Conventional Plant Care Practices and Automated Plant Pot Prototype in

Urban Gardening

Clark S. Basoc, John Flourenz O. Baga, Grean S. Barinque, Kimberly Calderon,

Maica D. Gementiza, Krizsha Marie S. Mateo, Gleanz Rhajyn G. Ombajin,
Rommel Valdez, John Soujie O. Villamor
Mintal Comprehensive High School, Mintal, Davao City, Philippines

Timoteo L. Corpuz Jr., Alex Gabriel Dagatan- Research Adviser

ABSTRACT
This study explored the differences in the plant growth between plants under
conventional plant care and under the automated plant pot prototype. To test this,
the researchers performed three trials with five samples of ice cabbage (Brassica
rapa) per group per trial, a total of 15 plants under the plant pot prototype or the
experimental group and another 15 under the conventional plant care or the
controlled group. The findings suggests that there is a significant difference in terms
of plant weight after a week of observation. There is also a significant difference for
the first 2 trials in terms of the root length; however, the plant length did not show
any significant difference. As for the water consumption, the controlled group’s water
consumption is greater compared to that of the experimental group.

Keywords: Arduino Uno, Automated Plant Pot Prototype, Plant Growth, Automatic Irrigation system

INTRODUCTION
The pandemic has caused a surge of the plantita/plantito. Gardening has

become a common hobby amongst people in the country (Sunga & Advincula,

2021). However, as the country is slowly opening things up and slowly, more and

more companies are requiring employees to report more often, this entails that the

plantitas/plantitos will have a lot more on their plates rather than maintaining the

home gardens. As the years go on, Davao City is aiming to further modernize its

infrastructure. According to the Regional Physical Framework Plan by NEDA XI, the

goal is to fully modernize the city by 2045, with a projected 60% growth in

population. With these predictions, land areas in the city can lessen, hence a growth

in Urban Gardening is expected. Various technologies have made agriculture have

lesser labor work. One of these said systems is the water irrigation system, with this,

various systems that can be done at home have expanded. The accessibility of
Arduino kits has opened the door for automatic water systems that automatically

waters a pot once dry soil moisture is detected. The idea behind an automated

system opens a bigger door for expansion to make home gardening easier. There

are a lot of systems that make automated water irrigation possible, however, the use

of Arduino Uno along with other aspects is easier as well as the cheaper option

(Dhatri P V S et al., 2019), hence this is the route the researchers decided to go into.

However, water is not the only important aspect of plant growth. To grow,

plants need water, the proper nutrients, temperature as well as sunlight. The reason

why water is highly essential since this is the biggest component in plant cells, water

is also one of the most essential compounds in photosynthesis (IFAS Extension

University of Florida, 1997). The temperature however can vary from plant to plant,

especially in native plants. Temperature affects the respiration of the plant, as well

as this, affects the breakdown of sugars in the plant, too little prevents the

breakdown of sugar while too much causes excess that can be very damaging to the

plant (Pennisi, 2020). Liquid fertilizers are easier to incorporate into the soil

especially considering the use of Arduino Uno. Although urban gardens are a great

innovation, it is essential to remember that these types of gardens are so much more

susceptible to climate change. Compared to regular rural gardens, urban gardens

tend to face higher temperatures, about 5 to 11 degrees Celsius. Hence it is more

prone to drought (Lin et al., 2018). Improving agronomic productivity and nutritional

quality of vegetables and fruits grown on urban soils requires long-term soil quality

management. The use of compost, mulch, and other biomass-carbon sources (such

as lawn clippings, leaf litter, and household waste) is essential to improving soil

quality and functionality (R Lal, 2020). With this knowledge, it can be concluded that

urban gardens are hard to maintain. However, knowing that urban gardening is high
maintenance, it is gradually becoming important in agriculture. A study by

Bredenberg (2018) involving the Centaurea jacea showed that the plants placed in

an urban garden environment were able to germinate more in comparison to those

cultivated in the rural areas, with these, the researchers of the said study concluded

that rural areas are more negatively affected when it comes to the reduced

pollination due to increased pesticide use. In addition, during the COVID-19

pandemic, there has been a noticeable disruption in the food supply. A common

cause is the shortage of labor work. With this, households are needed to adapt to a

more resilient food supply, thus, home gardening. In adapting to home-urban

gardening, there is a possibility to improve nutritional security (Lal, 2020). During the

peak of lockdown in the Philippines, disruption of the food supply is also noticeable,

which can also be combated with urban gardening, which can increase opportunities

for increasing resilience in the local food supply (NICOLA et al., 2020). Although it is

called urban gardening, there is still a requirement for an efficient space. An

observation was made in Urumqi, Western China, from 1999 to 2019, which

concluded that in densely populated areas, urban garden spaces are highly

overlooked and not as accessible due to the scarcity of resources to make urban

gardens easily possible (Shi et al., 2020). The question remains how to make this

more accessible for people, especially for regular homeowners. There are already

multiple studies of automatic water irrigation systems that utilize a microcontroller,

