Effects of nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acids spraying on yield and yield components of mungbean (Vigna Radiate)

Transcription

1 Available online at Annals of Biological Research, 2013, 4 (8): ( ISSN CODEN (USA): RNBW Effects of nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acids spraying on yield and yield components of mungbean (Vigna Radiate) Pedramminaee, Mohammad Reza Haj Seyed Hadi*, Mohammad Taghi Darzand Amir Mansour Shahsavar Department of Agronomy, Roudehen Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudehen, Iran STRACT The main objective of this study was to determine the effects of nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acids on the quantitative yield of mungbean. The experiment was conducted during the growing season of The treatment groups consisted of nitrogen fixing bacteria (control, Azotobacter, Azospirillum and Azotobacter+Azospirillum) and the sprays of amino acids (control, at budding stage, a t flowering stage). The experimental design was a factorial experiment based on randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acid spraying successfully manipulates the growth of mungbean, resulting in beneficial changes in yield and yield components. Combined application of nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acid spraying can be helpful in developing of production and yield in Vigna radiate Keyword: Azotobacter, Azospirillum, Mungbean, Yield. INTRODUCTION Mungbean (Vignaradiata L.) is a widely-grown, short-duration grain legume crop grown in south and Southeast Asia. It is an important source of inexpensive protein and iron, and is a good substitute for meat in most Asian diets and a significant component of various cropping systems [25, 28]. Mungbean is considered as a substitute of animal protein and forms a balanced diet when used with cereals [1, 11, 19, 21]. Current trends in agriculture are centered on reducing the use of inorganic fertilizers by biofertilizers such as vermicompost [16]. The management practices with organic materials influence agricultural sustainability by improving physical, chemical and biological properties of soils [26]. Several types of studies in the last 20 years have shown a beneficial effect on crop plants by inoculation of seeds with Azospirillum strains [6, 22]. Inoculation of plants with Azospirillumand Azotobactercan result in asignificant change in various plant growth parameters. Positive effects of inoculation have been demonstratedon various root parameters, including increase in root length, particularly of the root elongation zone [12, 19]. The best performances of Azospirillum under field 265

2 conditions are usually associated with non-optimal conditions for plant growth (limited fertilization and water) and they occur mainly insemi-arid agriculture [5]. The asparagine and glutamine connect the two important metabolic cycles of the plant, the carbon and nitrogen cycles, and they have an influence both on sugars and on proteins. The glycine is an amino acid that inhibits the apparent photorespiration done by C3 [21]. The methionine is the ethylene precursor, it regulates the flowering and fruit ripening; the asparagine and the glutamine help in the nutrient transport and as reserve of nitrogen, besides being important in the pollination and fruit set. The tryptophan inhibits the precocious flower and fruit fall and it is important in the process of production of enzyme that catalyses synthesis reaction of auxin. The glutamic acid is important for the synthesis of the auxin and fruit set and the alanine for the germination and the pollen grains fertility [21]. The main objective of this study was to assess the effects of nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acids spraying on yield of mungbean (Vigna radiate). MATERIALS AND METHODS The present study was conducted during the growing season of 2011 at the research fields of RAN Company in Firouzkouh, Iran. The geographical location of the experimental station was 35º 45 N and 52º 44 E with the altitude of 1930 m. The soil of the experimental region was loamy with ph 7.36 (Table 1). Table 1.Analysis of soil on the experimental site (0-30 cm depth). Texture Loamy Clay ph 7.21 EC meq lit 0.31 OM % 1.25 K PPM 345 P PPM 35 N 0.14 A 4 3 factorial experiment, arranged in a randomized complete blocks designed with three replications. The treatments consisted of 4 level of nitrogen fixing bacteria (control, Azotobacter, Azospirillum and Azotobacter + Azospirillum) and 3 level of amino acid spraying (control, at budding stage, at flowering stage). Inoculation was carried out by dipping the seeds in the cells suspension of 10 8 CFU/ml for 15 min. Nitrogen (20 kg/ha) was applied to the plots before planting as starter. Also, 50 kg/ha P 2 o 5 and K 2 0 were used according to the soil analysis. Each experimental plot was 3 m long and 2 m wide with the spacing of 10 cm between the plants and 50 cm between the rows. There was a space of 50 cm between the plots and 3 meters between replications. Seeds were directly sown by hand into the field at a rate of 12 kg ha 1 to a depth of 3-5 cm. There was no incidence of pest or disease on dill during the experiment. Weeding was done manually and the plots were irrigated weekly. All necessary cultural practices and plant protection measures were followed uniformly for all the plots during the entire period of experimentation. Data were recorded for the plant height, number of pods per plant, dry leaf weight, seed number per pod, seed yield and nitrogen content in the seeds. Ten plants were randomly selected from each plot and the observations were recorded. At the flowering stage, the plant height, from plant base to the tip of plant, was measured for each plot using a ruler (±0.1 cm) [3, 7]. Pod number per plant was recorded at the end of growth season. In addition, For evaluating the dry leaf weight, leaves were put in the oven at 80º C for 48 h and dry weight was calculated using a digital balance (Sartorius B310S; ±0.01 g) [4, 14]. In order to determine seed yield, the plots were manually harvested following the air-drying of pods at C and then the seeds were removed from plants by hand [1, 7, 10]. Statistical analysis All the data were subjected to statistical analysis (one-way ANOVA) using SAS software (SAS Institute, version 8, 2001). Differences between the treatments were performed by Duncan s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) at 5% 266

