EFFECT OF INTRA-ROW SPACING AND VARIETIES ON

GROWTH AND YIELD OF HOT PEPPER (Capsicum annum L.) IN

BOLOSO BOMBE WOREDA, SOUTH ETHIOPIA
ABSTRACT
Hot pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) is an important spice and vegetable crop and it is a
source of nutrition, foreign currency and cash for the smallholder farmers. However, the
yield of the crop is low due to various constraints of which lack of varieties and proper
plant spacing is very important. Therefore, a field experiment was conducted at Ajora
kebele in Boloso Bombe Woreda during the 2023 rainy season to investigate the effect of
varieties and intra-row spacing on growth parameters and yield and yield components of
hot pepper. The treatments consisted of four varieties of pepper (Melka awaze, Melka
shote, Melka zalla and Challa) and four intra-row spacing (10cm, 20cm, 30cm and 40cm).
The experiment was laid out in randomized complete block design with three replications.
The analysis of variance showed that the main effect of varieties and intra-row spacing
had a significant effect on phenology, growth and yield of hot pepper. Similarly, the
interaction effect of varieties and intra-row spacing had significantly influenced all the
tested parameters except days of 50 % flowering, days of 50% pod setting and un
marketable fresh fruit yield. The variety challa has shown significantly delayed 50% of
plants flowering (63.58 days) after planting, while, the plants at intra-row spacing of 40
cm had significantly delayed. highest days of 50% flowering (59.500 days),lowest days of
50% flowering(46.6 days), The highest number of days of 50 % pod setting (73 days),the
lowest number of day of 50% fruit setting (59.9 days), highest days of first harvest (143
days),were recorded from the varieties challa and 40 cm intra-row spacing. Highest
marketable fresh fruit yield (28.8 t ha -1), lowest marketable fresh fruit yield (17.03 t ha -1),
highest total fresh fruit yield (29.06 t ha -1), lowest total fresh fruit yield (17.7 t ha -1),
highest marketable dry fruit yield (7.11 t ha-1) was obtained by variety Melka Shote with
40cm intra-raw spacing, lowest marketable dry fruit yield (1.21 t ha-1) was obtained by
variety Melka Awaze with 10cm intra-raw spacing and highest total dry fruit yield (7.53 t
ha-1) were obtained from the variety Melka Shote with 40 cm intra-row spacing.
Therefore, it can be concluded that variety Melka Shote and 40 cm intra-row spacing
could be provisionally recommended for pepper growers in the study area.

Keywords: Growth, Hot pepper, Spacing, Variety, yield

iii
 1. INTRODUCTION

Hot pepper (Capsicum annum L.) is an important spice and vegetable crop in tropical
areas of the world and it belongs to the Solanaceae family, and the genus Capsicum that
originated from Central and South America (Rodriguez et al., 2008). It is closely related to
tomato, eggplant, potato and tobacco. The genus Capsicum is the second most important
vegetable crop of the family after tomato in the world (Berhanu et al., 2011).

Hot Pepper is one of the most important spice crops widely cultivated around the world for
its pungent flavour and aroma (Obidiebub et al., 2012). It's an important crop, not only
because of its economic importance, but also due to the nutritional and medicinal value of
its fruit. The fruit is an excellent source of natural colours and antioxidant compounds
whose intake is an important health protecting factor by prevention of widespread human
diseases (Howard et al., 2000). The antioxidant, vitamin A, C and E are present in high
concentrations in pepper (Robi and Sreelathakumary, 2004). Fine pungent powder of hot
pepper ('berbere') is an indispensable flavoring and coloring ingredient in the daily
preparation of different types of Ethiopian sauces ('wot'), whereas the green pod is
consumed as a vegetable with other food items.

According to Weiss (2002), the total land area for the cultivation of pepper worldwide is
estimated at four million hectares with an average annual increase of 5%. However, the
productivity is still low attributed to lack of proper nursery and field agronomic
management practices. Such as, cultivation, poor aeration, unbalanced nutrient supply.
Moreover, soil nutrient deficiency, plant density and low accessibility of improved
varieties are among the most critical factors that limit the yield and production of hot
pepper in South Ethiopia (Tariku et al., 2018).

Different types of pepper varieties are produced in Ethiopia. It varies in mode of growth in
fruit characteristics such as fruit size, shape, color, and pungency. The degree of pungency
varies considerably from mild to hot. The fruits are erect or hanging depending on the
variety (Liu et al., 2008).

1
Studies on plant density on different types of pepper cultivars showed that plant density
and plant arrangement could influence plant development, growth and marketable yield
(Shimeles et al., 2016). FAO (2004) observed that the spacing between the rows and
within the rows in peppers were depend on the vigour and growth habit of individual
varieties being grown. Khasmakhi-Sabet et al. (2009) reported that increasing plant
density resulted in greater yield/ha of bell pepper. Plant spacing can influence
morphological development of pepper including reproduction characteristics. Competition
for available water and mineral nutrients from the soil and light is greater at high plant
population densities. Environmental factors, especially light intensity, stimulate the
process of photosynthesis which, in turn, affects biomass production and is closely
associated with plant growth rate (Alabi et al., 2014).

In plant densities studies, inter-plant competition is one of the most important stress
affecting biomass production, crop yield and economic profitability (Naser et al.,
2013).Wider spacing on the other hand led to increase in fruit yield/plant with bigger fruits
and more cracked fruits/plant (Nasto et al., 2009). Increasing plant density decreased
pepper root dry weight and had a positive relationship with fruit weight and root weight.
Increase in yield with higher plant density was a result of increased number of fruits/ha in
direct seeded paprika pepper (Law-Ogbomo and Egharevba, 2009)

Therefore, the present situation indicates that in the Wolaita area there are limited
Capsicum species and varieties including both improved and the local ones. As a result,
varietal information for the improvement of the crop for high fruit yield and quality in the
existing agro-ecology is insufficient. There has also been limited research on evaluation of
hot pepper which enables the growers to select the best performing varieties in the study
area. Evaluation of selected varieties was therefore one of the considerations to address the
existing problems obtaining the desired varieties for which the output of this study was
likely to assist and sensitize hot pepper growers and processors. Better adaptable and well
performing variety (varieties) with improved cultural practices could be a possibility to
boost quality and marketable production of the crop in the study area (BBDAO, 2022;
Annual report unpublished).

In spite of its benefit and increasing demand, hot pepper production and productivity in
South Ethiopia in general and at the study area in particular is far below the world average,
which requires immediate intervention. Farmers in the study area are allocating relatively
large plot of land for pepper production but constrained with many problems. Among
these, lack of high yielding improved varieties, soil nutrient depletion, lack of location
specific intra-row spacing recommendation, poor disease and insect pest management and
improper harvest and post-harvest handling practices are the major constrains of the crop
in major producing areas including the study area (Dessie Getahun and Birhanu Habite,
2017).

Even though, hot pepper is a major spice and vegetable crop produced by the majority of
farmers, there is a gap on recommended high yielding varieties and little information
about intra-row spacing for optimum and economic production and productivity of pepper.
Farmers produce hot pepper in study area (Bolosso Bombe woreda) they get small amount
of yield by lack of high yielding improved varieties. (Bombe Agricultural office, 2022;
Annual report unpublished). Similarly, these farmers use also the blanket intra-row
spacing for the production of hot pepper during rainy season. Based on these issues the
objectives of this study where;-

● To evaluate the effects of intra-row spacing and varieties on fruit yield of hot pepper.

● To identify appropriate varieties and spacing of hot pepper production in the study

area.
 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1 Description of Study Area

A field experiment was conducted during 2023 rain-fed cropping season at Ajora keble,
Bolosso Bombe Woreda in Wolaita Zone, South Ethiopia. The experimental site is
geographically located at 7º 92' 18' ' N latitude and 37º 03' 45" E longitude having an
altitude of 1524 meter above sea level. The area receives an annual rainfall of 1215mm.
The mean annual minimum and maximum temperatures are 21ºC and 28℃ respectively.
The type of soil is clay with pH 5.9.

