YIELD AND BEAN SIZE OF COFFEA ARABICA (CV CATUAÍ)

CULTIVED UNDER DIFFERENT POPULATION ARRANGEMENTS

AND WATER AVAILABILITY

Eduardo A. A. Barbosa1, Emilio Sakai2, Jane M. C. Silveira3, Regina C. M. Pires2

1
Ph.D. Student in Agricultural Engineering, FEAGRI/UNICAMP, Campinas – SP;
2
Researcher, D.Sc, (IAC/APTA), Campinas –SP; 3Researcher, D.Sc, APTA Regional
Nordeste Paulista, Mococa –SP.

Abstract: The purpose of this research was to evaluate the effect of drip irrigation under
different population arrangements on coffee productivity and bean size classification
according to sieve retention of two harvests (2008/2009 and 2009/2010). The experiment
with Coffea arabica L. cv Catuaí was carried out in Mococa, São Paulo, Brazil. The
experimental design was a 6 x 2 factorial scheme in randomized blocks, with four
replications. The six densities of plantation were E1 (1.60 x 0.50); E2 (1.60 x 0.75); E3 (1.60
x 1.00); E4 (3.20 x 0.50); E5 (3.20 x 0.75) and E6 (3.20 x 1.00), which were divided in
irrigated and non-irrigated groups. Data were submitted to analysis of variance and averages
compared by Tukey test at 1 and 5% of probability. In the first two years of Catuaí coffee
crop cultivation, the adoption of irrigation was more advantageous in denser crops, ensuring
higher production of processed coffee. In the first years the adoption of irrigation technique
provided an increase in bean size. In this cycle the average temperatures during the grain
filling stage, were lower than the observed temperatures in the 2009/2010 crop cycle. When
there was high water availability due to the rain, irrigation did not affected grain size and
grain type, but when there was low water availability, the adoption of irrigation technique
increased grain size. In the first year, the cultivation without irrigation had a higher
percentage of peaberry beans in relation to irrigate group. The production of peaberries is
partially related to adverse environmental factors, mainly in the flowering and fruiting. So
appropriate management of irrigation in these phases provided better conditions for the
formation of beans, thus reducing the percentage of peaberries.
Keyword: Drip irrigation, Plant density, Fertigation

1. Introduction
The adoption of irrigation in coffee crop is becoming increasingly common (Rezende et al.
2006) due to increases in grain yield provided by the technique, since the soil water deficit is
a main factor that affects the productivity of coffee (DaMatta & Ramalho, 2006). Other benefit
of irrigation system is to allow a lower dependence on climatic factors. In Brazil, according to
the study of Esperancini and Paes (2005), adoption of drip irrigation has been shown as
economically viable.
The adequate water supply to plants favors photosynthesis and therefore greater availability
of assimilates to fill the coffee beans (Barros et al 1997). In the culture of coffee, studies on
the use of irrigation show different effects on grain size. Rezende et al. (2006) and Silva et al.
(2009) found effect on the average sieve with the use of irrigation and Custodio et al (2007),
analyzing five seasons, found no effect of irrigation in four seasons. Another advantage of
irrigation in coffee is the synchronization of flowering, allowing a more uniform ripening of the
grains (Masarirambi, 2009).
Studies related to population arrangements in irrigated crops are essential for a greater
maximization of production and use of natural resources. Esperancini and Paes (2005) found
that the denser culture system, the best economic results when using drip irrigation. Thus,
the purpose of this research was to evaluate the effect of drip irrigation under different
population arrangements on coffee grain yield and grain size classification according to sieve
retention of two harvests (2008/2009 and 2009/2010).

