Project Modification

7/28/2019 Project Modification

1/33

UNIVERSITY OF DARE S SALAAM

COLLEGE OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES

(CONAS)

DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY

RESEARCH PROJECT

TITLE: AN ASSESSMENT OF SEEDLING GROWTH RATE OF SELECTED

POTENTIAL BIO-FUEL CROPS

STUDENT NAME: HASSAN VUAI M

REG. NO: 2009-04-01222

Degree Program: BSC IN BOTANICAL SCIENCE

Year of Study: 3RD

YEAR

RESEARCH SUPERVISOR NAME: DR. AGNES NYOMORA

2013


2/33

COPYRIGHT

All right reserve. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any

means, electronic or mechanical; including photocopying, for research or private study, critical

academic review or discourse with an acknowledgement, without written permission of the

author.


3/33

DECLARATION

I, Hassan Vuai M, hereby declare that this report is the product of my own work except where

acknowledged in the text. It is has not been submitted to any other university or anywhere else

for similar award.

..

Hassan Vuai, M

(Candidate)

Date..

Dr. A. Nyomora

(Supervisor)

Date


4/33

DEDICATION

To my mother Bi. Sharifa Hamoud Rashidand my father Dr. Mkoko Hassan M. who constantly

support and encourage me to be strong and behave nicely.


5/33

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The first special thank to God for giving me good health condition during all days in training

field. I wish to thank the Department of Botany, College of Natural and Applied Science (CONAS)

for assisting me to accomplish my research projects.

Very special thanks to My mother Bi. Sharifa H. Rashid and Bi. Tatu Mkubwa Bilali, and my

father Dr. Mkoko Hassan M. for their support, who encouraged me during my research project

period up to the end.

I wish to express my honest gratitude to my supervisor Dr.A.Nyomora for the constant support

and encouragement throughout the research study. It was very disappointing at the start and

without her guidance it would have been so impossible to complete this work. I would like to

confer my special thank and appreciation to her for all that she has done to ensure that this

research project is accomplished. Especially on the provision of relevant literature material as

well as her constructive criticism, comments and suggestion that led to the success of this

research projects.

I would like to thank my colleagues 3rd year Bsc, in botanical science in a year of 2010/2011 and

my friends mostly my friends Issa Yussuf and Sengerere Hassan for sharing ideas and support

during the study.

Very special thanks goes to my uncles Dr. Masoud, Nasoor and his wife Dr. khadija Sleiman for

their support, encouragement and guiding me using the relevant language in my study any

articles I want for the study including free internet and place to stay while doing my work.

I wish to thank my family mostly my brother Hassan, my sister Raya and young sister khadija for

being there for me, encouraging me and supporting me in my research project.

Very special thank to my friend Monica from Thailand for her courage and supporting in health

and happiness.


6/33

ABSTRACT

The aim of the study was to assess of seedling growth rate of the potential selected biofuel

crops for the target of increasing their production of biofuel in Tanzania .

Five selected species potential for biofuel were used in the study in 10 plants replicated in a

RCD measuring and recording of the growth rate was conducted for 15 weeks. Plant heigth,

stem girth, number of leaves and number of nodes per plant were observed as parameters.

Plant height and stem girth were measured using a tape meter and van caliper respectively,

while the number of leaves and number of nodes wererecorded by direct counting the number

present at the time of observation.

The data was analysis by subjected to ANOVA using GraphPad InStat 3 software. Comparison of

the differences between treatment means was accomplished using Tukey test. Results were

summarized in tables and figures to ease comparisons and discussion.

The final total study result show that Legenaria cineria (gourd), have high growth rate

compared with other biofuel crop species that were selected, followed by Legeneria cineria

(gourd), other Ricinus communis (seeds), Ricinus communis (seeded), and Legeneria cineria

(calabash) have show low growth rate.

Analysis of plant growth parameters showed significant correlations and considered to be a

standard approach to study of plant growth and productivity directly influenced the economic

yield. Legenaria cineria (large) have high growth rate also is considered to have high rate of

production as result shown.


7/33

Introduction:

A bio-fuel is a type of fuel whose energy is derived from biological carbon fixation i.e biofuel is

produced from renewable biological resources such as plant treated municipal and industrial

waste biomass . (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary), including fuel derived from biomass

conversion, solid biomass, liquid fuel, (biodiesel, bioethanol) and various biogases. Bio-fuels

have been in history for 150 years but media has not accurately presented core arguments

about bio-fuels, especially those concerning famine and food prices, Halvorsen(2007).

The use of biofuels is growing around the world and a debate between biofuels supporters and

opponents is intensifying. Given the rapidly increasing demand for energy it is expected that

biofuels will become an important part of the global energy mix and make a significant

contribution to meeting energy demand(World Energy Council, 2010). Drivers for a wide

introduction of biofuels vary across the world and include a broad range of issues from land-use

to energy security, to economics and environment. The main challenge for the future is to

develop biofuels which do not compete with the food chain, which are sustainable and efficient

both in terms of costs and energy, and for which the carbon footprint is a net gain. (World

Energy Council, 2010).