Figure 1: map of study area

2.2 Experimental Material

The experiment consisted of four hot pepper varieties (Melka Awaze, Melka Zala, Melka
Shote and Challa) from Melkasa research center. The blanket recommendation of urea
(100 kg/ha) and NPS (250 kg/ha) which contains 46% N; blended NPS contains (19% N,
38% P2O5 and 7% S) were used as a source of nitrogen and phosphorus and sulphur.

2.3 Treatments and Experimental Design

The treatments consist of factorial combinations of four varieties with four intra-row
spacing (10, 20, 30, and 40) with 70 cm inter-row space, 50 centimetres between plots and
80 centimetres between blocks. The experiment was arranged in a 4×4 factorial
randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications, sixteen treatments in
three replications gave a total of 48 Plot. All 48 plots were measured 2.4m x 3.5m (8.4m²)
and the total area of experiment was 12.1m × 45.9m (555.39m2) respectively. There were
24 plants in 10cm intra-raw spacing, 12 plants in 20cm intra-raw spacing, 8 plants in 30cm
intra-raw spacing and 6 plants in 40cm intra-raw spacing and 5 rows per plot was used.

Table 1. Treatment combination of variety and intra row spacing of hot pepper

Variety(V) Intra-row spacing(S) in Combination

cm

Melka awaze (V1) 10 V1*S1

20 V1*S2

30 V1*S3
 40 V1*S4

10 V2*S1

Melka shote (V2) 20 V2*S2

30 V2*S3

40 V2*S4

Melka zala (V3) 10 V3*S1

20 V3*S2

30 V3*S3

40 V3*S4

Chala (V4) 10 V4*S1

20 V4*S2

30 V4*S3

40 V4*S4

Where s1=intra raw-spacing 1, s2=intra raw-spacing 2, s3=inta-raw spacing 3, s4= intra-

raw spacing 4

2.4 Experimental Procedure

Land preparation was done from December to March in 2023 cropping season. The
experimental field was ploughed by oxen and levelled in order to get a smooth seed bed
manually. Watering was done based on climatic conditions with a fine watering can, and
was hand weeded.

During seed sowing about 92 g/bed TSP (46% P 2O5) was applied as recommended by
Kassa et al. (2018). The seeded beds were then covered lightly with fine soil and mulched
with dry grass until seedlings emerged and regular watering was done using a watering
can. After seedling emergence, the mulch material was removed and then the beds were
covered by raised shade to protect the seedlings from strong sun shine and heavy rainfall
until the seedling was ready for transplanting. At one true green leave stage, the seedlings
were thinned out and about 41 g/bed urea (46% N) was applied in order to maintain
optimum plant population and keep seedlings vigorous. Seedling was raised near the
experimental site and transplanted to the main experimental field when the seedlings
attained a 36 days after sowing. After seedling transplanting, watering, weeding, and
harvesting activities took place in the main field. All cultural practices were employed as
per the recommendations.

2.5 Data Collection and Measurement

Data was collected from the middle six plants of central rows excluding the border rows
and the rest of all response variables were recorded from selected sample plants per plot as
indicated below.

2.5.1 Phenological data

Days to 50% flowering: Is the number of days where 50% of the plants started blooming
beginning from the days of transplanting.
Days to 50% pod set: Refers to the number of days from transplanting until 50% of the
net plot plants in each plot started producing pods.
Days to first harvest: The number of days from transplanting to the date of first harvest
was recorded from central rows.

2.5.2 Growth parameters

Plant height (cm): Plant height was measured using a ruler from the soil surface to the
top most growth point of above ground plant part. The measurement was taken as the
length from six plants of central rows of each plot at last harvesting time.
Canopy diameter (cm): The mean values were taken by measuring diameter (North to
South or East to West dimension) of the plants at fruit maturity.
Numbers of branches per plant: Numbers of primary, secondary and tertiary branches
per stem of selected six plants at final harvest was counted.
2.5.3 Yield and yield related parameters
Number of fruit per plant: The numbers of fruit per plant harvested from six randomly
selected and tagged plants grown in net plot area were counted at each harvest and mean
values were computed.
Fruit length (cm): Average length measured from tip of the fruit to basal end of six
randomly selected marketable fruits from the net plot area at each harvest were recorded
and mean value was computed.
Fruit width (cm): Average diameter of six randomly selected marketable fruit from the
net plot area was measured at the middle of each fruit at each harvest and mean value was
computed.
Marketable fresh fruit yield (t ha-1): Red fruits which are uniform in color, shape and
size, free from damages, insect pest and disease attacks and physiological disorder like
blemish were considered as marketable. Such fruits harvested from the net plot area during
each successive harvest were weighed using digital balance. The summation of each
harvest was then converted to hectare basis and expressed in t ha-1.
Unmarketable fresh fruit yield (t ha -1): During each harvest, the unmarketable fresh
fruit yield from the net plot area of each plot was selected based on a subjective decision
of marketability. For example cracks, blemishes, discolorations, physiologically
disordered due to biotic and abiotic stresses and small sized fruits.
Total fresh fruit yield (t ha-1): Refers the sum of marketable and unmarketable fresh
fruit yield of successive harvests were summed up and the weight was determined using a
sensitive balance.
Marketable dry fruit yield (t/ha): The marketable yield of six sample plants were
determined at each harvesting by sorting dried fruits according to color, shape, shininess,
firmness and size of the fruits. After drying, the dried marketable fruits were separated, the
weight of the respective categories were recorded and converted to t/ha.
Total dry fruit yield (t/ha): Weight of total dry (marketable and unmarketable) fruits
harvested at each successive harvesting from the sample plants were recorded and
summed up to estimate yield per hectare and expressed in t ha-1.
2.5.4 Quality parameter

Total soluble solids (TSS): From randomly selected six plants, fruits were chopped in the
commercial blender with high performance was used to extract an aliquot of juice. Using a
portable portal refractometer that could measure 0Brix 0 to 90%, the TSS tested was
calculated by putting three drops of transparent juice on the prism Before being utilized
for a subsequent reading , the refractometer prism was dried with tissue paper and cleaned
with distilled water in between samples. The refractometer was calibrated at 0 percent TSS
using distilled water.

2.6 Data Analysis

The data were subjected to ANOVA using statistical analysis software (SAS) procedures
where version 9.3, (SAS, 2014). The least significant difference (LSD) test was used for
mean separation when the analyses of variance indicate the presence of significant
difference.
 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Phenological Parameters of Hot Pepper

3.1.1 Days to 50% flowering

The analysis of variance showed that the main effect of varieties and intra-row spacing
highly significantly (P≤ 0.01) influenced days to 50% flowering of hot pepper. However,
the interaction effect of both factors was not significant (figure 1and 2). Similarly 40cm
intra-raw spacing was prolonged (59.5) days to flowering as compared to 10cm intra- raw
spacing (54.9). Variety Challa days of 50% flowering was delayed for (63.583 DAT) as
compared with variety Melka Awaze (49.167) (figure 1and 2).

The delayed flowering might be due to lack of essential nutrients for metabolic process
and differentiation of buds into flower buds, genetic makeup of the variety while earliness
in flowering could be attributed to the enhancement of reproductive growth.

This finding could be due to the presence of high resource competition such as nutrients,
water and sunlight that lead to stress and ultimately early flowering instead of prolonging
vegetative growth of the plants at 10 cm intra-row spacing. On the other hand, prolonged
days of 50% flowering of pepper observed on plants grown with relatively wider intra-
row spacing could be due to the luxurious uptake of resources by plants that improved the
vegetative growth and delayed the reproductive stage. Flowering of pepper might be
delayed or inhibited by the continuous production of new leaves and stems associated with
a luxurious supply of nutrients. The result of the current study is in conformity with the
findings of Law and Egharevba (2009) and Thakur et al., (2018) who reported prolonged
50% flowering of pepper at wider intra-row spacing or lower population density.
.

