Chief EditorArvind kumar
Print ISSN 0253-150X
Online ISSN 0976-0547
NAAS Rating 4.75
Full Research Article
Response of Maize (Zea mays L.) to Blend (Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Sulfur, Boron) and Potassium Fertilizers Rates at Boloso Sore Woreda, Ethiopia
- Email email@example.com
Methods: The research was conducted at Achura kebele Farmers Training Center (FTC) from December 2020 to July 2021. Soil samples and crop data were collected and analyzed by standard procedures.
Result: The soil reaction revealed that the soil was moderately acidic (pH=5.68) and low in organic carbon, total nitrogen, available phosphorus, potassium, sulfur and boron. The result of this study indicated that the growth and yield of maize were significantly (P<0.05) affected by the combined effect of both blended (nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur, boron) and potassium fertilizer rates. The highest grain yield (7200.9 kg ha-1) was found from NPSB, 200 kg ha-1 + K, 50 kg ha-1and the lowest was recorded from control.
The above data showed that the average maize yield is less than the potential yield (15.8 t ha-1) of maize (Van et al., 2013). Among several production constraints, low soil fertility, mainly nutrient deficiency, inadequate soil management practices (Tolera, 2016) and the application of a low rate of organic fertilizers (Sanchez, 2002) are responsible for this low productivity of maize.
According to the agricultural transformation agency of Ethiopia (ATA) (2016), elements like N, P, K, S, Zn, B and Cu are deficient in major Ethiopia soils. Besides this, recent studies conducted by Mesfin et al., (2021) indicated that OC, TN and available P and K were low in cropland in different areas of the Wolaita Zone. Blended fertilizers contain balanced nutrients with recommended amounts of macro and micronutrients to produce significantly higher yields in cereal crops than the blanket recommendation of DA .
Different studies showed that the application of newly introduced blended fertilizers had a significant difference in maize crops in various regions of Ethiopia. Mulisa (2019) reported that using fertilizers at a specific rate could improve maize production. However, in the wolaita zone, farmers are currently using 100 kg ha-1 NPSB and 100 kg ha-1 urea without K for maize production as a blanket recommendation, which may or may not be sufficient to meet the crop requirement. There is no information found on site-specific recommended rates of blended (Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Sulfur, Boron) and Potassium for maize. Therefore, this experiment was conducted to evaluate the response of maize in growth, yield and yield components to blended fertlizers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Soil texture was analyzed using the hydrometer method (Sahlemedhin and Taye, 2000). The soil pH value was measured potentiometrically using a pH meter with a combined glass electrode in a 1: 2.5 soil: water ratio (Carter 1993). The soil organic carbon was determined following the wet combustion method of Walkley and Black as outlined by (Sahlemedhin and Taye 2000). The total soil nitrogen was analyzed using the Kjeldahl digestion and distillation method (Jackson, 2003). The available phosphorous was determined by Bray and Kurz (1945). Available boron: was determined by using a Spectrophotometer method. The cation exchange capacity (CEC) of the soil was determined by the 1M ammonium acetate pH-7 method (Van Reeuwijk, 1993). The soil’s exchangeable bases (K) were determined from the leachate of 1 molar ammonium acetate solution at pH 7 and were read using a flame photometer (Rowell, 1994).
Chemical fertilizers and urea were used as experimental materials, whereas KCl and urea were used as a source of Potassium and nitrogen, respectively. Hybrid (BH540) maize was used. The treatments consisted of a factorial combination of five rates of NPSB, (N,18.9%, P2O5 37.7%, S, 6.95%, B,0.1%), fertilizer (0, 50, 100, 150 and 200 kg ha-1), with four rates of KCl, (0-0-60 ) (0, 47.76, 95.5 and 143.25) kg ha-1 which, contained totally 20 treatments.
The treatments were laid out in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications, 3 x 20 = 60 treatments and they were randomly assigned to each experimental plot (Table 1). The gross size of each field was 3 m x 3 m (9 m2), consisting of four rows and with a space of 0.75 m x 0. 3 m between row and maize plants, respectively.
To measure ear diameter (cm), about five ears were taken randomly from the net plot area and then their diameters were measured at the middle of the ear with a caliper ruler. The mean value was recorded as ear diameter. A thousand kernel weight (g) was measured by taking about 1,000 kernels randomly and counting by using a kernel counter from the bulk of threshed kernels in each net plot. The area was then weighed using a sensitive balance level. Harvest Index (%) HI was recorded as the ratio of grain yield to total above-ground biomass yield and multiplied by 100% at harvest in each plot.
