ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Techinical-economic study in avocado cultivation, Atahualpa Canton, El Oro Province

Ing. Richard Fabricio Vásquez-Aguilar^{1  *} 
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6603-5180

MSc. Segress García-Hevia¹ 
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6178-9872

¹Universidad de Guayaquil, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Guayaquil, Ecuador.

ABSTRACT

Avocado presents a growing demand in the international market, as well as an increase in its price. Currently don´t represent the most diversified cultivation in the study area. However, by a growing demand is required study that show its profibility and input to farmers income, those haven´t identified the avocado production and marketing as economic alternative The research objective is realize technical-economic study for avocado small production, in El Tambo farm Atahualpa canton, El Oro province.

Scientific sources were reviewed and interviews and surveys were conducted with entrepreneurs and producers in the zone, using the observation and surveys, determining the main parameters involved in the avocado production and the expenses that affect it. The results show the Hass avocado represent an profibility economic alternative for small producers in Atahualpa canton. The benefits/cost indicator obtained for the third, quarter, fifth and sixth planted the crop reaches values of 0.28; 0.56; 0.67 and 1.22, respectively. The costs per kilogram of avocado in El Tambo farm, will oscillate between 1.67 and 0.67 USD for the third to sixth planted

Keywords: Cost per kilogram; Benefits/Cost Indicator; Profibility

INTRODUCTION

According to ^{INEC (2020)} during the year 2019, Ecuador had 5 738 ha planted of avocado as principal culture and 1 338 ha as associated culture, of theses only 31 ha corresponded to El Oro region with a production of 66 t. Despite this area is yet not enough, is important highlight that, in the year 2018, according the same source, they did not report avocado plantations in the zone, what evidence does not exist policy for the production and development of the crop as economic alternative to small farmers.

Internationally the most marketing varieties are the Guatemalan or Mexican origin, mainly Hass, Fuerte and Naval (^{Díaz & Arango, 2010}). The main variety what had produced to high scale in the latest five years is Hass avocado, reporting in 2017 almost 700 hectares (^{Briones et al., 2018}). This variety comes from a mixture between Mexican and Guatemalan avocado. It is increment is about nutritive fruit characteristic and unique flavor, also its resistance for the marketing (^{INIA, 2015}).

According ^{Pozo (2018)} the production costs per hectare of avocado oscillated between 12 000 & 14 000 USD, considering factors as a plant, maintenance, fertilizer and payment to workers. For each hectares is require in average three workers, two fixed and one eventual for fumigation, pruning and cleaning labors.

For starting to produce need the three to five years and reached high capacity at seven, but have a useful life between 30and 40 years. One of the highest items of investment is the irrigation, one kilogram of avocado need one thousand liters of water (^{Cañizares, 2016}).

A technical study tries to verify the technical possibility of sowing a product to be cultivated (^{Jhon, 1997}).This kind of study will allow reaching the high profibility in the farm, through correct choice of variety and culture to plant (^{Carvajal et al., 2015}). Also technical study, plantation profibility is essential to base any project or agriculture investment (^{Perilla et al., 2011}).

Adequate economic analyses allow identify limiting, opportunities, alternatives and risks. The costs accounting proportion date for monitoring enterprises activities, provide the necessary accompaniment to reached goals and act as an aid in making decision corrective, because to contribute to maintenance or increase the utilities. The basic elements of this costs are raw material, labor and direct production costs, as equipment rent, irrigation water quota, machinery depreciation and equipment among others (^{Chacón et al., 2006}; ^{Burbano, 2008}; ^{Molina, 2009}).