Figure 2: Main effect of varieties on days of 50% flowering of hot pepper

Figure 3: Main effect of intra-raw spacing on days of 50% flowering of hot pepper
Means within the different letter (s) are significantly different at 5% level of significance; LSD (0.05) =
Least Significant Difference at 5% level; CV= coefficient of variation.
3.1.2. Days to 50% fruit setting

The analysis of variance showed that the main effect of varieties and intra-row spacing
highly significantly (P≤ 0.01) influenced days to 50% fruit sets of hot pepper. However,
the interaction effect of both factors was not significant. (Table 2).

The prolonged days to 50% fruit setting of hot pepper (73.000 days) was recorded when
variety Challa. On the other hand, the earliest days to 50% fruit setting (59.9 days) was
recorded on variety Melka Awaze. Similarly 40cm intra-raw spacing was prolonged
(69.00) days to flowering as compared to 10cm intra- raw spacing (64.5).Table 2

The delayed days to harvest could be due to slow vegetative growth and late formation of
reproductive organs. This result, therefore confirmed with findings of Amare et al. (2013)
also observed that the earliest days to flowering (66.3 days) for Marako fana variety was
recorded from the plot treated with intra-row spacing 40 cm and the delayed flowering
(93.3 days). The observed early flowering and fruit setting of pepper at densely populated
plants (narrower intra-row spacing) might be a mechanism of escaping from stress like
nutrient, moisture and light, which ultimately causes earlier flowering that leads to early
green pod setting in pepper. Kassa Melese et al. (2018) who stated that a trend of earliness
in green pod settings were obtained from plants that received lower rate combinations of
intra-row spacing. Gardner et al. (2003) also indicated that higher rates of intra-row
spacing is used to vegetative growth and extends flowering, fruit setting and maturity date.
Similar results have been reported by Thakur et al. (2018) who found that plants grown at
closest spacing took minimum days of 50% pod setting, while the wider spaced plants bear
pods relatively late. Amare et al. (2013) also observed that the earliest days to flowering
(66.3 days) for Marako Fana variety was recorded and the delayed flowering (93.3 days)
was observed in plots.
Table 2. Main effect of varieties and intra-row spacing on days of 50% pod setting of hot
pepper.

Varieties Days to 50% pod setting

Melka awaze 59.917d
Melka shote 64.417c
Melka zalla 69.417b
Chala 73.000a
LSD (5%) 1.15
Intra-row spacing(cm)
10 64.500d
20 65.833c
30 67.417b
40 69.000a
CV (5%) 2.08
LSD (5%) 1.15

Means within the same letter (s) are significantly different at 5% level of significance; LSD (0.05) = Least
Significant Difference at 5% level; CV= coefficient of variation.
3.1.3 Days to first harvest

Days to first harvest were very highly significantly (P < 0.001) influenced by the main
effects as well as their interaction effects of the intra-row spacing and variety (Appendix
table 1).

The prolonged days of first harvest of hot pepper (143 days) was recorded by variety
Challa combined with 40 cm intra-row spacing.

Thus, the lowest days to first harvest was recorded from variety Melka Awaze whith
(10cm) intra-row spacing. Whereas the longest days to first harvest was obtained from
Variety Challa with (40cm) intra-row spacing. The delayed maturity in response to challa
varieties in 40cm intra-row spacing could be due to slow vegetative growth and late
formation of reproductive organs. Amare et al. (2013) also observed that the earliest days
to flowering (66.3 days) for Marako Fana variety was recorded and the delayed flowering
(93.3 days) was observed in plots.

Accordingly, the shortest number of days to first harvest was recorded from variety Melka
Awaze (111.67 days) and the longest days to harvest was obtained from variety Challa
(143.00 days) (Table 3). The variations in days to first harvest (maturity) could be due to
the genetic make-up of the varieties. The result is in agreement with the findings of
Delelegn (2011) who reported that delayed maturity of the variety was due to
environmental and genetic makeup of crops. Similarly Seleshi (2011) reported that the
shortest number of days to first harvest was recorded from the Gojeb local (66 days) at
Jimma experimental field. The longest day to attain days to first harvest was recorded
from the variety Dube Short (149 days).
Table 3. The interaction effect of varieties and intra-row spacing on days to first
harvesting of hot pepper.

Varieties intra-raw spacing (cm) days to first harvest

Melka Awaze 10 111.67hi

20 106.67i
30 114.00h
40 124.33ef
Melka Shote 10 117.67gh
20 125.67def
30 131.33bcd
40 129.67bcde
Melka Zalla 10 116.33h
20 122.67fg
30 123fg
40 122.67fg
Challa 10 126.33cdef
20 132bc
30 134.33b
40 143a
LSD (5%) 6.15
CV (5%) 2.98

Means within the same letter (s) are not significantly different at 5% level of significance; LSD
(0.05) = Least Significant Difference at 5% level; CV= coefficient of variation.
3.2 Growth Parameters of Hot Pepper

3.2.1 Plant height

The analysis of variance showed that the main and interaction effects of varieties and
intra-row spacing highly significantly (P≤0.01) influenced plant height of hot pepper
(Appendix Table 2).

The current study, it might be due to 40 cm intra-row spacing, the presence of lesser plant
competition for resources that leads to production of new shoots and improvement of
vegetative growth, which is directly related to the increase in plant height. However, the
shortest plant height that was observed on plants grown at closer intra-row spacing (10
cm) in the present study could be due to stiffer competition of the plants to resources that
leads to plant stress ultimately to shortest plant height.

The current study results in line with studies by Ocharo et al. (2017) reported that,
significantly increased plant height of hot pepper with decreased plant population density.
The tallest plant height was recorded from variety Challa (73cm) while, the shortest plant
height was obtained from variety Melka Awaze (50.9cm). This result is in agreement with
that of Engles (1984) who reported that Ethiopian pepper cultivars have plant height
ranges between 18 – 77 cm and also with the range of 58- 85 cm reported by
EARO(2004).

The highest plant height was recorded from treatment that received 40cm intra-row
spacing while, the lowest plant height was recorded from treatment with 10cm intra row
spacing (Table 4). The increase in plant height could mainly due to better availability of
soil nutrients in the growing areas which have enhancing effect on the vegetative growth
of plants by increasing cell division and elongation and the varietal variability to absorb
the nutrients from the soil (Vos and Frinking, 1997; El-Tohamy et al., 2006).

3.2.2 Canopy diameter

Analysis of variance indicated that canopy diameter was very highly significantly
(P<0.001) influenced by the main effects of variety and intra-row spacing. While, the
interaction showed a highly significant (P<0.01) effect on the canopy diameter of the plant
(Appendix Table 2) (Table 4).

The highest canopy diameter per plant was recorded from the variety Melka Zalla
(93.9cm) at 40 cm intra-row spacing. Whereas, the smallest canopy diameter per plant was
recorded from the variety Melka Shote (52.6cm) at 10 cm intra-row spacing. This might
be attributed to genetic variation and nutrient competition in the soil. This variation on the
other hand, may determine the yielding potential of the crop. This is in conformity with
the work of Faby (1997) who has reported that plants with wider crowns produced higher
early season yield than those with small crowns.

3.2.3 Number of branch

The analysis of variance revealed that the numbers of branch was highly significantly
influenced (P < 0.01) by the rate of varieties and intra-row spacing as well as their
interaction effects (Appendix Table 2).

In the interaction effect, the highest number of branches (97.8) was recorded by plants at
40 cm intra-row spacing and variety Melka shote. On the other hand, the lowest number of
branches (70.767) was recorded by variety Melka Awaze and 10 cm intra row spacing.
Islam et al. (2011) and Thakur et al. (2018) reported that highest branched pepper plants
were produced at lowest plant density or widest intra-row spacing while the lowest
branched plants were produced at highest plant density or closet intra-row spacing.

This might be due to the taller plants tended to have more number of branches per plant
which was partly due to the increased growing points (nodes) in taller varieties. The result
was inconsistent with the findings of Samira Awol 2008, that the highest number of
branches 14.10 obtained from applied nutrients.
Table 4: The interaction effect of varieties and intra-row spacing for plant height, canopy
diameter and number of branches per plant.