TAGBY = Total above-ground biomass yield.
The mean separation was carried out using the least significant difference (LSD) test at a 5% level of significance when the variance analysis indicated substantial differences busing SAS software 9.2 versions (SAS, 2008).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The soil of the study site has a proportion of 43% sand, 28% silt and 29% clay (Table 2). Thus, according to Bouyoucos’s (1962) classification, its texture was sandy clay loam. Soil reaction was moderately acidic soil with a pH value of 5.84 (Table 2) at the surface and suitable for maize production (EthioSIS, 2013). This result is in line with, Shimeles (2006), who suggested that the lower pH values at the surface soil could be due to the seasonal soil.
The available phosphorus content of the soil in the study area was low (Bray and Kurz 1945) (8.42 mg/kg) and needs phosphorous fertilizer. This may be due to the high P fixation of the soil, complete removal of crop residues and low input of organic amendments to the cultivated land in the study area. Thus, the soil indicates a crop response to P fertilizers to obtain optimum maize production. The result is in line with (Mesfin et al., 2021), who indicated the most cultivated land in the region showed low available soil phosphorus.
Soil organic carbon content was 1.14% having an organic matter content of 1.97% (with a conversion factor of 1.724. According to Tekalign, (1991), the composite sample could be rated as low. Soil organic matter content of the composite surface soil sample from the experimental area was found to be 1.97% (Table 2) and the rating is classified as low. This is may be due to the complete removal of crop residues and low input of organic amendments like compost to the cultivated land. The result is in line with (Tuma 2007), who indicated that intensive cultivation aggravates OM oxidation and reduces OC content. Regarding this fact, proper soil management practices such as adding crop residuals and compost were one the crucial practices to solve the problem.
The total nitrogen content of the experiment area before sowing was 0.19% (Table 2). According to EthioSIS (2013), TN content was low. The low total N contents may be associated with factors that cause a deficiency in organic matter. This indicates that the study area’s soils are deficient.
The CEC of the site was 11.72 cmol kg-1 (Table 2). According to the result obtained from the soil laboratory, the value of CEC was in the low range (Landon, 1991). This can be associated with the low OM content and the role of clay minerals which attract or adsorb many cations from the soil. This finding agrees with Kedir, (2015), who reported the variation in CEC is due to variation in OM.
The content of available potassium contents of the composite sample had 112.8 ppm (Table 2), indicating the soil is deficient in available potassium content (Horneck et al., 2011). The result is similar to (Mesfin et al., 2021), who indicated in their study, that cultivated land in Wolaita Zone was low in available potassium content. Additionally, the result agrees with (EthioSIS, 2013), which recommended potash fertilizer for the study area and contradicted with (Murphy 1968) which stated that Ethiopian soils are rich in K and hence no need for K application.
The available sulfur content of the experimental area was 18.09 (ppm) (Table 2) and the soil has been rated as low. So the addition of fertilizer that contains S is relevant. This low content of S may be due to loss of OM and continuous cultivation, which results in intensive mining of S from the soil. Available Boron in the soil was 0.50 mg kg-1 (Table 2). According to Horneck et al., (2011), soil availability B content was rated as low, suggesting the application of fertilizer containing B. Intensive cultivation in the area was responsible for the low B content of the soil.
As shown in Table 3, the interaction of NPSB and K fertilizer significantly (p£0.05) affected the maize height. The maximum plant height (314.10 cm) was obtained from the application of 150 kg NPSB + 50 kg K kg ha-1, while the minimum plant height (178.40 cm) was recorded from control treatments. According to this study, the combined application of NPSB fertilizer with K has significantly increased the plant height compared to the control. This indicated that as early discussed; the soil laboratory result showed that the soil of the study area was low in the amount of available P and K nutrients.
Leaf area and leaf area index
Maize leaf area and leaf area index was significantly (P<0.05) affected by the main effect and their interaction of NPSB and K fertilizer application. However, the maximum (8783.8 cm2) leaf area and (3.90) leaf index were recorded from 200 kg NPSB + 75 kg K ha. In comparison, the minimum (4650.1 cm2) leaf area and (2.07) leaf area index were recorded from the control. Moreover, the application of NPSB with K had a statistical difference compared to the same used rate of NPSB without K application. For example, the application of NPSB, 200 kg with K, 70 kg/ha was, increased leaf area by (33.21%) and leaf area index by (33.10%) as compared to the same used rate of NPSB at 200 kg ha without K (Table 3). This could be related to applying adequate blended NPSB with K fertilizers as proven macro and micronutrients to the plant, which encouraged cell elongation and more vegetative growth of maize.