Arduino. This system has been around since 2010 and has continuously become

more and more accessible throughout the years. A study by Hassan et al. (2018)

showed that an automatic water irrigation system is cost-effective in optimizing water

irrigation in agricultural areas. The prototype built also enables easier tracking of soil

moisture (Hassan et al., 2018). Devika et al. (2014) Have done related work on
automatic plant watering, and the watering object uses a plant grinn on the soil

where the humidity sensor detects the soil moisture level, and the system will

automatically water the plant if the soil is not moist/dry. Using an automated water

system showed that there are lesser water wastes in comparison to manual

watering. Water delivery became more efficient, resulting in an improved general

water irrigation system. (Hassan et al., 2020). However, in creating an optimum

water irrigation system, one needs knowledge of soil conditions. Optimized water

usage is also achievable with an innovative irrigation system (Jain et al., 2017). The

use of Arduino was improved by adding another command which is to add an

automated fertilizer dispenser along with the established water irrigation system that

can be beneficial for those that have busy lifestyles. The high maintenance aspect

of an urban garden can be combated with an automated system. With a

computerized water irrigation system, the proper timing and the correct amount of

water are ensured. In a vegetable like ice cabbage, and any other leafy vegetable

optimum moisture of 21% to 40% (AcuRite Blog, 2018). In the sight of sustainability

in creating automated systems for gardens, a study that utilized Robotic Process

Automation showed that the automatic hydroponics system is functionally

sustainable. The design can also be easily duplicated and revised (Ramos, 2021).

The use of automated or programmed water irrigation systems specifically in

established “smart cities” shows a positive correlation to the reduction of

overwatering, which is healthier for the plants and better for the environment

(Canales-Ide et al., 2019). A study conducted by Canales-Ide et al. (2021), in which

they performed a test on the automated water system using an Arduino

microcontroller, showed that said product showed satisfactory performance in terms

of plant watering. Although there are already these established designs utilizing the
Arduino Uno microcontroller to create an automated water system, there is still a lack

of study that focuses on the effect of an Arduino microcontroller when it comes to

plant growth.

With these ideas in mind, the prototype plant pot could be a way to expound

efficiency in urban gardening as our country, and the city is moving their way to

urbanization. This research aims to identify the effectiveness and costs of the

automatic plant pot prototype compared to conventional plant care practices. It

specifically seeks to answer the following questions: 1. What is the level of growth of

plants utilizing conventional plant care practices in terms of plant weight, root length,

and plant height? 2. What is the level of growth of plants utilizing automated plant pot

prototype in terms of plant weight root length and plant height? 3. Is there a

significant difference between conventional plant care practices and automated plant

pot prototype in terms of plant weight, root length and plant height? 4. Is there a

significant difference between conventional plant care practices and automated plant

pot prototypes in urban gardening according to cost benefits?

The result and the prototype of this study are relevant to providing an initial

model of convenient and household-friendly plant care where people seek to grow

valuable plant life. The results of this study are also significant in providing a more

convenient plant care method and how this can impact plant growth.

The researchers aim to test the efficiency of the prototype by conducting a

comparison with a similar plant but with manual plant care. Furthermore, this study,

specifically the observation of the trials, will be conducted in the Mateo residence,

Bandera Espanola Street Mintal Davao City, from April 19, 2022, to May 4, 2022.

This study is limited to testing the efficiency of the plant pot prototype in comparison

to conventional plant care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study is an Experimental Study focused on identifying the difference in

growth rate between plants, specifically, Ice Cabbage (Brassica rapa). Researchers

took an established design of an automated plant watering prototype that uses the

micro-controller Arduino to create their design of a more improved plant prototype

looking at more specific plant needs. To compare the efficiency of the plant growth,

the researchers also prepared a group of plants that will undergo conventional plant

care practices. The study and observation were conducted at the Mateo Residence,

294-A Bandera Espanola Street Mintal, Davao City from April 19 th to May 4th year

2022.

Phase I- Materials and Equipment needed in the study

In conducting this study, the researchers used the for each set-up; one Arduino UNO

Board, 13 F/M pins, one moisture sensor, a meter of copper wire, one breadboard

two relay modules, two submersible pump, three AC/DC adapter, PVC clear tube,

two 1-gallon water container, a gallon of liquid fertilizer, specifically, hydroponic

solution with a ratio of 5mL of solution to 1000mL of water and 10 ice cabbage

sprouts. To monitor the growth the researchers used a ruler and a weighing scale.

Arduino Set-Up

In setting up the prototype itself, the researchers needed the following

materials; Arduino Uno board, bead board, F/M wires, and relay modules; these

materials are the basic requirements for the actual Arduino set-up to function. In

setting up the automatic watering system, the researchers used a soil moisture

sensor along with a 5V submersible pump to connect to the Arduino set-up, the

researchers also used a 5mm tubing to connect to the pump in order to disperse the

water. The process is that once the sensor detects that soil moisture is below 20%, it
will disperse water and then stop once 40% soil moisture is achieved (See Fig. 1). In

order to create the liquid fertilizer dispenser, the researchers used the same concept

as the watering system, using 5V Submersible pump and another set of 5mm tubing,

however, the signal for this to automate is not through a sensor, rather was placed

under a timed loop, which in this case is every 3 days, or every 4,320,000 counts in

the Arduino system (see fig 2).

