EFFECT OF CHEMICAL, ORGANIC AND BIO FERTILIZERS ON GROWTH, SEED YIELD AND YIELD COMPONENTS OF CANOLA AND RESISTANCE TO POWDERY MILDEW DISEASE

EFFECT OF CHEMICAL, ORGANIC AND BIO FERTILIZERS ON GROWTH, SEED YIELD AND YIELD COMPONENTS OF CANOLA AND RESISTANCE TO POWDERY MILDEW DISEASE

Suzan, Abdel  El-Latif Kamel Ibrahim¹

and  Saber, Mohamed Ali Morsy²

¹Oil Crops Res.Dept- Field Crops Res.Inst, ARC-Egypt

²Plant Patholo.Res. Inst.– ARC-Egypt.

Key Words: Canola, Growth, Yield, Chemical, organic and Bio -fertilizer, Powdery mildew disease severity and incidence.

ABSTRACT

A field experiment designed in a randomized complete block design was conducted at Itay El-Baroud Agriculture Research Station, El-Behiragovernorate, Egypt during two growing seasons of 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 to study the effect of chemical, organic and bio-fertilizers on the growth, seed yield and powdery mildew disease incidence and severity of canola plants ( Brassica napusL.) c.v. Serw 4. Results indicated that, 50% NPK fertilizers + Humic soil application (SA)+ Humic foliar spray (FS) significant increases seed yield/fed and oil yield/fed in both seasons. In the same way, 50% NPK +Humic (FS) significant exceeded all treatments in increasing branches number/plant, plant height, plant dry weight, leaf area/plant, number of seed per pod, number of pod per plant , 1000-seeds weight, seed yield/plant and reducing powdery mildew disease incidence and severity in both two seasons. Finally, the highest oil percentages were obtained from canola plants that treated with H (FS) + H (SA) in both seasons.

INTRODUCTION

Canola (Brassica napus L.)has become one of the  most important sources  of  vegetable  oil  in  the  world.  Its  oil  also  has potentially developed in the bio-diesel market. In addition to oil production, (Dahmardeh,2013). It has a healthy vegetable oil because of its balance with omega 3-6-9 essential fatty acids, making canola oil a healthy vegetable oil throughout the world for cooking and processed food industry .Canola oil has higher nutrient value than other oil seeds due to its high unsaturated fatty acid (Naseriet al., 2012). Canola has become the second largest oil crop behind soybean in the world. The world total harvested area was 34740403 million acre produced about 76238340 tons(FAO STAT2017), Egypt is being faced by a problem  arising from  the  shortage  in local  production  of  edible  oils  in compassion with the increased level of their consumption. This wide gap between the production and consumption of edible oils reached about 90% (FAO Statistic Yearbook 2010). Canola as a new crop was sowing in Egypt to reduce the gap of oil consumption. The crop had a great supported from the Egyptian policy.Canola production of high yield and good quality usually depends on well-balanced plant nutrition and growing conditions. A well-balanced soil condition also affects canola plants responses to stress factors such as disease and bad weather conditions. Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium (NPK) are some of the major nutrients required to significantly increase canola yield.Fertilizerapplication dosages in canola production vary because of the variable occurrence of NPK in the soil. A high yielding canola production needs a well-balanced fertilization program. Sami (2015).Year after year, with the continuous use of agricultural land in Egypt under intensive farming systems, there is a sharp decline in organic matter and nutrients in the soil, resulting in a significant shortage of the yield, which requires the addition of these elements in the form of mineral, organic or some organisms that have The ability to provide these elements to the plant in what is known as bio-fertilization and humicacids .Humicacids as, one of the excellent are organic fertilizers that enhance nutrient availability, nutrient absorption, nutrient utilization, plant  growth, physiology  and  metabolism  through  various mechanisms  (Schiavonet  al., 2010 andBerbara&  Garcia,  2014).Better root architecture and increased root area by stimulating root elongation  and lateral  root development have been reported as important phenomena responsible for improved nutrient uptake by humic acids (Canellas et al, 2011; Jindoet al., 2012). In the same line, Bio-fertilizer such as microbin, nitrobin and rizobactrin  are content some organism (RhizobacteriencontainsRhizobacterim,,NitrobeincontainsAzotobactersp. (nitrogen fixing bacteria) and azospirillumsp (nitrogen fixing bacteria), and Microbiencontains Azotobactersp. (nitrogen fixing bacteria) , Azospirillumsp (nitrogen fixing bacteria). and Pesudomonasspp) which have the ability for increasing Gibberellin  level  and  it is also  increases  root growth.  By  increasing  the  root,  the  plant`s  power  to uptake nitrogen and  nutrients will increase  and Increase the permeability  of the  soil, increase  soil water holding capacity,  soil  nutrients  and  Leads  to  an  increase  in nutrient uptake by plants (Hamidiet al., 2015), Bio-fertilizer  is  increasing growth and  yield  by  producing  plant  growth  regulator  (PGRs) such  as  auxins,  gibberellin  and  cytokinins  etc. (Bhattacharyya &Jha 2012; Kang et al., 2012 andAfzalet  al.,  2015).Biofertilizers are low cost, effective and renewable source of plant nutrients to supplement chemical fertilizers (Borasteet al., 2009).

