Effects of Silicon-Based Fertilizer on Growth of Pinus Pinea Seedlings

Öz

Silicon is a common element and is reported to play a critical role in the development processes of seedlings. In this study, the effects of different doses of silicon-based fertilization on the development of 2+0-year-old Pinus pinea seedlings were investigated. Five different doses (0 g, 5 g, 10 g, 15 g, and 30 g/seedling) were applied to the seedlings, with a total of 150 seedlings (10 seedlings x 3 replications x 5 doses) used in the experiment. The fertilization process was carried out in May 2024. In the study, root collar diameter (mm), seedling height (cm) and sturdiness quotient were determined every month. At the end of the vegetation period, needle, shoot, stem and root biomasses were determined in seedlings that were treated with silicon-based fertilizer at different doses. According to ANOVA results, while no statistical difference was found in root collar diameter and seedling height values, it was observed that applied silicon-based doses were statistically effective in the average sturdiness quotient in June and July (p=0.001). In addition, silicon-based fertilizer was found to be effective in increasing the average root collar diameter (p=0.014) and seedling height (p=0.001) in the May-June period. However, silicon-based fertilizer did not show a significant effect on needle, shoot, stem and root biomass (p>0.05). The highest biomass value was recorded in seedlings applied with 5 g dose. These findings show that silicon-based fertilizers have the potential to increase sturdiness quotient, diameter and height development in Pinus pinea seedlings.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Nursery
• Sturdiness quotient
• Root collar diameter
• Seedling height
• Biomass

Pinus pinea Fidanlarının Büyümesinde Silikon Bazlı Gübrelemenin Etkisi

Öz

Silikon, yaygın bir element olup fidanların gelişimindeki süreçlerde kritik bir rol oynadığı bildirilmektedir. Bu çalışmada farklı dozlarda silikon bazlı gübrelemenin 2+0 yaşlı fıstıkçamı (Pinus pinea) fidanlarının gelişimi üzerindeki etkileri araştırılmıştır. Fidanlara farklı silikon bazlı gübre dozları (0 g, 5 g, 10 g, 15 g ve 30 g/fidan) uygulanmış olup, denemede toplam 150 adet fidan (10 fidan x 3 tekerrür x 5 doz) kullanılmıştır. Gübreleme işlemi Mayıs 2024 tarihinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmada her ay kök boğazı çapı (mm), fidan boyu (cm) ve gürbüzlük indisi saptanmıştır. Vejetasyon dönemi sonunda farklı dozlarda silikon bazlı gübreleme yapılan fidanlarda iğne yaprak, sürgün, gövde ve kök biyokütleleri belirlenmiştir. ANOVA sonuçlarına göre, kök boğazı çapı ve fidan boyu değerlerinde istatistiksel fark bulunmazken, uygulanan silikon bazlı gübre dozlarının Haziran ve Temmuz ayı ortalama gürbüzlük indisinde istatistiksel anlamda etkili olduğu (p=0.001) görülmüştür. Ayrıca silikon ağırlıklı gübrelemenin Mayıs-Haziran dönemi ortalama kök boğazı çapı (p=0.014) ve fidan boyu (p=0.001) artımında etkili olduğu görülmüştür. Ancak silikon bazlı gübre uygulamasının iğne yaprak, sürgün, gövde ve kök biyokütle üzerinde anlamlı bir etki göstermemiştir (p>0.05). Bununla birlikte, en yüksek biyokütle değeri 5g doz uygulanan fidanlarda kaydedilmiştir. Bu bulgular, silikon bazlı gübrelerin Pinus pinea fidanlarında gürbüzlük indisi, çap ve boy gelişimini artırma potansiyeline sahip olduğunu göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Fidanlık
• Gürbüzlük indisi
• Kök boğazı çapı
• Fidan boyu
• Biyokütle

Kaynakça

1. Al Pavel MA, Bravo F, Ordóñez C, Rodríguez-García E (2024) Linking the effects of nursery light and fertilization and post-transplant first summer irrigation on the field survival and growth of Pinus pinaster seedlings. New Forests, 55(2):251-271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-023-09973-x
2. Ashfaq W, Brodie G, Fuentes S, Pang A, Gupta D (2024) Silicon improves root system and canopy physiology in wheat under drought stress. Plant and Soil, 502(1):279-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-023-06202-4
3. Ayan S, Civek E, Çelik ENY, Gülseven O, Akın ŞS, Yılmaz E (2020) Akdeniz ve Arizona servisi fidanlarının morfolojik kalite özellikleri. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(2):580-590. https://doi.org/10.24011/barofd.707871
4. Aytaş V, Tilki F (2012) Fidan tipi ve dikim zamanının Erzurum-Tortum yöresinde sarıçamın (Pinus sylvestris L.) dikim başarısına etkisi. Artvin Çoruh Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(1):13-24.
5. Balekoglu S, Caliskan S, Dirik H (2020) Effects of geoclimatic factors on the variability in Pinus pinea cone, seed, and seedling traits in Turkey native habitats. Ecological Processes, 9:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-020-00264-3
6. Balekoglu S, Caliskan S, Makineci E, Dirik H (2021) Influence of seed nitrogen and carbon on germination in different populations of stone pine. Erwerbs-Obstbau, 63:369–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10341-021-00593-3
7. Balekoglu S, Caliskan S, Dirik H, Rosner S (2023a) Response to drought stress differs among Pinus pinea provenances. Forest Ecology and Management, 531:120779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2023.120779
8. Balekoglu S, Caliskan S, Makineci E, Dirik H (2023b) An experimental assessment of carbon and nitrogen allocation in Pinus pinea populations under drought stress and rewatering treatment. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 210:105334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2023.105334

