Kimyasal gübrelerin etkinliğini artırmada rizobakteri (PGPR) ve yarasa gübresi uygulamalarının marulda(Lactuca Sativa L.) verim ve verim bileşenlerine etkileri

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 28 Sayı: 4, 616 - 624, 15.12.2024

Yusuf Çelik

https://doi.org/10.29050/harranziraat.1485530

Öz

Marul yetiştiriciliğinde yüksek verim için üreticiler gereğinden fazla kimyasal gübre uygulamaktadırlar. Bu anlayış bir takım gıda ve çevre sorunlarını beraberinde getirmektedir. Tesadüf parselleri deneme düzeninde dört tekerrürlü olarak planlanan çalışmada, marul yetiştiriciliğinde verim ve kalitenin artırılması amacıyla Bitki Gelişimini Destekleyen Rizobakteriler (PGPR), artan dozlarda Yarasa Gübresi (YG) ve %30 oranında azaltılmış kimyasal gübre (7/10 KG) uygulamaları tarla koşullarında denenmiştir. Denemede; marul baş çapı, baş uzunluğu, baş ağırlığı, yaprak sayısı, kök uzunluğu, yaprak yaş ve kuru ağırlığı, kök boğazı çapı, suda çözünen kuru madde miktarı (SÇKM) ve bitkilerde bazı besin elementi kapsamları analiz edilmiştir. Denemede, tekli uygulamalar (KG, YG, PGPR) ile farklı dozlarda yarasa gübresi ilaveli PGPR kombinasyonları (PGPR+YG) karşılaştırıldığında; PGPR+YG kombinasyonlarının marul bitkilerinin gelişimini, verimini ve yaprak besin elementi içeriklerini artırmıştır. Yapılan ölçümlere göre; Kontrol, PGPR+25kg/daYG+7/10KG, PGPR+50kg/da YG+7/10KG ve sadece PGPR kombinasyonu önerilen gübre dozu (KG)’den daha düşük değer alırken, PGPR+100kg/daYG+7/10KG ve PGPR+1500kg/da YG+7/10KG kombinasyonları yüksek değerler almışlardır. Verim unsurlarına etkisi bakımından en yüksek değerleri aynı önem seviyesinde olan PGPR+100kg/da YG+7/10 KG, PGPR+150kg/da YG+7/10 KG uygulamaları almış olup kontrol uygulamasına göre, bitki baş boyunda; %40.1, bitki baş çapında; %27.7, bitki kök boğazı çapında; 19.6, baş ağırlığında %82.2, kök uzunluğunda; %60.1, yaprak sayısında; 24.7,yaprak yaş ağırlığında; %21.6 yaprak kuru ağırlığında; %19.1 oranında göre artış sağlamıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Gübreleme yönetimi, marul, bitki büyümesi, PGPR, yarasa gübresi

Effects of rhizobacteria (PGPR) and bat guano applications on yield and yield components in lettuce (Lactuca Sativa L.) in increasing the effectiveness of chemical fertilizers

Öz

For high efficiency in lettuce cultivation, producers apply more chemical fertilizers than necessary. This understanding brings with it a number of food and environmental problems. In the study, which was carried out with four replications according to the randomized block trial design, Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR), increasing doses of Bat Fertilizer (YG) and 30% reduced chemical fertilizer (7/10 KG) applications were tested under field conditions in order to increase the yield and quality of lettuce. In the study; Plant head height, head diameter, root collar diameter, leaf fresh and dry weight, root length, number of leaves, head weight, amount of water-soluble dry matter and some plant nutritional element contents were measured. In the study, when single YG,PGPR applications were compared with the combination of PGPR-added bat guano; It has been determined that PGPR+YG applications are more effective in increasing the yield, development and nutrient content of lettuce plants. According to the measurements made; While the combination of control, PGPR+25 kg/da YG+7/10 KG and only PGPR alone received lower values than the recommended fertilizer dose (KG), PGPR+50kg/da YG+7/10KG, PGPR+100kg/da YG+7/ 10KG, and PGPR+150kg/da YG+7/10KG combinations received high values. PGPR+100kg/da YG+7/10 KG, PGPR+150kg/da YG+7/10 KG applications, which are at the same level of importance, had the highest values in terms of their impact on yield elements. According to the control application, at plant head height; 30.7%, plant head diameter; 21.2% plant root collar diameter; 19.6, 49% in head weight, root length; 60.1%, number of leaves; 24.7% in leaf fresh weight; 21.6% in leaf dry weight; It increased by 19.1%.

