Agricultural Science; Vol. 2, No. 1; 2020 ISSN 2690-5396 E-ISSN 2690-4799 https://doi.org/10.30560/as.v2n1p230 230 Published by IDEAS SPREAD Adaptation of Tef {Eragrostistef(Zucc) Trotter} Varieties for Early Maturing Types in Tigray Chekole Nigus1, Yonas G/Mariam1, Muez Mehari2 & Haftamu H/kiross1 1 Tigari Agricultural Research Institute, Axum Agricultural Research center, Axum, Ethiopia 2 Tigari Agricultural Research Institute, Alamata Agricultural Research center, Ethiopia Correspondence: Chekole Nigus, Tigari Agricultural Research Institute, Axum Agricultural Research center, P. O. Box. 230, Axum, Ethiopia. E-mail: chekolenigus@gmail.com Received: April 24, 2020 Accepted: May 10, 2020 Online Published: May 22, 2020 Abstract Tef is the most important and wider adaptable cereal crop in Ethiopia. The most limiting tef productions are low yielding cultivars, biotic such as pest and diseases and abiotic such as drought, fertility depletion and inappropriate agronomic practice and difficulty nature of tef for mechanization. The objective of the study was to evaluate the adaptability of early maturing tef varieties. Tef varieties were evaluated for their earliness and adaptability at three locations and over two years. The trial included 8 varieties and one local check with the design of RCBD in three replications. The analysis of variance showed that there was significant difference (P<-0.001) between genotypes and locations for the days to heading, days to maturity, plant height, panicle length, grain yield and (P<-0.05) for biomass yield. However, it does not provide evidence for interaction between the varieties and locations on all traits except for days to maturity. Simada was early maturing and well performing, following Boset. Therefore, cultivation of both varieties enhances the production of tef in the study areas and similar agro-ecologies. Allocation of varieties to their niche might increase the productivity of tef. In general, evaluation tef varieties in the right place and development of target variety for earliness and yield performance increase production in the region as well as the nation. Further work needed breeding to develop drought tolerant and higher yielding. Keywords: Adaptation, erratic rainfall, Early maturing and Tef 1. Introduction Tef is the most important and wider adaptable cereal crop in Ethiopia. Tef is grown by more than 6.8 million households (CAS, 2018) with growing season rainfall of 450-550 mm (Ketema, 1993). It grows in various agro climatic condition from sea level to 3000meter above sea level and different types of edaphic factors thus from light sandy to heavy clay soil in variable fertility(Kebebew,2003). Tef has an advantage over the other cereal by generating and fulfilling nutritional needs (Assefa et al., 2015) and it is healthy food due to the grain is free of gluten (SpaenijDekking et al., 2005). The major features of the crop are resilience to drought and waterlogging problems, serves as a low-risk crop to replace long-maturing crops such as maize and sorghum, and no serious threats of pest and disease (Assefa et al., 2015). As result, the research institutes in Ethiopian needed to increase the productivity of tef per unit area. There are different types of tef production constraints in the nation. The most limiting tef productions are low yielding cultivars, biotic stress such as pest and diseases and abiotic stress drought (Assefa et al., 20111), fertility depletion and inappropriate agronomic practice (tef needs well prepared land for planting) and difficulty nature of tef for mechanization. The most yield-limiting factor is drought and it causes to reduce the yield 29 %(Mizan,2017), 40 %(Mulu, 1993) and 77%(Abuhay, 2001). Even though, the production areas is the higher coverage, but the productivity is very low in nationwide and as well as in the Tigray region, 17.50qt/ha and 16qt/ha (CAS, 2019), respectively. The constraint being lower yielding cultivars are selection and development of tef variety is not appropriate niche and inadequate enhancement of yield. Therefore, identifying the right bottleneck of tef production leads to provide a solution. The wider adaptability of tef under different agro ecology is the reason why tef selective crop in nation and