9. Boydak M, Çalışkan S (2014) Ağaçlandırma. Ormancılığı Geliştirme ve Orman Yangınları ile Mücadele Hizmetlerini Destekleme Vakfı (OGEM-VAK) Yayını, İstanbul.
10. Boydak M, Çalışkan S (2015) Afforestation in Arid and Semi-Arid Regions. The General Directorate of Combating Desertification and Erosion 64.
11. Chauhan SK, Sharma R (2017) Growth and quality indices of different nitrogen fixing tree nursery plants. Indian J Ecol, 44(2):344–347.
12. Coskun D, Deshmukh R, Sonah H, Menzies JG, Reynolds O, Ma JF, Bélanger RR (2019) The controversies of silicon's role in plant biology. New Phytologist, 221(1):67-85. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15343
13. Çalışkan S, Boydak M (2017) Afforestation of arid and semiarid ecosystems in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 41:317–330. https://doi.org/10.3906/tar-1702-39
14. Çalışkan S, Balekoğlu S, Dirik H (2023) Orman Ağaçlarında Kuraklık Stresi, İklim Değişikliği: Orman Ekosistemlerinde Etkileri ve Yönetimi. Palme Yayınevi, 29-51.
15. Deligöz A, Genç M, Özçelik H (2009) Kalite sınıflamasının Anadolu karaçamı [Pinus nigra Arn. subsp. pallasiana (Lamb.) Holmboe] fidanlarının arazi performansına etkisi. Turkish Journal of Forestry, 10(2):37-50.
16. Emadian SF, Newton RJ (1989) Growth enhancement of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) seedlings by silicon. Journal of Plant Physiology, 134(1):98-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0176-1617(89)80209-3
17. Grossnickle SC, MacDonald JE (2018) Seedling quality: history, application, and plant attributes. Forests, 9(5):283. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9050283
18. Heras-Marcial M, Aldrete A, Gómez-Guerrero A, Rodríguez-Trejo DA (2023) Influence of fertilization on survival and growth of Pinus patula Schiede ex Schltdl. & Cham. under nursery and field conditions. Revista Chapingo Serie Ciencias Forestales y del Ambiente, 29(1):3-14. https://doi.org/10.5154/r.rchscfa.2022.03.019
19. Huang H, Wu H, López R, Yin D, Shen H, Zhang P (2022) Effects of pre-hardening and autumn fertilization on biomass allocation and root morphology of Pinus koraiensis seedlings. Forests, 14(1):59. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14010059
20. Irfan M, Maqsood MA, Rehman HU, Mahboob W, Sarwar N, Hafeez OBA, ... Aziz T (2023) Silicon nutrition in plants under water-deficit conditions: overview and prospects. Water, 15(4):739. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15040739
21. Ivetić V, Devetaković J, Maksimović Z (2016a) Initial height and diameter are equally related to survival and growth of hardwood seedlings in first year after field planting. Reforesta, (2):6-21. https://doi.org/10.21750/REFOR.2.02.17
22. Ivetić V, Grossnickle S, Škorić M (2016b) Forecasting the field performance of Austrian pine seedlings using morphological attributes. iForest-Biogeosciences and Forestry, 10(1):99. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor1722-009
23. Ivetić V, Maksimović Z, Kerkez I, Devetaković JR (2017) Seedling quality in serbia–results from a three-year survey. Reforesta, (4):27-53. https://doi.org/10.21750/REFOR.4.04.43
24. Jaenicke H (1999) Good Tree Nursery Practices: Practical Guidelines for Research Nurseries. World Agroforestry Centre. ICRAF, Majestic Printing Works, Nairobi.
25. Jiang L, Xu X, Cai Q, Han R, Tigabu M, Jiang T, Zhao X (2022) Variations in growth and photosynthetic traits of polyploid poplar hybrids and clones in northeast China. Genes, 13(11):2161. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes13112161
26. Khan I, Awan SA, Rizwan M, Brestic M, Xie W (2023) Silicon: an essential element for plant nutrition and phytohormones signaling mechanism under stressful conditions. Plant Growth Regulation, 100(2):301-319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-022-00872-3
27. Kolevska DD, Dimitrova A, Cokoski K, Basova M (2020) Growth and quality of Pinus nigra (Arn.), Pinus sylvestris (L.) and Pinus pinaster (Aiton) seedlings in two container types. Reforesta, 9:21–36. https://doi.org/10.21750/REFOR.9.04.78
28. Landhäusser SM, Wiley ET, Solarik KA, Kulbaba SP, Goeppel AE (2023) The importance of initial seedling characteristics in controlling allocation to growth and reserves under different soil moisture conditions. Forests, 14(4):796. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14040796
29. Ma JF, Yamaji N (2006) Silicon uptake and accumulation in higher plants. Trends in Plant Science, 11:392–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2006.06.007
30. Ma JF, Yamaji N (2008) Functions and transport of silicon in plants. Cell Mol Life Sci, 65:3049–3057. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-008-7580-x
31. Madrid-Aispuro RE, Prieto-Ruíz JÁ, Aldrete A, Hernández-Díaz JC, Wehenkel C, Chávez-Simental JA, Mexal JG (2020) Alternative substrates and fertilization doses in the production of Pinus cembroides Zucc. in nursery. Forests, 11(1):71. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11010071