The present investigation is carried out with the objective of realize a technical- economic study for the avocado small production, in the farm El Tambo, El Oro Province

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The researcher was realized in El Tambo farm, Ayapamba parrish, Atahualpa canton, El Oro province. This population is the 1 387 habitants, (^{INEC, 2020}). The study area has 2 ha that will be used for the avocado plantation

Sample determination

The probabilistic method employed for the determination of sample number was by cluster ^{Zapata et al.(2011)}; ^{Otzen & Manterola (2017)}, valid to realize studies about population survey and prevalence

Was considered part of universe of small producers, potential customers who are dedicated direct and indirectly to production and consumption of avocado in the study zone

Methodology for technical and economic evaluation

The information for technical and economic study was obtained of theorist referents that exist. Interview technique was utilized, directed to entrepreneur and crop producer and the interview to agricultural producers of study area (who be or not dedicated to avocado crop)

For economic evaluation the expenses that will affect in avocado production were determined, those will be counting in adequate calculus spreadsheet to Collect the information, taking to account cost production, relation benefits cost, the profibility and the production costs of one kilogram of avocado.

Relation BenefitS Cost (B/C) and Profibility Calculus

$\mathrm{B}/\mathrm{C}\mathrm{}=\frac{\mathrm{N}\mathrm{E}\mathrm{T}\mathrm{}\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{M}\mathrm{E}}{\mathrm{}\mathrm{T}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{T}\mathrm{A}\mathrm{L}\mathrm{}\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{S}\mathrm{T}}$ (1)

$\mathrm{I}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{v}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{l}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{y}\mathrm{}=\frac{\mathrm{N}\mathrm{E}\mathrm{T}\mathrm{}\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{M}\mathrm{E}}{\mathrm{}\mathrm{T}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{T}\mathrm{A}\mathrm{L}\mathrm{}\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{S}\mathrm{T}}\times 100$ (2)

CalculuS of Production CosT per kilogram of avocado

$\mathrm{C}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{}1\mathrm{}\mathrm{k}\mathrm{g}=\frac{\mathrm{T}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{T}\mathrm{A}\mathrm{L}\mathrm{}\mathrm{C}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{S}\mathrm{T}}{\mathrm{T}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{T}\mathrm{A}\mathrm{L}\mathrm{}\mathrm{P}\mathrm{R}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{D}\mathrm{U}\mathrm{C}\mathrm{T}\mathrm{I}\mathrm{O}\mathrm{N}}$ (3)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Interview to avocado producers in the study zone were conducted, through which it was possible to know that cultural task are carried out in an artisanal way, using the empiric knowledge acquired by different experiences and day-to-day events, learning of hits and failures they had to benefit of the crop.

Results of questionnaires to producers

The interview results to agricultural producers showed that a 60 % don’t produce avocado (12), but have in their future projections the entrepreneurship in this crop in their own places but in small scale in areas until 2 ha, this it reflect uncertainty of growing the fruit en larger areas. However the 37, 5 % of them are dedicate to other kinds of beans and fruits production

The 100 % of interviewees mentioned above, if they decide to grow the avocado fruit they would do in their own places dedicating small areas to a production (less of 2 ha)

Of those who declare themselves producers (8), 86 % have between 5 to 20 plants of avocado in their farms, belonging to an association the 50 % and realizing the activity in less of 2 ha in own places the 100 %. The main production activities are fruits (37, 5 %), horticulture and grains (18, 75 %) and mixed (25 %). The principal destinations are local shops (56,2 %), markets (30,8 %), intermediaries (15,4 %) and supermarkets (7,7 %).

To analysis how valuate, all interviewees (avocado producers or not), the offer, demand and profits (Figure 1) in a range to very high to null it is noted that 55 % of interviewees qualify the offer as medium while the demand oscillating between high and medium, 45 %in each case and the profits 70 % considered as medium.

FIGURE 1 Qualification the producers of the zone of offer, demand and profits of avocado cultivation. 

The commercialization of avocado produced in the area extends to a municipalities and provinces, 70 % of producers raises as main problems to carry out this activity the lack of knowledge, 15 % the pets and 5 % state of the local roads and prices. Potential customers are not identified which limits the marketing of the products.

Technical and economic evaluation results.