Input: Soil
Moisture

Water from Soil Moisture

storage goes below
20%

Water Stops
Dispensing Output: Water

Soil Moisture
gets to 40%

Figure 1: Automated water dispensing process

 Counter hits
Input: Timer
4,320,000
(≈ 3 days)

Liquid
Fertilizer from
storage

Fertilizer
Stops Output: Liquid
Dispensing Fertilizer
Counter hits
5000
(≈ 5 seconds)

Figure 2: Liquid Fertilizer Dispensing

Conventional Plant Care

Plot A will undergo a conventional plant care which would only involve daily

watering every morning for the span of seven days, identical to the time frame for

Plot B which will utilize the automated plant pot prototype. To ensure that the same

amount of water is being consumed by both the Arduino prototype as well as the

conventional plant care on day 1, the researchers took a pilot test got how much the

Arduino extracts from 20% moisture to reach 40%, the amount of water extracted

from this pilot is what will be used as the regular amount to water the plants under

conventional care, which showed an average of 190mL. During the early stages of

ice cabbage, it is suggested to water for only 2-3 times per week, or as the need

arises for the perceived moisture that can be detected by the human senses

(Medellina, 2021). As for the fertilizer, the researchers tested a pilot with the protype

set-up in order to conclude the mL per second extracted, which was 18.5mLs per

second; this would then be taken into consideration in putting in the fertilizer

conventionally.
Phase II- Conduct of the Experiment

In order to see if the plant pot prototype improves the growth rate of the plant,

the researchers had three trials; two trials were done consecutively, 4 sets of 5 of

Brassica rapa (common name: Ice Cabbage) in its early stages and planted them

under identical conditions; two pots (Plot A and C) was watered and monitored

manually while another two pots (Plot B and D) were not monitored, but was under

the plant pot prototype. Both growths were monitored for one week, measuring the

sprout height every other day. At the end of one week, the plant growth was

measured along with the root length, and it was weighed in grams. Another 2 sets

with the same set-up were conducted the following week, Plot E was under

conventional plant care while Plot F was under the plant pot prototype, at the end of

the week, the plants were measured for their height, and root length and weight. It is

to be noted that samples in Plot A, B, C and D started at 4.5cm without any

treatment while Plot E and F started at 3cm.

Phase III - Data Collection and Analysis

The data gathered regarding the plant growth for all three trials were tested

through a t-test in order to compare the growth of the plants in Plot A, C and E with

the plant growth of the plants in Plot B, D and F. To get the raw data for plant growth

involved weighing the plant, measuring the shoot and the root (Buddies, 2021). With

this data we are able to differentiate the maturity level as well as the shoot to root

ratio. In order to analyze the economic factors, the water tank used by the

researchers’ labelled with measuring units, and the manual watering will also be

measured daily in order to compare both water consumptions. Another way that the

researchers measured the economic factors is by observing the amount of fertilizer

used within the span of one week. To ensure the reliability of the data collected, the
researchers performed three trials with the same set-up. The average of the growth

from every plot for each trial was taken and compared in order to arrive at the final

result.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Supported by the study of Bual et.al (2019), which shows that the water accuracy

and frequency brought by a microcontroller-based irrigation system is a significant

factor in cultivating mung bean sprouts, this chapter presents and discusses the data

gathered from all three trials and the analysis performed on the data in order to

obtain the final result. The findings of the data proceeds to answer the statements of

the problem. Specifically, to analyze the plant growth in terms of weight in grams,

root length in cm and lastly, shoot height in grams. This chapter also discusses the

water consumption and fertilizer consumption from both controlled and experimental.

Level of Plant Growth According to Weight (g)

This table shows the weight of each five samples from each three trials for both the

control and the experimental growth. The average for each trial was also computed

along with the standard deviation.

Table 1: The plant weight in grams of the ice cabbage samples from both

experimental and controlled samples after one week.

Control Group Experimental Group

Trials Std. Std.
Mean Mean
Deviation Deviation
Trial 1 7.4 2.792 15.6 3.13
Trial 2 8.2 3.271 15.4 5.595
Trial 3 0.14 0.055 0.36 0.134
2.0393333
Overall 5.246 10.453 2.953
3
Plant weight is one of the easiest ways to compare plant growth (Beadle, 1985). The

study by Younginger et al. (2017) regarding the relation between plant biomass and
fitness shows that there is a correlation between plant weight and a plant’s ability to

propagate. With that in mind, the controlled group or the samples under the

conventional plant care showed the following results; the weight of all five samples

for the first trial averaged to 7.4 grams with a standard deviation of 2.80. Trial two

showed a mean on 8.2 grams while the 3 rd trial had a mean of 0.14 grams. Both had

a standard deviation of 3.27 and 0.055 respectively. As for experimental group, or

the samples under the prototype showed the following results; the weight for the 1 st

trial showed an average of 15.6 grams with a standard deviation of 3.13, for trial 2,

the average weight in grams of the 5 plant samples is 15.4 grams with a standard

deviation of 5.60 and for the last trial, the mean of the weight was 0.36 grams while

the standard deviation is 0.13. As presented by the table, the average plant weight in

grams for the experimental group is greater with a mean of 10.453 g compared to

the controlled group with a total mean of 5.246 g. It is to be noted that the weight is

the fresh weight of the ice cabbages.

Level of Plant Growth According to Root Length (cm)

This table shows the root length of each five samples from every three trials for both

the control and the experimental growth. The average for each trial was also

computed along with the standard deviation.

Table 2: The root length in centimeters of the ice cabbage samples from both

experimental and controlled samples after one week.

Experimental
Control Group
Group
Trials Std. Std.
Mean Mean
Deviation Deviation
Trial 1 7.6 1.342 5.6 0.894
Trial 2 7.8 1.304 5.6 1.294
Trial 3 3.5 0.935 3.2 0.57
Overall 6.3 1.1937 4.8 0.9193
Root length in plants is highly dependent on the soil quality (Koç Koyun N., Acar, R.,

2015). Most nutrients are seen in the topsoil, and as moisture and nutrients lessen it

moves to the bottom, with this the root of the plant tends to chase for the moisture

and nutrients, resulting in a longer, yet less dense root (Hunter A.S., Kelley, O.J.,

1946). The results from the three trials shows that the average mean for the

experimental group is lesser (4.8 cm) compared to the 6.3 cm average mean for the

controlled group; more specifically, the first trial yielded an average of 7.6 cm with a

standard deviation of 1.34, the 2nd trial showed an average of 7.8 cm with a standard

deviation of 1.30 and the last trials for the controlled group yield a mean of 3.5 cm

with a standard deviation of 0.94. The samples from the group under the prototype

presented the following; both 1st and 2nd trials yielded a mean of 5.6 cm; however,

the standard deviation for trial one is 0.90 while the 2 nd trial’s standard deviation is

1.30. 3rd trial presented a mean of 3.2 cm with a standard deviation of 0.57.

