Sesame is a vital cash crop and used for selling purpose for the livelihood of Ethiopian people. Nevertheless, the seed yield is low because of a number of production factors like the lack of optimum plant density and row spacing for sesame productivity. A fieldwork did to determine the appropriate row and plant spacings for Sesame productivity and profitability at Metema and Tach Armachiho districts. Treatments were arranged to five rows (40, 50, 60, 70 and 80 cm) with three plant spacing (10, 20 and 30 cm) spacings comparing with the blanket recommendation (40cm x 10cm) and arranged in randomized complete block design with three replications. The plant height, pods plant-1, pod-bearing zone, seed and oil yield were highly significant and influenced by the interaction effects of row and plant spacings. The highest yield (1080 kgha-1), oil content (53.8%) and net benefit (70,767 ETB) obtained from the 70 cm row spacing with the 20 cm plant spacing. However, the minimum yield (840 kg/ha), oil content (51.1%) and net benefit (25,973.2 ETB) were obtained from the blanket recommendation (40cm x 10cm) spacing. Therefore, the inter row 70 cm with intra row 20cm spacings are the most suitable plant densities and suggested to be promoted for sesame production on the tested locations in the lowlands of northwestern Gondar, Ethiopia.
Published in | International Journal of Biochemistry, Biophysics & Molecular Biology (Volume 10, Issue 1) |
DOI | 10.11648/j.ijbbmb.20251001.12 |
Page(s) | 16-23 |
Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Abasena, Competition, Humera-1, Interaction, Lowland Areas, Row
TRT | DF | DM | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Row Spacings (cm) | Plant spacings (cm) | |||||
10 | 20 | 30 | 10 | 20 | 30 | |
40 | 59.1 | 59 | 61 | 99.5 | 100 | 100.7 |
50 | 59 | 57 | 61 | 100.3 | 100.2 | 101.5 |
60 | 58 | 60 | 59.5 | 99.8 | 102 | 101.3 |
70 | 59 | 61 | 60 | 100 | 101 | 101.7 |
80 | 61 | 58 | 62 | 101.8 | 100.6 | 101.2 |
Mean | 59.8 | 100.9 | ||||
CV (%) | 3.2 | 1.1 | ||||
LSD (0.05) | 2* | 1.2* |
TRT | NBpP | PH (cm) | LPBZ (cm) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Row Spacings (cm) | Plant spacings (cm) | ||||||||
10 | 20 | 30 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 10 | 20 | 30 | |
40 | 4.3 | 4.5 | 5.1 | 154.5 | 150 | 154.9 | 56 | 54 | 53 |
50 | 5.8 | 5.2 | 4.9 | 156.5 | 150 | 144.5 | 58 | 56 | 54 |
60 | 5.1 | 5.2 | 4.9 | 150.7 | 150 | 145 | 55 | 56 | 54 |
70 | 5.1 | 5.1 | 5.0 | 150.7 | 141.8 | 151.9 | 55 | 54 | 52 |
80 | 5.3 | 6.2 | 5.2 | 153.5 | 154 | 151.2 | 55 | 56 | 51 |
Mean | 5.1 | 150.7 | 54 | ||||||
CV (%) | 16.7 | 6.8 | 10 | ||||||
LSD (0.05) | 1.1* | 8.3** | 2.5** |
TRT | NPPP | NSPP | TSW (G) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Row Spacings (cm) | Plant spacings (cm) | ||||||||
10 | 20 | 30 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 10 | 20 | 30 | |
40 | 53.6 | 77.6 | 68.6 | 70.3 | 70.8 | 70.6 | 2.86 | 2.76 | 2.72 |
50 | 63.6 | 68.9 | 66.3 | 70.8 | 71.0 | 68.7 | 2.81 | 2.76 | 2.84 |
60 | 62.2 | 62.7 | 70.2 | 71.7 | 68.4 | 68.9 | 2.68 | 2.62 | 2.64 |
70 | 61.1 | 82.4 | 62.9 | 69.3 | 74.9 | 69.9 | 2.82 | 2.91 | 2.83 |
80 | 65.2 | 63.9 | 79.4 | 72.5 | 69.2 | 72.2 | 2.71 | 2.53 | 2.77 |
Mean | 67.2 | 70.4 | 2.7 | ||||||
CV (%) | 15.3 | 10.8 | 11.1 | ||||||
LSD (0.05) | 13** | 6* | 0.24* |
Treatment | Seed Yield (kgha-1) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Plant spacings (cm) | |||
Row spacings (cm) | 10 | 20 | 30 |
40 | 840 | 910 | 890 |
50 | 880 | 930 | 870 |
60 | 860 | 920 | 880 |
70 | 1000 | 1080 | 960 |
80 | 860 | 910 | 850 |