Variety Intra-row PH(cm) CD(cm) NBPP(count)

spacing(cm)

Melka Awaze 10 51.1ij 59.5i 70.7i

20 53.3hi 64.53h 78.8h

30 54.7gh 76e 85.8efg

40 66cd 83.6c 91.8bcd

Melka Shote 10 50.9j 52.6j 84.8fg

20 62.3e 59.5i 88.8cdef

30 56.8g 68.2fg 93.9ab

40 68.1bc 75.5e 97.8a

Melka Zalla 10 52.6hij 76.9e 79.2h

20 64.6de 83.6cd 83.5gh

30 59.7f 87.3b 90.3bcde

40 70.23b 93.9a 97.6a

Challa 10 54.7gh 67.2g 87.9defg

20 67.8c 70.2f 88.9bcdef

30 62.7e 76.2e 93.2abc

40 73a 81.1d 90.9bcd

LSD (5%) 2.31 2.51 5.04

CV (5%) 2.30 2.05 3.44

Means with in the same letter (s) are not significantly different at 5% level of significance; LSD (0.05) =
Least Significant Difference at 5% level; CV= coefficient of variation, PH =plant height, CD=Canopy

Diameter, NBPP=number of branches per plot.

3.3 Yield Related Traits of hot Pepper

3.3.1 Number of Fruits per plants

The current investigation also revealed that the number of fruits per plant is highly
significantly (P<0.001) influenced by the main effect of variety and spacing as well as
their interaction effects (Appendix Table 3).

The highest number of fruit per plant was recorded from variety Melka Zalla with 40 cm
intra raw spacing (80.6), While the lowest number of fruits per plant was recorded from
variety Melka Shote (42.7) with 10cm intra raw spacing( Table 5). The variation in fruit
set might be due to the influence of the growing environment’s associated traits like
canopy diameter that could limit the number of branches. The difference in number of
fruits per plant could be due to applied nutrients that increased soil fertility and increased
the growth of reproductive organs of the crop. The result was in agreement with findings
of Schemske (2014) who reported that, number of fruit can be affected by fruit abortion
and predation have all been proposed as factors explaining low fruit set in plants.
Pollination can be the first factor limiting fruit production.

The highest number of fruits per plant was obtained from variety Melka Zalla (80.6) and
the smallest number of fruits per plant was obtained from variety Melka Shote (42.7). This
result is in line with the work of Delelegn, (2011), reported that, the variations in fruit
development among varieties at both locations could also be due to the temperature stress
of the growing environment and the capability of each varieties to withstand the stress
specially on the reproductive development, which is more sensitive to high temperature
stress (day and night temperature) than vegetative development.

In addition, “wider intra row-spacing, growth factors (nutrient, moisture and light) for
individual plants might be easily accessible that retained more pods and supported the
development of lateral branches” (Abdul-Rafiu et al., 2019). The result was also in
conformity with the works of Monirul Islam et al. (2011) that obtained, an increased pods
number of sweet pepper variety at the wider row spacing.

3.3.2 Fruit Length

The analysis of variance showed that the main effects and interaction effects of varieties
and intra-row spacing had highly significant (P≤0.01) (Appendix Table 3)

The highest number of fruit length per plants was recorded from treatment that received
40cm intra-row spacing (14.8) and variety Challa, while the lowest number of fruits per
plant was recorded from treatment that received 10 cm intra-row spacing and varieties of
Melka Shote (7.7) (Table 5). Increasing the rate of intra-row spacing up to a certain level
has increased fruit length of hot pepper.

Less availability of growth resources due to high competition in closest intra-row spacing
also resulted in reduced pod length of pepper. Fufa Nimona and Abera Girma (2019)
reported that the fruit long in length and wide in width were produced in plots that
received wider intra-row spacing .Islam et al. (2011) and Thakur et al. (2018) also
reported the increase of fruit length of pepper at wider spacing due to availability of more
nutrients, sufficient light and buildup of sufficient assimilates.

3.3.3 Fruit width

The analysis of variance revealed that the main and interaction effects of varieties and
intra-row spacing very highly significantly (P<0.01) influenced the fruit width of hot
pepper (Appendix Table 3). Increasing the rate of intra-row spacing up to a certain level
generally increased pod width of pepper (Table 5).
The smallest fruit width of pepper (2 cm) was recorded by plants grown intra-row spacing
10cm and variety Melka Awaze. In the effect of variety Melka Shote at 40 cm intra-row
spacing recorded the highest fruit width (6.2 cm). The present result is in agreement with
the finding of Sileshi Delelegn (2011) who reported better fruit setting characteristics of
the plant with larger sized fruits is directly related with the amount of nutrients taken from
the soil. `Mareko Fana’ had the widest fruit (Gebretsadkan et al., 2018), consistent with
the current findings.

Table 5. Interaction effect of Varieties and intra-row spacing for yield related parameters
of hot pepper.

Varieties Intra-row NFP(count) FL(cm) FW(cm)

spacing(cm)

Melka Awaze 10 49.5f 8.3hi 2i

20 54.5e 9.2g 3.1f

30 66c 11.3e 5.1d

40 73b 13.2c 6.2a

Melka Shote 10 42.7 g 7.7i 2.1g

20 49.5f 9.3g 3.1e

30 58.2de 12.2d 5.2c

40 65.5c 14.2ab 6.25a

Melka Zalla 10 66.9c 8.4h 2.03hi

20 73.6b 10.2f 3.1f

30 73.9b 13.01c 5.2c

40 80.6a 14.03b 6.1b

Challa 10 57.2de 8.8gh 2.06gh

 20 60.2d 11.6de 3.2e

30 66.2c 12.9c 5.1d

40 71.1b 14.8a 6.1a

LSD (5%) 4.05 0.61 0.04

CV (5%) 3.85 3.27 0.7

Means with in the same letter (s) are not significantly different at 5% level of significance; NFP = Number
of fruit per plant; FL = Fruit length; FW = Fruit width; LSD (0.05) = Least Significant Difference at 5%
level; CV= coefficient of variation.

3.4. Fresh Fruit Yield of Hot Pepper

3.4.1 Marketable fresh fruit yield

The main effects as well as their interactions of intra-row spacing and variety highly
significantiy influenced marketable fresh fruit yield (P <0.001) (Appendix table 4).

The highest marketable fresh fruit yield value was obtained from variety Challa with 40
cm intra-row spacing (28.8 t/ha) while, the lowest value was recorded from variety Melka
Awaze with 10 cm intra-row spacing (17.033) (Table 7). The obtained yield of marketable
fresh fruit yield from the variety might be due to their differences in genetic make-up
and/or agro ecological adaptations compared to the locations in which they had evaluated,
which is in line with the findings of Fekadu and Dandena (2006), who reported that the
magnitude of genetic variability and heritability are necessary in systematic improvement
of hot pepper for fruit yield and related traits.

This result is in conformity with the findings of Leghari and Oad (2005) reported that
maximum marketable fresh fruit yield obtained might also be attributed to the enhanced
pod length, pod width, seed numbers per pod and number of pod per plant. It conforms to
that pod length; width and total dry pod weight per plant were positively correlated with
marketable green pod yield in pepper (Addisalem Mebratu et al., 2014; Russo, 2003).
Thus the increase in yield and yield attributes of hot pepper was due to improvement in the
level of carbohydrates owing to greater photosynthesis and ultimately increase in number
and weight of the pods (Tutia et al., 2015).

Similarly Melka Zalla (17.5 t ha -1) obtained yield of marketable fresh fruit yield from the
variety might be due to their differences in genetic make-up and/or agro ecological
adaptations compared to the locations in which they had evaluated, which is in line with
the findings of Fekadu and Dandena (2006), who reported that the magnitude of genetic
variability and heritability are necessary in systematic improvement of hot pepper for fruit
yield and related traits.

3.4.2 Unmarketable fresh fruit yield

The main effects of intra-row spacing and variety significantly (P < 0.01) affected
unmarketable fresh pod yields. However, their interaction did not significantly influence
this parameter (Appendix table 4).