Level of Plant Growth According to Plant Height (cm)

This table shows the root length of each five samples from every three trials for both

the control and the experimental growth. The average for each trial was also

computed along with the standard deviation.

Table 3: The plant height in centimeters of the ice cabbage samples from both
experimental and controlled samples after one week.
Experimental
Control Group
Group
Trials Std. Std.
Mea
Deviatio Mean Deviatio
n
n n
Trial 1 10.2 3.633 12.8 1.824
Trial 2 9.5 3.354 12.5 1.904
Trial 3 7 1.225 7.2 1.037
Overa 10.83
8.9 2.7373 1.5883
ll 3
 Along with soil nutrition, plant height gets affected by the sunlight, as they depend on

sunlight to photosynthesize. Light quality is one of the few environmental aspects

that affect plant growth, specifically, its height. Other than light, a plant’s height is

also affected by water and nutrition. (VanDerZanden, 2022), with this being said the

shoot height from the 3 trials under the controlled group yielded the following; for the

1st trial the shoot height average is 10.2 cm with a standard deviation of 3.63, and the

2nd trial showed a mean of 9.5 cm with a standard deviation of 3.35 and lastly, the

trial 3 presented an average of 7 cm and its standard deviation is 1.22. As for the

experimental group, the first trial had an average of 12.8 cm and a respective

standard deviation is 1.82, the 2nd trial showed a mean of 12.5 cm and a standard

deviation is 1.9, and finally, the 3rd trial yielded an average of 7.2 cm while the

standard deviation is 1.04. The experimental group yielded an average of 10.833 cm

which is greater in comparison to the 8.9 cm average of the controlled group.

Control Experimental
  Group Group Mean P-
Significance Decision
Indicator Differen tcomp valu
@ = 0.05 on H0
s Mean SD Mean SD ce e

Weight 5.24 2.95

2.039 10.453 -5.207 3.406 0.016 Significant Reject
(g) 7 3
Root
0.91 Not
Length 6.3 1.194 4.8 1.5 1.513 0.203 Accept
9 Significant
(cm)
Plant
1.58 Not
Height 8.9 2.737 10.833 -1.933 -1.053 0.397 Accept
8 Significant
(cm)
Difference between conventional plant care practices and automated plant pot

prototypes in terms of plant weight, root length and plant height.

A comparison of means using an independent-samples t-test was conducted to

analyze the significant difference in the level of plant growth in terms of weight in

grams, root length and plant height.

Table 4 shows the statistical significance of the plant growth from the three trials

regarding weight, root length and plant height.

The plant weight showed a p-value of 0.016, which is less than the level of

significance, 0.05, hence, there is a significant difference in the plant weight between

the samples under the controlled group and samples under the experimental group.

On the contrary, root length and plant height showed no significant difference,

yielding a p-value of 0.203 and 0.397 respectively, which are both greater than the

level of significance, 0.05.

These results indicate that the area that shows the greatest significant difference in

plant growth between conventional plant care and plant pot prototype is the weight,

as weight is the easiest to measure as well as the factor that manifests the earliest in

a plant’s growing process starting from seed germination along with an increase in

cell number (National Council of Educational Research and Training, 2020). For the

root length, there is still a significant difference between the two groups for the first

two trials, however, there isn’t any significant difference for the 3 rd trial, this is

because the samples from the last trial were in their earlier stage of germination; the

first 2 trials which started at 4.5 cm, the 3rd trial started at 3 cm. The samples were

not able to mature enough in 1 week for the researchers to garner a significant

difference between the root length, overall, the root length did not show any

significant difference. The results also show that there is no significant difference

between the plant heights in all three trials. As what VanDerZanden (2022) indicated,

the light quality is a big factor in a plant’s height. The samples were placed under a

roof outside to ensure that water content will not get affected by possible rain, hence,

direct sunlight is limited.

Water and Fertilizer Consumption

Water Consumption

Table 5: Water Consumption

Water Usage
Controlled Experimental
Trial 1 1.3L 830mL
Trial 2 1.3L 840mL
Trial 3 1.3L 720mL
Total 3.9L 2.4L
All samples started with 5L of water in a container, after the seven-day observation,

all the water usage from the controlled group was only up to 1.3L. However, as the

experimental group depended on the soil moisture, trial one only consumed 830mL

while trial 2 only consumed 840mL. Trial three was conducted separately from the

first 2 trials, with also the start of a lot of rain and lesser sun. Due to this the soil from

the plots did not dry out as often in compared to the previous two trials, hence, it only

consumed up to 720mL.

Fertilizer Usage

Fertilizer usage from all six plots, three trials under the controlled group as well as

the other three trials under the experimental group consumed up to 277.5mL of

water. This is because of the Arduino program set by the researcher was designed

to release fertilizer for 5000 counts or approximately 5 seconds, which would yield

92.5mL of water each time. With this idea in mind, the researchers also added

92.5mL of fertilizer through the conventional plant care.