The interview to owner of el Tambo farm showed that he is an independent producer, his age oscillating between 31 to 45 years old, with a familiar nucleus integrated between 5 to 10 persons. He is interested in avocado cultivation, considering it economically attractive and it is a product of medium demand and offer medium products. He doesn’t have experience in avocado production and marketing, which can influence him to achieve a broader and more entrepreneurial vision. .

Has the minimum resource necessary for crop production. Intends to market the product with its own motorized transport, to a market extending to the province, didn’t have identifying your possible customers.

Aspires to market fresh avocado, knowing as the product price 1, 50 USD/Kg

The information recover in interviews realizes to producers of the zone and bibliographic consults ^{León (1999)}; ^{Bernal & Díaz (2008)}; ^{Herrera & Cruz (2017)}; ^{Sotomayor et al. (2019)} outstand as important aspects for a fruit production the showing in Figure 2.

FIGURE 2 Avocado production process. 

For this crop in specific we suggest the planting of Hass Variety for the before reasons exposed, standing out nutritive value, unique flavor and commercialization resentence. On the other hand ^{Cevallos (2013)} realized a study in Fuerte and Hass varieties in Ecuador, demonstrating that Hass variety produce more quantity of fruits in comparison with Fuerte variety.

The land preparation most be realizes with two or three months before for destroy pest and weeds. The recommended labors are: plowing, harrowed, subsoiled and leveled. The plowing and subsoiled are applied with purpose that soils remains loose at 70- 80 cm deep, to obtain a good drainage and aeration, besides this labor allow expands roots in a major space in finding to water and feeds.

For transplantation would be selected plants grafted proceeding of certified commercial nurseries. The planting distance recommended is 5 x 5, 30 meters, so ^{INIAP (2014)} confirm that a higher density of sowing in avocado cultivation obtain a higher production per unit surface, best fruit quality and more handle facilities.

During first year will be realize formation pruning and in a second the fructification and sanitation, in the latter only diseased, broken or dead branches will be removed. Starting fourth year is recommended making intercross branch pruning to allow that light comes perfectly to all tree top. In high density plantations can be top pruning to maintenance the tree size, facilitating pests control and harvest. Control weed should done an integral way, be priority to prevents methods that generate minimum environmental impacts (^{Almanza, 2010}; ^{Quinatoa, 2015}).

The fertilizers applied should be based on soil and foliar analysis, always finding obtained the possible higher profits economics, and agronomics without to damage environmental. In avocado case are very important macro nutrient applied as nitrogen (N) and potassium (K) and the secondary calcium (Ca) and magnesium (Mg). In soils with medium- high to higher contains of phosphorus (P) without pH problems or another factors that decreasing the availability of this element, only is recommended applied phosphorus (P) by maintenance (appy only the amount that extracting of the plot) and amount that plant needed every two or three years (^{Alfonso, 2008}).

Nitrogen fertilizers are broadcast 50 cm from the trunk until the trip drip and its subsequent incorporation into the soil superficially. In the case of phosphorous and potassium fertilizers these must be applied in hole of 20 -40 cm deep distributed in tree drip perimeter (15 to 20 holes according to size tree). When planting 250 g of NP-K and disinfection of the hole 8 days before panting. First year 18-5-15-6-2 (complete formula fertilizer) strengthened, accompanied with organic matter. Next years repeat the dosages and make application of Zinc, Boron and Magnesium (^{Alfonso, 2008}; ^{López, 2009}; ^{Díaz & Arango, 2010}; Tapia et al., 2014).

Water requirements in avocado depends on crop age, clime and kind of soil, the water needs through year can be estimated between 10 000 - 12 000 m³/ha (^{Salazar & Cortés, 1986}). During first year the cultivation must be count with sufficient water for irrigation in dry season by the way that trees received adequate amount of water to reach a good development in the future of plantation. (^{INFOAGRO, 2021}). In the production phase the irrigation increase the yield between 30 to 50 % improving the fruits organoleptic qualities and trees development. Hass avocado is highly productive and with drip irrigation, must be reach around 16 tons per hectare (^{Alfonso, 2008}).