Mean | 910 | ||
CV (%) | 10.6 | ||
LSD (5%) | 150** |
Treatment | Oil Content Yield (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Plant spacings (cm) | |||
Row spacings (cm) | 10 | 20 | 30 |
40 | 51.1 | 53.2 | 51.3 |
50 | 52.4 | 52.6 | 53.3 |
60 | 51.4 | 52.2 | 52.7 |
70 | 52.6 | 53.8 | 52.7 |
80 | 52.7 | 52.4 | 51.8 |
Mean | 52.22 | ||
CV (%) | 2.5 | ||
LSD (5%) | 0.001*** |
Treatment (cm) | UASY (kgha-1) | ASY (kgha-1) | TVC (ETBha-1) | GFB (ETBha-1) | NB (ETBha-1) | Dominance | MRR (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
80×30 | 850 | 765 | 47600.5 | 76,500 | 28,899.5 | ND | |
80×20 | 910 | 819 | 47631.3 | 81,900 | 34,268.8 | ND | 17460.9 |
80×10 | 860 | 774 | 47723.5 | 77,400 | 29,676.5 | D | |
70×30 | 960 | 864 | 37034.2 | 86,400 | 49,365.8 | ND | 1717.9 |
70×20 | 1080 | 972 | 37070.0 | 97,200 | 60,130.0 | ND | 30004.9 |
70×10 | 1000 | 900 | 37177.7 | 90,000 | 52,822.4 | D | |
60×30 | 880 | 792 | 30375.4 | 79,200 | 48,824.6 | D | |
60×20 | 920 | 828 | 30416.4 | 82,800 | 52,383.6 | D | |
60×10 | 860 | 774 | 30539.4 | 77,400 | 46,860.6 | D | |
50×30 | 870 | 783 | 27333.3 | 78,300 | 50,966.7 | D | |
50×20 | 930 | 837 | 27384.6 | 83,700 | 56,315.5 | D | |
50×10 | 880 | 792 | 27519.1 | 79,200 | 51,680.9 | D | |
40×30 | 890 | 801 | 24541.6 | 80,100 | 55,558.4 | D | |
40×20 | 910 | 819 | 24608.2 | 81,900 | 57,291.8 | D | |
40×10 | 840 | 756 | 24808.1 | 75,600 | 50,792.0 | D |
ASY | Adjusted Seed Yield |
cm | Centi Meter |
CV (%) | Coefficient of Variation |
DF | Days to 50% Flowering |
DM | Days to 90% Physiological Maturity |
D | Dominance |
ETB | Ethiopian Birr |
GFB | Gross Field Benefit |
LSD (%) | Least Significant Difference |
LPBZ | Length of Pod Bearing Zone |
kg | Kilo Gram |
ha | Hectare |
PH | Plant Height |
NBpP | Number of Branches per Plant |
NPpP | Number of Pods per Plant |
NSpP | Number of Seeds per Plant |
ND | Non- Dominated |
Ns | Non-Significant |
MRR | Marginal Rate of Return |
SY | Seed Yield |
TVC | Total Variable Cost |
TRT | Treatment |
UASY | Unadjusted Seed Yield |
% | Percentage |
** | Highly Significant |
* | Significant |
[1] | Zhang, H., Miao, H., Wang, L., Qu, L., Liu, H., Wang, Q., and Yue, M. Genome sequencing of the important oilseed crop Sesamum indicum L. Genome Biology, 2013, 14: 401. |
[2] | Bedigian D. Sesame: The Genus Sesamum. St. Lois: Missouri Botanical Garden. 2010, ISBN 4933-5389. |
[3] | Khan, M., Sultana, N., Islam, M. & Hasan-uz-zaman, M. Yield and yield contributing characters of sesame as affected by different management practices. American-Eurasian 2009, Journal of Scientific Research, 4, 195-197. |
[4] | Balasubramanian T, Palaniappal S. Sesame. In: P Rathore (Eds.), Techniques and Management of Field Crops Production. AgroBios, India. 2011, pp. 181-200. |
[5] |
FAOSTAT. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; FAOSTAT: Rome, Italy, 2019; Available online:
http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC accessed on 30 August 2021. |
[6] | Taghouti, M., Nsarellah, N., Gaboun, F. and Rochdi, A.. Multi-environment assessment of the impact of genetic improvement on agronomic performance and on grain quality traits in Moroccan durum wheat varieties of 1949 to 2017. Global journal of plant breeding and. Genetics, 2017, 4, pp. 394-404. |
[7] | Terefe Negasa Abebe. Review of sesame value chain in Ethiopia. International Journal of African and Asian Studies. 2016 19. pp. 36-47. |
[8] | Central Statistical Agency. Report on area and production of major crops (private peasant holdings, Meher season) 2021; Volume I. Statistical Bulletin 590. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2021. |