3 confidence interval. Transformations were applied to the data to assure that the residuals had normal distribution [23]. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Plant height The present results have indicated that plant heights were not affected by the inoculation of seeds by Azotobacter and Azospirillum and amino acid spraying. Also, interaction of treatments did not caused significant differences on plant height (Table 2). Table2.Effects of nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acid spraying on some traits of mungbean. Treatments Height Dry leaf weight/p Pod number/plant Seed yield N %/seed Nitrogen Fixing Bacteria Control 23.8 a 2.02 a a a 2.75 b Azotobacter 22.8 a 2.12 a b a 4.04 a Azospirillum 23.1 a 2.20 a a a 3.72 b Azotobacter+Azospirillum 23.8 a 2.65 a a a 3.54 b Amino acid Control 33.3 a 2.3 a a a 3.75 a Budding stage 33.1 a 2.12 a a a 2.70 a Flowering stage 32.8 a 2.3 a b a 3.74 a Mean values followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P Dry Leaf weight The results have demonstrated that dry leaf weight was influenced by the inoculation of seeds by Azotobacter and Azospirillum, significantly. But, amino acid spraying did not show significant effects on dry leaf weight (Table 2). Among various treatments, the highest dry leaf weight was obtained by using Azotobacter+Azospirillum. The present results show that the interaction of biofertilizers and amino acids was significant (Table 2). The highest dry leaf weight was obtained at Azotobacter+Azospirillum and no amino acid spraying. Pod numbers per plant The results presented in Table 2 have demonstrated that number of pods per plant was influenced by bacteria inoculation and amino acid spraying (Table 2). Among various treatments, the application of Azotobacter+Azospirillumhas indicated maximum increase in number of pods per plant. Also, amino acid spraying at the budding stage caused the highest pod numbers per plant. The present results show that the interaction of treatments was significant (Table 2). The highest pod number per plant was obtained at Azotobacter+Azospirillumand no amino acid spraying. Seed numbers per pod Results presented in Table 2 show that seed number per pod was influenced by bacteria inoculation and amino acid spraying (Table 2). Among various treatments, the application of Azotobacter+Azospirillumhas indicated maximum increase in seed number per pod. Also, amino acid spraying at the budding stage caused the highest seed number per pod. The present results show that the interaction of treatments was significant (Table 2). The highest seed number per pod was obtained by Azospirillum inoculation and amino acid spraying at budding stage. Seed yield The present results show that the interaction of nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acid was significant (Fig1). The highest seed yield was obtained when Azotobacter+Azospirilluminoculated with seeds and amino acid sprayed at flowering stage. 267