Ear length and diameter
The result of this study indicated that there was a significant (P<0.05) variation in main and interaction effects on ear length and diameter in response to applied blended NPSB and K fertilizer in the study area (Table 3). Thus, the longest (24.20 cm) and (6.4 cm) ear length and ear diameter were recorded from the application of (200 kg NPSB + 75 kg K ha-1), respectively (Table 3). The variation in ear length and diameter might be related to the applied balanced nutrient content and the role of Potassium in the utilization of this nutrient.
Number of kernels per ear
There was a significant variation at (P<0.05) in the Number of kernels per ear among treatments. Thus, the highest average number of kernels per ear (469.00) was recorded from the combined application of NPSB with K at a rate of (200 and 50 kg ha-1) followed by (200 and 75 kg ha-1) and (150 and 75 kg ha-1) while, the lowest (155.90) was obtained from control (Table 4). However, the result implied that the application of balanced fertilizer NPSB with K had significant deference from NPSB without K application treatments. For instance, NPSB 200 kg ha with K 75 kg ha application increased maize number of kernels per ear by 54% compared to the same rates of NPSB 200 kg ha-1 without K (Table 4). This could be related to the effect of applied nutrient content in (NPSB and K) compared to without K. Moreover, Potassium plays multiple functions in plant growth and development (Sultana et al., 2015).
The output of the field experiment indicated that there were significant differences (P<0.05) in thousand-grain weight in response to the combined application of NPSB with K fertilizer application (Table 4). The maximum (539.80 gm) grain weight was obtained from the application of (NPSB, 200 kg ha-1 with K, 50 kg ha-1), while the minimum value was recorded from the control (Table 4). This may be related to the role of used potassium fertilizer in balanced NPSB. It ensures the utilization of applied nutrients and improves seed quality by activating the work of enzymes.
This output is similar to the findings of Mulisa (2019), the highest (425.31 gm) thousand-grain weights was recorded from the application of 250 NPS + 150 urea+ 100 KCl kg ha-1 while the lower (300.78 gm) thousand-grain weights were recorded from the control treatment.
Above-ground dry biomass yield
The analysis of variance in this study revealed that there were highly significant (P<0.0170) differences among fertilizer rates on biological yield). The maximum amount of biological yield (17838 kg ha-1) was obtained under the application of 200 NPSB + 100 kg urea + 50 K kg ha-1 and the minimum biological yield (8415 kg ha-1) was obtained from the control (Table 4). Besides, balanced fertilizer NPSB and K-applied treatments had statistically significant differences from only NPSB without K-application treatments. For example, NPSB 200 kg ha-1 with K 75 kg ha-1 increased maize biological yield by 15.47% compared to the same used rates of NPSB at 200 kg ha-1 without K applied treatment (Table 4).
There were significant differences at (P<0.05) in grain yield in response to the combined application of NPSB and fertilizer application in the study area (Table 4). The highest grain yield (7200.9 kg ha-1) was obtained in the application of 200 kg NPSB ha-1 with 50 kg K ha-1, whereas the lowest (2111.0 kg ha-1) grain yield was obtained from the control treatment (Table 4). Therefore, this response could be due to an adequate supply of N, P, K, S and B application in the form of NPSB and KCl and the role of potassium fertilizer, which might have played an essential role in the overall function of plant growth. Supporting this, before sowing soil surface sample analysis, the study area was low in soil fertility status and available K had found at a low level. In conformity with this result, (Mulisa, 2019) reported that the maximum amount of biological yield (18521.50 kg ha-1) was obtained under the application of 250 NPSB + 100 kg urea + 100 KCl kg ha-1 and the minimum biological yield (7675.4 kg ha-1) was obtained from the control treatment. Similarly, Dagne (2016) confirmed that blended fertilizer application significantly increased maize biological yield compared to control and recommended NP.
This result is supported by Mulisa (2019), who reported that the highest harvest index (47%) was recorded from the application of 250 NPSB + 100 urea + 100 KCl kg ha-1 and the lowest (38%) was received from the control treatment.