The highest unmarketable fresh fruit yield was obtained from Variety Challa (1.16 t ha -1)
and intra-row spacing of 40cm while the lowest was recorded from variety Melka Zalla
(1.01 tha-1) and intra-row spacing of 10 cm (Table 6). The increase in unmarketable fruit
yield might be due to a closest intra raw spacing. This might be attributed to poor root
development, many underdeveloped buds and shrunken shaped fruits which are not
acceptable in the market (Table 6).

Similarly Yemane Kahsay (2017) who recorded that the highest unmarketable yield was
obtained from Melka shote (7.4 t/ha), while the lowest was from Melka Shote (1.86 t/ha).

Table 6. The effects of varieties and intra-row spacing on un marketable fresh fruit yield
of hot pepper.

Varieties UMFFY(t/ha)

Melka Shote 1.06b

Meklka Zalla 1.01b

Melka Awaze 1.12a

Challa 1.16a

LSD (5%) 0.05

Intra-row spacing(cm)

10 0.6d

20 0.9c

30 1.2b

40 1.5a

CV (5%) 5.76

LSD (5%) 0.05

Means within the same letter (s) are not significantly different at 5% Level of significance; UMFPY =
Unmarketable fresh pod yield; LSD (0.05) = Least Significant Difference at 5% level; CV= coefficient of
variation.

3.4.3 Total fresh fruit yield

The analysis of variance revealed that the main effects of variety and intra-row spacing as
well as their interaction effects significantly (P<0.05) influenced total fresh fruit yield of
hot pepper (Appendix Table 4).

The highest total fresh fruit yield (29.06 t ha -1) was recorded by the combined treatment of
variety Challa with 40cm intra row spacing. However, the lowest total fresh fruit yield
(17.73 t ha-1) was observed by variety Melka Awaze with 10 cm intra row-spacing (Table
7).

The increase in total fruit yield could be due to variation in plant height, as well as
formation of more primary, secondary and tertiary branches that increase potential of fruit
bearing buds. This study was in agreement with Gebremeskel et al. (2015) significantly
higher total yield (36.125t/ha) was produced by Melka Awaze whereas significantly lower
total yield (30.22t/ha) was obtained by Melka Shote variety.

Bosland and Votava (2000) also pointed out that primary and secondary branches were
locations of fruit buds and thus foundations of new fruit bud development in bell peppers.

Table 7. Interaction effects of varieties and intra-row spacing on fresh yield parameters of hot
pepper

Varieties Intra-row MFPY(t/ha) TMFPY(t/ha)

spacing(cm)

Melka awaze 10 17.03i 17.7j

20 19.06g 19.9 hj

30 21.6e 22.9ef

40 25.3c 26.9bc

Melka Shote 10 18.06h 18.6ij

20 19.06h 19.9hi

30 20.7f 21.9fg

40 24.2d 25.6cd

Melka Zalla 10 17.5hi 18.ij

20 19.3g 20.9 gh
 30 22.3e 23.5e

40 26.6b 28.2 ab

Challa 10 17.2hi 17.9j

20 20.5f 21.5fg

30 24.5cd 25.3d

40 28.8a 29.06a

LSD (5%) 0.87 1.49

CV (5%) 2.46 3.99

Means with in the same letter (s) are not significantly different at 5% level of significance; MFPY
= Marketable fresh pod yield;; TFPY = Total fresh pod yield; LSD (0.05) = Least Significant
Difference at 5% level; CV= coefficient of variation.

3.5 Dry yield of hot pepper

3.5.1 Marketable dry fruit yield

The analysis of variance revealed that the main effects of variety and intra-row spacing as
well as their interaction effects significantly (P<0.05) influenced marketable dry fruit yield
of pepper (Appendix Table 5).

The highest marketable dry fruit yield (7.11 t ha -1) of variety Melka Shote with 40 cm
intra-row spacing , However, the lowest marketable dry fruit yield (1.21 t ha -1) of variety
Melka Awaze with 10 cm intra-row spacing (Table 8). This result is in conformity with
the findings of Leghari and Oad (2005) who reported that pod length, width and weight
were positively related with marketable dry pod yield in pepper.

Even though this study is a one season trial, the result disagrees with the evaluation trials
undertaken at three locations by Melkasa Agricultural Research Center (2005) which
indicated that the highest dry fruit yield was recorded from variety Melka Zala (1.7) which
produced a total dry fruit yield of (1.35) in Jimma. This is much lower than the average
fruit yield of the crop (2.53) reported by MARC (2005). This could be due to the climatic
conditions (i.e. the temperature, the soil type, the altitude) difference in which the crop
was evaluated.

3.5.2 Total dry fruit yield (t ha-1)

The analysis of variance revealed that the main effects of variety and intra-row spacing as
well as their interaction effects significantly (P<0.05) influenced total marketable dry fruit
yield of pepper (Appendix Table 5).
The highest total dry fruit yield was obtained from variety Melka Shote with 40 cm intra-
row spacing (7.53 t/h) while the lowest was recorded from Variety Melka Shote with
10cm intra-row spacing (1.26 t/ha) (Table 8). The increase in fruit dry weight in this study
is in conformity with the work of Hedge (1997) who reported that pod dry matter content
of peppers was directly related to the amount of nutrient taken from the soil, which was
proportional to the nutrients present in the soil or the amount of organic and inorganic
fertilizers applied to the soil. It is also in conformity with Russo (2003) who reported that
fruit weight increased linearly with seed number in sweet pepper.

This study is in agreement with Yemane Kahsay (2017) who reported that the highest and
the lowest total dry yield were observed in Melka Shote and Mareko Fana which is 27.21
t/ha and 26.52 t/ha respectively.
Table 8. The Interaction effects of varieties and intra-row spacing on marketable dry fruit
yield and total dry fruit yield of hot pepper.
Varieties Intra raw spacing MDFY (t/ha) TMDFY (t/ha)
Melka Awaze 10 1.21h 1.3i
20 2.13ef 2.23gh
30 4.03cd 4.3f
40 5.86a 6.23bc
Melka Shote 10 1.23g 1.26i
20 2.49ef 2.6g
30 4.99c 5.53cde
40 7.11ab 7.53a
Melka Zalla 10 1.5gh 1.53hi
20 2.08f 2.26gh
30 5.42c 5.53cde
40 5.68b 6.03bc
Challa 10 1.82gh 1.9ghi
20 4.38e 4.6ef
30 5.42d 5.6cd
40 6.44ab 6.5b
LCD 0.07 0.89
CV 1.52 13.25

Means within the same letter (s) are not significantly different at 5% level of significance;
MDFY=marketable dry fruit yield, TDFY = Total dry fruit yield; LSD (0.05) = Least Significant Difference
at 5% level; CV= coefficient of variation.
3.6 Quality parameters

3.6.1 Total soluble solid of hot pepper

Analysis of variance revealed that total soluble solid was very highly significantly
(P<0.001) influenced by the main effect of intra-row spacing and varieties. Whereas the
interaction showed very highly significant effect on TSS (Table 9, Appendix Table 5).
The highest total soluble solid was obtained from 40 cm intra-row spacing (0.8) while the
lowest was recorded from 10 cm intra-raw spacing (0.06) (Table 9). The highest total
soluble solid was obtained from variety Challa (0.8) while the lowest was recorded from
variety Melka Awaze (0.06) (Table 9). In contrast to the current finding, Ilić et al. (2017)
found the highest TSS value in pepper fruit obtained from Mareko Fana variety. Similar to
the current findings, Fox et al. (2005) found that when the intra-row spacing increased bell
peppers, leading to an increase in total soluble solids.
Table 9. Interaction effects of varieties and intra-row spacing on total soluble solid of hot
pepper.

