p. 535−542
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 543−553
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 554−566
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 567−573
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 574−581
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 582−596
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 597−604
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
30 g were significantly different for farm ages at 0.01 level and in 14.1 to 16 g at 0.05 level. Mean of corm numbers per square meter was 55, 65, 71, 128, 152, 151, 184, and 248 for 1 year to 8 years old fields, respectively. The highest percentage of corms bigger than 8 g and more in the 3 years field which one effective in flower production was 59 percent. There was a positive correlation between corm diameter and corm weight (r2=0. 98).]]>
p. 605−612
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 613−620
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 621−631
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 632−640
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 641−648
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 649−657
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 658−664
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 665−676
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 677−682
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 683−692
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 693−703
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 704−717
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 718−726
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 727−737
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 738−750
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 751−765
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 766−775
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 776−783
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 784−792
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 793−804
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 805−812
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 813−821
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 822−833
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 834−840
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 841−851
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 852−861
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4
p. 862−870
2423-3978
Vol.12/No.4