Developing and developed countries are setting targets to increase the proportion of biofuels in

their energy mix for the purposes of climate change mitigation, energy security and rural

development . A great deal of scientific research that has been done on biofuel show some as

good sources of alternative energy, and biofuels have been seen as environment friendly and

affordable way to reduce ourdependency on fossil fuels, biofuels reduce dependence on fossil

fuels by replacing petroleum, diesel and other sources of fossil fuels

(http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis).

Most research to date has focused on the performance of biofuels in reducing world carbon

monoxide, carbon dioxide, sulphur oxide emissions, with questions being raised over their

potential in this respect. Far less attention has been paid to the potential impacts of biofuels on


8/33

biodiversity. (World Energy Council 2010), and their performance in different parts of the

world. The production of biofuels would lead to lower emissions of greenhouse gases, Biofuel

is termed as clean fuel as it does not contain carcinogens and its sulphur content is also lower

than that in the mineral diesel, thus greatly reduces particulate matter, carbon monoxide

carbon dioxide, sulphur oxide emissions. High amount of green houses gasses lead to climatic

change impacts and effect the environment directly by increasing temperature, causing global

warming and air pollution which can in turn cause diseases like cancer and lungs problems.Common plant species for biofuel crops including Jatropha (Jatropha curcas), Giant Reed

(Arundo donax), Chinese Tallow Tree (Triadica sebifera),Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris

arundinacea) , Neem Tree (Azadirachta indica), Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), Miscanthus

(Miscanthus species), Spartina (Spartina species), Olive (Olea europaea), Castor Oil Plant (Ricinis

communis) Chinese Apple (Zizyphus mauritiana), Willows (Salix species), Poplars (Populus

species), Calotrope (Calotropis procera), Giant Milkweed (Calotropis gigantea), Caper Spurge

(Euphorbia lathyris). The Legenaria cineria species have not been common in studies as bio-fuel

crop. Most of the current studies have base more on Jastropha curcas and Ricinus communis.

(htt://www. invasives.org.au).

Crop growth is in the strictest sense simply cell division (increase in number) and cell

enlargement (increase in size). The process of differenciation (cell specialization) is also

required making plant development be both growth and differenciation. As agronomists, plant

growth is frequently defined by the parameter from which measurements over time can be

taken dry matter increases. Dry weight accumulation is used as it generally has the greatest

economic importance; however, height, volume, and leaf area are also often used (D.B. 1995).

The factors affecting growth can be broadly divided into external and internal factors. Factors

under genetic control are numerous, thus these are only partial lists.

External Factor:- climatic (light, temperature, water, day length, wind, gases), soil edaphic

(texture, structure, organic matter, cation exchange capacity, pH, base saturation, nutrient

availability) biological (weeds, insects, disease organisms, nematodes, various herbivores, soil

microorganisms including nitrogen fixing/denitrifying bacteria and mycorrhiza contributing to

symbiotic fungal associations)


9/33

Internal Factors:- resistance to climatic, edaphic and biological stresses, photosynthetic rate,

respiration, partitioning of assimilate and nitrogen, chlorophyll, carotene and other pigment

contents type and location of growing points (meristems), capacity to store food reserves,

enzyme activity, direct gene effects, differenciation (D.B. 1995).

The goal of this study is to evaluate seedling growth rate of selected biofuel crop species for the

future uses of biofuel energy as an alternative energy in Tanzania.

Significance of the Research:

There is limited knowledge on biofuel production in Tanzania. Their agronomy and growth rate

are not known.

This study will equip growers with knowledge of growth rate and know what to expect when

they plant these trees, and hence enable them to plan effectively as to when exactly they

should plant and apply appropriate agronomic practices.

The assessment of growth rate of plants is meat to assess how the plant can survive. Hence this

study is expected to show which plants have better or lower growth rate.

Statement of the Research Problem:

Attainment of optimal plants size is important indicators of a plants response to control

techniques, so careful analysis of seedling growth may reveal characteristics important to

effective management for plant productivity

Objectives:

Main objective: To improve productivity of biofuel crops in Tanzania.

Specific objective: To assess seedling growth rate of selected bio-fuel crop species.

Hypotheses/Research Question:


10/33

There is any significance difference among growth rate of potential selected biofuel species

crop.

Literature Review:

General fossil fuels are the major contributor to a number of environmental problems. From

their extraction through their use in automobiles, industries home uses, many steps of the

process either are or can be detrimental to the environment. Producing and using biofuels for

transportation, industrial and our homes offer alternatives to fossil fuels that can help provide

solutions to many environmental problems.(http://www.ott.doe.gov/biofuels.)