CONCLUSION

From the findings of this study, the following conclusions are drawn:

It can be concluded that the usage of the plant pot prototype is able to

improve the growth of the plants, this is as seen from the significant difference

between the plant weight after a week of observation. Although the root length

shows no significant difference, it can be seen on table 2 that the experimental

groups’ roots are shorter. The shorter root hairs from the experimental group shows
that the nutrients and moisture stayed on topsoil, making it easier for the plant to

mature. It is also valuable to mention that the root hairs for the experimental group

have better density, which indicates a more efficient nutrient absorption during early

stages (Wang et al., 2016). Because of the time constraint, the researchers were

only able to have a short observation period, as a result, the plant height was not

able to present any significant difference, this is also due to the lack of the sunlight

coming in where the set-up is place. However, it can be observed (table 3) that the

plant height from the experimental group is taller in comparison to the controlled

group, showing sign of better maturity. The plant pot prototype water consumption is

also smaller compared to that of the controlled group, hence, the usage of the

Arduino Plant Pot Prototype is better economically.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the findings and conclusions of the study, the following recommendations

are drawn that may provide a clearer idea of the plant growth comparison between

conventional plant care and plants under the Arduino plant pot prototype.

In order to garner a better idea of the effect in plant growth, the researchers suggest

a longer observation period, at least another one or two weeks of observation would

give plants more time to mature providing a better data. A longer period of

observation would also yield a more obvious difference between the sample. The

researchers also suggest to perform the study with more samples per trial. As the

comparison was only conducted with ice cabbage samples, the researchers also

suggest test its capabilities on other plants.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The researchers wish to express their sincere gratitude and genuine appreciation to

the following people, who in their own ways helped the group during the completion

of this research group:

The group would firstly wish to express their heartfelt gratitude to their

research advisers Mr. Timoteo Corpuz Jr. and Mr. Alex Gabriel Dagatan, who

took their time and effort to support and assist us since the early stages of our study,

from the guidance in choosing the perfect materials up to dedicating their time in

troubleshooting the devices we needed. With this support we were able to proceed

further with little to no obstacles;

Maam Rosallen Batingal, Maam Miraflor Randing and Maam Jovy Dulay

for all the guidance and support that they provided especially in helping us clear up

the direction of this study and for sharing your expertise to help better our paper;

The researchers would also like to give their appreciation to Mr. Leonardo

Mateo Jr. and Mrs. Myrna Mateo, the parents of Krizsha; Mr. Mateo for assisting

during the set up and for sharing his agricultural knowledge, regarding plant growth,

especially during the observation period and to Mrs. Mateo for being group’s

statistician and taking her time to edit and organize the raw data gathered;

To the Grade 12 Apitong classmates who undeniably made this entire

process feel less stressful and more fun, we could not be more grateful for having

such an uplifting energy within the classroom;

To the researcher’s families for believing in us, encouraging us and for the

strong support, you have provided mentally, physically and especially financially

even when this study was still foggy;

 To our respective friends who served as our emotional support system

throughout this process, ever since the very beginning, especially to Shayrah and

Pythia who were not only an emotional support system but also never got tired in

answering questions when the group reached roadblocks;

And above all, to the Almighty God, who always bestowed upon us the

blessings, strength, potentials and capabilities; for always guiding and giving us the

courage, love and wisdom to finish everything.

Thank you very much!

REFERENCES

ALMEC Corporation, Oriental Consultants Global Co., Ltd., EX Research Institute

Ltd., Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), & National Economic and

Development Authority (NEDA). (2018, June). Davao City Infrastructure

Development Plan and Capacity Building Project (No. 18–077).

https://openjicareport.jica.go.jp/pdf/12308706.pdf

Arduino - ArduinoBoardUno. (2014). https://www.arduino.cc/en/pmwiki.php?

n=Main/arduinoBoardUno

BEADLE, C. (1985). PLANT GROWTH ANALYSIS. Techniques in Bioproductivity

and Photosynthesis, 20–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-031999-

5.50012-1

Bredenberg, L. (2018). Urban gardens found to have higher pollination success than

rural gardens | LUP Student Papers. Lund University LUP Student Papers.

https://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/search/publication/8937925

Buddies, S. (2021, 6 november). Measuring Plant Growth. Science Buddies.

Geraadpleegd op 6 mei 2022, van https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-

fair-projects/references/measuring-plant-growth

C. L. C. Bual, R. D. Cunanan, R. A. R. Bedruz, R. Kerwin C. Billones and R. R. P.

Vicerra, "Microcontroller-based Irrigation System for Experimental Design of

Mung Bean Sprouts Cultivation," 2019 IEEE 11th International Conference on

Humanoid, Nanotechnology, Information Technology, Communication and

Control, Environment, and Management ( HNICEM ), 2019, pp. 1-6, doi:

10.1109/HNICEM48295.2019.9072801.

