of Aguyoh et al (2009) who reported that

application of different levels of Tithonia (a shrub with high in NPK nutrients) manure

significantly increased number of watermelon branches at a rate of 3.6 t/ha and application

beyond this level resulted in reduced branch number. The high number of branches per plant

recorded in this study at 180 kg N/ha and 50 kg P2O5/ha could be attributed to the increase in

main vine length (Table 1). The longest the main vine length the more will be the chance for

branches to be developed. This is also clearly observed from the presence of highly significant

and positive correlation between branch number and average main vine length (r = 0.88**)

(Appendix Table 7).

4.3. Number of Leaves per Plant

There was a significant (P ≤ 0.05) interaction effect of N and P on mean leaf number per plant

of watermelon (Appendix Table 3). Mean number of leaves per plant from 60 kg N/ha was

25
increased by 29.63 (11.03 %) and 23.38 (8.05 %) at 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha, respectively;

similarly, average number of leaves per plant from 50 kg P2O5/ha was increased by 3.08 (1.04

%), 66.69 (21.62 %) and 39.22 (11.48 %) at 60, 120, and 180 kg N/ha, respectively (Table 2).

Similar trend was apparent at other rates of N and P (Table 2).

The interaction indicates that the response of number of leaves in watermelon is dependent on

the rates of both N and P. Similar results were reported by Aguyoh et al (2009) where

application of different levels of Tithonia manure significantly increased number of

watermelon leaves in Kenya. The interaction effects of N and P on number of leaves per plant

was positive up to a combination of 120 kg N/ha and 50 P2O5/ha and beyond this level it was

absent (Table 2).

The maximum mean number of leaves (375.20) per plant was recorded at 120 kg N/ha and 50

P2O5/ha while the lowest (250.72) was produced by the control. The present results are in

agreement with the findings of Uwah and Solomon (1998) who reported positive interaction

of N and P on number of watermelon (Sugar baby) leaves (124.33) only up to a level of 120

kg N/ha and 17 kg P/ha. Nitrogen and phosphorus enhanced main vine length (Table 1) and

number of branches (Table 2) which may explain their effects on leaf number. This is also

supported by the highly significant (p ≤ 0.01) and positive correlation observed between leaf

number and average main vine length (r = 0.89**) and mean branch number (r = 0.78**)

(Appendix Table 7). On the other hand, increasing N levels increased leaf number of maize by

delaying leaf senescence (Gungula et al., 2005). This is because redistribution of nutrients like

26
N mainly causes leaf senescence thus adequate supply of N may delay senescence. Yield

increment is therefore possible through optimum application of N in order to have more green

leaves on the plants for longer period thereby increasing dry matter production. Similarly,

Memon (2000, cited in Tanweer et al., 2005) indicated the vital role P in photosynthetic

activities and promote more number of leaves per plant.

Table 2. Mean number of branches and leaves per plant as influenced by N and P interaction

at Adami Tulu

Branch number per plant Leaf number per plant

Treatmen
P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means
ts
0 50 100 0 50 100
N (kg/ha)

0 21.83d 23.72d 24.06d 23.20 250.72e 268.67e 290.28de 269.89

60 22.67d 26.83c 28.61c 26.04 295.22de 298.30de 313.66cd 310.73

120 28.78c 33.83b 34.72ab 32.44 308.51cd 375.20ab 378.33ab 354.01

180 28.00c 34.78ab 36.06a 32.95 341.66bc 380.88a 393.36a 371.97

P-Means 25.32 29.79 30.86 305.28 330.76 343.91

LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 2.53 LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 38.81

N means = P means = 28.66 N means = P means = 324.57
CV (%) = 5.21 CV (%) = 5.79
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance

27
4.4 Leaf Area Index

There was no significant (p ≥ 0.05) interaction effect between applied N and P on leaf area

index of watermelon; similarly, the main effects of P levels remained non significant (p ≥

0.05) (Appendix Table 3). However, the main effects of N rates affected leaf area index of

watermelon highly significantly (p < 0.01) (Appendix Table 3). Mean leaf area index per plant

of watermelon was lowest (1.12) at 0 kg N/ha, increased with increasing N levels, reaching a

maximum of 1.42 at 180 kg N/ha (Table 3). Across the range of applied N, leaf area index was

increased by 0.30 (26.79 %).

Leaf area index of watermelon thus responded positively to applied N levels (Table 3). The

current findings agree with that of Aguyoh et al (2009) who reported watermelon (Crimson

Sweet) mean leaf area index of 1.17 at 3.6 t/ha of Tithonia manure which showed 30%

increase compared to the control (0.90). Nitrogen promoted average main vine length (Table

1), number of leaves and branches per plant (Table 2) and total leaf area per plant (Appendix

Table 6). The increase in leaf area index due to N may thus be attributed to the above effects

of N. This is also supported by the highly significant and positive correlation between leaf

area index and average main vine length (r = 0.75**), number of leaves per plant (r = 0.73**),

number of branches per plant (r = 0.75**) and total leaf area per plant (r = 0.79**) (Appendix

Table 7).

28
Table 3. Leaf area index of watermelon as influenced by main effects of N and P at Adami

Tulu

Treatment
Leaf are index per plant
N (kg/ha)
0 1.12c
60 1.22bc
120 1.23b
180 1.42a
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) 0.11
P2O5 (kg/ha)
0 1.20
50 1.22
100 1.31
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) ns
CV (%) 9.71
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance, ns = non significant

4.5 Above Ground Dry Weight per Plant

Interaction effect of N and P on mean above ground dry weight of watermelon was significant

(p ≤ 0.05) (Appendix Table 3). Mean above ground dry weight from 60 kg N/ha was increased

by 28.08 g (18.89 %) and 25.60 g (15.40 %) at 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha, respectively; likewise,

mean above ground dry weight of watermelon from 50 kg P2O5/ha was increased by 5.57 g

(3.25 %), 60.46 g (31.39 %) and 25.96 g (11.09 %) at 60, 120, and 180 kg N/ha, respectively

29
(Table 4). Similarly, average above ground dry weight of watermelon from 120 kg N/ha was

increased by 104.41 (70.23 %) and 76.69 g (46.13 %) at 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha. Similar trend

was observed at other levels of N and P (Table 4).

From the data presented above, the response of above ground dry weight in watermelon is

dependent on the levels of both N and P. In the present study, the highest mean above ground

dry weight per plant (262.66 g) was recorded at a combination of 180 kg N/ha and 100 P2O5

kg/ha which, however, was not significantly different from the value obtained at 120 kg N/ha

and 50 P2O5 kg/ha (Table 4). Above ground dry weight at 120 kg N/ha and 50 P2O5 kg/ha had

an interaction effect of 60.46 g (Table 4). Similar results were reported by Olaniyi and

Fagbayide (2008) that above ground dry weight of Egusi melon depends on levels of N and P.

The current findings also agree with the study of Uwah and Solomon (1998) who reported

maximum above ground dry weight of 84.49 g at 120 kg N/ha and 34 kg P/ha in Nigeria. The

high above ground dry weight yield attained at 120 kg N/ha and 50 P2O5 kg/ha was probably

due to the positive effects of N and P on main vine length (Table 1), number of leaves and

branches (Table 2) and leaf area index (Table 3). This result is validated with the existence of

highly significant (p ≤ 0.01) and positive correlations between above ground dry weight and

main vine length (r = 0.87**), number of branches per plant (r = 0.85**), number of leaves

per plant (r = 0.83**) and leaf area index (r = 0.73**) (Appendix Table 7).