In a study done by Dove Biotech (2005) problem of Castor oil Ricinus communis is considered an

international botanical answer to biodiesel production and renewable energy. The study

showed that biodiesel was total renewable, and therefore a sustainable organic solutions to

global energy, water and environment. Ricinus communis has been widely accepted as an

agricultural solution for all subtropical and tropical locations that addresses the need for

commercial crops with low costs and at the same time providing traditional farming with a

viable income from current non productive lands (www.dovebiotech.com). In the search for

more environmentally friendly fuels, the use of castor oil as biodiesel has proven to have

technical and ecological benefits, and stands as an opportunity for agricultural development in

arid and impoverished areas throughout the tropics and sub tropics globally. The author

concluded that for arid and semi arid regions, growing Ricinus communis in conjunct with

Jatropha offers the only viable solutions for turning marginal lands into viable economic lands.

(Http://www.dovebiotech.com).

A study done by Vwioko, Fashemi,(2005), investigated in Growth response ofRicinus communis

L (Castor Oil) in spent lubricating oil polluted soil. The result showed that highest percent

germination of approximately 92%, was obtained in control and the least in 5% w/w lubricating

oil polluted soil. The early germination obtained in this study was significant when considered

in the light of reported delay and depression of germination by spent lubricating oil in Capsicum

annum, Lycopersicon esculentum, Solanum melongena and S. incanum. For parameters like
http://www.dovebiotech.com/http://www.dovebiotech.com/http://www.dovebiotech.com/http://www.dovebiotech.com/http://www.dovebiotech.com/


11/33

plant height, stem girth, leaf area, fresh and dry weights, and root length, the mean values

obtained were higher for 1% w/w than the control. There was stimulation of growth at 1% w/w

spent lubricating oil in soil. Plants in higher concentration (2 6% w/w) exhibited depression in

growth. Plants grown in 1% w/w spent lubricating oil in soil flowered earlier than those grown

in control. (http:// www.bioline.org.br/ja)

A study by M. Vanaja, et al, (2008), based on investigated Growth and yield responses of

Ricinus communis L. to two enhanced CO2

levels. The study explained growth and yield

responses of Ricinus communis L. to two elevated CO2 levels (550 and 700 ppm) up to the

maturity of first order spikes in open top chambers (OTCs).The growth characteristics, root and

shoot lengths, root volume, root:shoot ratios, leaf area, dry weights of different plant parts, leaf

area duration and crop growth rate increased with 550 and 700 ppm of CO2 levels compared

with ambient control, while the normal level of that range between 330-350ppm. The spike

length, pod and seed yield of first order spikes increased under enhanced CO2 levels over

ambient control. Elevated CO2 levels significantly increased the total biomass and yield of

Ricinus communis L, however enhanced CO2 levels per se did not change the content and

quality of the castor oil. A positive response of Ricinus communis L, to increased CO2

concentrations is a good indication for its future existence in impacted climatic conditions. (M.

Vanaja, et al . 2008)

The studies based on algal as biofuel production (Jenner 2008; Wang et al. 2008), the literature

on algal biofuels is still very limited, and climate change mitigation potential of algal biodiesel

remains to be seen, but there is some optimism. Microalgal biodiesel has high energy potential,

as most of the algal dry weight can be used in production (Patil et al. 2008; Chisti, 2008; Herro

2008), and has been cited as the only renewable biofuel source that has the potential to

completely displace petroleum-derived transport fuels (Chisti, 2008). It has been estimated that

microalgae could account for half of the transport fuel needs of the US with just 1.1% of the

countrys cropland (Chisti 2008), and it can reportedly produce more fuel per area of land than

maize, rapeseed or jatropha even when grown on land that is not suitable for agriculture, in
http://www.bioline.org.br/jahttp://www.bioline.org.br/jahttp://www.bioline.org.br/ja


12/33

seawater and brackish water (Gross, 2008). If this were the case, then there would be

significant potential to reduce biodiversity impacts, but there does not appear to have been any

investigation of algal biofuels in this context. Currently the barriers to production appear to be

economic, and large-scale production does not appear likely over the short term.

Other biofuel studies in relation with land degradation, showed most sustainability criteria

promote the production of biofuels on degraded land to avoid impacts on food production

and biodiversity. Several recent studies have suggested that expanding biofuels into degraded

land could achieve carbon savings whilst significantly reducing biodiversity impacts (Metzger &

Hutterman 2008; Bindraban et al. 2009; Fargione et al. 2008; Gibbs et al. 2008), and some

authors have recommended that the production of biofuel feedstocks should be limited to

degraded land and waste products (Gallagher, 2008).The problem with this concept is that

there is no accepted definition of degraded land (RSC, 2008). This has led to vastly different

estimates of the global availability of such land. Recent research has suggested that the global

potential for bioenergy production on abandoned agricultural land is 5% (Field et al. 2008) to

8% (Campbell et al. 2008) of current energy demand globally, and will therefore be insufficient

to meet even the targets of the EU and US (Kanter 2008). The estimate by Campbell et al.