Canales-Ide, F., Zubelzu, S., & Rodríguez-Sinobas, L. (2019). Irrigation systems in

smart cities coping with water scarcity: The case of Valdebebas, Madrid (Spain).
 Journal of Environmental Management, 247, 187–195.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.06.062

Complete Guide to Use Soil Moisture Sensor w/ Examples. (2022, 12 april). Arduino

Project Hub. Geraadpleegd op 21 april 2022, van

https://create.arduino.cc/projecthub/electropeak/complete-guide-to-use-soil-

moisture-sensor-w-examples-756b1f

Dhatri P V S, D., Pachiyannan, M., Swaroopa Rani K, J., & Pravallika, G. (2019). A

Low-Cost Arduino based Automatic Irrigation System using Soil Moisture

Sensor: Design and Analysis. 2019 2nd International Conference on Signal

Processing and Communication (ICSPC). Published.

https://doi.org/10.1109/icspc46172.2019.8976483

Hassan, A., Abdullah, H., Farooq, U., Shahzad, A., Asif, R., Haider, F., & Rehman,

A. (2021). A Wirelessly Controlled Robot-based Smart Irrigation System by

Exploiting Arduino. Journal of Robotics and Control (JRC), 2(1), 29-34.

doi:https://doi.org/10.18196/jrc.2148

Hassan, A., Sheng, S. B., Shah, W. M., & Bahaman, N. (2018). An Automated

Irrigation System Using Arduino Microcontroller. An Automated Irrigation System

Using Arduino Microcontroller, 12.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330212779

How to connect DHT11 Sensor with Arduino UNO. (2020, 15 mei). Arduino Project

Hub. Geraadpleegd op 21 april 2022, van

https://create.arduino.cc/projecthub/pibots555/how-to-connect-dht11-sensor-

with-arduino-uno-f4d239
Hunter, A. S., & Kelley, O. J. (1946). THE EXTENSION OF PLANT ROOTS INTO

DRY SOIL. Plant Physiology, 21(4), 445–451.

https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.21.4.445

IFAS Extension University of Florida. (1997). What Makes Plants Grow? - UF/IFAS

EDIS. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdf/4H/4H36000.pdf

Ismail, I. N. B., Iskandar, A. H. B., Eqwan, M. R., Zuhdi, A. W. M., Mohamad, D., Isa,

M. R., Zahari, N. M., Zawawi, M. H., Mohamed, H., Ramli, M. Z., & Mansor, M.

H. (2018). Design and development an automatic plant pot prototype. AIP

Conference Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5066842

Ismail, Iszmir & Iskandar, Ahmad & Roslan, Eqwan & Mahmood Zuhdi, Ahmad Wafi

& Mohamad, Daud & Isa, Mohd Rashdan & Zahari, Nazirul & Hafiz, Mohd &

Mohamed, Habiba & Ramli, Muhammad & Mansor, Mohd Helmi. (2018). Design

and development an automatic plant pot prototype. AIP Conference

Proceedings. 2030. 020201. 10.1063/1.5066842. 

Koç Koyun, Nur & Acar, Ramazan. (2015). THE SOIL FACTORS WHICH EFFECT

ON ROOT GROWTH IN FORAGE PLANTS.

Lal, R. (2020). Home gardening and urban agriculture for advancing food and

nutritional security in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Food Security, 12(4),

871–876. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-020-01058-3

Lamsen, F. C. , Favi, JC & Hideliza, BH(2021).Indoor Gardening with Automatic

Irrigation System using Arduino Microcontroller.Journal of Advanced Studies,

4(1), 42-61pp. Retrieved from

https://psurj.org/psurj/online/index.php/jas/article/view/156 

Lin, B. B., Egerer, M. H., Liere, H., Jha, S., & Philpott, S. M. (2018). Soil

management is key to maintaining soil moisture in urban gardens facing

 changing climatic conditions. Scientific Reports, 8(1).

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-35731-7 

Mayuree, M. Aishwarya, P and Bagubali, A. (2019) Automatic Plant Watering

System,2019 International Conference on Vision Towards Emerging Trends in

Communication and Networking (ViTECoN), pp. 1-3, doi:

10.1109/ViTECoN.2019.8899452. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8899452

Medellina, V. (2021, 28 juni). Growing pechay in just a month. Manila Bulletin.

Geraadpleegd op 11 mei 2022, van https://mb.com.ph/2021/07/03/growing-

pechay-in-just-a-month/

National Council of Educational Research and Training. (2020). Plant Growth and

Development [E-book]. In Jeev Vigyan Textbook for Class - 11 - 11081

(2020ste editie, p. 241). National Council of Educational Research and

Training.

Nicola, S., Ferrante, A., Cocetta, G., Bulgari, R., Nicoletto, C., Sambo, P., & Ertani,

A. (2020). Food Supply and Urban Gardening in the Time of Covid-19. Bulletin of

University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca.

Horticulture, 77(2), 141. https://doi.org/10.15835/buasvmcn-hort:2020.0051

Pennisi, B. V. (2020). Growing Indoor Plants with Success. Growing Indoor Plants

with Success. Published. https://extension.uga.edu/publications/detail.html?

number=B1318&title=Growing%20Indoor%20Plants%20with%20Success

Ramos, B. (2021). DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF AN AUTOMATIC AND

MAINTENANCE-FREE EBB AND FLOW HYDROPONICS SYSTEM.

International Journal of Arts, Sciences and Education, 1(3), 139–165. Retrieved

from https://www.ijase.org/index.php/ijase/article/view/38
Servo Motor Basics with Arduino. (2022, 11 april). Arduino Documentation.

Geraadpleegd op 21 april 2022, van

https://docs.arduino.cc/learn/electronics/servo-motors/

Shi, L., Halik, M., Abliz, A., Mamat, Z., & Welp, M. (2020). Urban Green Space

Accessibility and Distribution Equity in an Arid Oasis City: Urumqi, China.

Forests, 11(6), 690. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11060690

Sunga, A. B., & Advincula, J. L. (2021). The “plantito/plantita” Home Gardening

During the Pandemic. The “Plantito/Plantita” Home Gardening During the

Pandemic, 7. https://doi.org/10.1285/i24212113v7i1p88

VanDerZanden, A. M. (2022, 16 april). Environmental factors affecting plant growth.