Therefore, this study is aimed at reducing the use chemical fertilizers to reduce environmental pollution and determining the optimal level of fertilizer to improve the seed yield and seed quality of canola under North Delta conditions in Egypt. Reducing the risk of chemical fertilization on the environment and reducing the total costs by using bio and organic fertilizers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A field experiment was conducted at Itay El-baroud Agriculture Research Station, El-Behira Governorate, Egypt during two growing seasons of 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 in order to study the effect of chemical, organic and bio-fertilizers on the growth, seed yield canola ,yield components of canola and controlof powdery mildew disease( Brassica napus l).c.v. Serw 4.

The experimental procedure and layout:

Seed of canola cv. Serw4 was obtained from Agriculture Research Center, Egypt. Seeds of canola were sown at the rate of 4 kg / fed (5 seeds / hill) at 13^th and15^th November during two growing seasons of 2017-2018 and 2018-2019, respectively. the harvest canola was 1, 5 may during two growing seasons of 2017-2018 and 2018-2019, respectively .The experiment was layout in a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replicates. The experimental consisted of 6 rows each row was 3.5m long and 50cm apart. Seeds were sown in the two sides of the row with 5 seeds per hill at 10 cm hill space. After three weeks (plants have 4-6 leaves) from planting, seedling were thinned out to one plant per hill The chemical properties of the experimental soil were presented in Table 1.

Table 1: The chemical properties of the experimental soil.

Fertilizations treatments:

1-   The control treatment:Zero soil application and sprayed with distillated water.

2-   100% NPK: the recommended dose of 100 kg/fed. Nitrogen (ammonium nitrate 33.5% N) + 100kg/fed. Supper phosphate (15.5 % P2O5) + 50kg/fed. potassiumsulphate(48% K₂O). Nitrogen and potassium fertilizers add in two equal doses, the first dose was add after three weeks from the sowing and the second one was added after a month from the first one. While, Phosphoruswas added in a single before sowing.

3-   H (SA):Humicacid ((Humic acid 80% + Potassium (K2O) 10-12% + Zn, Fe, Mn, etc. 100 ppm) were obtained from General Organization for Agriculture Equalization Fund (GOAEF) Ministry of Agriculture, Egypt and add as soil application three week after sowing in the recommended rate of 5 kg per feddan.

4-   H (FS):Humic Acid ((Humic acid 80% + Potassium (K2O) 10-12% + Zn, Fe, Mn, etc. 100 ppm) was applied as foliar spray (3g per liter) two times at 45 and60 days. after sowing.

5-  

Micrbien (M): was added at the rate of 1kg /total seed of feddan.

6-   Nitrobein (N): was added at the rate of 1kg /total seed of feddan.

7-   Rhizobacterien (R):was added at the rate of 1kg /total seed of feddan.

Microbien, NitrobeinandRhizobacterienwere obtained from General Organization for Agriculture Equalization Fund (GOAEF) Ministry of Agriculture, Egypt,and added at the rate of 1kg/ total seeds of feddan by mixing their with seeds before sowing using 20% Gum Arabic solution.