(2008), which is based on historical land use data, satellite derived land cover data and globalecosystem modelling, provides a range of 385-472 M ha of available abandoned agricultural

land, which does not compare favourably to most of the estimates of land requirements for

biofuel production. Land availability estimates very rarely take into account the land

requirements for other purposes such as afforestation and renewable energy.

A study done by Nyomora and Masomhe (2012), they focusing on assessment of propagation

methods for oilferous plant species with potential for biofuel production. One of specificobjective was to evaluate seedling growth rate of the selected plant species under different soil

type, complete randomized design was used in the study. They measured seedling growth

height from the pot base to the apex. The record taken a week for three month and determine

difference in growth rate for the selected biofuel species. The result of the study of the four


13/33

tested species namely as IEX, MRI4, MJA, and MTE shows different growth in different soils.

The study identify the performance of each selected species with relation to soil. MTE show

significance better in all soil type, while MJA performed poorly in almost all type except in loam

soil and MRI4 showed relatively average growth for the period of three month, Nyomora and

Masomhe (2012).

Growth is defined as an increase in number, size, and volume of cells during cell division

(mitosis). (http://www.cabi.org/cabreviews.) The term plant growth analysis refers to a useful

set of quantitative methods that describe and interpret the performance of the whole plant

systems grown under, natural, semi natural, or control condition. Plant growth analysis

provides an explanatory, holistic and integrative approach to interpreting plant form and

function. Growth analysis deal only with the analysis of whole plants grown as spaced

individual. (Thomas, et al., 2008). Relative growth rate, these are more complex rate of change,

but still involving only one plant variety and time, an example being the whole plants rate of

dry weight increase per unit of dry weight. Compounded growth rates, these are rates of

change involving more than one plant variety, such as the whole plants rate of dry weight

increase per unit of its leaf area. Absolute growth rates, these are simple rate of change

involving only one plant variety and time, an example being the whole plant rate of dry weightincrease, or the rate of increase the number of roots per plant. (Thomas, B., et al 2008).

The study of Geneve, et al (2003), focus on computer-aided digital image analysis of seedling

size and growth rate for assessing seed vigor in Impatiens.Vigor was measured using computer-

aided analysis of digital images in six seed lots of Impatiens that differed in vigour but retained

greater than 86% standard germination. Seed lots that differed in initial seed vigour were

selected based on the commercially used Ball Vigour Index and vigour independently assessedusing saturated salts accelerated aging tests. Digital images were captured from seeds

germinated in Petri dishes placed on a flat-bed scanner. Seedling growth was measured daily

for four days following initial radicle protrusion using commercially available root length

calculating software. Seedling size and growth rate generally ranked seed lots from high to low
http://www.cabi.org/cabreviewshttp://www.cabi.org/cabreviewshttp://www.cabi.org/cabreviews


14/33

vigour in a similar way compared to the Ball Vigour Index and saturated salts accelerated aging

tests. Their study showed that computer-aided analysis of digital images could be used

successfully to rank seed lot vigour in Impatiens based on seedling length (Geneve, et al 2003).

A study was conducted by Ohwo, O.A. et al (2012). to evaluate the effects of crude oil as a soil

contaminant on the performance ofJatropha curcas seedlings. The result of the study show the

rapid growth and development ofJ. curcas will represent the most immediate and available

responseof coping with depleting oil reserves, meeting growing energy demand in developing

countries like Nigeria i.e. tosupport development in rural areas. Ohwo, O.A. et al (2012).


15/33

METHODOLOGY:

Study Site:

The research was done along the niversity of Dar es Salaam inside green houses of botany

department. The climate is coastal, hot and humid. The average temperature lies between 25 Cand 30 C. umidity is high through the year, reaching the even the higher level in the rain

season

Material Uses:

1. Data sheet from computer2. Ruler3. Van caliper4. Calculator5. Note book, plain and graph papers6. Pen7. Pencil8. Tape meter9. GraphPad InStat 3 software10.Legenaria cineria (small),11.Legeneria cineria (calabash),12.Legenaria cineria (large),13.Ricinus communis (speckled),14.Ricinus communis (large),

Procedure:

A total of 5 selected species potential for biofuel was be used in the study as treatments. Each

observation was replicated on 10 plants/ they were grown inside the university green house.Measuring and recording the growth rate of all selected biofuel crop species (As Treatment).

Each observation was replicated on 10 plants in a RCD Measuring and recording of the growth

rate was conducted for 15 weeks. The parameters to be assessed was including plant heigth,

the stem girth, number of leaves and number of nodes. Growth plant in centimeter (cm) height

was measured from the base to the apex of the plant at an interval of seven day (once a week),


16/33

using a measure tape. Number of nodes and number of leaves are recorded by direct counting

the number present during the observing week. The plant girth was measured by using van

caliper in cm once a week.