32. MGM (2023) Meteoroloji Genel Müdürlüğü 2017-2023 Yılları Arası İklim Verileri. Ankara.
33. Mañas P, Castro E, de las Heras J (2009) Quality of maritime pine (Pinus pinaster Ait.) seedlings using waste materials as nursery growing media. New Forests, 37:295-311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-008-9125-4
34. Mason EG (2001) A model of the juvenile growth and survival of Pinus radiata D. Don; adding the effects of initial seedling diameter and plant handling. New Forest, 22:133–158. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012393130118
35. Novikova TP, Tylek P, Mastrangelo CB, Drapalyuk MV, Kharin SV, Novikov AI (2023) The root collar diameter growth reveals a strong relationship with the height growth of juvenile scots pine trees from seeds differentiated by spectrometric feature. Forests, 14(6):1164. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14061164
36. Olivo VB, Buduba CG (2006) Influence of six substrates in Pinus ponderosa grown in containers under greenhouse conditions. Bosque, 27(3):267–271. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0717-92002006000300007
37. Oszako T, Kowalczyk K, Zalewska W, Kukina O, Nowakowska JA, Rutkiewicz A, … Borowik P (2023) Feasibility of using a silicon preparation to promote growth of forest seedlings: application to pine (Pinus sylvestris) and Oak (Quercus robur). Forests, 14(3):577. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14030577
38. Öner N, Kondur Y, Simsek Z, Aslan S (2015) Evaluation of survival ratios and growth of the common plantation species (Black pine and Taurus cedar) on arid and semiarid sites in Turkey. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 24(9a):2906-2915.
39. Parlak S, Güner D (2017) Mikrobiyal gübre uygulamasının karaçam (Pinus nigra Arnold. subsp. Pallasiana (Lamb.) Holmboe) fidanlarının bazı morfolojik özelliklerine etkisi. Ormancılık Araştırma Dergisi, 4(2):100-106. https://doi.org/10.17568/ogmoad.337884
40. Semerci A (2005) Fifth year performance of morphologically graded Cedrus libani seedling in the Central Anatolia region of Turkey. Turk J Agric For, 29:483–491.
41. Shi W, Grossnickle SC, Li G, Su S, Liu Y (2019) Fertilization and irrigation regimes influence on seedling attributes and field performance of Pinus tabuliformis Carr. Forestry: An International Journal of Forest Research, 92(1):97-107. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpy035
42. Shreckhise JH, Altland JE (2024) A base layer of ferrous sulfate-amended pine bark reduces phosphorus leaching from nursery containers. Agronomy, 14(4):757. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14040757
43. Singh A, Kumar A, Hartley S, Singh IK (2020) Silicon: its ameliorative effect on plant defense against herbivory. Journal of Experimental Botany, 71:6730–6743. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eraa300
44. SPSS (2010) IBM SPSS Statistics 19 Core System User’s Guide. SPSS Inc., Chicago.
45. Tapwal A, Kapoor KS, Thakur Y (2022) Growth enhancement in containerized Pinus gerardiana seedlings inoculated with ectomycorrhizal fungi. Archives of Microbiology, 204(12):724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-022-03328-4
46. Thompson BE (1985) Seedling Morphological Evaluation: What You Can Tell By Looking. In: Duryea ML (Ed) Evaluating Seedling Quality: Principles, Procedures, and Predictive Ability of Major Tests. Oregon State University, Forest Research Laboratory, Corvallis, pp 59–72.
47. Tramblay Y, Koutroulis A, Samaniego L, Vicente-Serrano SM, Volaire F, Boone A, … Polcher J (2020) Challenges for drought assessment in the Mediterranean region under future climate scenarios. Earth-Science Reviews, 210:103348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2020.103348
48. Ürgenç S (1988) Genel Plantasyon ve Ağaçlandırma Tekniği. İstanbul Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Yayını, No:444, İstanbul.
49. Vaculík M, Lukačová Z, Bokor B, Martinka M, Tripathi DK, Lux A (2020) Alleviation mechanisms of metal (loid) stress in plants by silicon: a review. Journal of Experimental Botany, 71(21):6744-6757. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eraa288
50. Wang B, Zhang J, Pei D, Yu L (2021) Combined effects of water stress and salinity on growth, physiological, and biochemical traits in two walnut genotypes. Physiologia Plantarum, 172:176–187. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.13316
51. Yahyaoğlu Z, Genç M (2007) Fidan Standardizasyonu. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi, Yayın No: 75, Isparta, 555 s.
52. Yer EN, Baloglu MC, Ziplar UT, Ayan S, Unver T (2016) Drought-responsive Hsp70 gene analysis in populus at genome-wide level. Plant Molecular Biology Reporter, 34:483-500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11105-015-0933-3