[9] | Hailemariam M., Tesfaye A. Progress of soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill] breeding and genetics research in Ethiopia. JNSR. 2018, 8: 70. |
[10] | Nasser AS, Salah EH, Urs S. Influence of varied plant density on growth, yield and economic return of drip irrigated faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Turk. J. Field Crops, 2013, 18(2): 185-197. |
[11] | Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization (EARO). Directory of released crop varieties & their recommended cultural practices. Addis Ababa, 2004. |
[12] | CIMMYT. (1988). from agronomic data to farmer recommendations: An economics-training manual. Completely Revised. Mexico. D. F. |
[13] | Andrade, D. K. B.; Ferreira, M. A.; Véras, A. S. C.; Wanderley, W. L.; Silva, L. E.; Carvalho, F. F. R.; Alves, K. S.; Melo, W. S., Apparent digestibility and absorption of Holstein cows fed diets with forage cactus (Opuntia ficus-indica Mill) in replacement of sorghum silage (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench). Rev. Bras. Zootec. 2002, 31(5): 2088-2097. |
[14] | Jakusko, B. B. Usman, B. D. and Mustapha A. B. Effect of row spacing on growth and yield of Sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) in Yola, Adamawa State, Nigeria, 2013, Volume 2, Issue 3, PP 36-39. |
[15] | J. A. Idoko*, P. D. Baba, T. R. Ugoo. Effect of inter-row and intra-row spacing on the growth and yield of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) in Makurdi, Nigeria, Department of Crop Production, University of Agriculture, Makurdi, Nigeria, International Journal of Agronomy and Agriculture Research (IJAAR), 2018, Vol. 12, No. 1, p. 69-76, 2018. |
[16] | Nadeem, A., Kashani, S., Ahmed, N., Buriro, M., Saeed, Z., Mohammad, F. and Ahmed, S. Growth and Yield of Sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) under the Influence of Planting Geometry and Irrigation Regimes. American Journal of Plant Sciences, 2015, 6, 980-986. |
[17] | Ngala, A. L., I. Y. Dugje and H. Yakubu1. Effects of inter row spacing and plant density on performance of sesame in a Nigerian Sudan Savanna, 2013, Sci. Int. Lahore 25(3): 513-519. |
[18] | Mkamilo, G. S. and D. Bedigian, (2007). Sesame (Sesame indicum L.). In Van der Vossen, H. A. M. and G. S. Mkalimo (Ed.) Vegetable oils/Oleagineux, pp. 14. Wageningen, Netherlands. |
[19] | Ö. Öztürk, O. Şaman. Effects of Different Plant Densities on the Yield and Quality of Second Crop Sesame. International Journal of Biological, Life and Agricultural Sciences, 2012, ISSN: 2415-6612 Vol: 6. |
[20] | Mshelia, J. S., 2 Sajo, A. A. & Gungula, D. T. Effects of sowing date and intra- row spacing on oil crude protein, crude fiber and ash contents of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) seed in Yola, Nigeria. International Journal of science and nature, 2014, VOL. 5(2): 186-190. |
APA Style
Azanaw, M., Asmare, G. (2025). Determination of Optimum Plant Density for Sesame Productivity. International Journal of Biochemistry, Biophysics & Molecular Biology, 10(1), 16-23. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbbmb.20251001.12
ACS Style
Azanaw, M.; Asmare, G. Determination of Optimum Plant Density for Sesame Productivity. Int. J. Biochem. Biophys. Mol. Biol. 2025, 10(1), 16-23. doi: 10.11648/j.ijbbmb.20251001.12