Data Analysis:The data was subjected to ANOVA according to Gomez and Gomez, (1984) using GraphPad

InStat 3 software. Comparisons were made as change in growth occurring in each of ten

individual plants of selected biofuel crop species. Comparison of the differences between

treatment means was accomplished using Tukey test. Result/findings were summarized in

tables and figures/histograms to easy comparisons and discussion.


17/33

RESULT

FIGURE 1

One way of analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed the growth among the species was significant

(F=484.53, DF 49, P=0.0001) based on Turkeys test (t-test) the difference among the pays of means of

growth rate was statistical significant (P


18/33

One way of analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed the number of leaves among the species was

significant (F=7.433, DF 74, P=0.0001) based on Turkeys test (t-test) the difference among the pays of

means of growth rate was statistical significant (P


19/33

5 2.4 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.4

6 2.4 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.4

7 2.4 2.6 2.4 2.5 2.5

8 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.5

9 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.5

10 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.5

11 2.8 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.7

12 2.9 2.7 3.0 3.0 2.7

13 3.2 2.7 3.1 3.1 2.8

14 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.1 2.8

15 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.2 2.8

Average 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.4

Sum 37.7 37.6 38.2 38.2 36.3

Table 1.

One way of analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed the stem girth among the species was not significant

(F=0.2620, DF 74, P=0.9014) based on Turkeys test (t-test) the difference among the pays of means ofgrowth rate was statistical significant (P


20/33

DESCUSION.

The result showed that Legenaria cineria (larger) had the highest growth rate of all the species

within 15 weeks of experiment with the mean of 7.020 cm, thus mean Legenaria cineria (larger)

having significant correlations and considered to be a standard approach to study of plantgrowth and productivity directly influenced the economic yield and expected to produced high

product of biofuel, as the result show in the study of Ohwo, O.A. et al (2012), will represent the

most immediate and available response of coping with depleting oil reserves, meeting growing

energy demand in developing countries like TANZANIA.

The total result also show the performance of seedling growth rate of other species varieties

that follow after the Legenaria cineria (larger), the Legeneria cineria (small) with growth rate of

5.750 mean. Recinus communis (small) show minimum growth rate with 4.600 mesan. Recinus

communis speckled had growth rate of 3.100 mean. Legeneria cineria (cahabash) had the

smallest growth rate of all of the species with 15 weeks of experiment.

The result showed that Legenaria cineria (larger) had the highest number of leaves all the species

within 15 weeks of experiment with the mean of 8.733. Follow by the Legeneria cineria (small) with

number of leaves of 8.067 mean. Legeneria cineria (cahabash) show minimum number of leaves with

5.600 mesan. Recinus communis (speckled) had number of leaves of 5.267 mean. The number of leaves

considered extremely significance among the selected species members. Recinus communis (small) had

the smallest number of leaves of all of with the mean of 5.067 among the species within 15 weeks of

experiment, thus mean that Legenaria cineria (larger) show better performance than the among the

others species varieties.

Based on the number of nodes the result also shows extremely significance


21/33

CONCLUSION:

Biofuel production in tanzania must however, be carefully planned. Biofuel producing states should

invest in developing the agribusiness chain taking into consideration food security and other

environmental impacts especially in already deprived rural regions. Tanzania will essentially need to

build up her basic infrastructure to reap the benefits.In establishing biofuels industries, Tanzania would

also evaluate its impact on health and gender. At present, household use of traditional bioenergy

sources adversely affect the poor, especially women and children as unskilled wage labour. So biofuels

policy must ensure that this group benefit from the positive effects of such investments as well as the

political, economic and environmental effects of energy production. The potential to rapidly develop the

countrys rural areas and provide jobs and opportunities within these areas is huge and Tanzania with

her arable lands could easily surpass the two biggest producers of biofuel given the right infrastructure,

human and environmental management.


22/33

RECOMMENDATION:

Enhancement of the capacity of the nation to harness biofuels technologies to her advantage.One

example is to transfer to developing countriesresearch and technology that would facilitate the

development of biofuel Production facilities in rural communities. Western biofuel technologies, suited

to large-scale Industrial agriculture cannot easily be adapted to small-scale farming.


23/33

REFERENCE

1. Analysis Papers 2008 The S Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.(http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/aeo_/eisa.html)

2. Biofuels. Working Party on Agricultural Policies and Markets, Directorate for Food,Agriculture and Fisheries, Committee for Agriculture, Organization for Economic

Cooperation and Development, AGR/CA/APM(2005)24/FINAL, February 1.)

