مهندسی زراعی

شماره جاری

بر اساس شماره‌های نشریه

بر اساس نویسندگان

بر اساس موضوعات

نمایه نویسندگان

نمایه کلیدواژه ها

درباره نشریه

اهداف و چشم انداز

بانک ها و نمایه نامه ها

پیوندهای مفید

پرسش‌های متداول

فرایند پذیرش مقالات

بررسی تاثیر همزمان کاربرد عناصر کم مصرف و اسید هیومیک بر برخی ویژگی‌ها کمی و کیفی چغندرقند (Beta vulgaris L.) رقم یونیورس

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه علوم زراعی دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه ارومیه، ارومیه، ایران

2 استادیار گروه علوم خاک دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه ارومیه، ارومیه، ایران

3 دانشجوی دکتری گروه علوم زراعی دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه ارومیه، ارومیه، ایران

چکیده

به منظور بررسی تاثیر اسید هیومیک و عناصر کم‌مصرف بر برخی از ویژگی‎های کمی و کیفی چغندرقند رقم یونیورس آزمایشی به صورت فاکتوریل در قالب طرح پایه بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار در اراضی تحقیقاتی کارخانه چغندرقند نقده اجرا گردید. تیمارهای آزمایشی شامل مقادیر مختلف اسید هیومیک شامل صفر، 200، 300، 400، 500 و 600 کیلوگرم در هکتار و محلول‌پاشی عناصر کم‌مصرف (آهن، روی، بر، منگنز و شاهد) به عنوان فاکتور دوم در نظر گرفته شد. صفات مورد مطالعه شامل درصد قند ناخالص، مقدار سدیم، پتاسیم و نیتروژن در غده، شاخص قلیایئت، ضریب استحصال قند، عملکرد ریشه، درصد قند خالص و قند ملاس بود. نتایج نشان داد که حداکثر درصد قند ناخالص (67/18 درصد)، خالص (30/16 درصد) و ضریب استحصال شکر (25/87 درصد) از تیمار مصرفی 500 کیلوگرم در هکتار اسید هیومیک با محلول‌پاشی بور (B) بدست آمد. کاربرد عناصر کم‌مصرف و اسید هیومیک سبب کاهش میزان قند ملاس و افزایش درصد پتاسیم ریشه چغندرقند گردید. افزایش مقادیر‌ مصرفی اسید هیومیک به ترتیب سبب افزایش درصد عملکرد ریشه (08/ 29 درصد)، عملکرد قند ناخالص (75/32 درصد) و شاخص قلیایئت (39/29)، نسبت به تیمار شاهد شد. همچنین با افزایش مواد هومیکی مقادیر نیتروژن (58/27 درصد) و سدیم (89/24 درصد) در ریشه چغندرقند کاهش یافت. حداکثر عملکرد ریشه (96 /68 تن در هکتار) و عملکرد قند ناخالص (18/12 تن در هکتار) در تیمار با منگنز (Mn) به دست آمد. لذا جهت نیل به کشاورزی پایدار و افزایش عملکرد کمی و کیفی چغندرقندکاربرد اسید هومیک همراه با عناصرکم مصرف توصیه می شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating the effect of micronutrient and humic acid application on quantitative and qualitative characteristics of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.), Univers variety

نویسندگان [English]

  • Amir Rahimi 1
  • Behnam Doulati 2
  • Saied Heydarzadeh 3

1 Assistance Professor of Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Urmia, Iran

2 Assistance Professor of Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Urmia, Iran

3 PhD Student in Agroecology, Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Urmia, Iran

چکیده [English]