Varieties Intra-row spacing(cm) TSS (0brix)

Melka Awaze 10 0.06j

20 0.1h

30 0.12j

40 0.17c

Melka Shote 10 0.08j

20 0.09i

30 0.14f

40 0.16cd

Melka Zalla 10 0.07j

20 0.1h

30 0.13f

40 0.16d

Challa 10 0.12h

20 0.15f

30 0.18g

40 0.8a

LSD (5%) 0.32

CV (5%) 2.85

Means with in the same letter (s) are not significantly different at 5% level of significance; Tss = Total
soluble solid; LSD (0.05) = Least Significant Difference at 5% level; CV= coefficient of variation.
 4. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Hot pepper is one of the major vegetable and spice crops produced in the Southern part of
Ethiopia, that serve as the source of income particularly for small holders in study area.
However, the productivity of pepper in the study area is very low as compared to national
average yield due to lack of well adapted varieties and lack of information on right rate of
intra-row spacing in the study area. Therefore, a field experiment was conducted to
investigate the effect of varieties and intra-row spacing on growth, yield and quality of hot
pepper in Boloso Bombe District, Southern Ethiopia in 2023 during the main cropping
season.

The treatments consisted of four varieties (Melka Awaze,Melka Shote,Melka Zalla and
Challa) and four intra-row spacing (10, 20, 30 and 40 cm). The experiment was laid out as
a Randomized Complete Block Design in a 4 x 4 factorial arrangement and replicated
three times. Data were collected on phonological data, growth parameter, yield and yield
related parameters, and quality parameters analysed using statistical analysis software
(SAS) where procedures version 9.3, (SAS, 2014). The results of analysis showed that the
phenology (days to 50% flowering, 50% fruit setting and days of first harvest), growth
(plant height, canopy diameter and number of branches per plant), yield components
(number of fruits per plant, fruit length and fruit width) and yield (marketable fresh fruit,
unmarketable fresh fruit, total fresh fruit, marketable dry fruit, total dry fruit yield) and
quality parameters (total soluble solid) were significantly influenced by the main effects.

The longest days to 50% flowering (63.5 days) was obtained by the variety Challa. The
longest days to 50% fruit setting and days to first harvest (73 and 143 days) were obtained
by the variety Challa and 40cm intra-row spacing respectively. The highest plant height
(73cm), canopy diameter (93.9cm) and number of branches per plant (97.8) were recorded
by the varieties of Melka Shote and melka zalla respectively and 40cm intra-row spacing.
The maximum number of fruits per plant (80.6), fruit length (14.8cm) and fruit width (6.2
cm) were obtained by the varieties of Melka Zalla, Challa and Melka Awaze respectively
and 40 cm intra row-spacing. The highest marketable fresh fruit yield (28.8 t ha -1) and total
marketable fresh fruit yield (29.06 t ha-1) recorded from the variety Challa by 40 cm intra-
row spacing. The highest marketable dry fruit yield ( 7.11 t ha-1) was obtained by variety
Melka Shote with 40cm intra-raw spacing. Whereas, the lowest marketable dry fruit yield
(1.21 t ha-1) as obtained by variety Melka Awaze with 10cm intra-raw spacing and total
dry fruit yield (7.53 t ha-1) was achieved from variety Melka Shote and 40cm intra-row
spacing.

Generally, combination of 40 cm intra-row spacing with variety Melka Shote, which can
be recommended for agronomical feasible production of dry hot pepper in Boloso Bombe
Woreda and areas with similar agro-ecologies. Since the study was conducted at one
location for a single season, repetition of the experiment on various location and seasons
was recommended for effective production of hot pepper for the mentioned varieties and
spacing also recommended.
 5. REFERIANCE