3. Biofuels: Policies, Standards and Technologies World Energy Council 2010.4. Campbell, A. & Doswald, N. (2009) The impact ofs of biofuel production on biodiversity:

a review of the current literature. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK

5. Chisti, y. (2008) biodiseal from microalgae beat bioethanol. Trends in biotechnology, 26,126-131

6. David T. Canvin, Formations of oil in the Seed ofRicinus communis L., Can. J. Physiol.7. Dove BIOTech Ltd. 2005 Castor Ben (Ricinus communis), an International Botanical

Answer to Biodiesel Production & Renewable Energy(www.dovebiotech.com).

8. E. P. Masomhe,. Dr. A.M.S.Nyomora (2012), An Assessment of Propagation Methodsfor Oilferous Plant Species with Potential for Biofuel Production.

1. Field,C.B., Campbell,J.E. & Lobell,D.B. (2008) Biomass energy: the scale of the potentialresource. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 23, 65-72.

2. Gallagher,E. (2008) The Gallagher Review of the indirect effects of biofuels production .Renewable Fuels Agency, UK

3. Gibbs,H.K., Johnston,M., Foley,J.A., Holloway,T., Monfreda,C., Ramankutty,N. & Zaks,D.(2008) Carbon payback times for crop-based biofuel expansion in the tropics: the effects

of changing yield and technology. Environmental ResearchLetters, 3.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/aeo_/eisa.htmlhttp://www.dovebiotech.com/http://www.dovebiotech.com/http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/aeo_/eisa.html


24/33

4. Gomez, K. A. and A. A. Gomez. Statistical procedures for agricultural research". J.

5. Gross,M. (2008) Algal biofuel hopes. Current Biology, 18, R46-R476. Hailman, JP, and KB Strier. 1997. Planning Proposing and Presenting Science Effectively:

A Guide for Graduate Students and Researchers in the Behavioral Sciences and Biology.

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 128pp.

7. Herro,A. (2008) Better than corn? Algae set to beat out other biofuel feedstocks. WorldWatch, 21, 4.

8. Luis F. Razon 2009,CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science,Nutrition and Natural Resources 2009 4, No. 056, Department of Chemical Engineering,

De La Salle University, 2401 Taft Avenue, Manila, The Philippines

9. Metzger,J.O. & Hutterman,A. (2008) Sustainable global energy supply based onlignocellulosic biomass from afforestation of degraded areas. Naturwissenschaften .

10.Miguel A. Carriquiry, Xiaodong Du,Govinda R Timilsina 2010. Second-GenerationBiofuels Economics and Policies. The World Bank Development Research Group

Environment and Energy Team August 2010. Policy Research Working Paper 5406.

11.Oakley, K,. Kester, S.T And Geneve, R.L (2004), computer aidil digital image analysis ofseedling size and growyh rate for assessing seed vigour in in impatiens. Seeds Sci. And

Technol,. 32, 907-915

12.Ohwo, O.A. et al (2012). Effects Of Crude Oil As A Soil Contaminant On SeedlingGrowth Of Jatropha Curcas

13.P. Tongoona, Castor (Ricinus communis L.) research and production prospects inZimbabwe, Industrial Crops and Products 1, no. 2-4 (December 1992): 235-239.7.

14.Paul B. Thompson, (2012). The Agricultural Ethics of Biofuels: The Food vs. Fuel Debate.Agriculture 2012, 2, 339-358; doi:10.3390/agriculture2040339.


25/33

15.Patil,V., Tran,K.Q. & Giselrod,H.R. (2008) Towards sustainable production of biofuelsfrom microalgae. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 9, 1188-1195.

16.Pechenik, JA. 2004. A Short Guide to Writing About Biology. Pearson Education Inc.,Boston, MA. 302pp. Pharmacol. 41(9): 1879-1885 (1963),

17.Tim Low & Carol Booth (2007), The Weedy Truth About Biofuels. Invasive SpeciesCouncil,Http://www. invasives.org.au.

18.S. D. Koutroubas, D. K. Papakosta, and A. Doitsinis, Water Requirements for Castor OilCrop (Ricinus communis L.) in a Mediterranean Climate, Journal of Agronomy and Crop

Science 184, no. 1 (2000): 33-41.

19.Solomon, B. D., Barnes, J. R., alvorsen K. E. (2007). Grain and cellulosic ethanol:istory, economics, and energy policy. Biomass and Bioenergy, 31(6), 416-425.

20.Vwioko, D E; Fashemi, D S. 2005 Growth Response ofRicinus communis L (Castor Oil) inSpent Lubricating Oil Polluted Soil. J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Mgt. 2005 Vol. 9 (2) 73 79.

21.Wiley and Sons, Singapore, 2nd Ed. (1984)207-322


26/33


27/33

3.1 4.5 3.1 3.4 2.6 4.1 3.0 3.0 2.3 2.1 3.1 31.2

7 5 6.9 8.6 9.4 7.9 7.8 7 5.7 7.9 7.3 73.2

1.9 0.6 2.5 1.2 1 2 3.1 4 4 2.5 2.3 22.8

5 3.4 1.2 1.1 1.8 1 1.3 1 1.9 1 1.9 18.7

1 0.5 2.3 0.7 1.5 1 1.5 2 2.8 1 1.4 14.3

2 2.5 5 7 5.7 6 5.6 3 6.3 7.5 5.1 50.6

0.5 5.5 4 3 3 2.5 1.7 4 1.3 2 2.8 27.5

1.8 5 2 1.5 1.4 1.5 2 2.3 1.7 2 2.1 21.2

1.7 0.5 1.7 1.9 1.5 2.3 2.3 1.9 1.9 2.1 1.8 17.8

4 2.8 3.5 2.8 2.3 4.7 1.1 1.9 4.3 6.3 3.4 33.7

2.2 1.1 2 0.9 2.2 1.5 1.8 0.9 1.3 2.4 1.6 16.3

0.9 1.1 1.2 1.1 0.5 0.7 1.1 1.9 1 0.2 1.0 9.7

1.6 1.4 1.3 3.7 1.4 2 2.4 2.4 1.4 1.8 1.9 19.4

1.7 1.6 0.6 1.3 1.6 2.1 1.1 2.9 1 1.3 1.5 15.2

1.2 1.8 2.9 1.8 2.6 2.1 3.5 1.9 0.5 1.8 2.0 20.1

A 2.4 2.5 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.8 2.6 2.7 2.5 2.8

S 35.6 37.3 40.2 40.0 38.5 41.4 39.3 40.1 37.4 41.9

SP Legenaria cinaria. L

R I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X A S

5.4 5.0 3.9 5.5 4.5 4.8 3.8 5.2 5.6 6.0 5.0 49.7

5.6 6.5 15.6 15.0 13.2 13.2 14.2 7.8 7.8 12.6 11.2 111.5

5.4 8.5 1.5 0.5 4.3 4.0 3.0 8.1 6.6 0.5 4.2 42.4

11.6 5.5 5.0 7.0 6.7 7.5 7.2 5.9 6.0 6.0 6.8 68.4


28/33

1.0 4.5 1.0 4.0 5.7 4.5 4.8 6.3 8.6 5.0 4.5 45.4

5.0 14.5 23.7 10.0 9.2 6.0 8.0 6.8 7.4 15.9 10.7 106.5

17.0 24.5 8.9 17.0 16.3 8.7 11.6 5.8 20.0 16.1 14.6 145.9

22.0 11.9 11.0 7.7 1.1 28.8 27.4 39.6 8.0 13.5 17.1 171.0

10.5 7.9 8.0 3.5 20.9 11.6 6.7 4.6 10.9 11.9 9.7 96.5

6.6 2.1 2.7 4.6 8.3 3.1 11.8 0.1 9.9 11.5 6.1 60.7

5.4 2.0 7.5 5.7 4.2 4.1 1.9 9.7 5.9 1.6 4.8 48.0

1.7 2.4 1.3 1.7 1.1 1.1 2.1 1.0 2.1 1.5 1.6 16.0

2.9 5.0 5.3 4.1 4.4 1.1 1.4 1.1 1.7 1.4 2.8 28.4

3.2 2.9 4.7 4.1 1.4 2.4 1.0 1.5 3.2 1.8 2.6 26.2

2.5 2.7 4.3 3.9 2.9 2.2 3.2 4.9 3.9 4.9 3.5 35.4

A 7.1 7.1 7.0 6.3 6.9 6.9 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.3

S 105.8 105.9 104.4 94.3 104.2 103.1 108.1 108.4 107.6 110.2

SP Recinus communis. SP


5.9 6.0 3.0 5.4 4.4 5.3 3.0 4.0 4.6 5.0 4.7 46.6

6.1 12.0 14.0 10.9 13.6 11.7 16.0 9.0 7.6 13.5 11.4 114.4

9.0 2.0 2.0 2.2 1.0 3.0 1.0 6.0 6.8 1.5 3.5 34.5

1.2 1.2 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.0 1.2 1.9 1.1 1.8 1.7 16.9

0.8 2.8 2.0 2.0 1.3 1.2 2.8 4.1 4.1 0.4 2.2 21.5

1.1 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.7 2.2 1.9 0.5 0.8 2.9 1.6 16.1

6.9 5.0 5.0 2.3 2.5 2.4 5.1 4.5 5.0 6.9 4.6 45.6

2.3 4.0 2.2 4.1 2.0 2.8 2.0 5.0 4.0 2.1 3.1 30.5


29/33

0.8 0.6 2.0 2.3 1.4 1.4 2.1 0.2 0.3 1.2 1.2 12.3

4.7 1.1 3.2 4.6 4.3 2.7 1.1 1.0 1.9 1.3 2.6 25.9

0.5 8.6 3.8 3.4 4.6 1.7 3.8 3.9 3.9 2.3 3.7 36.5

0.8 1.3 1.9 1.4 2.1 1.3 2.1 1.6 1.0 1.3 1.5 14.8

0.5 1.3 1.6 1.2 1.1 2.5 1.1 0.9 1.0 2.4 1.4 13.6

1.8 0.4 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.7 1.8 1.7 0.3 1.2 1.2 12.3