the region. Different authors reported that there is a statistically significance difference in phenological and yield and yield related traits of tef varieties/genotypes (Seyfu, 1993; Molla et al.,2012; Aliyi et al., 2016; Abebe and Wondwosen, 2017; Bakala et al., 2018). These authors determined the yield depends on the moisture availability for better yielding tef varieties. The most farmers selection criteria is higher yielding, early maturing and white as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 2, No. 1; 2020 231 Published by IDEAS SPREAD seed color(Molla et al.,2012). These works were evaluated different maturing tef varieties under different rainfall and humidity condition. We evaluated early maturing tef varieties under light and moisture stressed areas of the region. Selection of tef varieties with wider adaptable through early maturity and higher yielding in biomass and yield is the criteria in stressed areas. Adaptation is the survival value of an organism for it habitat (Wilsie, 1962). The adaptable for various factors might be expressed with different mechanism; these might be physiological by earliness and rolling their leaves escaped from deficit of moisture. Tef required days to physiological maturity from 60-140 days Assefa et al. (2001) this range is categorized in to three sets the first set is early set it ranges less than 80days and the intermediate also 80 to 95 days while the third group is late set more than 95 days(Tiruneh et al., 2000). As result, the broader genetic variability in maturity evaluation of early released tef varieties under moisture stressed areas leads to increase the production. Then, evaluation of the statistically significance difference for early maturing tef variety is important in advancing the yield. Furthermore, providing improved tef variety for tef growing farmer’s needs selection and evaluation of released tef varieties for adaptability. Farmers have a limitation in cultivating improved tef varieties, but also it grown under inappropriate niches. Even though the current production influenced by different factors and yielding 17.5qt/ha. However, the potential yield of tef is estimated more than 50 qt/ha as recorded per experimental plots (Tefera and Ketama, 2000). The purpose of the study was to evaluate tef varieties under moisture stress areas facing with early and late drought problems. Therefore, an evaluation of early maturing tef varieties for their adaptability can serve as an assessment of a mechanism to escape drought. The main contribution of this paper is to provide a best performing early maturing tef varieties and thereby to increase the production of tef in the region. The objective of the study was to evaluate the adaptability of early maturing tef varieties in the study area. 2. Methodology The experiment was conducted at Axum and Alamata Agricultural Research center during the 2017/18 and 2018/19 cropping season. Experiments venues were such that at the station of Ahiferom(dibdbo) with altitude of 2021masl, latitude 14016’57.12’’ and longitude 39004’6.78’’ while the soil texture is loam. Whereas, the second substation was adwa (mayteum) having an altitude of 1887masl, latitude of1409’4.64’’ longitude, 38050’57.24’’ and loam soil texture. The third substation was Alamata(Kara-Adisho) altitude of 1550mals, latitude 12040’48’’, longitude 39041’06’’ the soil texture is loam. There was a failure at Ahiferom in the first year 2017/18 the data were only from Adwa and Alamata, while for the second season data were collected from all sites. The materials were including one local check and 8 varieties to evaluate their yield performance and adaptability. The experiment was laid out as RCBD design with three replication and plot size of 2mx2m=4m2 net harvestable plot size 3.2 m2, 0.2m between rows,0.5m between plots and 1m between replication spaced. Blended fertilizer was applied per the recommendation of the specific locations with rate of 100 kg/ha and while the urea was applied 100 kg/ha for all locations with split application. The first phase at early two weeks later after germination the second phase also applied near to heading of the crop. Whereas, all recommended agronomic management practice was applied. The following data were