8-   50% NPK+H (SA): The half amounts of the recommended NPK dose + 5 kg humic acid per feddan were added in the same methods of the single treatments.

9-   50% NPK+H (FS): The half amounts of the recommended NPK dose +3g per literhumic acid were added in the same methods of the single treatments.

10-              50% NPK+M: The half amounts of the recommended NPK dose + 1 kg microbin were added in the same methods of the single treatments.

11-              50% NPK+N: The half amounts of the recommended NPK dose + 1 kg nitrobin were added in the same methods of the single treatments.

12-              50% NPK+R: The half amounts of the recommended NPK dose +1kg Rhizobacterien were added in the same methods of the single treatments.

13-              H (SA) +H (FS): 5 kg of humic acid per feddanwas added as a soil application + 3g per liter humic acid as foliar spray.

14-              50% NPK + H (SA)+H (FS): The half amounts of the recommended NPK dose + 5 kg of humic acid per feddan was added as a soil application + 3g per liter humic acid as foliar spray.

15-              50%NPK+H (SA)+M+N+R: 50% NPK + H (FS) + : The half amounts of the recommended NPK dose +5 kg of humic acid was added as a soil application + 1 kg microbin + 1 kg nitrobin + 1 kg Rhizobacterien were added in the same methods of the single treatments.

16-              H (SA)+M+N+R:5 kg of humic acid per feddanwas added as a soil applicationhumic acid + 1 kg microbin + 1 kg nitrobin + 1 kg Rhizobacterien were added in the same methods of the single treatments.

Data recorded:

1-      Growth traits:

-          At 75 days sowing a sample of ten plants were randomly chosen from each plot and use to measure the averages of plant dry weight (g) and leaf area/plant (cm²).   

-          At harvest a sample of ten plants from each plot were randomly chosen and use to measure the averages of number of branches/plant, plant height (cm), plant dry weight (g) and leaf area/plant (cm²).

2-      Seed yield and yield components traits: 

-          At harvest a sample of ten plants from each plot were randomly chosen and use to measure the averages of number of silique per plant , number of seed persilique,1000-seed weight (g), seed yield/plant (g), seed yield/feddan (kg), oil percentage and oil yield/feddan (kg).

  Determination of oil percentage:

Seed oil was extracted using the Soxhlet extraction apparatus and petroleum ether (40 to 60°C) was used as a solvent. As 20 g of oil was needed for further analysis, 60 g of pumpkin seeds and 100 g of milk thistle seeds were taken for oil extraction. The extracted oil was separated from the organic solvent using a rotary vacuum evaporator.

Seed oil percentage (%): was determined according to A.O.A.C. (1995) using soxhlet apparatus using petroleum ether as a solvent

3-      Powdery mildew severity and incidence:

Severity due to natural infection was determined after 90 days from sowing. Ten randomly pre-tagged canola plants in the three central rows, disease severity on leaves was rated using 1-9 rating scale (Bernier et al., 1993), where 1= no disease symptoms or very small specks; 3= few small discrete lesions; 5= some coalesced lesions with some defoliation; 7= large coalesced sporulating lesions, 50% defoliation and some dead plant; and 9= extensive lesions on leaves, stems and pods, severe defoliation, heavy sporulation, stem girdling, blackening and death of more than 80% of plants (Bernier et al., 1984). Powdery mildew disease severity % was assessed according to the following formula:

Disease severity % = Σ (n X v)/9N) X 100,

Where: (n) = Number of plants in each category; (v) = Numerical values of symptoms category; (N) = Total number of plants; (9) = Maximum numerical value of symptom category.

Then efficacy percentage (E %) of each compound in reducing disease, severity percentage was assessed according to the equation adapted by Rewal and Jhooty (1985) as follow:-

E% = (C – T / C) X 100

Where: C = Disease severity % in control treatment; T = Disease severity % in the treatment

 It was worthy to calculate the disease inhibition (DI %) to evaluate the real comparable efficacy of treatments.