Introduction Nutritional deficiencies (e.g. Iron, Zinc, Manganese and Boron) account for almost two‐thirds of the childhood death worldwide. Most of those afflicted are dependent on staple crops for their sustenance. Declining soil fertility in many countries, duo to continuous cropping systems, has reduced soil production capacity affected by depletion of soil nutrient without proper replacement. Soil application of prepared humic substances is not economical, but the response to foliar sprays has the potential to be economical because the relatively small quantities are needed. Foliar application is one of the swift response methods for plants to add fertilizer, which leads to dispel of nutrients deficiency and providence in the use of chemical fertilizers. The solubility of nutrients decreases in soils with high acidity or undesirable chemical composition and can be possibility of ionic competition (Antagonism) or the accumulation of nutrient in soilcanlee resulthed. Therefore, adsorption of nutrients and root growth will be inappropriate. On the other hand, the application of humic substance with improving physical, chemical and biological conditions causes an increase in adsorption and soil fertility. Using humic substances is another benefit of the reduction of environmental pollution in order to achieve sustainable agriculture. A sugar beet is a plant whose root contains a high concentration of sucrose and which is grown commercially for sugar production. Sugar beet is one of the strategic crops and is widely cultivated in the West Azerbaijan region. So, the aim of this study was to investigate the application of humic substances and micronutrient on some quantitative and qualitative characteristics of sugar beet.
Material and Methods This study was carried out as a randomized complete block design with six levels of humic substance (0, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600 kg ha-1) and foliar application of micronutrients including Fe, Zn, B, and Mn with 3 replications. Physicochemical properties of soil (calcium carbonate equilibrium, pH, OC, EC, micro and macro elements, soil texture) were determined by standard methods. There fore, quantitative and qualitative characteristics of sugar beet including total sugar content, pure sugar content, and molasses sugar content, Na, K and N content in root, alkalinity, sugar extraction coefficient, root yield and pure sugar and total sugar yield were determined in sugar beet samples.
Results The results showed that the application of humic and micronutrient was significant in qualitative and quantitative characteristics of sugar beet. Maximum root yield (68.96 ton ha-1) was obtained in the Mn treatment. The highest of pure (16.30%), gross sugars (18.68%) and sugar extraction coefficient (87.25%) was observed in B and 500 kg ha-1 of humic asid treatment. Humic acid application increased nitrogen (27.58%) and root yield (29.08%) compared to control. Also, micronutrient and humic substance application reduced the molasses sugar content and increased potassium in the root of sugar beet. So that the highest (3.48%) and lowest (2.37%) amounts of molasses sugar were obtained in control and 500 kg ha-1 humic acid plus B treatment respectively. Boron is much required for cell division and development in the growth regions of the plant near the tips of shoots and roots. It also affects sugar transport and appears to be associated with some of the functions of calcium.
Conclusion According to the results of this study, foliar application of humic substance and micronutrient improved qualitative and quantitative characteristics of sugar beet. The root and refined sugar yields are among the most important components in sugar beet production. Also, treatment of 600 kg ha-1 of humic acid and Mn spraying had the greatest effect on the root and gross sugars yield in sugar beet. Also, the amount of molasses sugar decreased with increasing sugar content and replacing potassium instead of harmful elements. Application of Mn and B may need to be considered for sugar beets. Foliar fertilization with Mn has the beneficial effect mainly on such features like White sugar yield, root, gross sugars yield, and the number of leaves per single sugar beet plants. It can be concluded that the contemporary use of humic substance and micronutrient is recommended in order to achieve adequate yield and preserve the environment.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Extraction coefficient
  • Humic acid
  • Sugar beet
  • Pure sugar
  • Root yield
  • Sustainable agriculture
مراجع
  1. Ahmadpur Dehkordi, A., and Tadayon, M.R. 2013. Effect of urban wastewater, spent mushroom compost, sheep manure and chemical fertilizer on physiological traits and growth of sugar beet (Beta Vulgaris L.). Plant Process and Function. 4:12. 72-61. (In Persian with English abstrac).
  2. Ayas, H., and Gulser, F. 2005. The effects of sulfur and humic acid on yield components and macronutrient contents of spinach (Spinacia Oleracea Var. Spinoza). The Journal of Biological Sciences, 5(6): 801-804.
  3. Azin Pour, K. 2010. Investigate the use of different strains of Azoto bacter, Hiomic acid composition of micronutrients Berrer some physiological traits in wheat. Master's thesis, Department of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture - Natural Resources Karaj Azad. (In Persian with English abstrac).
  4. Bybordi, A., and Mamedov, G. 2010. Evaluation of application methods efficiency of zink and iron for canola (Brassica napus L.). Notulae Scientia Biologicae, 2(1): 21-30.
  5. Camberato, J.J. 2004. Foliar application on sugar beet. Journal of Fruit and Ornamental Plant Research, 12: 120-126.
  6. Chapman, HD., and Pratt, PF. 1978. Methods of analysis for soils, plants and waters. Division of Agricultural Sciences University of California Berkeley USA, 3043p.
  7. Clarke, J.M., Richards, R.A., and Condon, A.G. 1991. Effect of drought stress on residual transpiration and its relationship with water use of wheat. Journal of Plant Science, 71: 695-702.
  8. Cookd, A., and Scott, P.K. 1993. The sugar beet crop science in to practice Chapman and Hall. London, World Crop Series, 675 pp.
  9. Cooke, D.A., and Scott, R.K. 1993. Sugar beet crop science into practice. Published by Chapman and Hall, 304pp.
  10. Dutton, J., and Bowler, G. 1984. Money is still being wasted on nitrogen fertilizer. British Sugar Beet Review, 2: 75-77.
  11. Ebrahimipak, N.A., and Mostashari, M. 2012. Evaluation of irrigation water management and boron fertilizer to increase water use efficiency of sugar beet. Water and Irrigation Management, 2(2): 53-67. (In Persian with English abstrac).
  12. Ehsan, S., Javed, S., Saleem, I., and Niaz, A. 2016. Effect of humic acid on micronutrient availability and grain yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Agricultural Research, 54(2).172-184.
  13. El-Hassanin, A.S., Samak, M.R., Moustafa, N., Shafika, A.M., Khalifa, N., and Ibrahim Inas, M. 2016. Effect of foliar application with humic acid substances under nitrogen fertilization levels on quality and yields of sugar beet plant. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 5(11): 668-680.
  14. Feckova, J., Pacuta, V., and Cerny, I. 2005. Effect of foliar preparations and variety on sugar beet yield and quality. Journal of Central European Agriculture, 6(3):295-308.
  15. Flavy, A., and Vukou, K. 1977. Physics and Chemistry of Sugar Beet in Sugar Manufacture. Elsiviere Science Ltd. Co. Hungry, 596 pp.
  16. Hassanzadeh Azar, S., Roshdi, M., and Futohi, K. 2009. The effect of foliar micronutrients, zinc and manganese on the properties of sugar beet root qualitative and quantitative components. Journal of Crop Sciences, 2 (5): 25-13. (In Persian with English abstrac).
  17. Honarvar, M. Ashtari, A.K., and Karimi, K. 2012. Estimation of sugar losses at production in Molasses sugar industries, based on technological qualities of sugar beet. Journal of Food Technology and Nutrition, 9: 31-38. (In Persian with English abstrac).
  18.  Jahan, M., Nassiri Mahallati, M.,  Ranjbar, F.,  Aryaee, M., and Kamayestani, N. 2014. The effects of super absorbent polymer application into soil and humic acid foliar application on some agrophysiological criteria and quantitative and qualitative yield of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) under Mashhad conditions. Agroecology. 6(4): 753-766. (In Persian with English abstrac).
  19. Jalilian, J., and Heydarzadeh, S. 2015. Effect of cover crops, organic and chemical fertilizer on the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius). Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 25: 71-85. (In Persian with English abstrac).
  20. Jalilian, J., Kohnaward, P., and Pirzad, A. 2016. Safflower Growth as Affected by Cropping Intensity and Micronutrient Foliar Spray. Journal of Crop Improvement, 30(3): 259-273.
  21. Janmohammadi, M., Abdoli, H., Sabaghnia, N., Esmailpour, M., and Aghaei, A. 2018. The Effect of Iron, Zinc and Organic Fertilizer on Yield of Chickpea (Cicer artietinum L.) in Mediterranean Climate. Acta Universitatis Agricultural Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 66(1): 49-60.
  22. Jokar, L., and Ronaghi, A.  2015. Effect of foliar application of different Fe levels and sources on growth and concentration of some nutrients in sorghum. Journal of Greenhouse Culture Science and Technology, 6(22): 163-174.
  23. Jozi, M., and Zare Abianeh, H. 2015. Effect of N-fertilizer levels and deficit irrigation on qualitative and quantitative yield of sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet, 31(2): 141-156. (In Persian with English abstrac).
  24. Khorshidi, A.M., Ayuzi, A., and Nyazkhany, M. 2013. The effect of foliar application of micronutrients on quantity and quality of sugar beet genotypes. Journal of Crop Sciences, 6 (21): 110-10. (In Persian with English abstrac).
  25. Lindsay, W.L., and Norvell, W.A. 1978. Development of a DTPA soil test for zinc, iron, manganese, and copper, Soil Science Society of America Journal, 42: 421–428.
  26. Marschner, H. 1995. Mineral nutrition of higher plants. 2nd Academic Press, Ltd. London. 452pp.
  27. Mehdi, S.S., Farzad, P., Hossein, H.D., Hamid, M., Majid, M., and Mohamad, R.T. 2013. Effect of intermittent furrow irrigation, humic acid and deficit irrigation on water use efficiency of sugar beet. Annals of Biological Research, 4 (3):187-193. (In Persian with English abstrac).
  28. Nardi, S., Pizzeghello, D., Muscolo, A., and Vianello, A. 2002. Physiological effects of humic substances on higher plants. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 34: 1527–1536.
  29. Nelson, DW., and Sommers, LE. 1982. Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. In: Page AL, Miller RH and Keeney DR (ed.), Methods of soil analysis part 2. America Society Agronomy, Soil Science Society of America Journal, Madison Wisconsin, pp: 539–579.
  30. Olsen, SR., and Sommers, LE. 1982. Phosphorus. In: Page AL, Miller RH and Keeney DR (ed.), Methods of soil analysis part 2. America Society Agronomy, Soil Science Society of America Journal, Madison Wisconsin, pp: 403-430.
  31. Osman, K.T. 2018. Acid soils and acid sulfate soils. In management of soil problems, Springer, Cham, pp: 299-332.
  32. Ouda Sohier, M.M. 2005. Yield and quality of sugar beet as affected by planting density and nitrogen fertilizer levels in the newly reclaimed soil. Sugar Crop Res. Egypt.
  33. Pahlavan, M.R., Keykha, G.A., Eatesa, G.R., Akbarimoghaddam, H., Kookhan, S.A., and Naroueiral, M.R. 2006. The study of effects Zn, Fe and Mn on quantity and quality of grain wheat. Presented in 18th World Congress of Soil Science, 23pp.
  34. Rahimi, A., and Arslan, N. 2012. Effect of soil salinity (EC) and pH on quality component of sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris L.). 1st International Anatolian Sugar Beet Symposium, Kayseri, Turkey, Symposium book, 1:118-135.
  35. Rassam, G., Dadkhah, A., Khoshnood yazdi, A., and Dashti, M. 2015. Impact of humic acid on yield and quality of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L) grown on calcareous soil. Notulae Scientia Biologicae, 7(3):367-371.
  36. Ravi, S., Channal, H.T., Hebsur, N.S., Patil, B.N., and Dharmatti, P.R. 2008. Effect of sulphur, zinc and iron nutrition on growth, yield, nutrient uptake and quality of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.). Karnataka Journal Agriculture Science, 32: 382-385.
  37. Reinefeld, E., Emmerich, A., Baumarten, G., Winner, C., and Beiss, U. 1974. Zur voraussage des melasse zuckers aus Rubenanalysen. Zucker, 27: 2-15.
  38. Shaban, K.H.A., Eman, H.A.F., and Dalia, A.S. 2014. Impact of humic acid and mineral nitrogen fertilization on soil chemical properties and yield and quality of sugar beet under saline. Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering, 5 (10): 1335- 1353.
  39. Shariatmadari, M.J., Zamani, G., and Siyari, M.j. 2012. The effects of salinity and iron sulphate on leaf area index, percentage of light absorption and their relationship with sunflower yield. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 9 (2): 293-285. (in Persian with English abstrac).
  40. Shekhawat, A.S., Purohit, H.S., Meena, R.H., and Jat, G. 2017. Efficiency of inorganic and organic fertilizers on soil health and yield of black gram (Vigna mungo L.). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 6(8): 690-696.
  41. Shiemshi, D. 2007. Leaf chlorosis and stomatal aperture. New Phytologist, 166: 455-461.
  42. Shukla, A.K., Behera, S.K., Pakhre, A., and Chaudhari, S.K. 2018. Micronutrients in soils, plants, animals and humans. Indian Journal of Fertilisers, 14(3): 30-54.
  43. Tan, K.H. 2014. Humic matter in soil and the environment: principles and controversies. Second Edition, CRC Press, 495 pp.
  44. Vaughan, D., and MacDonald, I.R. 1976. Some effects of humic acid on cation uptake by parenchyma tissue. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 8: 421-425.
  45. Yarnya, M., Farajzadeh, E., Rezaei, F., and Nobari, N. 2009. Effect of application method of micronutrient on yield of sugar beet varieties monogerm "Rasoul". Journal of Agricultural Scientific Research of Islamic Azad University of Tabriz Branch, 10: 31- 46. (In Persian with English abstrac).
  46. Yildirim, E. 2007. Foliar and soil fertilization of humic acid affect productivity and quality of tomato. Journal Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B - Soil and Plant Science. 57(2): 182-186.
مهندسی زراعی
دوره 41، شماره 4
اسفند 1397
صفحه 83-97
فایل ها
هم رسانی
ارجاع به این مقاله
آمار