The duration of the harvest depends on the height of the trees. For recollection is necessary have ladders, scissors or prunes. Production and harvest peaks are defined from February to March and August to September (^{INIAP, 2014}). The fruit will be collected with a part of peduncle to prevent the development of fungi, not receiving any hit or bruises or leaves in direct sunlight

In Ecuador the fruit is classified into large, medium and small, collection in boxes is recommended so that they are transported to the market

En el Ecuador la fruta se clasifica en grande, mediana y pequeña y se recomienda la recolección en cajas para sean transportadas a los mercados.

Production costs

Total cost was calculated in cost projection table (Table 1) per 1 ha of avocado, these values are given for the first six years for the plantation´s life.

Each farmer can make modify depends of zone where locating yours plantation and materials with it count.

The first year, the investment required to implement a 1 ha of avocado Hass is the 6 168,03 USD, increasing this value from the third year, because is the period where harvest begins and as the production increases, higher costs will be generated. Results matching with ^{INIAP (2014)} considering that harvest are the more expenses labors in avocado crop. Refer to investment required to implement one hectare of avocado (Hass or Fuerte), similar results obtained ^{Pilapaña (2013)} with a amount of 9 657.88 USD.

To estimated a kilogram number to produce it is established that in one hectare there would be approximately 350 plants, with an estimating yield of 10 t/ha in the third year of fruit planting, in the fourth year increase the production until 13 t/ha, in the fifth year 15 t/ha and in sixth year the production will reach 20 t/ha. With these production levels and a price of 1, 5 USD per kilogram, income will be generated from the third year with values of 15 000, 19 500; 22 500 y 30 000 USD, during the first four harvest years of the plantation. Net incomes at the six year increase respect to the first year of production (third year of planting) in 70 % what equals to 11 696 USD.

TABLE 1 Production costs in 1 ha for avocado crop. (USD) 

Crop: Avocado System: Extensive crop Located: Atahualpa Area: 1 ha Cycle:6 meses		Production cost of 1^st year			Production cost of 2^nd year			Production cost of 3^rd year			Production cost of 4^th year			Production cost of 5^th year			Production cost of 6^th year
Details	U	Amount.	U.C $	T.C $	Amount	U.C $	T.C $	Amount	U.C $	T.C $	Amount	U.C $	T.C $	Amount	U.C $	T.C $	Amount	U.C $	T.C $
Direct cost
Workforce
Cleaning	J	4	20	80	4	20	80	4	20	80	4	20	80	4	20	80	4	20	80
Plow	J	2	20	40
Harrow	J	2	20	40
Subsoiled	J	2	20	40
Level	J	2	20	40
Layout and marking of the hole	J	4	20	80
Transplant	J	4	20	80
Irrigation system installation	J	3	20	60
Irrigation maint.	J				3	20	60	3	20	60	3	20	60	3	20	60	3	20	60
Subtotal 1		14		460	7		140	7		140	7		140	7		140	7		140
Sowing
Sowiing	J	3	20	60
Subtotal 2		3		60
Agricultural labors
Weeds control	J	3	20	60	2	20	40	2	20	40	2	20	40	2	20	40	2	20	40
Formation pruning	J	2	20	40
Sanitation pruning	J				3	20	60	3	20	60	3	20	60	3	20	60	3	20	60
Intercross branch pruning	J							2	20	40	2	20	40	2	20	40	2	20	40
Subtotal 3		5		100	5		100	7		140	7		140	7		140	7		140
Equipment and materials
Hoe	U	2	20	40
Fumigate pump	U	1	30	30
Ladderss	U	10	20	200
Pruning scissors	U	5	20	100
Plastic boxes (for a harvest)	U							30	4.80	144	10	4.80	48	10	4.80	48	10	4.80	48
Irrigation system	U	1		3 364.0
Subtotal 4		7		3 734.0				30		144	10		48	10		48	10		48
Harvest
Fruit picking and transfer	J							480	20	9 600	600	20	12 000	650	20	13 000	650	20	13 000
Subtotal 5								480		9 600	600		12 000	650		13 000	650		13 000
Supplies
Seedlings	U	360	5	1 800
Subtotal 6		360		1 800
Fertilizers
Chemical fertilizer	Bol- sa 50 kg	2	30	60	2	30	60	2	30	60	2	30	60	2	30	60	2	30	60
Organic fertilizer	Bol-sa 50 kg	2	7	14
Subtotal 7		4		74	2		60	2		60	2		60	2		60	2		60
Insecticides. herbicidal. fungicides
Diurón 80% SC	l				4	15.3	61.4	4	15.3	61.4	4	15.3	61.4	4	15.3	61.4	4	15.3	61.4
Glifosato	l				4	5.8	23.2	4	5.8	23.2	4	5.8	23.2	4	5.8	23.2	4	5.8	23.2
Subtotal 8					8		84. 6	8		84. 6	8		84. 6	8		84. 6	8		84. 6
Total directs costs				6 168.03			384.6			10 168.6			12 472.6			13 472.6			13 472.6
Indirect costs
Total production costs				6 168.03			384.6			10 168.6			12 472.6			13 472.6			13 472.6
Ingreso bruto
Product sale	kg							10 000	1.5	15 000	13 000	1.5	19 500	15 000	1.5	22 500	20 000	1.5	30 000
Net income										4 831.4			7 027.4			9 027.4			16 527.4