Statistical analysis:

All data were subjected to the analyses of variance (ANOVA) for split-plot design followed by compared means with LSD at level probability 5% according to (Gomez and Gomez, 1984) using Costat 6400 (1985)statistical software.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

1-      Effect of different fertilizers treatments on canola cvSerw 4.  growth traits in 2017 and 2018 seasons:

The presented data in Table 2 and Fig1 indicated that, the response of canolacvSerw 4 plants significantly differed under all the fertilization treatments in all growth traits. (Dry weight of plant and leaf area / plant) compared to all other fertilization treatments and control.

1.1.           

 Number of branches / plant:

It was clear from the results shown in Table 2 and Fig1 that humic superiority in all forms, whether foliar spraying or soil application single or combined with other fertilization treatments in branches numbers/plant in both seasons of study. The results confirmed that foliar spraying humic(FS)+ 50% NPK gave the highest branches number/plant (10.62 and 10.32) followed by  50% NPK+M(8.68 and 8.43) and then humic (SA)with averages of 7.53 and 7.32 in both seasons, respectively. On the other hand the branches numbers/ plant were obtained under the control treatment with averages of 3.51 and 3.41 in both seasons, respectively.

1.2.            Plant height (cm):

In both seasons all treatments except 50%NPK + Nitroben,Rizobactrin, 50% NPK +Microbin and 50 NPK + Rizobactrin significantly increase plant height compared to the control treatment (Table 2 and Fig1).  the results indicated that, the tallest plants were obtained in canola plants that treated with 50% NPK+ humic (FS) (173.82 and 168.95 cm) followed by 50% NPK+M(141.93 and 137.96 cm) then H (SA)+H (FS)with averages of  124.94 and 121.44 cm in both seasons, respectively. On the other hand the shortest canola plants were obtained under the control treatment with averages of 71.45 and 69.84cm in both seasons, respectively.

1.3.            Plant dry weight (g):

From data shown in Table 2 and Fig1 it could be clear that, treated canola plants with both forms of humic single or combined with others fertilizers significantly increase the total dry biomass in both seasons of the study. Also,  the results in table 2 showed  that, the highest plant dry weight were presented when treated canola plants with 50% NPK+ humic (FS) (12.49 and 12.14g) followed by 50% NPK+M (10.20 and 10.90g),Humic (SA) with averages of (8.86 and 8.61 g)thenHumic (SA)+ Humic (Fs) with averages of (8.98 and 8.73) in both two seasons, respectively. comparedwith control gave 4.13 and 4.01 g in both two seasons, respectively.

1.4.            Leaf area/plant (cm²):

The obtained data in Table 2 and Fig1 confirmed that, the highest leaf area/plant were presented when treated canola plants with 50% NPK+ humic (FS) (2361.54 and 2295.42 cm²) followed by 50% NPK+M (1928.38 and 1874.39 cm²) then H (SA)+H (FS) with averages of  1697.49and 1649.96 cm² in both seasons, respectively. In the contrast of this, the lowest leaf area/plant was shown in the control treatment with averages of 780.51 and 758.65 cm² in both two seasons, respectively.

Table 2: Effect of different fertilizers treatments on canola cvSerw 4.  growth traits in 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 seasons.

H = Humic     M = Microbin   N = Nitrobin        R = RizobacrinSA  = Soil application       FS = Foliar spray

Fig. 1: Effect of different fertilizers treatments on canola cvSerw 4.  growth traits in 2017-2018 (S1) and 2018-2019 (S2) seasons.