0.9 2.0 1.7 2.0 1.9 1.5 1.1 2.6 1.4 0.3 1.5 15.4

A 2.9 3.4 3.1 3.1 3.1 2.9 3.1 3.1 2.9 2.9

S 43.3 50.3 46.6 45.8 46.6 43.4 46.1 46.9 43.8 44.1


5.5 5.6 3.8 3.9 4.3 5.0 3.5 6.1 5.4 4.4 4.8 47.5

10.5 9.9 7.7 12.7 8.2 8.0 11.0 7.2 7.6 7.6 9.0 90.4

1.0 2.8 6.5 1.9 2.5 3.0 0.5 2.1 2.5 4.0 2.7 26.8

2.5 2.7 1.0 0.5 2.0 2.3 6.0 3.5 3.6 3.0 2.7 27.1

3.5 3.1 4.0 3.6 5.0 4.9 3.0 1.1 1.9 3.0 3.3 33.1

3.0 1.2 7.0 4.4 7.0 3.8 1.0 4.0 2.0 2.9 3.6 36.3

1.0 5.7 2.3 3.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 6.0 7.0 2.1 3.2 32.1

3.0 2.3 1.6 3.3 2.0 1.3 3.0 1.2 1.1 3.3 2.2 22.1

5.0 5.3 2.6 3.4 1.5 1.7 3.4 4.1 1.9 1.8 3.1 30.7

1.4 1.6 2.3 1.1 2.0 1.8 0.6 1.3 1.5 5.6 1.9 19.2

0.6 1.0 1.3 0.6 2.2 3.0 2.7 1.8 2.0 1.1 1.6 16.3

1.1 1.0 2.8 1.7 2.5 3.2 1.8 1.7 2.8 1.5 2.0 20.1


30/33

1.1 1.6 1.0 2.4 1.1 2.0 1.7 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.6 15.5

1.3 1.8 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.5 1.9 2.1 0.3 1.3 1.4 13.6

2.1 1.3 0.4 1.2 0.7 1.3 2.0 1.4 2.6 1.3 1.4 14.3

A 2.8 3.1 3.0 3.0 2.9 3.0 2.9 3.0 2.9 3.0

S 42.6 46.9 45.3 44.7 43.4 44.8 44.1 44.9 43.8 44.6

Stem

Species

varieties

Legenaria

cineria. S

Legenaria

cineria. C

Legenaria

cinaria. L

Recinus

communis. SP

Recinus

communis. SM

average average average average average

1.74 2 1.97 1.96 2

2 2 2.00 2.00 2

2 2 2.00 2.00 2

2 2 2.31 2.30 2

2.4 2.58 2.44 2.44 2.36

2.41 2.58 2.44 2.44 2.36

2.41 2.58 2.45 2.45 2.46

2.47 2.58 2.45 2.46 2.46

2.47 2.59 2.46 2.46 2.46

2.48 2.59 2.69 2.66 2.46

2.81 2.59 2.73 2.71 2.73


31/33

2.86 2.69 3.01 3.01 2.73

3.22 2.69 3.05 3.06 2.76

3.22 3.08 3.10 3.12 2.78

3.22 3.08 3.15 3.15 2.78

AV 2.51 2.51 2.55 2.55 2.42

SUM 37.7 37.6 38.2 38.2 36.3

Number of leave table.

Species

varieties

Legenaria

cineria. S

Legenaria

cineria. C

Legenaria

cinaria. L

Recinus

communis. SP

Recinus

communis. SM


2 2 2 2 2

4 4 4 4 4

4 4 5 6 4

6 4 8 6 4

6 4 9 8 8

8 7 9 5 5

6 4 7 5 5

8 6 7 4 5

8 6 8 4 5

10 7 10 6 6

12 8 12 7 5

12 8 11 5 6


32/33

11 6 13 6 6

12 7 13 6 6

12 7 13 5 5

AV 8.0667 5.6000 8.7333 5.2667 5.0667

SUM 121 84 131 79 76

Number of nodes

Species

varieties

Legenaria

cineria. S

Legenaria

cineria. C

Legenaria

cinaria. L

Recinus

communis. SP

Recinus

communis. SM


0 0 0 0 0

2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 2 3

3 3 3 2 3

4 4 5 3 4

4 4 8 3 4

6 5 9 5 5

8 6 9 6 5

8 7 10 6 5

9 7 11 7 6

9 8 11 7 6

10 8 11 7 6

10 8 11 7 6


33/33

10 8 12 7 6

11 8 12 8 7

A 97 81 117 72 68

S 6.47 5.40 7.80 4.80 4.53

Documents

Project Modification