Levels incomes and production costs presented, show that the plantation begins to generate profits during the third year of planting, since during the first two years gross profits are generated in sales with negative results, reaching the recovery of the investment in the first six years cultivation established (Table 2).

TABLE 2 Profitability analysis of avocado crop in 1 ha of land 

Indicators	3^rd year	4^th year	5^th year	6^th year
Net income	$ 4 831,4	$ 7 027,4	$ 9 027,4	$ 16 527,4
Total cost of production	$ 16 721,23	$ 12 472,6	$ 13 472,6	$ 13 472,6
B/C ratio	0,28	0,56	0,67	1,22
Investment profibility	28 %	56 %	67 %	122 %

The cost/benefit ratio obtained for the fourth, fifth and six year of planting reaches values of 0, 28; 0, 56; 0,67 and 1,22, respectively. Which shows the feasibility of crop, in the sixth year obtaining a profit of 0, 22 USD for every dollar invested, which over the years will continue to increase significantly because avocado is a perennial crop

Production cost per kilogram of avocado

Production cost per kilogram of avocado decrease over the years (Table 3), because the crop gradually increases its production. Coinciding with ^{Pilapaña (2013)} who affirm that avocado production increases yearly until reach its higher production in the nine years.

TABLE 3 Production cost per kilogram of avocado 

Indicators	3^rd year	4^th year	5^th year	6^th year
Cost per1 kg	1.67	0.95	0.89	0.67

CONCLUSIONS

• The Hass avocado represents an economic profitable opportunity for small producers in Atahualpa canton, by its nutritional value, unique flavor, resistance to commercialization and because it produces more fruits compared with others varieties.

• The benefits /cost indicator obtained for the third, fourth, fifth and sixth years after planting the crop reaches values of 0,28; 0,56; 0,67 y 1,22 respectively.

• The production costs per kilogram of avocado at El Tambo farm in Atahualpa canton, El Oro province oscillating between 1,67 and 0,67 USD from third to sixth year of planting

REFERENCES

ALFONSO, B.J.A.: Manual técnico del cultivo de aguacate Hass (Persea americana L), La lima, Cortés, Honduras, 49 p., 2008.

ALMANZA, L.: “Bioplaguicida para el control del barrenador del hueso de aguacate”, Revista Claridades Agropecuarias, 216: 24-31, 2010.

BERNAL, J.A.; DÍAZ, C.A.: Tecnología para el Cultivo del Aguacate. Manual Técnico Corpoica, Rionegro, Ecuador, 2008, ISBN: 978-958-8311-74-6.