Humic acids are recognized  as dark colored  organic  substances which have been reported to enhance nutrient  availability, nutrient absorption, nutrient utilization, plant  growth, physiology  and  metabolism  through  various mechanisms  (Berbara&  Garcia,  2014). In the previous studies,humic acid foliar application was significant on plant height and branch number and so, humic acid application reduces the requirement of other fertilizers (Sani 2014). In this study humic acid at any forms (soil application or foliar spry) combined with or without NPK and others fertilizers increase all growth traits. These finding may in the same way with those obtained by,Fatemehet al 2019) which reported that, humic acid Foliar Application could significantly increase plant height, branch number, yield components, biological yield, final seed yield as well as oil percentage and yield,Fatemehet al(2019) reported that, humic acid foliar application could increase agronomic traits in canola cultivars. In the contrast of our finding, Rastghalamet al. (2011) found that, The usage of humic acid showed significantly negative effect on plant height, shoot dry weight  and root dry weight of canola. In the same direction, Behzad( 2014 ) showed that foliar application of humic acid significantly affected plant height and highest this parameter was achieved under 2% foliar application of humic acid and the lowest plant height was obtained under control conditions. Also , means comparison showed that plant height under 0.5% foliar application of humic acid and 1% foliar application of humic acid were in a similar statistical group.Rajparet al. (2011) showed that, the application of  humic acid at 6.35 kg acre^-1  positively affected almost all the growth and parameters. Also, El-Sherbenyet al. (2012) indicated that The highest growth parameters or biomass of Turnip (Brassica rapa) represented by leaves and roots were obtained with NPK or humic acid, but it can recommend to applied humic acid as an organic fertilizer for producing organic products. Humic acid or compost tea increased carbohydrate content while the two levels of NPK fertilizers caused inhibition for its accumulation.

The study also, revealed that Microbin had excellent effect in growth traits and this may due to the role of bio-fertilizers in increase the chemical proses in plant where, the bio-fertilizer led to increase Gibberellin level and Gibberellin also,increases  root growth. By  increasing  the  root,  the  plant`s  power  to uptake nitrogen and  nutrients will increase  and Increase the permeability  of the  soil, increase  soil water holding capacity,  soil  nutrients  and  Leads  to  an  increase  in nutrient uptake by plants (Hamidiet al., 2015), Bio-fertilizer  is  increasing growth and  yield  by  producing  plant  growth  regulator  (PGRs) such  as  auxins,  gibberellin  and  cytokininsetc(Ahmad et al (2016)Bhattacharyya &Jha, 2012; Kang et al., 2012; Afzaletal and(2015)Belimovet al., (2015).Biofertilizers are low cost, effective and renewable source of plant nutrients to supplement chemical fertilizers (Borasteet al., 2009).

2-    Effect of different fertilizers treatments on canola cv.  Yield and yield components traits in 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 seasons:

2.1. Number of silique/plant:

The obtained data in Table 3 and Fig 2a indicated that the highest number of silique/plant were presented in canola plants that fertilized by 50% NPK + H (SA)+H (FS) (562.60 and 551.35) followed by 50%NPK+H (SA)+M+N+R (530.40 and 519.79) then H (SA)+H (FS) with averages of 525.20 and 514.70 in both seasons of this study respectively, on the contrast of this, the control treatment showed the lowest number of silique/plant in both seasons with averages of 300.43 and 294.42, respectively.

2.2. Number of seeds/silique:

The obtained data in Table 3 and Fig 2a indicated the highest number of sees/silique were presented in canola plants that fertilized by 50% NPK + H (FS) (28.80 and 27.36) followed by 50% NPK + H (SA)+H (FS) (28.02 and 26.62) then H (SA)+H (FS) with averages of 27.30 and 25.94 in both seasons of this study, respectively. On the contrast of this, the control treatment showed the lowest number of seeds/pod in both seasons with averages of 21.50 and 20.43, respectively.

2.3. 1000-seed weight (g):

Data in Table 3 and Fig 2a showed that canola plants under 50% NPK+ humic (FS)  had the heaviest 1000-seed weight (4.65and 4.52 g) followed by 50% NPK + Humic (SA)+ Humic (FS) (4.18 and 4.06 g) then 100 % NPK with averages of  (3.80 and 3.69 g) in both seasons, respectively.compared with control gave averages of 1.54 and 1.49 g in both two seasons, respectively.

2.4. Seed yield/plant (g):

From the results in Table 3 and Fig 2a it could be clear that, the highest seed yield/plant were obtained in canola plants that fertilized with 50% NPK+ humic (FS) (54.99 and 53.45 g) followed by 50% NPK + Humic (SA)+Humic (FS) (49.38 and 47.99 g) then 100 % NPK with averages of (44.90 and 43.65 g) in both seasons, respectively. In the contrast of this, the lowest seed yield/plant was shown in the control treatment with averages of (18.17 and 17.67 g)  in both seasons, respectively.