30
Table 4. Interaction effect of N and P on above ground dry weight of watermelon at Adami

Tulu

Mean above ground dry weight (g/plant)

Treatments
P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means
N (kg/ha) 0 50 100

0 123.11d 148.66cd 166.23bc 146.00

60 171.17bc 176.74bc 191.83b 179.91

120 192.61b 253.07a 242.92a 229.53

180 234.17a 260.13a 262.66a 252.32

P-Means 180.27 209.65 215.91

LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 38.00

N means = P means = 201.94
CV (%) = 11.11

Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance

4.6 Days to 50% Flowering

There was a significant (p < 0.05) interaction effect between applied N and P on mean number

of days to 50 % flowering of watermelon (Appendix Table 3). Increasing N level from 0 to 60

kg N/ha had no significant effect on days to 50 % flowering both at 50 and 100 kg P2O5 kg/ha

(Table 5). However, increasing N level from 60 to 120 kg N/ha significantly decreased

number of days to 50 % flowering only at 50 kg P2O5/ha while increasing N level from 120 to

31
180 kg N/ha had no significant effect on number of days to 50 % flowering both at 50 and 100

kg P2O5/ha (Table 5). On the other hand, increasing P level from 0 to 50 and from 50 to 100

kg P2O5/ha had no significant effect on number of days to 50 % flowering at 60, 120 and 180

kg N/ha (Table 5).

Maximum number of days to 50 % flowering was recorded at control and increasing NP levels

up to 60/100 resulted in significantly decreased number of days to 50 % flowering (Table 5).

These finding are in line with the study of Jilani et al (2009) who reported minimum days

(39.33) to 50 % cucumber flowering at fertilizer combination of 100-50-50 kg NPK/ha and

maximum days (47.99) from plot without applied fertilizers while increasing NPK levels to

120-60-60 increased number of days to 50 % flowering to 42.66. Similarly, these findings

agree with that of Olaniyi and Fagbayide (2008) who reported increased NP levels from 40 kg

N/ha and 8.8 kg P/ha to 60 kg N/ha and 13.2 kg P/ha significantly (p ≤ 0.05) decreased

number of days to 50 % flowering of Egusi melon from 44.50 to 41.40. The decrease in days

to flowering at intermediate levels of N and P is supported by the fact that at control or lower

rate of NP the plants show stunted growth as result of deficiency in major nutrients such as N

and P which are required for normal plant growth and development. This is also supported by

negative and highly significant (p ≤ 0.01) correlation between days to 50 % flowering and

main vine length (r = -0.50**), number of branches per plant (r = -0.49**), number of leaves

per plant (r = -0.45**) and leaf area (r = -0.45**) (Appendix Table 7).

32
Table 5. Interaction effect of N and P on days to flowering of watermelon at Adami Tulu

Treatments Days to 50 % flowering

P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means
N (kg/ha)
0 50 100
0
40.33a 39.33ab 38.33bcd 39.33

60 38.00bcd 39.00abc 37.67cd 38.22

120 37.33d 37.33d 37.33d 37.33

180 38.33bcd 37.00d 37.00d 37.44

P-Means 38.50 38.17 37.67

LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 1.65
N means = P means = 38.08
CV (%) = 2.56
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance

4.7 Number of Fruits per Plant

Highly significant (p < 0.01) interaction effects of N and P was observed on mean total

number of fruits (Appendix Table 4). Mean total number of fruits per plant of watermelon

from 60 kg N/ha was increased by 0.11 (7.05 %) and 0.22 (13.17 %) at 50 and 100 kg

P2O5/ha, respectively; likewise, mean total number of fruits from 50 kg P2O5/ha was increased

by 0.23 (15.97 %), 0.55 (32.93 %) and 0.22 (11.64 %) at 60, 120, and 180 kg N/ha,

respectively (Table 6). The same trend was apparent at other levels of N and P (Table 6).

33
Nitrogen and phosphorus interaction effects indicate that the response of total fruit number in

watermelon depends on N and P levels. The interaction was positive for NP combination of

60/100 and 120/50 (Table 6). The positive interaction effects observed was mainly due to the

positive effects of applied N and P on length of main vines (Table 1), number of branches and

leaves per plant (Table 2), above ground dry weight per plant (Table 4) and total leaf area per

plant (Appendix Table 6). This is also supported by the highly significant and positive

correlation observed between total fruit number per plant and main vine length (r = 0.83**),

number of braches per plant (r = 0.90**), number of leaves (r = 0. 78**), above ground dry

weight per plant (r = 0.84**) and total leaf area per plant (r = 0.82**) (Appendix Table 7).

Increasing combined application of NP fertilizer to a certain level (120 kg N/ha and 50 kg

P2O5/ha) increased mean total fruit number (2.22) per plant and beyond this rate it started

declining, which showed that the excess NP rates ultimately reduced total number of fruits

(Table 6). These findings are in agreement with that of Jilani et al (2009) who found combined

application of NPK resulted in maximum (35.5) fruits per plant at 100-50-50 kg/ha and

increasing NPK beyond this level significantly (p ≤ 0.05) reduced fruit number to 26.3 at 120-

60-60 kg/ha in cucumber. Fatondji et al (2008) also indicated that soil amendments with

compost at the rates of 1.25 t/ha and NPK at 60 kg NKP/ha of 15-15-15 significantly (p ≤

0.05) increased number of fruits in watermelon compared to control.

34
Table 6. Nitrogen and phosphorus interaction effect on mean total fruit number per plant at

Adami Tulu

Total fruit number per plant

Treatments
P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means
0 50 100
N (kg/ha)
0 1.33e 1.56cd 1.67c 1.52
60 1.44de 1.67c 1.89b 1.67
120 1.67c 2.22a 2.06ab 1.98
180 1.89b 2.11a 2.11a 2.04
P-Means 1.58 1.89 1.93
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 0.18
N means = P means = 1.80
CV (%) = 5.77
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance

4.8 Fruit Diameter

Interaction effect of applied N and P on fruit diameter was non significant (p ≥ 0.05). Nitrogen

levels had a highly significant effect (p ≤ 0.01) on fruit diameter while P levels did not

(Appendix Table 4). Mean fruit diameter of watermelon was increased by 0.96 cm (5.31 %),

0.74 cm (3.89 %) and 0.77 cm (3.89 %) with increasing N level from 0 to 60 kg N/ha, 60 to

120 kg N/ha and 120 to 180 kg N/ha, respectively (Table 7). The results of this experiment are

in agreement with the findings of Olaniyi and Fagbayide (2008) who reported increasing N

levels from 0 to 60 kg N/ha significantly increased fruit diameter of Egusi melon from 11.1 to

12.50 cm.

35
Maximum fruit diameter (20.55 cm) was recorded at 180 kg N/ha, having main effect of 1.47

cm (Table 7). This is attributed to the increased main vine length (Table 1), number of

branches and leaves per plant per plant (Table 2), leaf area index (Table 3), above ground dry

weight per plant (Table 4) and total leaf area per plant (Appendix Table 9) due to main effect

of N rates. This is also validated with the existence of highly significant (P ≤ 0.01) and

positive correlations between fruit diameter and main vine length (r = 0.88**), number of

braches per plant (r = 0.89**), number of leaves per plant (r = 0. 82**), leaf area index (r =

0.68**), above ground dry weight per plant (r = 0.74**) and total leaf area per plant (r =

0.84**) (Appendix Table 7).