BRIONES, V.; INTRIAGO, J.; MARIA, V.; VASQUEZ, C.: “Análisis de las exportaciones del aguacate de la zona 5 y 8 del Ecuador hacia los mercados sustentables¨, Pol. Con, (Edición núm. 24) 3(1), 273-299pp, ISSN: 2550 - 682X, DOI: 10.23857/pcv3i1 Esp.672, 2018.

BURBANO, J.E.: Presupuestos. Enfoque de gestión, planeación y control de recursos, [en línea], Ed. McGraw Hill, Bogotá, Colombia, 2008, Disponible en:https://catedrafinancierags.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/burbanopresupuestosenfoquedegestic3b3n.pdf, [Consulta: 5 de diciembre de 2020].

CAÑIZARES, H.: Técnicas para el cultivo, manejo y mantenimiento de sembríos de aguacate, Ed. Green Planet, México D.F., 2016.

CARVAJAL, U.J.; PANIAGUA, A.A.; MORALES, A.F.: “Estudio técnico y financiero para la producción de una hectárea de acerola (Malpighia emarginata) en Puriscal, Costa Rica”, E-Agronegocios, 1(2), 2015, ISSN: 2215-3462.

CEVALLOS, M.: Manejo Agronómico del Cultivo de Aguacate con sistema de alta densidad, Ed. Unidad Técnica del Norte-INIAP, Ibarra, Ecuador, 2013.

CÁRDENAS, F.: Nutrición de aguacate. 5-15 pp., 2002.

LÓPEZ, C. D.:Manejo de nutrición y fertilización del aguacate Persea americana en el cantón Pimampiro provincia de Imbabura Loja Ecuador (Tesis en opción al título de ingeniero en administración y producción agropecuaria, Loja, Ecuador) Recuperado de https://dspace.unl.edu.ec, 2009.

CHACÓN, G.; BUSTOS, C.; ROJAS, E.S.: “Los procesos de producción y la contabilidad de costos”, Actualidad Contable Faces, 9(12): 16-26, 2006, ISSN: 1316-8633. e-ISSN: 2244-8772.

DÍAZ, S.D.A.; ARANGO, C.B.: Manual técnico del cultivo del aguacate, Ed. Aproare SAT-Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario ICA, Bogotá, Colombia, 2010.

HERRERA, M.; CRUZ, A.: Estudio de la producción y comercialización del aguacate (Persea americana) en las variedades Fuerte y Hass, en la provincia de Imbabura, Universidad Técnica del Norte. Carrera de Ingeniería en Agronegocios, avalúos y catastros, Trabajo de Grado. Ingeniero en Agronegocios, avalúos y catastros, Ibarra, Ecuador, 106 p., 2017.

INEC.: Instituto Nacional de Estadística de Ecuador Proyección cantonal total 2010-2020, [en línea], Inst. Instituto Nacional de Estadística de Ecuador (INEC), Quito, Ecuador, 2020, Disponible en:www.ecuadorencifras.com/www.inec.gov.ec, [Consulta: 5 de enero de 2021].

INFOAGRO.: El cultivo del aguacate (1^ra parte). Curso online fruticultura tropical, 2021. Disponible en:https://www.infoagro.com/frutas/frutastropicales/aguacate.htm, [Consulta:15 de febrero de 2021 .

INIAP. Aguacate INIAP tecnología, [en línea], Inst. Instituto Nacional Autónomo de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIAP), Quito, Ecuador, 2014, Disponible en: www. iniap.gob.ec:http://www.tecnologia.iniap.go.ec, [Consulta: 15 de febrero de 2021].

INIAP.: Evaluación de exportación de aguacate, [en línea], Inst. Instituto Nacional de Estadística de Ecuador (INEC), Quito, Ecuador, 2015, Disponible en: www. iniap.gob.ec:http://www.iniap.gob.ec/nsite/index.php?optioncom_content&viewarticle&id728:iniapevaluadistanciasdesiembraenelcultivodeaguacateconbuenosresultados&catid97&Itemid208, [Consulta: 5 de febrero de 2021].