OSU Extension Service. Geraadpleegd op 8 mei 2022, van

https://extension.oregonstate.edu/gardening/techniques/environmental-

factors-affecting-plant-growth

Wang, Y., Thorup-Kristensen, K., Jensen, L. S., & Magid, J. (2016). Vigorous Root

Growth Is a Better Indicator of Early Nutrient Uptake than Root Hair Traits in

Spring Wheat Grown under Low Fertility. Frontiers in Plant Science, 7.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00865
T-Test | 0.05 Significance Level | Two-tailed
Plant Weight
Trial 1
Controlled Group (Conventional Plant Care) Experimental Group (Plant Pot Prototype)

N1: 5 N 2: 5
df1 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4 df2 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4
M1: 7.4 M2: 15.6
SS1: 31.2 SS2: 39.2
2
s  = SS1/(N - 1) = 31.2/(5-1) = 7.8
1 s22 = SS2/(N - 1) = 39.2/(5-1) = 9.8

T-value Calculation

s2p = ((df1/(df1 + df2)) * s21) + ((df2/(df2 + df2)) * s22) = ((4/8) * 7.8) + ((4/8) * 9.8) = 8.8

s2M1 = s2p/N1 = 8.8/5 = 1.76

s2M2 = s2p/N2 = 8.8/5 = 1.76

t = (M1 - M2)/√(s2M1 + s2M2) = -8.2/√3.52 = -4.37

The t-value is -4.37062. The p-value is .002379. The result is significant at p < .05.

Trial 2
Controlled Group (Conventional Plant Care) Experimental Group (Plant Pot Prototype)

N1: 5 N 2: 5
df1 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4 df2 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4
M1: 8.2 M2: 15.4
SS1: 42.8 SS2: 125.2
2
s  = SS1/(N - 1) = 42.8/(5-1) = 10.7
1 s22 = SS2/(N - 1) = 125.2/(5-1) = 31.3

T-value Calculation

s2p = ((df1/(df1 + df2)) * s21) + ((df2/(df2 + df2)) * s22) = ((4/8) * 10.7) + ((4/8) * 31.3) = 21

s2M1 = s2p/N1 = 21/5 = 4.2

s2M2 = s2p/N2 = 21/5 = 4.2

t = (M1 - M2)/√(s2M1 + s2M2) = -7.2/√8.4 = -2.48

The t-value is -2.48424. The p-value is .037861. The result is significant at p < .05.
 Trial 3
Controlled Group (Conventional Plant Care) Experimental Group (Plant Pot Protoype)

N1: 5 N 2: 5
df1 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4 df2 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4
M1: 0.14 M2: 0.36
SS1: 0.01 SS2: 0.07
2
s  = SS1/(N - 1) = 0.01/(5-1) = 0
1 s22 = SS2/(N - 1) = 0.07/(5-1) = 0.02
T-value Calculation

s2p = ((df1/(df1 + df2)) * s21) + ((df2/(df2 + df2)) * s22) = ((4/8) * 0) + ((4/8) * 0.02) = 0.01

s2M1 = s2p/N1 = 0.01/5 = 0
s2M2 = s2p/N2 = 0.01/5 = 0

t = (M1 - M2)/√(s2M1 + s2M2) = -0.22/√0 = -3.39

The t-value is -3.39467. The p-value is .009434. The result is significant at p < .05.

Root Length
Trial 1
Controlled Group (Conventional Plant Care) Experimental Group (Plant Pot Prototype)

N1: 5 N 2: 5
df1 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4 df2 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4
M1: 7.6 M2: 5.6
SS1: 7.2 SS2: 3.2
2
s  = SS1/(N - 1) = 7.2/(5-1) = 1.8
1 s22 = SS2/(N - 1) = 3.2/(5-1) = 0.8

T-value Calculation

s2p = ((df1/(df1 + df2)) * s21) + ((df2/(df2 + df2)) * s22) = ((4/8) * 1.8) + ((4/8) * 0.8) = 1.3

s2M1 = s2p/N1 = 1.3/5 = 0.26

s2M2 = s2p/N2 = 1.3/5 = 0.26

t = (M1 - M2)/√(s2M1 + s2M2) = 2/√0.52 = 2.77

The t-value is 2.7735. The p-value is .024166. The result is significant at p < .05.

Trial 2
Controlled Group (Conventional Plant Care) Experimental Group (Plant Pot Prototype)

N1: 5 N 2: 5
df1 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4 df2 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4
M1: 7.8 M2: 5.6
SS1: 6.8 SS2: 6.7
2
s  = SS1/(N - 1) = 6.8/(5-1) = 1.7
1 s22 = SS2/(N - 1) = 6.7/(5-1) = 1.68

T-value Calculation

s2p = ((df1/(df1 + df2)) * s21) + ((df2/(df2 + df2)) * s22) = ((4/8) * 1.7) + ((4/8) * 1.68) = 1.69

s2M1 = s2p/N1 = 1.69/5 = 0.34

s2M2 = s2p/N2 = 1.69/5 = 0.34

t = (M1 - M2)/√(s2M1 + s2M2) = 2.2/√0.68 = 2.68

The t-value is 2.67776. The p-value is .028023. The result is significant at p < .05.