2. Material and Methods

The experiment was carried out in the Agribusiness Technological Development Cluster of
Northeast of São Paulo State, located at latitude 21°28'S, longitude 47°00'W and altitude 663
m. The climate according to Köppen is Cwa, featuring dry winters and warm and wet
summers. Seedlings of Coffea arabica L. cultivar Yellow Catuaí were transplanted between
March 6th and 7th, 2006, and the 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 crop cycles were assessed.
The experimental design was a 6 x 2 factorial scheme in randomized blocks, with four
replications. The six densities of plantation were E1 (1.60 x 0.50); E2 (1.60 x 0.75); E3 (1.60
x 1.00); E4 (3.20 x 0.50); E5 (3.20 x 0.75) and E6 (3.20 x 1.00), corresponding to 12,500;
8,333; 6,250; 6,250; 4,127 and 3,125 plants ha-1, respectively, which were divided according
to the availability of water (irrigated – I – or non-irrigated – NI – groups).
Fertilization was performed according to Bulletin 200 of the Campinas Agronomic Institute
(Fazuolli et al. 1998) based on the result of the soil chemical analysis. Fertirrigation was
performed once a week, except during water restriction period (July-August). In the non-
irrigated treatments, three applications were manually performed, along with the rainy
months (October, November and January).
Meteorological data were daily collected from the Automatic Weather Station located
approximately 500 m from the experimental area.

300 30
Precipitation (mm)

250 25

200 20 Temperature (ºC)

150 15

100 10

50 5

0 0

Date (Month - years)

Precipitation Average air temperature

Figura 1 - Monthly distribution of precipitation and average air temperature, during the two years of cultivation
of coffee in Mococa-SP, Brazil.

The amount of water applied depended on the irrigation interval, the climatic demand
(reference evapotranspiration), undertaken by the Penman-Monteith method, and the
estimated crop evapotranspiration, according to Allen et al. (1998). Irrigation was suspended
for 60 days during July and August for the imposition of water deficit, in order to promote
uniformity of flowering. The irrigation system was surface drip irrigation, with emitter flow rate
of 2.3 l h-1 and emitter spacing of 0.50 m.
The harvest of irrigated coffee was performed on April and that of non-irrigated one on June.
The early harvest in the irrigated group was due to the early fruit maturation. The crop was
harvested in a sieve thus preventing fruit falling on the ground. The processing of freshly
harvested coffee was done using the conventional terrace drying method. The production of
coffee cherries from each plant was stored separately in nylon bags and let it dry in the sun,
constantly revolving throughout the day. After 45 days of drying, the husk and parchment
were removed.
Values of the average sieve were determined in samples of 100 grams of processed coffee
per treatment. After removal of the endocarp, the flat beans were separated through a set of
sieves, with round opening between 23 and 12, and the peaberry beans were retained on
sieve 11. The types of beans (flat and peaberry) retained on the sieves were weighed on
precision balance for further statistic analysis.
Data regarding production of processed coffee, average sieve and type of beans were
subjected to analysis of variance followed by Tukey test at 1 and 5% of probability.

3. Results and Discussion

The yield of processed coffee was significantly affected by different population arrangements
(p> 0.05) and use of irrigation (p> 0.01) in the two cycles. In the cycle 2008/2009 the
interaction between population arrangement x irrigation was statistically significant (p> 0.01),
as shown in Table 1.

Table 1 - Analysis of variance for yield of processed coffee cv. Catuaí, cultivated in different
population arrangements (PA), with or without irrigation, in 2008/2009 harvest, in Mococa – SP, Brazil.
-1
Yield of processed coffee (kg ha )
2008/2009 2009/2010
E1 - 1.60 x 0.50 2979 a 4631 a
E2 - 1.60 x 0.75 3173 a 4201 ab
Population E3 - 1.60 x 1.00 2894 a 3590 ab
arrangements
(m) E4 - 3.20 x 0.50 1627 b 3463 b
E5 - 3.20 x 0.75 1835 b 3287 bc
E6 - 3.20 x 1.00 1373 b 2268 c
F test for PA 25** 10.3**
With 3775 a 4162 a
Irrigation
Without 853 b 2985 b
F test for I 517** 32.3**
ns
F test for I x PA 10** 1.03
C.V.% 19.23 20.1
General mean 2314 3574
* Significant at 5% of probability; ** Significant at 1% of probability; ns – non
significant. S.A.D = Significant average deviation; C.V. = Coefficient of variation.