JHON, M.: A Random Walk Down Wall Street, EEUU, Ed. Norton & Company, USA, 1997, ISBN: 978-0-393-31529-5.

LEÓN, F.J.: Manual del cultivo del aguacate para los valles interandinos del ecuador, Ed. INIAP: Instituto Nacional Autónomo de Investigaciones Agropecuarias, vol. Proyecto Fruticultura INIAP COSUDE, Quito, Ecuador, 1999.

MOLINA, O.: “La papa: Diversos elementos que intervienen en la cuantificación de su costo de producción”, Actualidad Contable Faces, 12(18): 73-80, 2009, ISSN: 1316-8633. e-ISSN: 2244-8772.

OTZEN, T.; MANTEROLA, C.: “Técnicas de Muestreo sobre una Población a Estudio”, International journal of morphology, 35(1): 227-232, 2017, ISSN: 0717-9367. e-ISSN 0717-9502.

PERILLA, A.; RODRÍGUEZ, L.F.; BERMÚDEZ, L.T.: “Estudio técnico-económico del sistema de producción de tomate bajo invernadero en Guateque, Sutatenza y Tenza (Boyacá)”, Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Hortícolas, 5(2): 220-232, 2011, ISSN: 2011-2173. e-ISSN: 2422-3719.

PILAPAÑA, J.G.S.: Rentabilidad de aguacate, durazno, mora y tomate de árbol en Carchi, Imbabura y Tungurahua, [en línea], Universidad Central del Ecuador-UCE, Tesis de Ingeniería Agronómica, Quito, Ecuador, 237 p., 2013, Disponible en:www.dspace.uce.edu.ec/T-UCE-0004-47.pdf, [Consulta:10 de diciembre de 2020].

POZO, A.: Estudio de factibilidad para la producción, comercialización y demanda del aguacate en el mercado, Inst. Ministerio de Agricultura-MAG, Informe institucional, Ibarra-Imbabura, Ecuador, 32 p., 2018.

Salazar, G. S.; Cortés, F. J. I.: ¨Root distribution of mature avocado growing in soils of different texture, Calif. Avocado Soc. Yrbk. 70:165-174, 1986.¨

QUINATOA, F.L.M.: Proyecto de pre-factibilidad para la implementación de un centro de acopio de aguacate hass en la parroquia Guayabamba y su comercialización en la ciudad de Quito, . Universidad Central del Ecuador-UCE, Tesis de Ingeniera en Administración de empresas, Quito, Ecuador, 2015.

SOTOMAYOR, A.; VIERA, W.; VITERI, P.; POSSO, M.; RACINES, M.; GONZÁLEZ, A.; CHO, K.; VILLAVICENCIO, A.: Manual Técnico para la producción de plantas injertas de aguacate (Persea americana Mill.), Ed. INIAP, vol. Manual N^o 108, Quito, Ecuador, 62 p., 2019.

ZAPATA, O.H. de J.; CUBIDES, M.A.M.; LÓPEZ, M.C.; PINZÓN, G.E.M.; FILIGRANA, V.P.A.; CASSIANI, M.C.A.: “Muestreo por conglomerados en encuestas poblacionales”, Revista de Salud Pública, 13(1): 141-151, 2011, ISSN: 0124-0064.

Received: February 25, 2021; Accepted: June 18, 2021

^*Author for correspondence: Richard Fabricio Vásquez-Aguilar, e-mail: [e-mail]

Richard Fabricio Vásquez-Aguilar, Estudiante Maestría en Agropecuaria, mención Agronegocios. Universidad de Guayaquil, Ecuador, e-mail: [e-mail]

Segress García-Hevia, Profesora, Universidad de Guayaquil, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Guayaquil, Ecuador, e-mail: [e-mail]

The authors of this work declare no conflict of interests.

The mention of trademarks of specific equipment, instruments or materials is for identification purposes, there being no promotional commitment in relation to them, neither by the authors nor by the publisher.