Table 7. Mean fruit diameter as affected by main effects of N and P at Adami Tulu

Treatment
N (kg/ha) Mean fruit diameter (cm)
0 18.08d
60 19.04c
120 19.78b
180 20.55a
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) 0.47
P2O5 (kg/ha)
0 19.23
50 19.37
100 19.49
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) ns
CV (%) 2.50
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance, ns = non significant
36
4.9 Fruit Length

Interaction effect of N and P on watermelon fruit length was highly significant (p < 0.01)

(Appendix Table 4). Increasing N level from 0 to 60 kg N/ha significantly (p < 0.05) increased

fruit length at 50 and 100 kg P2O5 kg/ha (Table 8). However, increasing level of N from 60 to

120 kg N/ha resulted in significant fruit length increment only at 50 kg P2O5/ha. No

significant increase was observed in fruit length beyond NP combination of 120/50. On the

other hand, increasing P level from 0 to 50 kg P2O5/ha significantly increased fruit length at

60, 120 and 180 kg N/ha. Increasing P level from 50 to 100 kg P2O5/ha significantly increased

fruit length only at 60 kg N/ha (Table 8).

It follows that fruit length in watermelon is influenced by the levels of both applied N and P.

The highest fruit length (40.94 cm) was recorded at a combination of 180/100 which,

however, was not significantly different from fruit length at 120/50 (Table 8). These results

are in agreement with the findings of Jilani et al (2009) who reported a maximum fruit length

(18.36 cm) in cucumber at 100-50-50 kg NPK/ha and increased level of NPK beyond this rate

resulted in reduced fruit length (16.36 cm). The high fruit length observed at these NP levels

may be due to the positive effects of N and P on length of main vines (Table 1), number of

leaves and branches per plant (Table 2), leaf area index per plant (Table 3), above ground dry

weight per plant (Table 4) and total leaf area per plant (Appendix Table 6). This is also

supported by the highly significant and positive correlation observed between mean fruit

length and average main vine length (r = 0.83**), number of branches per plant (r = 0.91**),

37
number of leaves per plant (r = 0.71**), leaf area index (r = 0.68**), above ground dry weight

per plant (r = 0.74**) and total leaf area per plant (r = 0.80**) (Appendix Table 7).

Table 8. Interaction effect of N and P on mean fruit length of watermelon at Adami Tulu

Mean fruit length (cm)

Treatments
P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means
N (kg/ha)
0 50 100
0
34.06ef 35.56e 34.52ef 34.71

60 33.61f 37.32d 39.18bc 36.70

120 37.82cd 40.56ab 40.45ab 39.61

180 37.28d 40.34ab 40.94a 39.79

P-Means 35.69 38.45 38.97

LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 1.59
N means = P means = 37.63
CV (%) = 2.49
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance

4.10 Average Fruit Weight

Interaction effect of N and P on average fruit weight of watermelon was significant (p < 0.05)

(Appendix Table 4). Average fruit weight from 60 kg N/ha was increased by 0.37 kg (8.04 %)

and 0.07 kg (1.41 %) at 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha, respectively (Table 9). In the same way, mean

fruit weight from 50 kg P2O5/ha was increased by 0.21 kg (4.41 %), 0.59 kg (11.49 %) and

0.65 kg (12.92 %) at 60, 120, and 180 kg N/ha, respectively. Mean fruit weight from 120 kg

38
N/ha was increased by 1.13 kg (24.57 %) and 0.61 kg (12.30 %) at 50 and 100 kg P 2O5/ha,

respectively. The same trend was apparent at other rates of applied N and P (Table 9).

The interaction indicates that the response of fruit weight in watermelon was dependent on

both N and P levels. The highest average fruit weight per plant (5.73 kg) of watermelon was

achieved at a combination of 120 kg N/ha and 50 kg P2O5/ha, giving an interaction effect of

0.59 kg (Table 9). These findings are in agreement with those of Olaniyi and Fagbayide

(2008) who reported the influence of NP interaction on fruit weight of Egusi melon in Nigeria.

The results of this study also agree with the study of Uwah and Solomon (1998) who reported

maximum fruit weight (3.43 kg) at combination of 120 kg N/ha and 34 kg P/ha, giving an

interaction effect of 1.20 kg. Likewise, Fatondji et al (2008) reported that soil amendments

with compost (1.25 t/ha) and NPK (60 kg NKP/ha of 15-15-15) significantly (P ≤ 0.05)

increased mean fruit weight (1.62 kg) with an interaction effect of 0.56 kg.

Nitrogen and phosphorus combination of 120/50 enhanced main vine length (Table 1), branch

and leaf number per plant (Table 2), total leaf area per plant (Appendix Table 6), leaf area

index (Table 3), above ground dry weight (Table 4), fruit number (Table 6), fruit diameter

(Table 7) and fruit length (Table 8). The high fruit weight achieved at 120 kg N/ha and 50 kg

P2O5/ha may thus be due to the effects of N and P on the above parameters. This is also

validated with the existence of highly significant (P ≤ 0.01) and positive correlations between

mean fruit weight and main vine length (r = 0.83**), number of branches (r = 0.85**), number

of leaves (r = 0.81**), total leaf area (r = 0.86**), leaf area index (r = 0.72**), above ground

39
dry weight (r = 0.89**), fruit number (r = 0.75**), fruit diameter (r = 0.88**) and fruit length

(r = 0.75**) (Appendix Table 7).

Table 9. Interaction effect of N and P on mean fruit weight of watermelon at Adami Tulu

Fruit weight
Treatments P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means
0 50 100
N (kg/ha)
0 4.58e 4.60de 4.96cde 4.71
60 4.76cde 4.97cde 5.03cd 4.92
120 5.14bc 5.73a 5.57ab 5.48
180 5.03cd 5.68a 5.67a 5.47
P-Means 4.88 5.25 5.32
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 0.44
N means = P means = 5.14
CV (%) = 5.00
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance

4.11 Total Fruit Yield

There was a highly significant (p < 0.01) interaction between applied N and P on mean total

fruit yield of watermelon (Appendix Table 4). Mean total fruit yield from 60 kg N/ha was

increased by 2.59 t/ha (16.02 %) and 2.36 t/ha (12.88 %) at 50 and 100 kg P 2O5/ha,

respectively; similarly, mean total fruit yield from 50 kg P2O5/ha was increased by 3.24 t/ha

(20.88 %), 7.62 t/ha (39.04 %) and 6.62 t/ha (33.60 %) at 60, 120, and 180 kg N/ha,

respectively (Table 10). Mean total fruit yield from 120 kg N/ha was increased by 10.97 t/ha

(67.84 %) and 6.57 t/ha (35.86 %) at 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha, respectively (Table 10). Similar

trend was apparent at other levels of N and P (Table 10).

40
The interaction indicates that the response of total fruit yield in watermelon depends on the

levels of both N and P. The current findings agree with the study of Uwah and Solomon

(1998) who also reported maximum mean total fruit yield of watermelon (Sugar baby) of

16.88 t/ha at 120 kg N/ha and 17 kg P/ha having an interaction effect of 4.52 t/ha in Nigeria.

Similar results were also reported by Jilani et al (2009) who found that different levels of NPK

fertilizers resulted in a significant effect on fruit yield of cucumber.

The interaction effects of N and P on mean total fruit yield of watermelon were positive for

NP combination of 60/50, 60/100 and 120/50; it was negative or absent in all other

combinations (Table 10). The response of total fruit yield at lower or intermediate levels may

be due to the positive effects of applied N and P on main vine length (Table 1), number of

branches and leaves per plant (Table 2), total leaf area per plant (Appendix Table 6), leaf area

index (Table 3), above ground dry weight per plant (Table 4), total number of fruits per plant

(Table 6), fruit diameter (Table 7) fruit length (Table 8), average fruit weight (Table 9) and

marketable fruit yield (Table 11). This is also supported by the highly significant and positive

correlation observed between total fruit yield and main vine length (r = 0.81**), number of

branches per plant (r = 0.94**), number of leaves per plant (r = 0.74**), total leaf area per

plant (r = 0.82**), leaf area index per plant (r = 0.71**), above ground dry weight per plant (r

= 0.85**), total number of fruits per plant (r = 0.91**), average fruit diameter (r = 0.84**),

fruit length (r = 0.88**), fruit weight (r = 0.88**) and marketable fruit yield (r = 0.99**)

(Appendix Table 7).

41
Nitrogen and phosphorus interaction effect on total fruit yield at combinations above 120/50

were negative (Table 10). This may be mainly attributed to the negative effects of applied N

and P on number of fruits (Table 6) and weight of fruits (Table 9) at 120/100, 180/50 and

180/100. The highest total fruit yield (27.14 t/ha) was recorded at a combination of 120 kg

N/ha and 50 kg P2O5/ha, giving an interaction effect of 7.62 t/ha (Table 10). The yield of

watermelon recorded in this study was 12.14 t/ha (80.93 %) higher than the average yield

obtained by farmers in Ethiopia (15 t/ha) (Amenti et al., 2009; unpublished). The finding

shows that it is possible to increase the fruit yield of watermelon on farmers’ field by about

double through proper management of fertilizers.

Table 10. Interaction effect of N and P on total fruit yield of watermelon at Adami Tulu

Treatments Total fruit yield (t/ha)

P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means
N (kg/ha)
0 50 100

0 13.99e 16.17cde 18.32bcd 16.16

60 15.52de 18.76bc 20.68b 18.32
120 19.52b 27.14a 24.89a 23.85
180 19.70b 26.32a 25.85a 23.96
P-Means 17.18 22.10 22.44
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 2.82
N means = P means = 20.57
CV (%) = 8.10
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance

42
4.12 Marketable and Unmarketable Fruit Yield

Interaction effect of applied N and P on marketable fruit yield of watermelon was highly

significant (p ≤ 0.01); however, it had no significant (p ≥ 0.05) effect on unmarketable fruit

yield (Appendix Table 4). Increasing N level from 0 to 60 kg N/ha did not increase marketable

fruit yield significantly (p ≤ 0.05) at all rates of P (Table 11). On the other hand, increasing N

level from 60 to 120 kg N/ha significantly (p ≤ 0.05) increased marketable fruit yield at all

levels of P. Increasing level of N from 120 to 180 kg N/ha did not significantly (p ≥ 0.05)

increased marketable fruit yield at 0, 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha (Table 11).

Average marketable fruit yield of watermelon from 60 kg N/ha was increased by 2.52 t/ha

(16.17 %) at 50 P2O5/ha and 2.62 t/ha (15.09 %) at 100 kg P2O5/ha (Table 11). In the same

way, mean marketable fruit yield from 50 kg P2O5/ha was increased by 3.28 t/ha (22.13 %),

7.22 t/ha (38.20 %) and 5.48 t/ha (27.24 %) at 60, 120, and 180 kg N/ha, respectively.

Average marketable fruit yield from 120 kg N/ha was increased by 10.54 t/ha (67.65 %) and

6.83 t/ha (39.34 %) at 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha, respectively (Table 11). The same trend was

apparent at other rates of N and P (Table 11).

Similar to total fruit yield, the interaction effects of N and P on marketable fruit yield of

watermelon were positive for NP combination of 60/50, 60/100 and 120/50; it was negative or

absent in all other combinations (Table 11). The high marketable fruit yield recorded in this

study could be attributed to the positive effect of N and P on number of marketable fruits

(Appendix Table 8) and average fruit weight (Table 9). This is also validated with the
43
existence highly significant (P ≤ 0.01) and positive correlations between marketable fruit yield

and marketable fruit number per plant (r = 0.97**) and average fruit weight (r = 0.90**)

(Appendix Table 7).

Application of 120 kg N/ha combined with 50 kg P2O5/ha gave the highest marketable fruit

yield (26.12 t/ha), having an interaction effect of 7.22 t/ha (Table 11). The interaction effects

of N and P beyond this rate were negative mainly due to the negative effects of applied N and

P on number of marketable fruits (Appendix Table 8) and fruit weight (Table 9) at 120/100,

180/50, 180/100. Fatondji et al (2008) reported that soil amendments with compost and NPK

significantly increased marketable fruit yield of watermelon compared to control.

Table 11. Interaction effect of N and P on mean marketable and unmarketable fruit yield of

watermelon at Adami Tulu

Treatmen Marketable fruit yield (t/ha) Unmarketable fruit yield (t/ha)

ts
N (kg/ha) P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means
0 50 100 0 50 100
0 13.34e 15.58cde 17.36bcd 15.43 0.65 0.59 0.85 0.70
60 14.82de 18.10bc 19.98b 17.63 0.65 0.65 0.70 0.67
120 18.90b 26.12a 24.19a 23.07 0.62 0.90 0.70 0.74
180 20.12b 25.60a 24.91a 23.54 0.74 0.72 0.89 0.78
P-Means 16.80 21.35 21.61 0.67 0.72 0.79
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 2.90 LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = ns
N means = P means = 19.92 N means = P means = 0.72
CV (%) = 8.61 CV (%) = 26.76
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance; ns = non significant

44
4.13 TSS %

Nitrogen and phosphorus levels had a highly significant (P ≤ 0.01) effect on average TSS% of

watermelon (Appendix Table 4). Mean TSS% from 60 kg N/ha was increased by 1.42 (15.38

%) and 0.57 (5.81 %) at 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha, respectively (Table 12). Similarly, average

TSS% from 50 kg P2O5/ha was increased by 0.53 (5.24 %), 0.81 (7.53 %) and 0.52 (4.73 %) at

60, 120, and 180 kg N/ha, respectively. Mean TSS% of watermelon from 120 kg N/ha was

increased by 2.34 (25.35 %) and 1.58 (16.11 %) at 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha, respectively.

Similar trend was apparent at other rates of N and P (Table 12).

The interaction indicate that the response of TSS % in watermelon depend on the levels of

both N and P (Table 12). The present findings are in line with those of Fatondji et al (2008)

who reported that application of compost (1.25 t/ha) and NPK (60 kg NKP/ha of 15-15-15)

significantly (p < 0.05) improved fruit TSS % content of watermelon compared to control.

This is mainly due to the positive interaction effect of N and P on above ground dry weight

(Table 4) and the main effect of N on leaf area index (Table 3). This is also supported by the

highly significant (p ≤ 0.01) and positive correlation observed between TSS % and above

ground dry weight per plant (r = 0.85**) and leaf area index (r = 0.64**) (Appendix Table 7).

High leaf area index assist the plant to intercept more sun light hence higher rate of

photosynthesis which in turn increased the amount of total soluble solids in the fruit.

45
Table 12. Interaction effect of N and P on TSS% of watermelon at Adami Tulu

Treatments TSS%
P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means
N (kg/ha) 0 50 100
0 7.93h 9.23g 9.81f 8.99
60 10.12ef 10.65cd 10.38de 10.38
120 10.76cd 11.57a 11.39ab 11.24
180 10.99bc 11.51a 11.71a 11.40
P-Means 9.95 10.74 10.82
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 0.43
N means = P means = 10.50
CV (%) = 2.39
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance

4.14 Soil Nutrient Analysis

There was no significant (p ≥ 0.05) interaction effect between applied N and P on mean soil

total N and available P concentration of the experimental field (Appendix Table 5). However,

N rates affected significantly (p < 0.05) soil total N concentration while P level remained non

significant (Appendix Table 5). On the other hand, available P concentration in soil after

harvest was not significantly (p ≥ 0.05) influenced by main effects of N while main effects of

P highly significantly (p< 0.01) affected soil available P (Appendix Table 5).

