Effect of Phosphorous Fertilizer and Bacterial Applications on Seed Yield of Morphologically Different Forage Pea (Pisum sativum L.) Varieties

Abstract

As a result of today's modern agricultural practices, many negative consequences have been encountered due to the use of intense, inaccurate and excessive chemical fertilizers and pesticides. In particular, chemical fertilizers have reached fresh water sources as a result of washing, causing environmental pollution and this has become a threat to human, domestic and wildlife. Therefore, one of the alternatives created by experts in terms of prevention of environmental pollution and agricultural sustainability has been the use of useful bacteria instead of chemical input.

              

          In this study, carried out in Erzurum, was aimed to determine the effects of different phosphorous rates (0, 30 and 60 kg/ha P₂O₅) and bacteria genotypes (control, nitrogen fixing and phosphate solvent) on agricultural and morphological characteristics of some fodder pea cultivars. The experiment was established in Randomized Split Blocks Trial Design with three replications. In the study, were used Kirazli (semi-leafless) and Urunlu (leafed) pea cultivars, Rhizobium leguminasorum and Arthrobacter agilis bacteria and triple superphosphate 0-45-0 fertilizer.  According to the results, number of pods per plant 6.5-7.7, number of seeds per pod 5.6-6.2,  1000 seed weight 187.5-198.9 g, seed yield 1087-1663 kg/ha, seed crude protein content 30.6-31.6 % were investigated. As a result; no response was observed for phosphate fertilization since the soils of experiment plots were rich of this nutrient. Yet, Rhizobium inoculation yielded positive and significant results.

Keywords

• Bacteria inoculation,environmental pollution,forage pea,phosphate rates,variety

References

1. References
2. Acıkgöz E & Uzun A. 1997. Yarı Yapraklı ve Normal Yapraklı Bezelye (Pisum sativum L.) Çeşitlerinden Geliştirilen Melez Hatların Bazı Tarımsal ve Morfolojik Özellikleri, Türkiye 2. Tarla Bit. Kong, 22-25 Eylül 1997, Samsun.
3. Acıkgöz E. 2001. Yem Bitkileri (Yenilenmiş 3. Baskı), Uludağ Üni. Vakfı Yayın No: 182, Bursa, p,584.
4. Alan M.N. 1984. Bezelye El Kitabı. Ege Bölgesi Zirai Araştırma Enstitüsü Yayınları, No: 37, Menemen- İzmir.
5. Altın M.1991. Yem Bitkileri Yetiştirme Tekniği (Yem Bitkileri Tarımı), Trakya Üniversitesi Tekirdağ Zir. Fak. Yayın No:114. Ders Kitabı No,3. Tekirdağ,116.
6. Anlarsal A. E., Yucel C. & Ozveren D. 2001. Çukurova Koşullarında Bazı Bezelye (P. sativum ssp. sativum L. ve P. sativum ssp. arvense L.) Hatlarının Uyumu ve Verimlerinin Saptanması Üzerinde Bir Araştırma, Çukurova Üni. Zir. Fak. Derg, 16(3),11-20.
7. Anonymous 2004. Tohumluk Tescil Raporu, Tohumluk Kontrol ve Sertifikasyon Merkezi, Ankara.
8. Bayraktar K. 1981. Sebze Yetiştirme II. E. Ü. Ziraat Fakültesi Yay. No:169, İzmir.