In cycle 2008/2009 the treatments with 1.60 m spacing between rows presented significant
differences when compared with the treatments with spacing of 3.20 m, irrespective of
spacing between plants. Coffee trees cultivated in 1.60 m spacing had a 46.5% higher
average productivity than those cultivated in 3.20 m spacing. In this cycle, despite the similar
planting density in E3 and E4 arrangements (6,250 plants ha-1), E3 treatment showed higher
productivity of processed coffee (approximately 44%) when compared with E4, indicating that
the spacing between rows has greater influence on productivity than the spacing among
plants, in the cycle 2008/2009.
In the cycle 2009/2010 the treatment E1 had the highest yield of processed coffee (4,631 kg
ha-1), differing from the yield obtained by the treatments E4, E5 and E6. The productivity of
E1 was approximately two times higher than that obtained in E6. The treatments E6 showed
small yield of processed coffee (2,268 Kg ha-1), and was not statistically different only from
treatment E5. Moreira et al. (2004) found significant effects of the spacing between planting
rows on Mundo Novo coffee tree productivity; the authors observed that the treatments with
smaller spacing showed the highest productivity of processed coffee.
In the irrigated crop, in the cycle 2008/2009 an average productivity of 3775 kg ha-1 was
observed, representing an increase of 77% when compared to non-irrigated treatment. This
value in productivity of processed coffee represented an increment of 49 bags ha-1 in the
irrigated plants. In the cycle 2009/2010 the irrigated coffee showed higher production of
processed coffee (4162 kg ha-1) in relation to rainfed cultivation (2985 kg ha-1), with an
increase of approximately 19 bags ha-1 for irrigated crops.
Increases in coffee yield by the use of irrigation have been reported by several authors in
recent years as Silva et al. (2005) and Rezende et al. (2006). Soil water deficit decreases
yield due to the reduction in steam flow and transpiration, and consequently the absorption of
water and nutrients by the root system and CO2 by leaves, thus affecting photosynthesis
(DaMatta & Ramalho, 2006).
The result of interaction between population arrangement and irrigation, in the cycle
2008/2009, revealed that the irrigated coffee trees, cultivated at spacing of 1.6 m between
planting rows, had higher productivity (47%) of processed coffee when compared with those
cultivated at spacing of 3.2 m between rows (p <0.01) (Table 2). Within each spacing, the
irrigation provided significant effects in every population arrangements (p > 0.01). A 74-82%
increase in productivity was observed with the irrigated plants when compared with the non-
irrigated coffee trees. These findings highlight the benefit of irrigation in coffee plantation,
improving productivity irrespective of the adopted spacing.

Table 2 – Yield of processed coffee according to the adoption of irrigation in different population
arrangement as well as of every population arrangement according to the adoption of irrigation in the
2008/2009 harvest, in Mococa - SP.
Productivity of processed coffee
Population (kg ha )
-1
arrangement
Irrigation F test
(m)
With Without
ns
F test 33.4** 1,8
E1 - 1.60 x 0.50 4995 a A 963 a B 164**
E2 -1.60 x 0.75 5109 a A 1238 a B 151**
E3 - 1.60 x 1.00 4675 a A 1113 a B 128**
E4 - 3.20 x 0.50 2577 b A 678 a B 36**
E5 - 3.20 x 0.75 2965 b A 706 a B 52**
E6 - 3.20 x 1.00 2326 b A 421 a B 37**
* Significant at 5% of probability; ** Significant at 1% of probability; ns
– non significant. Lower cases represent average values in the column
and upper cases represent average values in the row.