Abdul-Rafiu A.M, Adebisi M.A, Daniel I.O, Bodunde J.G, Ajayi O.O, Muhammad
S.M, and Dixon H.G. 2019. Influence of plant population on fruit and seed yield
characters of cayenne pepper (Capsicum frutescens L.) genotypes. Agro- Science,
18 (1), 30-38. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4314/as.v18i1.5
Alabi E.O, Ayodele, O.J, and Aluko, M. 2014. Growth and yield responses of bell
pepper (Capsicum annuum, rodo'variety) to in-row plant spacing. Journal of
Agricultural and Biological Science. 9( 11): 389- 397.
Amare Tesfaw, Nigussie Dechassa and Kebede W/T Sadik. 2013. Performance of hot
pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) varieties as influenced by nitrogen and phosphorus
fertilizer at Bure, Upper Watershed of the Blue Nile in Northwestern Ethiopia.
International Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 3(8), 599–608.
Aminifard M.H, Aroiee H., Ameri A. and Fatemi H. 2012. Effect of plant density and
nitrogen fertilizer on growth, yield and fruit quality of sweet pepper (Capsicum
annum L .). African Journal of Agricultural Research, 7(6), 859–866.
Anonymous. 2014. Sweet and hot peppers production guideline. www.Starkeayres.Co.Za.
Asfaw Zeleke and Eshetu Derso. 2015. Production and management of major vegetable
crops in ethiopia. Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.149.
Berhanu Yadeta, Derbew Belew, Wosene Gebresillase, Fekadu Marame. 2011.
Variability, heritability and genetic advance in hot pepper (Capsicum annuum L.)
genotypes in west Shoa, Ethiopia. American-Eurasian Journal of Agriculture and
Environmental Science. 10(4):587- 592.
Bhuvaneswari G, R. Sivaranjani, S. Reetha and K. Ramakrishan. 2014. Application of
nitrogen fertilizer on plant density, growth, yield and fruit of bell peppers
(Capsicum annuum L.). International Letters of Natural Sciences, 8(2), 81–90.
Boseland P.W. and E. J. Votava, 2000. Pepper, Vegetable and Spice Capsicum. Crop
Production Science in Horticulture. CABI publishing, New York. 1-16 .
Bosland PW and Votava EJ. 2012. Peppers, Vegetables and Spices Capsicum. CABI
Publishing. New York, 198p.
Cavero J., Ortega R.G. and Gutierrez M. 2001. Plant density affects yield, yield
components, and color of direct seeded paprika. HortScience, 36(1), 76-79.
CSA (Central Statistical Authority of Ethiopia), 2017. Agricultural sample survey. Report
on area and production of major crops. Volume I, Statistical Bulletin 584. Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.
Decoteau D.R. 2000. Vegetable Crops. Prentice Hall Upper Sadedle River, New Jersey.
USA, pp. 292
Dennis S. Learn How to Grow Peppers. Nairobi, Kenya. 2013, ISBN 978-9966-47-838-2.
Dessie Getahun and Birhanu Habtie. 2017. Growth and Yielding Potential of Hot Pepper
Varieties under Rain-Fed Production at Woreta, Northwestern Ethiopia,
International Journal of Research Studies in Agricultural Sciences (IJRSAS),
3(3), 11–18.
EARO (Ethiopian Agricultural research Organization). 2004. Released crop varieties and
their recommended cultural practices. Progress report. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
EIAR (Ethiopia Institute of Agricultural Research). 2007. Technology guideline for
different crops. Amharic Version Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 121-124.
El-Tohamy W.A., A.A. Ghoname, and S.D. Abou-Hussein. 2006. Improvement of Pepper
Growth and Productivity in Sandy Soil by Different Fertilization Treatments under
Protected Cultivation. Journal of Applied Sciecnes Research, 2(1), 8–12.
Engles.J.M.M, J.G. Hawkes, and MelakuWerede, 1994.Plant genetic resource of Ethiopia.
Cambridge University press,Cambridge, UK. 126p.
Erickson AN, Markhart AH. 2002. Flower developmental stage and organ sensitivity of
bell pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) to elevated temperature. Plant Cell Environ
25:123-130. doi:10.1046/j.0016-8025.2001.00807.x
ESEF (Ethiopian Spice Extraction Factory). Unpublished data. Ethiopia, 2005.Ethiopia.
Cambridge University press,Cambridge, UK. 126p.
Islam Monirul, Satyaranjan Saha, MD. Hasanuzzaman Akand and Md. Abdur Rahim.
2011. Effect of Spacing on the Growth and Yield of Sweet Pepper (Capsicum
annuum L.). Journal of Central European Agriculture, 12(2), 328–335.
FAO. 2004. Hot pepper seed and crop production in the Bahamas. Production manual.
Prepared by the FAO project in cooperation with the Ministry of Agriculture,
Fisheries and Local Government of the Bahamas. 57 pp.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2018. Production status.
(http://www faostat.fao.org.). Accessed on August 14, 2020.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2020. Production status.
(http://www faostat.fao.org.). Accessed on December 21, 2021
Fekadu M, and Dandena, G. 2006. Status of Vegetable Crops in Ethiopia.
.http//scribd.asterpix.com/cy/2437661/= accessed on 12/29/2009. Ugandan
Journal of Agriculture, 2006, 12(2): 26-30.
Fox A.J, D. Del Pozo-Insfran, J.H. Lee, S.A. Sargent, and S.T. Talcott. 2005. Ripening-
induced chemical and antioxidant changes in bell peppers as affected by harvest
maturity and postharvest ethylene exposure. HortSci. 40(3):732–736. doi:
10.21273/HORTSCI.40.3.732.
Fufa Nimona and Abera Girma. 2019. Effects of blended fertilizer types and rates on fruit
yield and nutrient use efficiencies of hot pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) at
Asossa, Western Ethiopia. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 14(33),
pp.1737-1748.
Fufa Nimona. 2020. Yield response and nutrient use efficiencies of hot pepper (Capsicum
annuum L.) to inorganic fertilizers in Ethiopia : A review article, International
Journal of Research in Agronomy, (April), 24–32.
Gardner E, Michael R. and John H. 2003. Soil Sampling for Home Gardens and Small
Acreages.Corvallis, OR Oregon State University Extension Service
Gebremeskel H, H. Abebe, W. Biratu, K. Jelato. 2015. Performance evaluation of hot
pepper (Capsicum annum L.) Varieties for productivity under irrigation at Raya
Valley, Northern, Ethiopia.Basic Rese. J. 4(7): 211-216.
Gencoglan C, Akinci, I. E., Akinci, S., Gencoglan, S. and Ucan, K. 2005. Effect of
different irrigation methods on yield of red hot pepper and plant mortality caused
by Phytophthora capsici Leon. Journal of environmental biology, 26, 741-746.
Getahun D, and Habtie B. 2017. Growth and Yielding potential of hot pepper cultivars
under rain feed production at Woreta, North-western Ethiopia. International
Journal of Research studies in Agricultural sciences, 3(3): 11-18.
Gomez K. A. and Gomez, A. A. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research,
2nd edition. John Viley and Sons Inc., New York.
Hedge. 1997. Nutrition requirement of solanacaous. Vegetable crops, All India
coordinated safflowers improvement project. Solapur, Maharashtra, India. Food
and Fertilizer Technology center. Taipie, 10616.
Howard LR, Talcott ST, Brenes CH, Villalon B. 2000. Changes in phytochemical and
antioxidant activity of selected pepper cultivars (Capsicum sp.) as influenced by
maturity. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry. 48:1713-1720.
Huffnagel H.P., 1961. Agriculture in Ethiopia. Food and Agricultural Organization of the
United Nations (FAO), Rome, Italy.
Hussen S, Kemal M. and Wasie M. 2013. Effect of Intra – row spacing on growth and
development of tomato (Lycoperscumesculentum Mill) Var. Roma VF, at the
experimental site of Wollo University, South Wollo, Ethiopia. Ethiopia
International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied research, 10: 19-24.
Ilić Z.S, and E. Fallik. 2017. Light quality manipulation improves vegetable quality at
harvest and postharvest: A review. Environ. Exp. Bot. 139:79–90. doi:
10.1016/j.envexpbot.2017.04.006.
Kassa Melese, Wassu Mohammed and Gebre Hadgu. 2018. Response of Hot Pepper
(Capsicum annuum L.) as Affected by NP Fertilizer and Farmyard Manure
Combined Application in Raya Azebo District, Northern Ethiopia. International
Journal of Life Sciences, 6(4), 2320–7817.
Khasmakhi-Sabet S. Sedaghathoor J. Mohammady, and A. Olfati. 2009. "Effect of plant
density on bell peper yield and quality," International Journal of Vegetable
Science, vol. 15, pp. 264-271.
Law and Egharevba 2009. Increase in yield with higher plant density was a result of
increased number of fruits/ha in direct seeded paprika pepper.
Leghari G.M. and Oad F. C. 2005. The Effect of Nitrogen Fertilizer Regimes on the
Growth and Yield of Pepper. Indus Journal of Plant Science, 4(3): 386-390.
Lemma D. 2002. Tomato research experience and production prospects. Research Report
Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization, No.43.
Lemma D. Fekadu M, and Chemeda F, 2008. Research Journal of Agriculture and
Biological Science.4(6): 803-809.
Liu B, M.L. Gumpertz, S.Hu and J.B. Ristaino, 2008. Effect of prior tillage and fertility
amendments on dispersal of Phytophthora capsiciand infection of pepper, Eur. J.
Plant Pathol.120: 273-287.
Melkasa Agricultural Research Center, 2005.Progress Report on CompletedActivities. pp:
1-7 Addis Ababa.
MoARD (Minstry of Agriculture and Rural Development), 2009. Variety registers. Issue
No. 9. June 2006. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Monirul Islam, Satyaranjan Saha, Md. Hasanuzzaman Akand, Md. And Abdur Rahim.
2011. Effect of spacing on the growth and yield of sweet pepper (Capsicum
Annuum L.). Journal of Central European Agriculture.12 (2): 328-335.
Naser A, El-Hendawy S, and Schmidhalter U. 2013. Influence of varied plant density on
growth, yield and economic return of drip irrigated faba bean (Vicia faba l.).
Turkish Journal of Field Crops 18(2): 185-197.
Nasto, Balliu, and N. Zeka, "The influence of plant density on growth charavteristics and
fruit yield of peppers," Journal of Acta Horticulturae, vol. 830, pp. 609-912, 2009.
Ngozi E. Abu and Chidera V.O. 2017. The effect of plant density on growth and yield of
Nsukka Yellow aromatic pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). African Journal of
Agricultural Research, 12(15), 1269–1277.
Nwose EU. Pepper soup as an antioxidant therapy. Medical Hypothesis 2009; 75:860-861,
200-229.
Ocharo Edgar N, Korir Nicholas K, and Gweyi-Onyango Joseph. 2017. Green pepper
growth and yield response to the integration of mulching materials and row
plant spacing. Journal of Agriculture and Crops, 3(9), 72–77.
Ou B, Huang D, Hampsch-Woodill M, Flanagan JA, Deemer EK.2002. Analysis of
antioxidant activities of common vegetables employing oxygen radical
absorbance capacity (ORAC) and ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP)
assays: a comparative study. J Agr and Food Chemistry. 50:3122-3128.
Poulos J.M., 1993..Pepper breeding. In Breeding of Solonaceaeous and Cole crops.
Research produced red peppers (Capsicum annum L.). Republic of
Turkey.Ministry of Agriculture and RuralAffairs.Aegean,AgriculturalResearch
Institute Mencemen-zmir. /Turkey. www.isofar.org/.

Purseglove JW, Brown EG, Green CI, Robbins SRI. Spices. Vol.1. Longman Inc. New
York. 1981, 365p.
Robi R, Sreelatha Kumari. Influence of maturity at harvest on capsaicin and ascorbic acid
content in hot chilli (Capsicum chinense Jacq.). Capsicum and Eggplant
Newsletter, 2004; (23):13-16.
Rodríguez Y, Depestre T, Gómez O. 2008. Efficiency of selection in pepper lines
(Capsicum annuum) from four subpopulations in characters of productive interest.
Ciencia e Investigación Agraria, 35(1):29-40.
Ruiz-Lau N, Medina-Lara F, Minero-García Y, Zamudio-Moreno E, Guzmán-Antonio A,
Echevarría-Machado I, and Martínez-Estévez M, 2011. Water Deficit Affects the
Accumulation of Capsaicinoids in Fruits of Capsicum chinense Jacq. HortScience,
46(3), 487–492.
Russo V. M. 2003. Planting date and plant density affect the fruit seed of Jalapeno
peppers. Journal of Horticulture Science, 38: 520-523.
Sam-Aggrey, W.G. and Bereke_TsehaiTuku, 1985. Proceedings of the 1st Ethiopian
Horticultural.
Sayed, A.V, and Hossein, A. F. 2010. Effects of planting density and pattern on
physiological growth indices in maize (Zea mays L.) under nitrogenous fertilizer
application. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development 2(3): pp.
040-047.
Schollenberger C.J, and Simon, R.H. 1945. Determination of exchangeable bases in
soils,ammonium acetate method. Soil Sci. 59:13-14.
Seleshi Delelegn. 2011. Evaluation of elite hot pepper varieties (Capsicum species) for
growth, dry pod yield and quality under Jimma condition, South West Ethiopia
(Doctoral dissertation, Jimma University).
Sharma R, Kumar R. 2017. Growth, flowering and yield of chilli, (Capsicum annuum L.)
as influenced by spacing and growing conditions. Int.J. Pure App. Biosci. ;
5(5):524-527.
Shimeles A. Bekele W. Dagne, and W. T. 2016. Adeferis, "Genetic variability and
association of characters in Ethiopian hot pepper (Capsicum Annum L.)
landraces," Journal of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 61, pp. 19-36.
Shimeles A, 2004. Capsicum production In: Training manual of horticultural and spice
crops. Joint Publication of MARC/EARO and World Vision Ethiopia. Melkassa,
Ethiopia. Pp. 25-28.
Simon T. and B. Tesfaye, 2014. Growth and productivity of hot pepper (Capsicum
annuum L.) as affected by variety, nitrogen and phosphorus at Jinka, Southern
Ethiopia. Res. J. Agri. Enviro. Manage. 3(9): 427-433 pp.
Song EY, Moon KH, Son IC, Kim CH, Lim CK, Son D, Oh S. 2014. Impact of elevated
temperature in growing season on growth and fruit quality of red pepper
 (Capsicum annuum L.). KoreanJ Agric For Meteor 16:349-358.
doi:10.5532/KJAFM.2014.16.4.349.
Song EY, Moon KH, Son IC, Wi SH, Kim CH, Lim CK, Oh S. 2015. Impact of elevated
temperature based on climate change scenarios on growth and fruit quality of red
pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). Korean J Agric For Meteor 17:248-253.
Doi:10.5532/KJAFM. 2015.17.3.248.
Tariku S, Getachew G, Kanko C, Alemnesh A, Abriham A, Arega A, and Abayneh F. 2
018. Identifcation and Prioritization of Major Factors that Challenge Crop
Productivity and Production System in the Case of Gamo Gofa, Segen Area
People Zone and Basketo Special Woreda. Annals of Social Sciences and
Management Studies, 1 (1): 001-006.
Tefera A. and Tefera T. 2013. Tomato Production in Ethiopia Challenged by Pest.
Global Agricultural Information Network.
Thakur G, Singh A. K., Maurya P. K., Patel P. and Kumar U. 2018. Effect of Plant
Spacing on Fruit Quality of Capsicum (Capsicum annuum L) Hybrid Buffalo
under Natural Ventilated Polyhouse. Jornal of Pharmacolghosy and
Phytochemistry, 7, 78–81.
Tong N, and P.W. Bosland, 2003. Observations on interspecific compatibility and meiotic
chromosome behaviour of Capsicum buforum and C. lanceolatum. Genetic
Resource and Crop Evaluation 50:193-199.
Tutia N, Hedaua, K. Bishta, J. and J .Bhatta, 2015. Effect of organic and inorganic
sources of nutrients on yield, economics, and energetics of pepper and soil
properties in naturally Ventilated Polyhouse. Indian Council of Agricultural
Research, Almora, Uttarakhand, India.
Vos J. G, and H.D. Friking. 1997. Nitrogen fertilization as a component of integrated
crop management of hot pepper (Capsicum species) under tropical lowland
conditions. International Journal of Pest Management.43:1-10.
Weiss E. A. 2002. World Production and Trade. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing, CAB
International.
Yemane Kahsay. 2017. Evaluation of Hot Pepper Varieties (capsicumspecies) for Growth,
Dry pod Yield and Quality atM/Lehke District, Tigray, Ethiopia.
 6. APPENDIX

Table 1. Mean square value of days to 50% flowering, days to 50% pod setting and days to
first harvest of hot pepper.

Source of variation DF mean square and significance level

Days to 50% days to 50% days to first

flowering pod setting , harvest

Replication 2 32.812 69.812 176.896

Intra row Spacing 3 46.521 *** 45.576*** 314.944***

Variety 3 479.632*** 393.187 *** 829.167***

Variety*intra raw 9 0.465 ns 0.965 ns 45.815***

Error 30 0.568 1.924 13.607

Cv 1.32 2.08 2.98

Where; DF= Degree of freedom, CV= coefficient of variation, **= highly significant,***=very highly
significant, ns= non-significant

Table 2. Mean square value for effects of varieties and intra row spacing on growth
parameters of hot pepper.

Source of variation DF mean square and significance level

Plant height Canopy diameter number of branch

 (cm) (cm) (count)

Replication 2 53.763 27.452 36.750

Intra raw spacing 3 148.457*** 876.251*** 453.059***

Variety 3 604.253 ** * 957.846*** 217.734***

Spacing*variety 9 13.781*** 18.064*** 34.790***

Error 30 1.932 2.273 9.146

Cv 2.30 2.05 3.44

Where; DF= Degree of freedom, CV= coefficient of variation, **= highly significant, ***=very highly
significant,ns= non-significant

Table 3. Mean square value for the interaction effects of varieties and intra row spacing on
yield related parameters of hot pepper

Source of variation DF mean square and significance level

Number of fruit per Fruit length fruit width

Plant(count) (cm) (cm)

Replication 2 5.603 0.4145 0.0008

Intra row spacing 3 789.116*** 75.9323*** 41.9663***

Variety 3 807.444*** 5.5323*** 0.0108***

Spacing*variety 9 27.579 *** 0.7046*** 0.0063***

Error 30 5.903 0.1348 0.0008

CV 3.85 3.27 0.70

 Where; DF= Degree of freedom, CV= coefficient of variation, **= highly significant, ***=very highly
significant.

Table 4. Mean square value for the main and interaction effects of varieties and intra row
spacing on fresh fruit yields of hot pepper.

Source of variation DF mean square and significance level

MFPY(t/ha) UMFPY(t/ha) TFPY(t/ha)

Replication 2 1.577 0.02297 0.554

Intra row spacing 3 173.771*** 1.89548*** 193.388***

Variety 3 12.064*** 0.05188*** 8.907***

Spacing*variety 9 3.144*** 0.00504ns 2.061***

Error 30 0.276 0.00397 0.801

CV 2.46 5.76 3.99

Where; DF= Degree of freedom, CV= coefficient of variation, **= highly significant, ***=very highly
significant, MFFY= marketable fresh fruit yield, UMFPY= unmarketable fresh fruit yield, TFFY= total fresh
fruit yield.

Table 5. Mean square value for the interaction effects of varieties and intra row spacing on
yields and TSS of hot pepper.

Source of variation DF mean square and significance level

MDFY(t/ha) TDFY(t/ha) TSS(oBrix)

Replication 2 0.0008 0.0792 0.00017

Intra row spacing 3 42.2413*** 61.4209*** 0.04549***

Variety 3 0.0058** 3.4164*** 0.11606***

Spacing*variety 9 0.061** 1.1229** 0.9691***

Error 30 0.0017** 0.2866 0.00002

CV 1.52 13.25 2.85

Where; DF= Degree of freedom, CV= coefficient of variation, ** highly significant, ***= very highly
significant,

Nursery Site transplanting time

 At transplanting Data Recording

Recording quality of pepper at harvest time dry pepper at oven

Appendix figure 1. Performances of the experiment at different stages..