9. Biarnes-Dumoulin, V., Denis J. B. Lejeune-Henaut I. & Eteve G. 1996. İnterpeting Yield Instability in Pea Using Genotypic and Environmental Covarates, Crop Sci, 36,115-120.
10. Cakmakcı R., Donmez F. Aydın A. & Sahin, F. 2006. Growth Promotion of Plants by Plant Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria Under Greenhouse and Two Different Field Soil Conditions, Soil Biol. Biochem, 38, 1482-1487.
11. Davies D. R., Berry G.J. Heath M. C. & Dawkins T.C.K.1985. Pea (Pisum sativum L.) İn: summerfield R.J. & Roberts E.H. (Eds.), Grain Legume Crops, Ch 5, Collins, London, 147-198.
12. Dwivedi S. L., Nigeum S. N. Nageswara Rao R. C. Sningh U. & Rao K.V.S. 1996. Effect of Drought on Oil Fatty Acids and Protein Contents of Groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.) Seeds, Fields Crop Res, 48:,125-133.
13. Erman M., Yıldırım B. & Togay N. 2009. Effect of Phosphorous Aplication and Rhizobium Inoculation on The Yield, Nodulation and Nutrient Uptake in Field Pea (Pisum sativum sp. arvense L) Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advences, 8(2), 301–304, 2009. ISSN:1680-5593, Medwell Journals, 301-304.
14. Genckan M. S. 1983. Yem Bitkileri Tarımı, E. Ü. Ziraat Fakültesi Yay, No, 467, p,230-23 .
15. Guilioni L., Wery J. & Lecouer J. 2003. High Temperature and Water Deficit May Reduce Seed Number in Field Pea Purely by Decreasing Plant Growth Rate, Functional Plant Biology, 30, 1151-1164.
16. Heath M. C. & Hebblethwaite P. D. 1985. Agronomic Problems Associated With The Pea Crop. In: Hebblewaite P.D. Heath M.C. & Dawkins T.C.K.(Eds.) The Pea Crop, Butterwoths, London, pp.19-26.
17. Kacar B. 1996. Bitki Fizyolojisi, Ankara Üni. Zir. Fak. Yayın no: 1447, Ders Kitabı, p,427.
18. Khalid A., Arshad M. & Zahir Z.A. 2004. Screening Plant Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria for İmproving Growth and Yield of Wheat, Journal of Applied Microbiology , 96 (3),473–480.
19. Khan H., Haqqani A.M. Khan M.A. & Malik B.A. 1992. Biological and Chemical Fertilizer Studies in Chickpea Grown Under Arid Conditions of Thal (Pakistan), Sarhad J. of Agron, V.8(3), 321-327.
20. Kocacalıskan İ. 2004. Bitki Fizyolojisi, DPÜ Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi, Biyoloji Bölümü, Kütahya-2004.
21. Lucy M., Reed E. & Glick B.R. 2004. Aplications of Free Living Plant Grovth-Promoting Rhizobacteria, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, 86, 1-25.
22. Mut Z., & Aydın N. Bayramoglu H. O. & Ozcan H. 2007. Bazı Ekmeklik Buğday (Triticum aestivum L.) Genotiplerinin Verim ve Başlıca Kalite Özelliklerinin Belirlenmesi, OMU Zir. Fak. Derg, 22(2), 193-201.
23. Ney B., Duthion C. & Turc O. 1994. Phenological Response of Pea to Water Stress During Reproductive Development, Crop. Sci, 34,141-146.
24. Ozturk A. & Caglar O. 1999. Kışlık Buğdayda Kuraklığın Vejetatif Dönem, Tane Dolum Dönemi ve Tane Dolum Oranına Etkisi, Atatürk Üni. Zir. Fak. Dergisi, 30 (1),1-10.
25. Sayar M. S., Anlarsal A. E. Acıkgoz E. Basbag M. & Gul İ. 2009. Diyarbakır Koşullarında Bazı Yem Bezelyesi (P. arvense L. ) Hatlarının Verim ve Verim Ünsurlarının Belirlenmesi, Türkiye VIII. Tarla Bit. Kong, 19-22 Ekim 2009, Hatay, 646-650.
26. Sharma A.K., Haribendra S. Sushil S. Singh H. & Singh S, 1989. Response of Cicer arietinum L. to Rhizobial and N Fertilization, Indian J.of Agron, 34(3),381-383.Smith G.P. & Googing M.J. 1999. Models of Wheat Grain Quality Considering Climate, Cultivar and Nitrogen Effects, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 94(1),86-93.Snoad B 1974. A preliminary Assessment of Leafless Peas Euphytica, 23,257-265.
27. Sahin F., Cakmakcı R.& Kantar F. 2004. Sugar Beet and Barley Yields in Relation to Inoculation With N2-fixing and Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria, Plant and Soil, 265, 123-129.
28. Tamkoc A. 2007. Kışlık Olarak Ekilen Yem Bezelyesi Hatlarının Verim ve Bazı Bitkisel Özellikleri, VII. Türkiye Tarla Bit. Kong, Erzurum (25-29 Haziran 2007) Çayır Mera ve Yem Bitkileri Bildirileri, Erzurum, pp,94-97.
29. Tan M. Dumlu Z. & Gul İ. 2009. Yerel Yem Bezelyesi Çeşitlerinde Tohum Verimi ve Bazı Özelliklerin Belirlenmesi, Türkiye VIII.Tarla Bit. Kong, 19-22 Ekim 2009, Hatay, 2,857-860.
30. Timuragaoglu K. A., Genc A. & Altınok S. 2004. Ankara Koşullarında Yem Bezelyesi Hatlarında Yem ve Tane Verimleri, Tarım Bil. Derg, Ankara, 10 (4), 457-461.
31. Tosun F. 1974. Baklagil ve Buğdaygil Yem Bitkileri Kültürü, Atatürk Üniv. Yay. No: 242, Ziraat Fak. Yay. No: 123, Ders Kitapları Seri No: 8, Erzurum, p,300.
32. Uzun A. & Acıkgoz E. 1998. Effect of Sowing Season and Seeding Rate on The Morphological Traits and Yields on Pea Cultivars of Differing Leaf Types, J. Agron. and Crop Sci, 181, 215-222.
33. Uzun A., Bilgili U. Sincik M. Filya I. & Acıkgöz E. 2005. Yield and Quality of Forage Type Pea Lines of Contrasting Leaf Types, Eur. J. of Agron, 22(1),85-94.
34. Vadavia A.T., Kalaria K.K. Patel J.C. & Baldha N.M. 1991. Influence of Organic, Inorganic and Biofertilizers and on Growth Yield on Nodulation of Chickpea, İndian J. Agron, 36(2),263-264.
35. Yildiz N. 2008. Bitki Beslemenin Esasları ve Bitkilerde Beslenme Bozukluğu Belirtileri, Eser Ofset Matbaacılık, Erzurum, p,304.