collected:-day to heading, days to maturity, plant height, panicle length and biomass yield and grain yield. Days to heading and Days to maturity were measured from date of planting to 50% heading and 90% of physiological maturity respectively. Plant height measured from the ground to tip of the plant and panicle length was also from the base of the panicle to the tip of it. Whereas, the biomass yield and grain yield also weighed from the net harvestable plot area 3.2m2 by hand threshing and converted to hectare. The data was subjected to analysis of variance by SAS software of version 9.1.3 (SAS, 2004) for days to maturity and grain yield and while the remained traits were analyzed by R software (Pinheiro, and Bate, 2000). The normality and homogeneity of the data was tested by shapiro.test(Patrick Royston, 1982) and levenes.Test(Wilcox, 1989) respectively by R software. Table 1. List of tef pedigree and common name varieties and release of year S.no Pedigree Varieties Year of released 1 (DZ-01-186 XDZ-01-566)T-4 Tseday 1984 2 DZ-01-196 X DZ-Cr-37 Boset 2012 as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 2, No. 1; 2020 232 Published by IDEAS SPREAD 3 DZ-01-2785 X E. Pilosa(305)1998 Simada 2009 4 Ho-Cr-136 Amarach 2006 5 DZ-01-146 Genet 2005 6 Acc. 205953 Macharie 2007 7 (DZ-Cr-387 RIL273) Lakech 2009 8 (DZ-Cr-387 RIL127) Gemechus 2007 9 Farmers cultivar Local early 3. Results and Discussion The analysis of variance shown that the varieties were statistically significant differed for all traits. This indicates that there is variance in earliness for heading and maturity, difference(P<0.01) and agronomic traits that is plant height and panicle length as well as higher and lower performance for biomass and grain yield of the tested tef varieties(P<0.05) Table 3. Therefore, the presence of the statistically significance difference leads for the selection tef variety having an advantage of early maturing and higher yielding in the moisture limiting areas of the region. In areas facing with moisture stress, cultivation of early heading and maturing tef varieties are important. In this research the shorter days to heading and days to maturity is Simada. Tef heading less than 39 days were grouped under the early heading category (Truneh et al., 2000). Confirming Tiruneh et al., reported Simada is the best variety for the production of tef in the study area. While, the longest days to heading and maturity is Lakech. Tef varieties headed and matured more than 44 days to heading and 90 days maturity are grouped in the late set (Truneh et al., 2000) which are not well adaptable for the study area. This causes to mature by forcing due to the early or late drought existing. In such condition, the grain filling is becoming influenced to be poor seed size and grain. The presence of variability between tef varieties helps for the choice early maturing and wider adaptable tef variety for the tested locations. Determining the correlation of agronomic traits for the grain yield of tef variety is an important ways to select tef varieties. The study shows that there was significance difference between the varieties in agronomic traits. Macharie and Genet measured a longer plant height and panicle length respectively. The longer plant height did not have a direct correlation to a longer panicle length. Even the yield also not associated with longer plant height and panicle length (Table. 3). However, the shorter plant height and panicle length was recorded on Simada. Moreover, the shorter length on plant height and panicle has a direct relationship to be weight the higher grain yield (Table 3). In contrast, to the potential tef variety, evaluation, which is the longer panicle length, has the higher yield, but the shorter panicle length recorded the higher yield in this research. The finding noted that the combination of earlier days to maturity and shorter plant height is a good trait for selection of tef variety for moisture stressed areas. The report of Mzan et al.,(2016) confirming with present finding in earliness has positively correlated with grain yield however, disagreed with this result longer plant height panicle length has lower yielding. In small scale farming system higher in biomass and grain yield of tef, varieties