@article{10.11648/j.ijbbmb.20251001.12, author = {Melaku Azanaw and Getachew Asmare}, title = {Determination of Optimum Plant Density for Sesame Productivity }, journal = {International Journal of Biochemistry, Biophysics & Molecular Biology}, volume = {10}, number = {1}, pages = {16-23}, doi = {10.11648/j.ijbbmb.20251001.12}, url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbbmb.20251001.12}, eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijbbmb.20251001.12}, abstract = {Sesame is a vital cash crop and used for selling purpose for the livelihood of Ethiopian people. Nevertheless, the seed yield is low because of a number of production factors like the lack of optimum plant density and row spacing for sesame productivity. A fieldwork did to determine the appropriate row and plant spacings for Sesame productivity and profitability at Metema and Tach Armachiho districts. Treatments were arranged to five rows (40, 50, 60, 70 and 80 cm) with three plant spacing (10, 20 and 30 cm) spacings comparing with the blanket recommendation (40cm x 10cm) and arranged in randomized complete block design with three replications. The plant height, pods plant-1, pod-bearing zone, seed and oil yield were highly significant and influenced by the interaction effects of row and plant spacings. The highest yield (1080 kgha-1), oil content (53.8%) and net benefit (70,767 ETB) obtained from the 70 cm row spacing with the 20 cm plant spacing. However, the minimum yield (840 kg/ha), oil content (51.1%) and net benefit (25,973.2 ETB) were obtained from the blanket recommendation (40cm x 10cm) spacing. Therefore, the inter row 70 cm with intra row 20cm spacings are the most suitable plant densities and suggested to be promoted for sesame production on the tested locations in the lowlands of northwestern Gondar, Ethiopia. }, year = {2025} }
TY - JOUR T1 - Determination of Optimum Plant Density for Sesame Productivity AU - Melaku Azanaw AU - Getachew Asmare Y1 - 2025/01/16 PY - 2025 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbbmb.20251001.12 DO - 10.11648/j.ijbbmb.20251001.12 T2 - International Journal of Biochemistry, Biophysics & Molecular Biology JF - International Journal of Biochemistry, Biophysics & Molecular Biology JO - International Journal of Biochemistry, Biophysics & Molecular Biology SP - 16 EP - 23 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2575-5862 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbbmb.20251001.12 AB - Sesame is a vital cash crop and used for selling purpose for the livelihood of Ethiopian people. Nevertheless, the seed yield is low because of a number of production factors like the lack of optimum plant density and row spacing for sesame productivity. A fieldwork did to determine the appropriate row and plant spacings for Sesame productivity and profitability at Metema and Tach Armachiho districts. Treatments were arranged to five rows (40, 50, 60, 70 and 80 cm) with three plant spacing (10, 20 and 30 cm) spacings comparing with the blanket recommendation (40cm x 10cm) and arranged in randomized complete block design with three replications. The plant height, pods plant-1, pod-bearing zone, seed and oil yield were highly significant and influenced by the interaction effects of row and plant spacings. The highest yield (1080 kgha-1), oil content (53.8%) and net benefit (70,767 ETB) obtained from the 70 cm row spacing with the 20 cm plant spacing. However, the minimum yield (840 kg/ha), oil content (51.1%) and net benefit (25,973.2 ETB) were obtained from the blanket recommendation (40cm x 10cm) spacing. Therefore, the inter row 70 cm with intra row 20cm spacings are the most suitable plant densities and suggested to be promoted for sesame production on the tested locations in the lowlands of northwestern Gondar, Ethiopia. VL - 10 IS - 1 ER -