Soil total N content of the experimental field before planting was 0.31 % (Appendix Table 1)

and soil analysis after harvest showed that this figure was reduced to 0.24 % (Table 13). This

46
is mainly due to positive response of watermelon to the nutrient, the very mobile nature of N

and loss of the nutrient through different processes in the soil (Tisdale et al, 1995). The lowest

soil total N was recorded from 0 kg N/ha plots (0.22 %) while the maximum soil total N was

recorded due to the main effects of N at 180 kg N/ha (0.28 %) (Table 13).

Contrary to N, mean soil available P before planting was 11.20 ppm and soil analysis result

indicated that this figure was increased to 16.28 ppm as a result of applied phosphate fertilizer.

This is probably due to the relatively immobile nature of P in the soil (Tisdale et al, 1995). It

was also observed that the main effect of P at 50 and 100 kg P2O5/ha had a mean soil available

P content of 11.5 ppm and 29.75 ppm, respectively (Table 13) which maintained and

increased available P in the soil. According to Marx et al (1999), such soils are considered as

medium P content soils with sufficiency range of 70 – 95 % for next crop to be grown while

available P content of soil from plots received 0 kg P2O5/ha was only 7.60 ppm falls under soil

with low P content due to removal of the nutrient by watermelon.

47
Table 13. Influence of main effects of N and P on mean soil total N and available P

concentration at harvest at Adami Tulu

Treatment Soil total N (%) Soil available P (ppm)

N (Kg/ha)

0 0.22b 14.02
60 0.22b 18.07
120 0.25ab 14.48
180 0.28a 18.57

LSD (p ≤ 0.05) 0.040 ns

P2O5 (kg/ha)
0 0.24 7.60b
50 0.26 11.50b
100 0.23 29.75a
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) ns 10.55
CV (%) 12.82 58.87
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance, ns = non significant

4.15 Nutrient Tissue Concentrations

Interaction effect of N and P on mean leaf total N and P concentration was found to be non

significant (p ≥ 0.05) (Appendix Table 5). However, leaf total N was significantly (p < 0.05)

influenced by the main effects of N while non significant differences was observed due to

main effects of P. Leaf total P content was significantly (p < 0.05) affected by main effects of

both N and P (Appendix Table 5).

48
Increasing N levels from 0 to 120 N kg/ha increased leaf total N by 1.68 % (73.04 %) while

application of N beyond 120 N kg/ha had no significant (p < 0.05) influence on leaf total N

(Table 14). This indicates that N uptake by watermelon is high up to 120 N kg/ha to attain the

nutrient level needed by the crop. The result also revealed the presence of 3.98 % of N at 120

N kg/ha which is in upper sufficiency range as it was indicated by Hochmuth et al (1991).

Phosphorus concentration in leaf was increased with increased amount of both N and P levels.

Maximum leaf total P of 1879.3 ppm and 1886.0 ppm were observed at 180 kg N/ha and 100

kg P2O5, respectively (Table 14). The range of leaf total P concentration in these findings is

similar to those reported in Hochmuth (1991).

Table 14. Main effects of N and P on mean leaf N and P content at Adami Tulu

Treatment Leaf total N (%) Leaf total P (ppm)

N (Kg/ha)

0 2.30c 1266.0b
60 3.23bc 1462.7b
120 3.98ab 1602.7b
180 4.66a 1879.3a

LSD (p ≤ 0.05) 0.94 384.35

P2O5 (Kg/ha)
0 3.79 1248.5b
50 3.68 1523.5b
100 3.68 1886.0a
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) ns 332.86
CV (%) 19.91 19.48
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly
different at 5 % level of significance, ns = non significant

49
4.16 Economic Analysis

The highest marketable fruit yield (26.12 t/ha) was recorded at NP combination of 120/50

followed by 180/50 (Table 11). Similarly, the adjusted marketable fruit yield (23.51 t/ha)

according to CIMMYT (1988) was high when 120 kg N/ha was combined with 50 kg P2O5/ha

(Table 15). The economic evaluation indicated that the highest net benefit of Birr 68501.31/ha

was recorded at NP combination of 120 kg N/ha and 50 kg P2O5/ha followed by 180 kg N/ha

combined with 50 kg P2O5/ha (66240.77 Birr/ha) with benefit cost ratio of 7.00 and 6.32,

respectively. The lowest net benefit (32376.65 Birr/ha) was obtained from control treatment

(Table 15) with benefit cost ratio of 4.26. These findings are in agreement with those of

Makokha et al (2001) who reported that treatment with high net benefit also got high benefit

cost ratio from fertilizers and manure use in maize production in Kenya.

The high net benefit from the abovementioned treatments could be mainly attributed to high

marketable fruit yield resulted from the interaction of N and P while the low net benefit was

attributed to low marketable fruit yield due to absence of adequate supply of N and P.

50
Table 15. Interaction effect N and P on economic analysis of marketable fruit yield of

watermelon at Adami Tulu

Avy Ajy FGP GFB/ha TC NB/ha B:C

Treatment (Birr/kg)
(kg/ha) (kg/ha) (Birr/ha)
N P2O5
(kg/ha) (kg/ha)
180 100 24912.50 22421.25 3.33 74662.76 11282.58 63380.19 5.62

180 50 25598.61 23038.75 3.33 76719.04 10478.27 66240.77 6.32

180 0 20122.22 18110.00 3.33 60306.30 9673.89 50632.41 5.23

120 100 24188.89 21770.00 3.33 72494.10 10591.30 61902.80 5.84

120 50 26122.22 23510.00 3.33 78288.30 9786.99 68501.31 7.00

120 0 18901.39 17011.25 3.33 56647.46 8982.61 47664.85 5.31

60 100 19976.39 17978.75 3.33 59869.24 9899.97 49969.27 5.05

60 50 18102.78 16292.50 3.33 54254.02 9095.66 45158.37 4.96

60 0 14819.44 13337.50 3.33 44413.87 8291.28 36122.60 4.36

0 100 17356.94 15621.25 3.33 52018.76 9208.69 42810.08 4.65

0 50 15579.17 14021.25 3.33 46690.76 8404.38 38286.38 4.56

0 0 13338.89 12005.00 3.33 39976.65 7600.00 32376.65 4.26

Avy = Average marketable fruit yield, Ajy = Average marketable fruit yield adjusted
downward by a 10%, FGP = Farm gate price, GFB = Gross field benefit, TC = Total cost, NB
= Net benefit, B: C = Benefit cost ratio

51
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Increase in production and productivity of watermelon with acceptable fruit quality can

mainly be achieved either through adopting improved varieties with better cultural practices or

by bringing more area under cultivation. Fertilizer application, being one of the most

influencing and known cultural practices, is the quickest and easiest ways of improving yield

and quality in watermelon. The study was carried out to investigate the influence of N and P

application on growth, yield and quality of watermelon [Citrullus lanatus (Thumb) Matsun

and Nakai] at Adami Tulu, East Shewa, Ethiopia. Factorial experiment arranged in RCBD was

used with three replications having four levels of N (0, 60, 120, 180 kg N/ha) and three levels

of P (0, 50, 100 kg P2O5/ha).

Among evaluated parameters, branch number per plant, total leaf area per plant, marketable

fruit yield per hectare, total fruit yield per hectare, marketable fruit number per plant, total

fruit number per plant, average fruit length and TSS % were highly significantly (p ≤ 0.01)

influenced by interaction of N and P while days to 50 % flowering, average main vine length,

leaf number per plant, above ground dry weight per plant and average fruit weight were

significantly (p ≤ 0.05) affected by NP interaction. On the other hand, interaction of N and P

had no significant effect on leaf area index, fruit diameter, unmarketable fruit number and

unmarketable total fruit yield. However, main effect of N significantly (p ≤ 0.05) influenced

leaf area index and fruit diameter. Combination of 180 kg N/ha and 100 kg P2O5/ha gave

highest average vine length (2.69m), branch number per plant (36.06), leaf number per plant

(393.36), above ground dry weight per plant (262.66 g), fruit length (40.94 cm) and TSS %

52
(11.71). However, none of them are significantly (p ≥ 0.05) different with value obtained at

NP combination at 120 kg N/ha and 50 kg P2O5/ha except branch number. Maximum mean

total fruit yield (27.14 t/ha), highest marketable fruit yield (26.12 t/ha), maximum number of

marketable fruit (2/plant) and highest fruit weight (5.73 kg) were recorded at combination of

120 kg N/ha and 50 kg P2O5/ha.