are required. The evaluated tef varieties were statistically significance difference with local check in biomass and grain yield. Boset was the higher biomass whereas; the lower biomass was obtained from Simada. Farmers, which are practicing the mixing farming system highly needs both biological yield and grain yield of tef variety. Thus, tef straw is the favorable feed for livestock’s in this farming system. The higher yielding tef variety from the evaluated for their adaptability was Simada following by Boset. Simada shows statistically significance difference in grain yield with local check and the higher yield of the tested tef varieties. The yield advantage of Simada over the local check was 18.80%. This might be due to presence of drought adaptation mechanism which is drought escaping, the variety matured before the drought occurred (Zerihun, 2016). Therefore, cultivation of Simada and Boset under the tested areas enhance the yield in both providing the food for human and feed for animals. Understanding the influence of varieties, location and their interaction between location and varieties on tef grain yield and adaptability is so vital. Tef varieties shows that a statistically significance difference on performance of the yield. This might be due to the phenologically variance in days to heading and maturity. The earlier the variety was the higher yielding in the tested locations. Except the days to maturity, not all traits had shown statistically as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 2, No. 1; 2020 233 Published by IDEAS SPREAD significance difference variety by locations interaction (VLI). Worku, (2018) proved out that days to maturity had a genotype by location interaction that the other triats. Moreover, locations were shown significantly differ for all measured traits. Even though there is difference in locations the variety by location, interaction did not demonstration statistically significant different, thus the average mean performance would be selected for the tested areas and similar agro-ecologies. The absence of variety by location interaction in grain yield indicated that varieties did not a differently response at different locations (Eberhart and Russel, 1966) and it has wider adaptability capacity in yield. So it makes easy to give a general recommendation of cultivars without loss of maximum yield (Cruz and Castodi, 1991). Therefore, varieties were selected by their average mean yield of location and season. As a result, of the present finding early maturing and well performing in biomass and grain yield of tef varieties were Simada and Boset. Moreover, location difference implies that the genotypes were exposed to diversified growth condition to evaluate their performance and stability. Kassa et al. (2006) reported that there is a presence of variability between tef genotypes and location tested. The significance interaction of varieties and location on days to maturity revealed that it might be due to the variability of rainfall over the tested locations and seasons. This difference of rainfall forced fluctuation of the maturity of varieties on the different environments (Table. 3). Then, selection early heading and maturing with combined of higher biomass and grain yield enhance the production of tef in moisture stress areas. In addition to this, the response of tef varieties per different locations varies in phenologically and yield and yield related traits (Table.2). The minimum yield of nine varieties over the tested location was record from Lakech (1084kg/ha) at Ahiferom. The reason why this variety was low yield might be the days to heading of that variety was very late than the others. As result, in moisture limiting and fertility depleted areas late heading varieties are faced a problem of maturing/grain filling in the right time and then become lower yielding. Whereas, the maximum yield also obtained at Alamata(2242.77kg/ha) from Simada. Whereas, Boset was expressed the performance on biomass and grain yield at Adwa while, Buni(local check) was earlier in maturity at Alamata (Table 2). Table 1. The Combined mean performance of day to maturity and grain yield atthree locations in two growing seasons (Ahiferom. Alamata and Adwa and 2017/18 and 2018 S.no Varieties