The values of average sieve were not altered significantly (p> 0.05) by population
arrangements in the crop cycles. The irrigation provided significant effect in grain size (p>
0.05) in the crop cycle 2008/2009. The grains of irrigated group were higher than those of
non-irrigated cultivation (Table 3). Rezende et al. (2006) and Silva et al. (2009) reported that
there was increase in the size of the coffee beans through the use of irrigation. In the crop
cycle 2009/2010, there was no effect of irrigation on average sieve of grains.
Table 3 – Analysis of variance for average sieve and type of Catuaí coffee bean (flat or peaberry),
cultivated in different population arrangements (PA), with or without irrigation, in 2008/2009 harvest, in
Mococa – SP.
Cycles
2008/2009 2009/2010
Average Type of bean Average Type of bean
sieve Flat Peaberry sieve Flat Peaberry
E1 18.4 66.6 ab 16.5 16.9 77.9 abc 8.5 ab
E2 18.2 63.4 b 18.9 16.8 74.5 bc 11.0 a
Population E3 18.1 63.8 ab 17.7 16.7 73.9 c 11.0 a
arrangements (m) E4 18.1 68.7 ab 16.9 16.8 80.0 a 7.2 b
E5 18.2 69.8 a 15.6 16.8 79.9 ab 7.7 ab
E6 17.6 67.4 ab 16.9 16.7 76.9 abc 8.9 ab
ns ns
F test – PA 2.47 2.98* 0.78 0.19 4.2* 4.4*
Irrigation With 18.8 a 67.6 12.3 b 16.8 76.0 b 9.3
Without 17.4 b 65.7 21.8 a 16.8 78.3 a 8.7
ns ns ns
F test – I 99.7* 2.57 83.5* 0.19 5.2* 0.92
ns ns ns ns ns ns
Teste F - I x AP 0.65 0.62 1.21 1.08 0.40 0.79
CV % 2.72 6.28 21.1 1.47 4.66 24.2
General mean 18.1 66.6 17 16.8 77.2 9.0
** Significant at 1% of probability by Tukey test. * Significant at 5% of probability by Tukey test.. SAD = Significant
average deviation; CV = Coefficient of variation.

The amount of water available by precipitation, in the phase of grain formation, was higher
during cycle 2009/2010, with a rainfall of 886 mm, while in the previous cycle it rained 461
mm. The largest volume of water made available by the rains, certainly promoted a grain
filling of plants cultivated without irrigation similar to irrigated plants. To DaMatta & Ramalho
(2006) water deficit in the pellet-like berries (October-December) delays fruit growth,
resulting in smaller sieve. The good water supply provides better conditions for plant growth,
reflecting a greater capacity for grain filling, obtaining a higher grain formation, because the
water is directly involved in cell expansion and also the transport of assimilates from leaves
to fruits, causing an increase of the grains. There was no effect of the interaction between
irrigation and population arrangement in the average sieve in both years.
The type of flat bean was significantly altered by the arrangement of population (p> 0.05) in
both crop cycles. In general, the plants cultivated in a 1.60 m between the rows had lower
values than the flat bean plants cultivated in a 3.20 m (Table 3). The use of drip irrigation in
2008/2009 cycle was not significant for flat bean, in contrast to the cycle 2009/2010, when
there was a significant effect (p> 0.05) of the use of irrigation on flat type grain. There was no
effect of irrigation, or the interaction of irrigation and population arrangement on the formation
of flat bean.
Peaberry bean was not influenced by the population arrangement in the cycle 2008/2009
(Table 3). The percentage of peaberry beans in the population arrangements is above the
acceptable values for exports (12%), and may be related to the adverse environmental
effects, such as the high temperature during flowering. Pezzopane et al. (2007) verified that
an average air temperature close to 24ºC provided high productivity of peaberry beans,
which affected the quality of beans. In the experiment, flowering occurred at 25º C during
September/October, as illustrated in Figure 1. In the cycle 2009/2010 the population
arrangement provided effect significantly in the peaberry bean, with less percentage in
treatment E4 when compared with treatment E2 and E3.
In the cycle 2008/2009 the coffee irrigated showed the production of peaberry beans was
very close to the accepted values for exports (Table 3), and differed significantly (p> 0.01)
from the non-irrigated group, which presented great amounts of peaberry beans (21.8%). As
previously stated, the production of peaberries is partially related to adverse environmental
factors, mainly in the flowering and fruiting. In the cycle 2009/2010 the irrigation and the
interaction of irrigation and population arrangement did not provide significant effect in the
peaberry beans. Custódio et al. (2007) did not observe effect in the peaberry beans of coffee
during five years of irrigation .