Simple correlation analysis indicated the presence of positive and highly significant (p ≤ 0.01)

correlation between mean total fruit yield and mean main vine length, number of branches,

number of leaves, leaf area index, above ground dry weight, number of fruits, weight of fruits,

length and diameter of fruits. Similarly, all above mentioned parameters were positively and

highly significantly (p ≤ 0.01) correlated with marketable fruit yield. The positive and highly

significant correlation coefficient observed between fruit yield and growth and fruit yield

components show that fruit yield is greatly affected by aforesaid parameters. Moreover, the

analysis indicated positive and highly significant correlation between TSS % and growth

parameters such as mean main vine length, number of branches, number of leaves and leaf

area index. This indicates that watermelon fruit yield and quality can be improved by

application of optimum NP combination that positively influence growth and fruit yield

components of the crop. Days to 50 % flowering was negatively correlated with all

parameters.

Interaction effect between N and P on mean soil total N was non significant (p ≥ 0.05).

Nevertheless, main effects of N significantly (p ≤ 0.05) affected soil total N and the maximum

result was obtained at 180 kg N/ha (0.28 %) while lowest soil total N (0.22 %) was recorded

53
from plots received 0 kg N/ha. Generally, mean total N content of the soil was decreased from

0.31 % before planting to 0.24 % at harvest due to removal of the nutrient by watermelon

plant, mobile nature of N and loss the nutrient via various processes in the soil. Similarly, N

and P interaction had no significant effect on soil available P. However, main effects of P

significantly (p < 0.05) affected soil available P. Mean soil available P before planting was

11.20 ppm and soil analysis result after harvest revealed that this figure was increased to 16.28

ppm as a result of applied P. Nitrogen and phosphorus interaction effect on mean leaf total N

and P was found to be non significant (p ≥ 0.05) while leaf total N was significantly (p < 0.05)

affected only by the main effects of N. Main effects of both N and P significantly influenced

leaf total P concentration.

Economic evaluation using simple partial budget analysis (CIMMYT, 1988) revealed that the

highest net benefit of Birr 68501.31/ha was recorded from a plot received 120 kg N/ha

combined with 50 kg P2O5/ha followed by NP combination 180 kg N/ha and 50 kg P2O5/ha

(66240.77 Birr/ha) with benefit cost ratio of 7.00 and 6.32, respectively. Control treatment

gave the lowest net benefit (32376.65 Birr/ha) with benefit cost ratio of 4.26. High marketable

fruit yield recorded due to interaction of N and P resulted in high net benefit while absence of

adequate supply of N and P resulted in low marketable fruit yield thereby affecting the

expected net benefit from the field. Hence, combined application of 120 kg N/ha and 50 kg

P2O5/ha could significantly improve not only fruit yield but also fruit quality thereby

increasing watermelon growers’ income around Adami Tulu and other areas with similar

agroecologies. However, similar study should be repeated at least one more season to make

more reliable recommendation.

54
6. REFERENCES

Adami Tulu Agricultural Research Center (ATARC). 1998. ATARC profile. Oromia

Agricultural development Bureau, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. p 5.

Aguyoh, J.N., W. Audi, M. Saidi and L. Gao-Qiong. 2009. Growth, yield and quantity

response of watermelon (CITRULLUS LANATUS [THUNB] MANSF. & NAKAI) CV.

Crimson Sweet) subjected to different levels of Tithonia manure. International Journal

of Science and Nature 1(1):7-11.

Amenti Chali, Tekalign Gutu, Teshome Abdissa and Wole Kinati. 2009. Assessment of
watermelon production and utilization in major producing areas of Ethiopia:
Challenges and opportunities. Survey report. Adami Tulu Agricultural Research
Center, East Shewa, Ethiopia. 12 p.

Bernard, P.K. 1993. Manual for plant analysis and interpretation. Improvement of soil services

for agricultural development. National Soil Service Project ETH/87/010 Field

Document. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Biswas, T. D., and S. K. Mukherjee. 1993. Text book of soil science. (5th ed.). Tata McGraw-

Hill, New Delhi. pp 170-197.

CIMMYT, 1998. From agronomic data to farmer recommendations. An economics-training

manual. Completely revised edition. D.F, Mexico. 84 p.

Crase, B. 2011. Curcurbitaceae. In Short, P.S. & Cowie, I.D. (eds), Flora of the Darwin

Region. (Northern Territory Herbarium, Department of Natural Resources,

Environment, the Arts and Sport) 1: 1–17.

55
Daniel Mekonnen. 2006. Effects of Integrated nutrient management on agronomic

performance of potato (Solanum tuberosum. L.) and fertility of nitosol at Bako. M. Sc

Thesis. Hawassa University College of Agriculture, Hawassa, Ethiopia. 76 p.

Dauda, S.N., L. Aliyu, and U.F. Chiezey. 2005. Effect of variety, seedling age and poultry

manure on growth and yield of garden egg (Solamun gilo L.). The Nigerian Academic

Forum 9(1): 88-95.

Day, P.R. 1965. Hydrometer method of particle size analysis. In: Methods of soil analysis

(C.A. Black ed.). American Society of Agronomy, Madison Wisconsin Argon. 9(2): 562-563.

Dewis, J. and P. Freitas. 1970. Physical and chemical methods of soil and water analysis. FAO

Bulletin, Rome. 10: 271 p.

FAOSTAT. 2009. Production indices: Available at:

http://faostat.fao.org/site/612/default.aspx#ancor. Accessed on Nov 05, 2010.

Fatondji, D., D. Pasternak and L. Woltering. 2008. Watermelon production on stored

rainwater in Sahelian sandy soils. African Journal of Plant Science 2 (12): 151-160.

Gichimu, B. M., B. O. Owuor and M. M. Dida. 2008. Agronomic performance of three most

popular commercial watermelon cultivars in Kenta as compared to one newly

introduced cultivar and one local landrace grown on dystric nitosols under sub-humid

tropical conditions. ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science 3(5 & 6):

65-71.

Goreta, S., S. Perica, G. Dumicic, L. Bucan and K. Zanic. 2005. Growth and yield of

watermelon on polyethylene mulch with different spacing and nitrogen rates.

American Journal of HortScience 40(2):366-369.

56
Groeneveld, D. P. 1997.Vertical point quadrat sampling and an extinction factor to calculate

leaf area index. Journal of Arid Environments 36: 475 – 485

Guner, N. and T.C. Wehner. 2004. The genes of watermelon. American Journal of

Horticultural Science 39(6): 1175-1182.

Gungula, D.T., A.O. Togun and J.G. Kling. 2005. The influence of N rates on maize leaf

number and senescence in Nigeria. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences 1(1): 1-5.

Hochmuth, G.J., D. Maynard, C. Vavrina and E.A. Hanlon. 1991. Plant tissue analysis and

interpretations for vegetable crops in Florida. Gainesville (FL): University of Florida

Cooperative Extension Service. Special Series SS-VEC-42. 44 p.

Jilani, M.S., A. Bakar, K. Waseem and M. Kiran. 2009. Effect of different levels of NPK on

the growth and yield of cucumber (Cucumis sativus) under the plastic tunnel. Journal.

of Agriculture and Social Science 5: 99–101.