DH DM Ph Pl Biom G Y(kg/ha) 1 Tseday 44.78f 84.733c 94.73de 35.84de 7083.33bc 1687.5cde 2 Boset 50.44cd 84.60c 103.47bc 36.64cde 8333.33a 1945.8ab 3 Simada 38.56g 81.66e 89.18e 34.8e 6875c 2074.4a 4 Amarach 47.44e 83.80cd 100.33cd 35.89de 7083.33bc 1822.9abcd 5 Genet 52.11bc 89.53b 108.49ab 44.067a 7083.33bc 1433.2e 6 Macharie 51.33c 88.60b 111.267a 43.64a 6875c 1621.3de 7 Lakech 56.87a 91.40a 109.02ab 39.6b 8055.56ab 1880.5abc 8 Gemechus 53.89b 88.20b 105.93abc 39.156bc 7638.89abc 1737.2bcd 9 Local early 49de 82.60de 104.02bc 38.64bcd 7291.67bc 1746.2bcd Grand mean 49.29 86.125 102.9 38.7 7369 1772.092 CV% 4.56832 2.84342 5.805 7.7704 14.4362 19.80623 R –square 0.8725 0.9503 0.497973 0.417 0.6615 0.74806 Location * *** *** ** ** *** Varieties 2.1 **** 1.7796*** 5.65 *** 2.84 *** 1006.27* 255.05*** Location X Varieties Ns *** Ns Ns Ns ns DH(days)=days to heading, PH(cm)=plant height, PL(cm)=panicle length, Biom(kg/ha)=biomass yield, DM(days)=days to maturity and GY(kg/ha)=grain yield, ns=non significance difference, * and*** signfi difference at P,-0.05 and P<-0.001 value as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 2, No. 1; 2020 234 Published by IDEAS SPREAD Table 2. The combined mean performance of days to heading (days), days to maturity (days), plant height (cm), panicle length (cm), biomass (kg/ha) and grain yield (kg/ha) for Adwa, Ahiferom and Alamata in 2017/18 and 2018/19.NB:-for days heading, plant height, panicle length and biomass did not include from Alamata for both year and Ahiferom also missed from 2017/18 for traits s.no Varieties Adwa Ahiferom Adwa Ahiferom Adwa Ahiferom Adwa Ahiferom Adwa Ahiferom Alamata Adwa Ahiferom Alamata DH DH PH PH PL PL Biom Biom DM DM DM GY GY GY 1 Tseday 44.83 44.67 95.33 93.53 36.67 34.2 6354.17 8541.67 82.83 79 89.5 1744.58 1285.52 1831.38 2 Boset 51 49.33 105.1 100.13 36.5 36.93 7916.67 9166.67 86 81 85 2208.59 1224.06 2043.92 3 Simada 39.5 36.67 91.97 83.6 35.9 32.6 6250 8125 78.67 79 86 2016.3 1853.65 2242.77 4 Amarach 47.83 46.67 102.43 96.13 36.2 35.27 6979.17 7291.67 83.33 80.33 86 2097.45 1300.94 1809.25 5 Genet 51.5 53.33 111.37 102.73 44.03 44.13 6979.17 7291.67 90.33 85.33 90.83 1751.25 911.98 1375.67 6 Macharie 53.17 47.67 113.4 107 45.5 39.93 6458.33 7708.33 89.83 84.33 89.5 1927.4 1202.08 1524.73 7 Lakech 56.75 57 112.2 102.67 41.63 35.53 7395.83 9375 90.67 89.67 93 1848.7 1084.58 2118.52 8 Gemechus 53.83 54 109.8 98.2 40.4 36.67 6666.67 9583.33 87.83 84 91 1798.65 1263.44 1668.17 9 Local early 49.83 47.33 105.27 101.53 38.27 39.4 6562.5 8750 85 80 81.5 1816.35 1127.81 1877.04 4. Summary and Conclusions Cultivation of early maturing and wider adaptable tef varieties are helpful to minimize a yield gap due to the presence of erratic rainfall in the study area. Allocation of variety at their right niche and application of appropriate agronomic practice might increase the productivity of tef. We recommend that from the present research finding Simada and Boset with appropriate agronomic practice for the tested and other similar agro-ecologies. Further work needed breeding to develop drought tolerant and higher yielding. Acknowledgement We wish to thank Agricultural Growth project (AGP –II) and Tigray Agricultural Research Institute, Axum and Alamata centers allocating the budget to accomplish this activity and the staff of both centers. References Aliyi, K. O., Chimdesa, S. A., & Yeared, T. (2016). Adaptability Study of Tef Varieties at Mid Land Agro-ecologies of Guji Zone, Southern Oromia. Journal of Natural Sciences Research, 6(19). Assefa, K., Connarazzi, G., D, G., Kamies, R., Chanyalew, S., & Plaza-Wuthrich, S., et al. (2015). Genetic Diversity in Tef{Eragrostis tef {Zucc) Trotter}. Frontiers in plant Science, 6, 177. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00177 Assefa, K., Ketema, S., Tefera, H., Hundera, F., & Kefyalew, T. (2001). Genetic Divesrity for Agronomic Traits in tef. In H. Tefera, G. Belay, & M. Sorrel (Ed.), Narrowing The Rift , Proceeding of the internation Worship on Tef genetics and improvment,16-19, (pp. 33-48). Debre Zeit , Ethiopia. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439- 0523.2010.01782.x Assefa, K., Yu, J. K., M, Z., Belay, G., Tefera, H., & Sorrel, M. E. (2011). Breeding Tef {Eragrostis tef(Zucc) Trotter}:Conventional and Molecular approaches. Plant Breeding, 130, 1-9. CAS. (2018). The Federal democratic Republic of Ethiopia Centeral stastical Agency Agriultural Sample servey. Stastical Bulletin , Addis Ababa. Cruz, C., & Castodi, F. (1991). Decomposicao da interaccao genotipos x ambientes em partes simples ecomplexa. Revista ceres, 38, 422-430. Eberhart, S., & Russel, W. A. (1966). Stability Parameters for Comparing Variaaties. Crop Science, 6, 36-40. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1966.0011183X000600010011x Kassa, L. D., Smith, M. F., & Fufa, H. (2006). Stability analysis of grain yield of tef (Eragrostis tef) using the as.ideasspread.org Agricultural Science Vol. 2, No. 1; 2020 235 Published by IDEAS SPREAD mixed model approach. South African Journal of Plant and Soil, 23(1), 38-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/02571862.2006.10634727 Kebebew, A., Getachew, B., Hailu, T., Ju-kyung, Y., & Mark, E. S. (2009). Breedinf tef:Conventional and Moleculra Approaches. In Z. Tadele (Ed.), New Approaches to Planr Breeding of Orphan crops in Africa : proceeding of an Interanational cofference, 19-21 (pp. 21-25). Bern ,Switzerland . Ketema, S. (1993). Tef(Eragrostis tef): Breeding,Genetic Resources, Agronomic, Utilization and Role in Ethiopia . Institute of Agricultural Research. Mizan, T. A., Hussein, S., Mark, L., & Kebebew, A. (2016). Performance of Tef [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter] Genotypes for Yield and Yield Components Under Drought-Stressed and Non-Stressed Conditions. Crop Science, 56. Mizan, T. A., Shimelis, H., Mark, L., & Kebebew, A. (2017). Genetic variation and trait association of tef [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter] evaluated under optimal and moisture stressed environments. Australian journal of crop science. AJCS, 11(03), 241-247. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2015.07.0449 Molla, F., Nigus, D., & Tsedalu, J. (2012). Participatory on farm performance evaluation of improved Tef (Eragrostis tef L) varieties in East Belessa, north western Ethiopia. International Research Journal of Plant Science, 3(7), 137-140. Natol, B., Tolessa, T., & Belda, I. (2018). Performance Evaluation and Adaptation Trial of Tef Genotypes for Moisture Stress Areas of Borana, Southern Oromia. Advances in Crop Science and Technology, 6(3). Patrick, R. (1982). An extension of Shapiro and Wilk's W test for normality to large samples. Applied Statistics, 31, 115–124. https://doi.org/10.2307/2347973 Pinheiro, J. C., & Bates, D. M. (2000). Mixed-Effects Models in S and S-PLUS, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0318-1 SAS. (2004). SAS (.1.3 Users Guide cary, NC ::SAS institute Inc. S. Memon, M. J, USA . Seyfu, K. (1993). Tef {Eragrostis tef(Zucc)Troter} Breeding genetic resource, agronomy utilization and role of in Ethiopia agriculture.Institute of agricultural research. Addis Ababa. Tefera, H., & Ketama, S. (2000). production andImportnace of tefin Ethiopia Agriculture. In H. Tefera, G. Belay, & M. Sorrel (Ed.), Proceeding of the International Workship on Tef Genetics and improvement (pp. 16-19). Addis Ababa. Tiruneh, K., Hailu, T., Kebebew, A., & Mulu, A. (2000). Phenotypic diversity for qualitative and phenologic characters in germplasm collections of tef (Eragrostis tef). Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, 47, 73– 80. Vavilov. (1951). The origin, variation, immunity and breeding of cultivated plants. Translated from the russian by K.S. Chester, Ronald Press Co.New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-195112000-00018 Wilcox, R. R. (1989) Comparing the variances of dependent groups. Psychometrika, 54, 305-315. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294522 Wilsie. (1962). Crop Adaptation and Ditribution . san Francisco: freeman and Co.,. Worku, K. (2018). Genetic Variability and Association of Yield and Yield Related Traits in Drought Tolerant Tef [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter] Genotypes in the Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia. Zerihun T. (2016). Drought Adaptation in Millets. In Arun K. Shanker & Chitra Shanker (Eds.), Aboitic and Biotic stress in plant, Recent Advance and future perspectives. INTech. Janeza trdine Croatio. << /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false /AutoPositionEPSFiles true /AutoRotatePages /None /Binding /Left /CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20%) /CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Error /CompatibilityLevel 1.4 /CompressObjects /Tags /CompressPages true /ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages true /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default /DetectBlends true /DetectCurves 0.0000 /ColorConversionStrategy /CMYK /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true /EmbedOpenType false /ParseICCProfilesInComments true /EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576 /LockDistillerParams false /MaxSubsetPct 100 /Optimize true /OPM 1 /ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true /PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveDICMYKValues true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveFlatness true /PreserveHalftoneInfo false /PreserveOPIComments true /PreserveOverprintSettings true /StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts true /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply /UCRandBGInfo /Preserve /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile () /AlwaysEmbed [ true ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages false /CropColorImages true /ColorImageMinResolution 300 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleColorImages true /ColorImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /ColorImageResolution 300 /ColorImageDepth -1 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeColorImages true /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages true /GrayImageMinResolution 300 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000GrayImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages true /MonoImageMinResolution 1200 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict << /K -1 >> /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None ] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile () /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier () /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName () /PDFXTrapped /False /CreateJDFFile false /Description << /ARA /BGR /CHS /CHT /CZE /DAN /DEU /ESP /ETI /FRA /GRE /HEB /HRV (Za stvaranje Adobe PDF dokumenata najpogodnijih za visokokvalitetni ispis prije tiskanja koristite ove postavke. Stvoreni PDF dokumenti mogu se otvoriti Acrobat i Adobe Reader 5.0 i kasnijim verzijama.) /HUN /ITA /JPN /KOR /LTH /LVI /NLD (Gebruik deze instellingen om Adobe PDF-documenten te maken die zijn geoptimaliseerd voor prepress-afdrukken van hoge kwaliteit. De gemaakte PDF-documenten kunnen worden geopend met Acrobat en Adobe Reader 5.0 en hoger.) /NOR /POL /PTB /RUM /RUS /SKY /SLV /SUO /SVE /TUR /UKR /ENU (Use these settings to create Adobe PDF documents best suited for high-quality prepress printing. Created PDF documents can be opened with Acrobat and Adobe Reader 5.0 and later.) >> /Namespace [ (Adobe) (Common) (1.0) ] /OtherNamespaces [ << /AsReaderSpreads false /CropImagesToFrames true /ErrorControl /WarnAndContinue /FlattenerIgnoreSpreadOverrides false /IncludeGuidesGrids false /IncludeNonPrinting false /IncludeSlug false /Namespace [ (Adobe) (InDesign) (4.0) ] /OmitPlacedBitmaps false /OmitPlacedEPS false /OmitPlacedPDF false /SimulateOverprint /Legacy >> << /AddBleedMarks false /AddColorBars false /AddCropMarks false /AddPageInfo false /AddRegMarks false /ConvertColors /ConvertToCMYK /DestinationProfileName () /DestinationProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /Downsample16BitImages true /FlattenerPreset << /PresetSelector /MediumResolution >> /FormElements false /GenerateStructure false /IncludeBookmarks false /IncludeHyperlinks false /IncludeInteractive false /IncludeLayers false /IncludeProfiles false /MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings /Namespace [ (Adobe) (CreativeSuite) (2.0) ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /PreserveEditing true /UntaggedCMYKHandling /LeaveUntagged /UntaggedRGBHandling /UseDocumentProfile /UseDocumentBleed false >> ] >> setdistillerparams << /HWResolution [2400 2400] /PageSize [612.000 792.000] >> setpagedevice