Anahtar Kelimeler

fertilization management, lettuce,, plant growht, PGPR, bat guano

Kaynakça

• Audra, P., Heresanu, V., Barriquand, L., Boutchich, M. E. K., Jaillet, S., Pons-Branchu, E., ... & Renda, M. (2021). Bat guano minerals and mineralization processes in Chameau Cave, Eastern Morocco. International Journal of Speleology, 50(1), 91-109.
• Acurio Vásconez, R. D., Mamarandi Mossot, J. E., Ojeda Shagñay, A. G., Tenorio Moya, E. M., Chiluisa Utreras, V. P., & Vaca Suquillo, I. D. L. Á. (2020). Evaluation of Bacillus spp. as plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) in broccoli (Brassica oleracea var. italica) and lettuce (Lactuca sativa). Ciencia y Tecnología Agropecuaria, 21(3).
• Basu, A., Prasad, P., Das, S. N., Kalam, S., Sayyed, R. Z., Reddy, M. S., & El Enshasy, H. (2021). Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) as green bioinoculants: recent developments, constraints, and prospects. Sustainability, 13(3), 1140.
• Gallant, L. R., Grooms, C., Kimpe, L. E., Smol, J. P., Bogdanowicz, W., Stewart, R. S., ... & Blais, J. M. (2020). A bat guano deposit in Jamaica recorded agricultural changes and metal exposure over the last> 4300 years. Palaeogeography, palaeoclimatology, palaeoecology, 538, 109470.
• Gabriels, R., & Verdonck, O. (1992). Reference methods for analysis of compost. Composting and compost quality assurance criteria, 173-183.
• Dasgan, H. Y., Aldiyab, A., Elgudayem, F., Ikiz, B., & Gruda, N. S. (2022). Effect of biofertilizers on leaf yield, nitrate amount, mineral content and antioxidants of basil (Ocimum basilicum L.) in a floating culture. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 20917.
• Dasgan, H. Y., Kacmaz, S., Arpaci, B. B., İkiz, B., & Gruda, N. S. (2023). Biofertilizers improve the leaf quality of hydroponically grown baby spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.). Agronomy, 13(2), 575.
• Dasgan, H. Y., Yilmaz, D., Zikaria, K., Ikiz, B., & Gruda, N. S. (2023). Enhancing the yield, quality and antioxidant content of lettuce through innovative and eco-friendly biofertilizer practices in hydroponics. Horticulturae, 9(12), 1274.
• El-Tohamy, W. A., El-Abagy, H. M., El-Greadly, N. H. M., & Gruda, N. (2012). Hormonal changes, growth and yield of tomato plants in response to chemical and bio-fertilization application in sandy soils. Journal of Applied Botany and Food Quality, 82(2), 179-182.
• FAOSTAT. (2021). Available online: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data (accessed on 17 November 2021).
• Jones, J. B. (2001). Laboratory guide for conducting soil tests and plant analysis. CRC press.
• Horneck, D. A., Hart, J. M., Topper, K., & Koepsell, B. (1989). Methods of soil analysis used in the soil testing laboratory at Oregon State University.
• Karagöz, K. (2014). Yarasa gübresinin tarımda kullanılma olanakları. Alınteri Zirai Bilimler Dergisi, 27(2), 35-42.
• Karagöz, K.,& Hanay, A. (2017). Effects of bat guano on some yield parameters of wheat. Acad. J. Environ. Sci, 5(11), 200-206.
• Kjeldahl, J. (1883). Neue methode zur bestimmung des stickstoffs in organischen körpern. Zeitschrift für analytische Chemie, 22(1), 366–382.
• Khatoon, Z., Huang, S., Rafique, M., Fakhar, A., Kamran, M. A., & Santoyo, G. (2020). Unlocking the potential of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on soil health and the sustainability of agricultural systems. Journal of Environmental Management, 273, 111118.
• Mauro, R. P., Agnello, M., Distefano, M., Sabatino, L., San Bautista Primo, A., Leonardi, C., & Giuffrida, F. (2020). Chlorophyll fluorescence, photosynthesis and growth of tomato plants as affected by long-term oxygen root zone deprivation and grafting. Agronomy, 10(1), 137.
• Martini, J. & Kavalieris, I. (1978). Mineralogy of the Transvaal caves. South African Journal of Geology, 81(1), 47-54.
• Mou, B. Lettuce. In Vegetables I; Prohens, J., Nuez, F., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2008; pp. 75–116.
• Nicolle, C., Carnat, A., Fraisse, D., Lamaison, J. L., Rock, E., Michel, H., ... & Remesy, C. (2004). Characterisation and variation of antioxidant micronutrients in lettuce (Lactuca sativa folium). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 84(15), 2061-2069.
• Palita, S.K., Panigrahi, R., & Panda, D.(2021). Potentiality of bat guano as organic manure for improvement of growth and photosynthetic response in crop plants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. India Sect. B , 91, 185–193.
• Rostaminia, M., Habibi, D., Shahbzi, S., Sani, B., & Pazoki, A. (2021). Effect of three commercial bio-fertilizers prepared with Pseudomonas on yield and morphophysiological traits of lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.). Iran Agric. Res. 39(2), 99–107.
• Sabatino, L., Iapichino, G., La Bella, S., Tuttolomondo, T., D’Anna, F., Cardarelli, M., ... & Rouphael, Y. (2020). An appraisal of calcium cyanamide as alternative n source for spring-summer and fall season curly endive crops: Effects on crop performance, NUE and functional quality components. Agronomy, 10(9), 1357.
• Sabatino, L., Consentino, B. B., Rouphael, Y., De Pasquale, C., Iapichino, G., D’Anna, F., & La Bella, S. (2021). Protein hydrolysates and mo-biofortification interactively modulate plant performance and quality of ‘canasta’lettuce grown in a protected environment. Agronomy, 11(6), 1023.
• Solaiman, A.R.M.,&Rahbbani, M.G. (2006). Effects of NPKS and cow dung on growth and yield of tomato. Bulletin of the Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Kyushu University, 29(1), 31-37.
• Temminghoff, E.E.,& Houba, V.J. (2004). Plant Analysis Procedures, 2nd ed.; Temminghoff, E.E., Houba, V.J., Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: London, UK.
• Ünal, M., Can, O., Can, B. A., & Poyraz, K. (2018). The effect of bat guano applied to the soil in different forms and doses on some plant nutrient contents. Communications in soil science and plant analysis, 49(6), 708-716.
• Van Reeuwijk, L.P. (2002)Procedures for Soil Analysis, 6th ed.; Technical Paper 9; ISRIC; FAO: Rome, Italy.
• Zaidi, A., Ahmad, E., Khan, M. S., Saif, S., & Rizvi, A. (2015). Role of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in sustainable production of vegetables: Current perspective. Scientia Horticulturae, 193, 231-239.