John, L.W., D.B. Jamer, L.T. Samuel and L.W. Warner. 2004. Soil fertility and fertilizers: An

introduction to nutrient management. Pearson education, India. pp 106-153.

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.

Makokha, S.S, S. Kimani, S. Mwangi, W. Verkuisil and F. Musembi. 2001. Determinants of

fertilizer and manure use in maize production in Kiambu district, Kenya, Mexico, D.F.

International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and Kenya

agricultural research Institute (KARI). 32 p.

Marx, E.S., J. Hart and R.G. Stevens. 1999. Soil test interpretation guide. Oregon State

University. pp 1-2.

57
Miles, C. 2004. Icebox Watermelons. In: crop production, vegetable research and extension.

Washingston State University. Vancouver research and extension center, Vancouver,

USA. Online publication: Available at: http://www.wsu.edu/watermelons. Accessed on

December 20, 2010.

Miller, R. W. and R. L. Donahue. 1995. Soils in our environment. (7th Ed). Prentice Hall,

Engle wood Cliff. pp 261 –289.

Ogunremi, E.A. 1978. Effect of Nitrogen on melon (Citrullus lanatus) at Ibadan, Nigeria.

Experimental Agriculture 14: 357 – 365.

Olaniyi, J.O. and J.A. Fagbayide. 2008. Growth and seed yield response of Egusi melon to

nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers application. Amerian-Eurasian Journal Agriculture

and Environment Science 4 (6):707-712.

Olsen, S.R and L.R. Dean. 1965. Phosphorus. In: methods of soil analysis. American Society

of Agronomy 9: 920-926.

Ozanne, P.G. 1980. Phosphate nutrition of plant a general treatise. In: Khasaconneh FE,

Sample EC, Kamprath (Eds). The role of phosphorus in agriculture. Soil Science

Society of America, Madisim, Wisconsin, USA, pp 229-589.

Rao, A. V. and S. Agarwal. 1999. Role of lycopene as antioxidant carotenoid in the prevention

of chronic diseases: A Review. Nutrition Research 19(2): 305-323.

Rice, R.P., L.W. Rice and H.D. Tindal. 1986. Fruit and vegetable production in Africa.

Macmillan Publications. pp 221-222.

Robinson, R.W. and D.S. Decker-Walters. 1997. Cucurbits. CAB International, Wallingford,

UK. pp 84-86.

58
Salisbury, B. F. and C .W. Ross. 1992. Plant physiology. 4th ed. Wadsworth Publishing

Company. Belmont, A Division of Wadsworth, Inc. California.

Tanweer, S., H. Ahmed, A.A. Nadeem and Z. Sajjad. 2005. Effect of seedling age and

different levels of phosphorus on growth and yield of cucumber (Cucumis sativus L).

International journal of Agriculture and Biology 7(2):311-314.

Tisdale, S.L., W. Nolson, L. Beaton, D. James and J. L. Halvin. 1995. Soil fertility and

fertilizers (5th Ed) Macmillan Publishing Company, New York. pp 109-229.

USDA. 2009. Nutrient database. Release 22. Available at:

http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=8964. Accessed on June 15, 2010.

Uwah, D.F. and M.G. Solomon. 1998. Effects of nitrogen and phosphorus on yield and yield

component of watermelon (Citrullus lanatus Thunb.Mansf.). Journal of Applied

Chemistry and Agricultural Research 5:48-53.

Wayne, W. F., D. B. Benny and M. R. Vincent. 2009. Watermelon juice: a promising

feedstock supplement, diluent, and nitrogen supplement for ethanol biofuel production.

Biotechnology for Biofuels 2:12-18.

Wehner, T. C. and D.N. Maynard. 2003. Cucumbers, melons, and other cucurbits. In: S.H.

Katz (editor) Encyclopedia of Food and Culture. Scribner & Sons, New York, 2014 p.

Available at: http://cuke.hort.ncsu.edu/cucurbit/wehner/articles/book13.pdf. Accessed

on July 12, 2010.

Zohary, D. and M. Hopf. 2000. Domestication of plants in the old World. 3rd Ed. Oxford

University Press. p 193.

59
7. APPENDICES

60
Appendix Table 1. Physico-chemical properties of soil at experimental site before planting

Soil Depth pH (H2O) Total N Available P Texture Class Organic Matter CEC
(cm) (%) (ppm) (%)
Clay (%) Silt (%) Sand (%)

0 - 30 8.4 0.31 11.20 23 46 31 Loam 3.39 15.93

Appendix Table 2. Weather data of Adami Tulu Agricultural Research Center (2010)

Month RH (%) Air Temperature (OC) Rainfall (mm)

Min. Max. Mean Mean
January 56 11.1 28.2 19.65 0.0
February 60 14.9 27.6 21.25 125.4
March 62 13.6 28.1 20.85 89.0
April 65 15 29.7 22.35 60.4
May 72 16.5 28.5 22.5 135.9
June 67 15.6 27.8 21.7 77.8
July 74 15.4 23.6 19.5 167.2
August 74 15.4 25.4 20.4 104.3
September 74 13.7 26.1 19.9 61.8
October 54 11.4 29.5 20.45 0.8
November 50 9.5 29.2 19.35 0.0
December 50 9.2 28.2 18.7 7.8
Total 830.4
Source: Adami Tulu Agricultural Research Center meteorological station

61
Appendix Table 3. Analysis of variance for growth attributes of watermelon as affected by N and P fertilizers

Mean Squares

Source of variation DF DTF AMVL NBPP NLPP TLAPP LAI AGDW

Replication 2 0.25ns 0.33** 26.64** 10179.22** 2.31** 0.07* 6724.12**

Nitrogen 3 5.85** 1.13** 244.86** 21046.24** 7.03** 0.15** 21191.54**

Phosphorus 2 1.75 ns 0.02 ns 16.19** 832.78 ns 0.23 ns 0.05ns 615.52 ns

NXP 6 2.6* 0.04* 15.96** 1417.96* 0.32** 0.02ns 1451.36*

Error 22 20.83 0.01 2.23 506.39 0.08 0.013 503.48

CV (%) 2.56 4.80 5.21 6.89 8.84 9.35 11.11

DF = Degree of freedom, DTF = Days to 50 % flowering, NBPP = Number of branches per plant, AMVL = Average Main vine
length, NLPP = Number of leaves per plant, TLAPP = Total leaf area per plant (cm2), LAI = Leaf area index, AGDW = Above
ground dry weight (g/plant)

*, ** indicate significant and highly significant differences at 5 and 1% levels of probability, respectively, ns = non-significant

62
Appendix Table 4. Analyses of variance for yield, yield components and quality of watermelon as influenced by N and P fertilizers
Source of Mean Squares

variation
Fruit Yield (t/ha) TNFPP Fruit Size AFW (kg) TSS %

DF Mark. Unmark. Total Mark. Unmark. Total AFL (cm) AFD (cm)

Replication 2 6.30 ns 0.02 ns 8.64 ns 0.002 ns 0.0007 ns 0.002 ns 0.65 ns 0.08 ns 0.77** 0.14 ns

Nitrogen 3 160.41** 0.02 ns 159.40** 0.581** 0.0007 ns 0.663** 56.75** 9.97** 1.53** 11.22**

Phosphorus 2 4.52 ns 0.05 ns 7.06 ns 0.009 ns 0.0007 ns 0.007 ns 12.91** 0.20 ns 0.08 ns 0.14 ns

NXP 6 24.80** 0.06 ns 28.54** 0.121** 0.0036 ns 0.108** 7.50** 0.40ns 0.18* 1.16**