Trial 3
Controlled Group (Conventional Plant Care) Experimental Group (Plant Pot Prototype)

N1: 5 N 2: 5
df1 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4 df2 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4
M1: 3.2 M2: 3.5
SS1: 1.3 SS2: 3.5
2
s  = SS1/(N - 1) = 1.3/(5-1) = 0.32
1 s22 = SS2/(N - 1) = 3.5/(5-1) = 0.88

T-value Calculation

s2p = ((df1/(df1 + df2)) * s21) + ((df2/(df2 + df2)) * s22) = ((4/8) * 0.32) + ((4/8) * 0.88) = 0.6

s2M1 = s2p/N1 = 0.6/5 = 0.12

s2M2 = s2p/N2 = 0.6/5 = 0.12

t = (M1 - M2)/√(s2M1 + s2M2) = -0.3/√0.24 = -0.61

The t-value is -0.61237. The p-value is .557292. The result is not significant at p < .05.

Plant Height
Trial 1
Controlled Group (Conventional Plant Care) Experimental Group (Plant Pot Prototype)

N1: 5 N 2: 5
df1 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4 df2 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4
M1: 10.2 M2: 32.8
SS1: 52.8 SS2: 7753.3
2
s  = SS1/(N - 1) = 52.8/(5-1) = 13.2
1 s22 = SS2/(N - 1) = 7753.3/(5-1) = 1938.32

T-value Calculation

s2p = ((df1/(df1 + df2)) * s21) + ((df2/(df2 + df2)) * s22) = ((4/8) * 13.2) + ((4/8) * 1938.32) = 975.76

s2M1 = s2p/N1 = 975.76/5 = 195.15

s2M2 = s2p/N2 = 975.76/5 = 195.15

t = (M1 - M2)/√(s2M1 + s2M2) = -22.6/√390.3 = -1.14

The t-value is -1.14395. The p-value is .285718. The result is not significant at p < .05.

Trial 2
Controlled Group (Conventional Plant Care) Experimental Group (Plant Pot Prototype)

N1: 5 N 2: 5
df1 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4 df2 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4
M1: 9.5 M2: 12.5
SS1: 45 SS2: 14.5
2
s  = SS1/(N - 1) = 45/(5-1) = 11.25
1 s22 = SS2/(N - 1) = 14.5/(5-1) = 3.62

T-value Calculation

s2p = ((df1/(df1 + df2)) * s21) + ((df2/(df2 + df2)) * s22) = ((4/8) * 11.25) + ((4/8) * 3.62) = 7.44

s2M1 = s2p/N1 = 7.44/5 = 1.49

s2M2 = s2p/N2 = 7.44/5 = 1.49

t = (M1 - M2)/√(s2M1 + s2M2) = -3/√2.98 = -1.74

The t-value is -1.14395. The p-value is .285718. The result is not significant at p < .05.

Trial 3
Controlled Group (Conventional Plant Care) Experimental Group (Plant Pot Prototype)

N1: 5 N 2: 5
df1 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4 df2 = N - 1 = 5 - 1 = 4
M1: 7 M2: 7.2
SS1: 6 SS2: 4.3
2
s  = SS1/(N - 1) = 6/(5-1) = 1.5
1 s22 = SS2/(N - 1) = 4.3/(5-1) = 1.08
T-value Calculation

s2p = ((df1/(df1 + df2)) * s21) + ((df2/(df2 + df2)) * s22) = ((4/8) * 1.5) + ((4/8) * 1.08) = 1.29

s2M1 = s2p/N1 = 1.29/5 = 0.26

s2M2 = s2p/N2 = 1.29/5 = 0.26

t = (M1 - M2)/√(s2M1 + s2M2) = -0.2/√0.52 = -0.28

The t-value is -0.27869. The p-value is .787549. The result is not significant at p < .05.

Table 4: Independent samples t-test of plant growth

Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3
  Mean Mean Mean
t p t p t p
Difference Difference Difference

Weight - 0.0023 - 0.0378 -

-8.2 -7.2 0.00943 -0.22
(g) 4.35 8 2.48 6 3.39
Root
0.0241 0.0280 -
Length 2.77 2.77 2.38 2.22 0.55729 -0.3
7 2 0.61
(cm)
Plant
- 0.2857 - 0.1201 -
Height -22.6 -3 0.78755 -0.2
1.14 2 1.74 7 0.28
(cm)
Note: p-value > 0.05 - no significant difference, p-value ≤.05 has significant difference

Raw Data:
WEIGHT IN GRAMS
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3
Control Experimental
6 5 0.1 14 14 0.3
12 8 0.2 11 12 0.3
6 12 0.2 19 25 0.5
8 5 0.1 17 15 0.5
5 11 0.1 17 11 0.2
7.4 8.2 0.14 15.6 15.4 0.36
2.7928 3.27108 0.05477 3.13049 5.5946 0.13416
5 5 2 5 4 4

ROOT LENGTH IN CM
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3
Control Experimental
 9 8 3 4 4.5 4
7 7 2.5 6 7 2.5
6 7 3 6 5 2.5
7 10 4 6 4.5 4
9 7 3.5 6 7 4.5
7.6 7.8 3.2 5.6 5.6 3.5
1.3416 1.3038 0.57008 0.89442 1.29421 0.93541
4 4 8 7 8 4

SHOOT HIGHT IN CM
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3
Control Experimental
11 6 6 15 12.5 6.5
15 9 9 11.5 11.5 6.5
11 15 6 14.5 15 7
5 8 7 11 13.5 9
9 9.5 7 12 10 7
10.2 9.5 7 12.8 12.5 7.2
3.6331 3.35410 1.22474 1.82345 1.90394 1.03682
8 2 5 8 3 2