Growth Response of Cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) Varieties to Different Soil Amendments Combined With Inorganic Fertilizers


  • Enrique Jr Binas Iloilo State College of Fisheries, San Enrique, Iloilo, 5036 Philippines.
  • Filmar T. Bucan Jose Rizal Memorial State University, Tampilisan, Zamboanga del Norte, 7116, Philippines


animal manure, application of the combined organic and inorganic fertilizer, growth increment, inorganic fertilizer, nutrient management, soil nutrient enhancement


Cacao is essential because of its high domestic and foreign demand. Nutrient supply to cacao varieties is required to enhance their growth. Thus, this study was conducted to assess the growth response of four NSIC-approved cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) varieties: ICSS 40, UF 18, BR 25, and K 2 to chicken dung and vermicompost combined with inorganic fertilizer. An area of 1,620 m2 was laid out in a 4 x 3 factorial experiment adopting the Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three (3) replications. The existing Cacao plants were used in the experiment. Cacao varieties (V1 - ICS 40, V2 - UF 18, V3 - BR 25, and V4 - K 2) were designated as factor A, while soil amendments (A0 – inorganic fertilizer alone, A1 - chicken dung + complete fertilizer, and A2 – vermicompost + complete fertilizer) were as factor B. The application of both chicken and vermicompost + complete fertilizers gave a significantly tall, number of leaves and branches of cacao varieties than the application of inorganic fertilizers alone. The BR 25 variety applied with chicken dung + inorganic fertilizer (T8) had significantly performed in terms of stem girth 90 days after the application of treatments. The BR 25 + chicken dung + complete fertilizer (T8) and ICS 40 applied with chicken dung + complete fertilizers (T2) treatment combinations are the best for growth.




How to Cite

Binas, E. J., & T. Bucan, F. (2022). Growth Response of Cacao (Theobroma cacao L.) Varieties to Different Soil Amendments Combined With Inorganic Fertilizers. Journal of Current Opinion in Crop Science, 3(4), 177–182. Retrieved from



Research Article