2.5. Seed yield/fed (kg):

From the results in Table 3 and Fig 2b it could be clear that, the highest seed yield/fed were obtained in canola plants that fertilized with50% NPK + Humic (SA)+ Humic (FS) (1693.22 and 1734.06 kg)) followed by100 % NPK with averages of  (1635.23 and 1665.33 kg) then50% NPK+ humic (FS) (1583.55 and 1661.75 kg) in both seasons, respectively. In the contrast of this, the lowest seed yield/fed was shown in the control treatment with averages of (968.23 and 876.15kg)  in both seasons, respectively.

2.6. Oil percentage:

The results in Table 3 and Fig 2b indicated that, the highest oil %  was shown in canola plants that fertilized with H (SA)+H (FS)(44.93 and 44.82 %) followed by Humic (FS) (44.04 and 44.18%) then 50% NPK + H (SA)+H (FS) with averages of  (43.75 and 43.90%) in both seasons, respectively. In the contrast of this, the lowest oil percentage was shown in the control treatment with averages of (40.13 and 40.07%) in both seasons, respectively.

2.7. Oil yield/fed (kg):

The results in Table 3 and Fig 2b indicated that, the highest oil yield/fed  was shown in canola plants that fertilized with 50% NPK + H (SA)+H (FS)(740.78 and 761.25 kg) followed by H (SA)+H (FS) (732.61 and 722.27 kg) then Microbin  with averages of (708.70 and 698.62 kg ) in both seasons, respectively. In the contrast of this, the lowest oil yield/fed was shown in the control treatment with averages of(388.55 and 351.07 kg) in both seasons, respectively.

Canola production of high yield and good quality usually depends on well-balanced plant nutrition and growing conditions. A well-balanced soil condition also affects canola plants responses to stress factors such  as  disease  and  bad  weather  conditions.  Nitrogen,  phosphorus  and  potassium  (NPK) are  some  of  the  major  nutrients required to significantly increase canola yield. Fertilizer application dosages in canola production because of the variable occurrence of NPK in the soil. A high yielding canola production needs a well-balanced fertilization program. Sami (2015). Our data indicated that, organic fertilizers humic and NPK significantly increase all growth traits and this may in agree with those by, Rajparet al. (2011) who showed that, the application of  humic acid at 6.35 kg acre^-1  positively affected almost all the yield parameters. Also,   Mohammadiet al. (2011)  who reported that, the  highest  percentage  of Canola  oil  was  obtained  under the organic treatments  farmyard  manure  and  compost  application  and  the highest  oil  yield  belonged  to  combined  application of  chemical  and  organic  fertilizers  treatment. Application  of  organic  manure significantly increased unsaturated fatty acids. In the same line, Ali et al. (2011) showed that, oil  content  was  decreased  by nitrogen  application  but  it  was  increased  with  addition  of  biofertilizer  and  compost manure.  Seed  protein  and  oil  content  were  significantly  increased  by  the  integrated fertilizers applications. This mean that inoculated seed of canola plant with biofertilizer containing  nitrogen  fixer  bacteria  plus  addition  of  compost  manure  at  10  ton/fed., substitute half of the recommended dose from the used mineral nitrogen fertilizer.  Humic Acid foliar application could significantly increase seed yield as well as oil percentage and yield (Naseriet al., 2012).(Fatemehet al 2019). In another study, humic acid foliar application was significant on seed yield and yield components as well as biological yield, oil percentage and yield. It has been reported that humic acid application reduces the requirement of other fertilizers (Sani 2014),Humic Acid Foliar Application caused an increase in oil percentage and oil yield in comparison with control plants.(Fatemehet al 2019) In the contrast of this, Rastghalamet al. (2011) found that, The usage of humic acid showed significantly negative effect on number of pods per plant, plant height, shoot dry weight  and root dry weight of canola. (Naseriet al., 2012).found that  applications of humic acid had beneficial effect on seed and seed oil yield

Table 3: Effect of different fertilizers treatments on canola cv. Serw 4 Yield and yield components traits in 2017-2018 (S1) and 2018-2019 (S2) seasons.

H = Humic         M = Microbin         N = Nitrobin            R = RizobacrinSA  = Soil application       FS = Foliar spray