Error 22 2.94 0.04 2.78 0.012 0.0038 0.005 0.88 0.19 0.07 0.06

CV (%) 8.61 26.79 8.10 6.90 32.13 3.86 2.49 2.25 5.02 2.40

DF = Degree of freedom, Mark. = Marketable, Unmark. = Unmarketable, MFY = Marketable fruit yield, UMFY = unmarketable
fruit yield, TFY = Total fruit yield, TNFPP = Total number of fruits per plant, AFL = Average fruit length (cm), AFD = Average
fruit diameter (cm), AFW = Average fruit weight, TSS% = Total soluble solids percentage

*, ** indicate significant and highly significant differences at 5 and 1% levels of probability, respectively, ns = non-significant

63
Appendix Table 5. Analysis of variance for Soil total N, soil available P, leaf total N, and leaf total P as affected by interaction of N

and P

Mean Squares
Source of variation DF Soil total N Soil available P Leaf total N Leaf total P
ns ** ns
Replication 1 0.0042 719.42 0.56 41666.67ns
* ns **
Nitrogen 3 0.0057 33.54 3.45 398977.78**
Phosphorus 2 0.0023 ns 1118.53** 0.03 ns 817916.67 **
NXP 6 0.0018ns 67.25ns 0.31 ns 129827.78ns
Error 11 0.0010 91.88 0.55 91484.85
CV (%) 12.82 58.87 19.91 19.48
*, ** indicate significant and highly significant differences at 5 and 1% levels of probability, respectively, ns = non-significant

Appendix Table 6. Mean total leaf area per plant as influenced by interaction of N and P at Adami Tulu

N (kg/ha) Total leaf area per plant(m2)

P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means
0 50 100
0 2.15e 2.25e 2.46de 2.29
60 2.77cd 2.78cd 2.95bc 2.83
120 2.99bc 4.14a 4.21a 3.78
180 3.35b 4.36a 4.43a 4.05
P-Means 2.82 3.38 3.51
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 0.48
N means = P means = 3.24
CV (%) = 8.82
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance
64
Appendix Table 7. Simple correlation coefficients among different parameters

AM NBPP NLPP TLAP LAI AGD DTF TNFP AFD AFL AFW NMFP MFY UMF TFY TSS %
P VL P W P P Y
AMVL 1.00 0.88** 0.89** 0.92** 0.75** 0.87** -0.50** 0.83** 0.88** 0.83** 0.83** 0.76** 0.83** 0.17 ns 0.81** 0.85**
NBPP 1.00 0.78** 0.87** 0.75** 0.85** -0.49** 0.90** 0.89** 0.91** 0.85** 0.89** 0.94** 0.28 ns 0.94** 0.84**
NLPP 1.00 0.96** 0.73** 0.83** -0.45** 0.78** 0.82** 0.71** 0.81** 0.68** 0.76** 0.31 ns 0.74** 0.75**
TLAPP 1.00 0.79** 0.89** -0.45** 0.82** 0.84** 0.80** 0.86** 0.77** 0.84** 0.28 ns 0.82** 0.79**
LAI 1.00 0.73** -0.22 0.66** 0.68** 0.68** 0.72** 0.65** 0.71** 0.16 ns 0.71** 0.64**
AGDW 1.00 -0.51** 0.84** 0.74** 0.74** 0.89** 0.79** 0.87** 0.20 ns 0.85** 0.85**
DTF 1.00 -0.57** -0.56** -0.43** -0.47** -0.55** -0.55** -0.13 ns -0.54** -0.63**

TNFPP 1.00 0.90** 0.87** 0.75** 0.95** 0.93** 0.30 ns 0.91** 0.90**
AFD 1.00 0.88** 0.88** 0.84** 0.85** 0.32 ns 0.84** 0.85**
AFL 1.00 0.75** 0.87** 0.88** 0.27 ns 0.88** 0.79**
AFW 1.00 0.75** 0.90** 0.30 ns 0.88** 0.73**
NMFPP 1.00 0.97** 0.25 ns 0.95** 0.84**
MFY 1.00 0.26ns 0.99** 0.85**
UMFY 1.00 0.34* 0.22ns
TFY 1.00 0.83**
TSS % 1.00

P = parameter, AMVL = Average Main vine length, NBPP = Number of branches per plant, NLPP = Number of leaves per plant,
TLAPP = Total leaf area per plant, LAI = Leaf area index, AGDW = Above ground dry weight (g/plant), DTF = Days to 50 %
flowering, TNFPP = Total number of fruits per plant, AFD = Average fruit diameter (cm), AFL = Average fruit length (cm), AFW
= Average fruit weight, NMFYPP = Number of marketable fruit per plant, MFY = Marketable fruit yield, UMFY = Unmarketable
fruit yield per plant, TFY = Total fruit yield, TSS% = Total soluble solids percentage

*, ** indicate significant and highly significant differences at 5 and 1% levels of probability, respectively, ns = non significant

65
Appendix Table 8. Nitrogen and phosphorus interaction effect on mean marketable and unmarketable fruit number per plant at

Adami Tulu

N (kg/ha) Marketable fruit number Unmarketable fruit number

P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means P2O5 (kg/ha) N-Means
0 50 100 0 50 100
0 1.17e 1.39cde 1.44cd 1.33 0.17 0.17 0.22 0.19
60 1.28de 1.50bc 1.67b 1.48 0.17 0.17 0.22 0.19
120 1.50bc 2.00a 1.89a 1.80 0.17 0.22 0.17 0.19
180 1.67b 1.94a 1.89a 1.83 0.22 0.17 0.22 0.20
P-Means 1.41 1.71 1.72 0.18 0.18 0.21
LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = 0.19 LSD (p ≤ 0.05) = ns
N means = P means = 1.61 N means = P means = 0.15
CV (%) = 6.92 CV (%) = 33.40
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance; ns =
non significant

66
Appendix Table 9. Main effects of N and P on mean main vine length, leaf number per plant and branch number per plant at Adami

Tulu

Treatment Mean
N (kg/ha) Main vine length (m) Branch number per plant Leaf number per plant Total leaf area per plant (m2)

0 1.8c 23.20c 269.89c 2.29c

60 2.14b 26.04b 310.73b 2.83b
120 2.49a 32.44a 354.01a 3.78a
180 2.54a 32.94a 371.97a 4.05a
LSD 0.17 2.03 34.74 0.51
P2O5 (kg/ha)
0 2.08b 25.32b 305.28b 2.82b
50 2.29a 29.79a 330.76ab 3.39a
100 2.35a 30.86a 343.91a 3.51a

LSD 0.15 1.76 30.08 0.44

CV (%) 8.05 7.36 11.05 16.32
Means followed by the same letter within the same column or rows are not significantly different at 5 % level of significance

67
 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

The author was born on March 10, 1980 in West Wollega Zone, Oromia Regional State. He

attended his elementary and junior schools at Mendi Mekane Yesus Elementary School from

September 1985 to June 1993 and his secondary school at Menesibu Senior Secondary School

from September 1993 to May 1998. He successfully passed the Ethiopian School Leaving

Certificate Examination (E.S.L.C.E.) in 1998 and joined the then Alemaya University (now

Haramaya University) and graduated with B.Sc. degree in Agriculture (in Plant Science) on

July 06, 2002. Immediately after graduation, he was employed by the Ministry of Agriculture

(MOA) and worked at Kombolcha Agricultural Technical Vocation Education and Training

College as junior lecturer for 8 months. In May 2003, he was then employed by Oromia

Agricultural Research Institute and assigned to work as junior researcher in horticulture

research division at Adami Tulu Agricultural Research Center. During his stay at this center,

he participated in various short-term trainings, workshops, and professional societies until he

joined Hawassa university college of Agriculture to obtain M.Sc. degree in Agronomy.

xiii