4 C A 0 A1N1 A1N2 A1N3 A1N4 A2N1 A2N2 A2N3 A2N4 A3N1 A3N2 A3N3 Seed yield (kg/ha A3N4 Figure 1.Effects of interaction between various levels of nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acid spraying on seed yield. (N1 = control, N2 = Azotobacter, N3 = Azospirillum andn4: Azotobacter+Azospirillum; A1 = control, A2 = spraying at budding stage, A3= spraying at flowering stage). Nitrogen content in the seeds Results presented in Table 2 show that nitrogen content in the seeds was influenced by bacteria inoculation, significantly (Table 2). Among various treatments, the inoculation of seeds by Azotobacter has indicated maximum increase in nitrogen content in the seeds. The present results show that the interaction of nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acid was significant (Table 2). The highest nitrogen content in the seeds was obtained by azotobacter inoculation and amino acid spraying at budding stage. It seems that Azotobacter had positive effects of nitrogen content in the seeds in comparison with Azospirillum and integrated application of bacteria. DISCUSSION According to the present analysis, nitrogen fixing bacteria have shown positive effects measured traits. Improved growth, development and height of crops have previously been reported [7, 9]. The present result was derived from the improvement of nitrogen fixing bacteria activities in soil at Azotobacter+Azospirillumtreatment. The results clearly demonstrate the effectiveness of nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acid spraying in increasing the quantitative yield. Nitrogen fixing bacteria increase the growth rate which leads to the biological yield improvement. This finding is in accordance with the previous observations [17]. CONCLUSION It is clear from the present study that nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acid spraying successfully manipulates the growth of mungbean, resulting in beneficial changes in yield and yield components. Combined application of nitrogen fixing bacteria and amino acid spraying can be helpful in developing of production and yield in Vignaradiata. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank the Eng. Amin Reza Yoosefi for his friendly collaboration and RAN Company in Firouzkooh for providing research field to undertake this research project. REFERENCES [1] MAH Abdou, AA El Sayed, FS Badran and RMS El Deen, Annals ofagricultural Science, 2004, 42(4), [2] MS Anjum, ZI Ahmed and CA Rauf, International Journal of Agriculture and Biology, 2006, 2,

5 [3] M Azizi, F Rezvani, ZKM Hassan, ALekzian and A Nemati, Iranian Journal of Medicinal Plants and Spices Research, 2009, 24(1), [4] FS Badran and MS Safwat, Egyptian Journal of Agricultural Research, 2004, 82 (2), [5] Y Bashan and G Holguin, Canadian Journal of Microbiology, 1997, 43, [6] K Das, R Dang, TN Shivananda and N Sekeroglu, Journal of Medicinal. Plants Research, 2007, 1(1), 5-8. [7] MT Darzi, M R Haj SeyedHadi and F Rejali, Journal of Medicinal. Plants Research, 2012, 6(2), [8] D Delice, O Stajkovic-Sibrinovic, D Kuzmanovic, N Rasulic, V Mrvic, S Andjelovic and J Knezevic-Vukcevic, African Journal of Microbial Research, 2011, 5(23), [9] MR Haj SeyedHadi, MT Darzi, GH Riazi and Z Ghandehari, Journal of Medicinal. Plants Research, 2011, 5(23), [10] KA Khalid and AM Shafei, Arab Universities Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2005, 13(3), [11] A Khanand MA Malik, Journal of Biological Science, 2001, 1, [12] W Kolb and P Martin, InAzospirillum. III. Genetics, physiology, ecology. Edited by W. Klingmüller. Springer- Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1985, pp [13] M Mansoor, PhD thesis. Department of Agronomy Faculty of Agriculture Gomal University, [14] HA Migahed, AE Ahmed and BF Abdel Ghany, Arab Universities Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2004, 12 (2), [15] MA Pereyra, P Garcia, MN Colabelli, CA Barassi and CM Creus, Applied Soil Ecology, 2012, 53, [16] S Rudy, C Sontichai, T Theerayut, N Sumana and S Peerasak, Journal of Crop Science and Biotechnology, 2006, 10(3), [17] AH SaeidNejad and P RezvaniMoghaddam, Journal of Horticultural Science, 2011, 24(2), [18] S Saha,BL Mina, KL Gopinath, S Kundu and HSGupta, BioresourcesTechnology,2008, 99, [19] S Sarig, A Blum and Y Okon, J. Agric. Sci, 1988, 11, [20] P Srinives, N Hual-Alai, S Saengchot and S Ngampongsai, In Proc. 7th MAFF Inter. Workshop on Genetic Resources Part 1.Wild Legumes.October 21-25, 1999, Tsukuba, Japan. [21] J Taize and E Zeiger, Plant Physiology, 2001, vol p. [22] NK Verma, African Journal of Plant Breeding, 2011, 3(8), JH Zar, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey,