
This scientic publication in digital format is a continuation of the Printed Review: Legal Deposit pp 196802ZU42, ISSN 0378-7818.
Bernal-Margfoy et al. Rev. Fac. Agron. (LUZ). 2022, 39(4): e2239495-5 |
Once the modelling process has concluded and the adequacy 
of the modelling is clearly appreciated respecting the nature of the 
variables, it can be statistically asserted that the planting density 
factor explains the numbers for all the sizes evaluated, corroborated 
by different authors like Escobar and Zaag (1988), where an increase 
in the sowing density from 40,000 to 100,000 plants per hectare  
increased  the  yield  by  50%;  but  smaller  tubers  were  generated, 
interpreted as an effect of the density on the size of the tubers.
The results of table 6 suggest the need to use low planting 
densities (fewer plants per hectare) if the market requires larger 
tubers. However, this is accompanied by low yields that will most 
likely be offset by higher costs when selecting tubers by size. Note 
that average tubers per plant is reduced by almost 130% in the two 
extreme densities. Additionally, in the rst density for every 27 tubers 
of the two largest sizes approximately 104 of the smaller sizes are 
generated (almost 4:1), whereas in the lowest density the ratio is 
approximately 3:1 ((33+32).(20+1))
-1
.
Table 6. Distribution of fresh weight (t.ha
-1
), mean of tubers 
per plant and ratios of generated tuber by size in each 
density.
Density
Fresh weight 
(t.ha
-1
)
Tubers.plant
-1
Ratio
d1:(30cm*100cm) 10.77 18.4 52:52:26:1
d2:(40cm*100cm) 8.20 11.4 38:40:20:1
d3:(50cm*100cm) 5.37 8.1 33:32:20:1
Tuberization in potatoes involves the differentiation of stolon 
in young tubers (initiation) and the collection of young tubers (Dutt 
et al. 2017). Competition for resources at high densities can affect 
tuberization by reducing the number of starting tubers (Mackerron et 
al. 1988). In addition, these resourced-related stresses (for example 
water) can reduce tuber lling with assimilated tubers in the plant’s 
growth phase (Lahlou et al. 2003). In both cases, the result in a 
reduction in tuber yield.
Marketable tuber yield depends on the average tuber size, that is, 
both the total tuber weight and the total number of tubers. Therefore, 
cultivars that produce fewer tubers in drought-prone areas are 
recommended. If you have a smaller number of tubers, it is more 
likely that they are larger when the photo-assimilated are limited 
during drought, thus increasing their average size (Aliche et al. 2019)
The  negative  binomial  distribution  or  zero-inated  negative 
binomial model can provide information on the marketable proportion 
of tuber yields. However, not much research has been conducted 
towards understanding  the underlying reason for the model 
parameters that describe total and marketable tuber size distribution, 
although it seems to be associated with the number and size of tubers  
under quantitative inheritance (Celis-Gamboa, 2002). Despite this, 
the relationship between the density of seeding and the count of 
tubers by size was evident and can be used to direct the production in 
favour of generating the sizes required by the market.
Conclusions
In sizes less than 4 cm adjusting negative binomial models without 
excess zeros found that the terms associated with the planting density 
were more appropriate to show the statistical relationship between the 
density of the seedlings and the number of tubers. Similarly, in sizes 
greater than 4 cm adjusting negative binomial models with excess 
zeros showed the terms associated with the sowing density were the 
ones with the best statistical adjustment. So, it can be statistically 
asserted that sowing density inuences the number of tubers in larger 
sizes.
Larger tuber sizes were associated with lower planting density, 
but this was associated with lower yields, suggesting that there is a 
yield penalty in the interest of improving tuber sizes.
Literature cited
Aliche, E. B., Oortwijn, M., Theeuwen, T. P. J. M., Bachem, C. W. B., van Eck, H. 
J., Visser, R. G. F. & van der Linden, C. G. (2019). Genetic mapping of 
tuber size distribution and marketable tuber yield under drought stress in 
potatoes. Euphytica, 215(11). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-019-2508-0
Arias, V., Bustos, P. & Ñustez, C. E. (1996). Evaluation of the yield in 
papa criolla (Solanum phureja Juz. et BUk.), «yema de Huevo» variety, under 
different densities at Sabana de Bogotá. Revista Agronomía Colombiana, 
13(2), 152-161. https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/agrocol/article/
view/25442
Barragán, J. N. (2019). Desempeño y perspectivas económicas del subsector papa 
2018-2019. Revista Papa (47), 44-48.
Celis-Gamboa, B. C. (s. f.). The life cycle of the potato (Solatium tuberosum L.): 
From crop physiology to genetics [Ph.D. Thesis]. Wageningen University. 
https://www.proquest.com/openview/96d595f31eaa4257cbf73c2041988
475/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=2026366&diss=y
Cotes, J. M., Ñústez, C. E. & Pachón, J. I. (2000). Evaluación de la densidad de 
siembra y el tamaño del tubérculo semilla en la producción de semilla 
básica de papa criolla, variedad yema de huevo (Solanum phureja Juz et 
Buk.). Revista Agronomía Colombiana, 17(1-3), 57-60. https://revistas.
unal.edu.co/index.php/agrocol/article/view/21546/22550
Dutt, S., Manjul, A. S., Raigond, P., Singh, B., Siddappa, S., Bhardwaj, V., Kawar, 
P. G., Patil, V. U. & Kardile, H. B. (2017). Key players associated with 
tuberization in potato: potential candidates for genetic engineering. 
Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 37(7), 942-957. https://doi.org/10.108
0/07388551.2016.1274876
Escobar, V. and Vander Zaag, P. (1988). Field performance of potato (Solanum 
spp.) cuttings in the warm tropics: Inuence of planting system, hilling, 
density and pruning. American Potato Journal, 65(1), 1-10. https://doi.
org/10.1007/bf02855308
He, W., Struik, P. C., He, Q. & Zhang, X. (1998). Planting Time and Seed Density 
Effects on Potato in Subtropical China. Journal of Agronomy and Crop 
Science,  180(3), 159-171. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037x.1998.
tb00386.x
Henne, D. C., Workneh, F. & Rush, C. M. (2012). Spatial Patterns and Spread of 
Potato Zebra Chip Disease in the Texas Panhandle. Plant Disease, 96(7), 
948-956. https://doi.org/10.1094/pdis-09-11-0805-re. 
Hilbe, J. M. (2014). Modeling Count Data. Cambridge University Press. https://
doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139236065
Lahlou, O., Ouattar, S. & Ledent, J. F. (2003, abril). The effect of drought and 
cultivar on growth parameters, yield and yield components of potato. 
Agronomie, 23(3), 257-268. https://doi.org/10.1051/agro:2002089
R Core Team (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R 
Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
Rodríguez Pérez, L., Corchuelo Rozo, G. & Ñústez, C. E. (2003). The inuence 
of plant spacing on potato (Solanum tuberosum L. cv. Parda pastusa) 
morphology and growth in two contrasting environments. Revista 
Agronomía Colombiana, 21(3), 210-21. http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.
oa?id=180317974010
Struik, P. C., Haverkort, A. J., Vreugdenhil, D., Bus, C. B. & Dankert, R. (1990). 
Manipulation of tuber-size distribution of a potato crop. Potato Research, 
33(4), 417-432. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02358019
Tabares Patiño, E. D., Jaramillo Villegas, S., González Santamaría, L. H. & Cotes 
Torres, J. M. (2009). Effect of fertilization in potato (Solanum tuberosum 
L.) DIACOL Capiro variety under Andisol from EAST Antioquia, 
COLOMBIA.  Revista Facultad Nacional de Agronomía - Medellín, 
62(2), 5099-5110. http://www.scielo.org.co/pdf/rfnam/v62n2/a09v62n2.
pdf
van der Veeken, A. J. H. and Lommen, W. J. M. (2009). How Planting Density 
Affects Number and Yield of Potato Minitubers in a Commercial 
Glasshouse Production System. Potato Research, 52(2), 105-119. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11540-008-9124-z
Wasserstein, R. L. & Lazar, N. A. (2016). The ASA Statement on p-Values: 
Context, Process, and Purpose. The American Statistician,  70(2), 129-
133. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108