4. Conclusions
In both years of Catuaí coffee crop cultivation, the adoption of irrigation was more
advantageous in denser crops, ensuring higher production of processed coffee.
The population arrangement did not affect the average sieve of coffee in both cycles, and the
adoption of irrigation technique provided an increase in grain size in 2008/2009 crop cycle .

5. Reference list
Allen, R. G.; Pereira, L. S.; Raes, D.; Smith, M. Crop evapotranspiration – guidelines for
computing crop water requirements. Irrigation and Drainage, Roma: FAO. 1998. 300p.
Barros, R. S.; MOTA, J. W. S.; DaMatta, F. M.; MAESTRI, M. (1997). Decline of vegetative
growth in Coffea arabica L. in relation to leaf temperature, water potential and stomatal
conductance. Field Crops Research, 54, 65-72.
Custódio, A. A. P.; Gomes, N. M.; Lima, L. A. (2007). Irrigation effect on coffee beans
classification. Engenharia Agrícola, 27, 691-701. (In Portuguese, with abstract in English).
Esperancini, M. S. T.; Paes, A. R. (2005). Investment analysis for the production of coffee
irrigated and conventional systems, in region of Botucatu, State of São Paulo. Informações
Econômicas, 35, 52-60. (In Portuguese)
Fazuolli, L.C.; Gallo, P.B.; Cervellini, G.J.; Barros, I.; Van Raij, B. (1998). Coffee. In: J. I.
Fahl.; M. B. P. Camargo; M. A. P. Pizzinato; J. A. Betti; A. M. Melos; I. C. de Maria; A. M. C.
Furlani (Eds.). Instructions to the Principal Agricultural Crops - Bulletin 200. (396p.) 6° ed.
Campinas: Agronomic Institute of Campinas. (In Portuguese).
Masarirambi, M. T., Chingwara, V., Shongwe, V. D. (2009). The effect of irrigation on
synchronization of coffee (Coffea arabica l.) flowering and berry ripening at Chipinge,
Zimbabwe. Physics and chemistry of the earth, 34, 786-789.
Moreira, R. C.; Furlani Junior, E.; Hernandez, F. B. T.; Furlani, R. C. M. (2004) Spacing to
coffee (Coffea arábica L.) with and without use of irrigation. Acta Scientiarium Agronomy, 26,
73-78. (In Portuguese, with abstract in English).
Pezzopane, J. R. M.; Pedro Júnior, M. J.; Gallo, P. B.; Camargo, M. B. P.; Fazuoli, L. C.
(2007). Phenological and agronomic evaluations in a coffee crop grown under unshaded and
shaded by 'Prata Anã' banana plants. Bragantia, 66, 527-533. (In Portuguese, with abstract
in English).
Rezende, F. C.; Oliveira, S. R.; Faria, M. A.; Arantes, K. R. (2006) Productivity
characteristics of pruned drip irrigated arabica coffee plants (Coffea arabica L., cv. topázio
MG -1190). Coffee Science, 1, 103-110. (In Portuguese, with abstract in English).
Silva, A. M.; Coelho, G.; Silva, R. A. (2005). Irrigation timing and split application of fertilizer
on productivity of the coffee plant in 4 harvests. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e
Ambiental, 9, 314-319. (In Portuguese, with abstract in English).
Silva, E.A.; brunini, O.; Sakai, E.; Arruda, F.B.; Pires, R.C.M. (2009). Influence of controlled
water deficits on flowering synchronization and yield of coffee under three distinct edapho-
climatic conditions of São Paulo State, Brazil. bragantia, 68, 493-501. (In Portuguese, with
abstract in English).