Harvest index was highly significantly (P<0.0170) influenced by the combined application of blended NPSB with K (Table 4). According to the interaction effect, the highest value of HI (42.97%) was obtained due to 200 kg blended NPSB ha-1 combined with 50 kg K ha-1, whereas the lowest (25.13%) was obtained from the control treatment (Table 4).
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
- ATA. (Agricultural Transformation Agency). (2016). Soil fertility status and fertilizer recommendation atlas for SNNPRS, Ethiopia. Ethiopian Agricultural Transformation Agency (ATA), A.A, Ethiopia.
- Bouyoucos, G.J. (1962). Hydrometer method improved for making particle size analyses of soils. Agronomy Journal. 54: 464-465.
- Bray, R.H., Kurz, L.T. (1945). Determination of total, organic and available forms of phosphorous in the soil. Soil Sci. 59(1): 39-45.
- Brady, N.C. and weil, R.R. (2000). The nature and Properties of soils. 13th ed. Person Education Ltd., USA. Broccoli with Increasing N, P or K Ratio in a Mixture of NPK Fertilizers.
- BSWAO (Boloso Sore Woreda Agricultural Office). (2020). Cropping season unpublished data. International Journal of Advanced Research in Biological Sciences. 4(12): 2017. DOI: http:/ /dx.doi.org/10.22192.
- Carter, M.R. (1993). Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis. Canadian Soil Science. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781 420005271.
- CSA. (2016). The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Agricultural Sample Survey. Report on Area and Production of Major Crop. Statistical Bulletin.
- Dagne Chimdessa. (2016). Soils characteristics in maize based farming system of Western Oromia, Ethiopia. Journal of Energy and Natural Resources. 5(4): 2016, pp. 37-46.
- EthioSIS. (Ethiopian Soil Information System). (2013). Towards improved fertilizer recommendations in Ethiopia-Nutrient indices for categorization of fertilizer blends from EthioSIS woreda soil inventory data. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
- EthioSIS (Ethiopian Soil Information System). (2014). Soil analysis reports agriculture transformation agency [Unpublished]. Ministry of Agriculture and Agriculture Transformation Agency.
- FAOSTAT (Food and Agriculture Organization Corporate Statistical Database). (2017). Statistical databases and data sets of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. http://faostat.fao.org/default.aspx.
- Horneck, D.A., Sullivan, D.M., Owen, J.S and Hart, J.M. (2011). Soil test interpretation guide. EC 1478 Revised July 2011 12 pages.
- Jackson ML. Soil chemical analysis. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 582p. Jaiswal, P.C. (2003). Soil, Plant and Water Analysis. Kalyani, New Delhi, India: Prentice-Hall Inc; 1958. 441 P.
- Kedir, A. (2015). Soil Fertility Assessment and Mapping of Amaregenda Abajarso Sub-Watershed in Dessie Zuria District, North- Eastern Ethiopia. Msc thesis, Haramaya University Haramaya, Haramaya.
- Landon, J.R., (Ed.). (1991). Booker tropical soil manual: A handbook for soil Survey and Agricultural Land Evaluation in the Tropics and Subtropics. Longman Scientific and Technical, Essex, New York. 474p.
- Mesfin, K., Kebede, F. and Haile, W. (2021). Forms and dynamics of soil potassium in acid soil in the wolaita zone of Southern Ethiopia. Preprints (www.preprints.org) DOI: 10.20944/ preprints 202105.0287.v1.
- Mulisa, W.A. (2019). Localizing Ethiosis fertility map-based fertilizer type recommendation for maize (Zea mays L.) in coffee and spice production belt in yeki district, southwest of Ethiopia. MSc Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies, Jimma University, Ethiopia. 93p.
- Murphy, H.F. (1968). A report on fertility status and other data on some soils of Ethiopia, experimental station bulletin No. 44. Haile Selassie College of Agriculture, Oklahoma State University, 551P; of Agriculture Faisalabad.
- Rowell, D.L. (1994). Soil science: Methods and applications. Addison Wesley Longman Limited. England. 350p.
- Sahlemedhin, S. and Bekele, T. (2000). Procedures for Soil and Plant Analysis. National Soil Research Center, EARO, Technical Paper No. 74, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
- SAS (Statistical Analysis System Institute). (2008). SAS Version 9.2 © 2002-2012. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, North Carolina, USA.
- Sanchez, P.A. (2002). Soil fertility and hunger in Africa. Policy forum 295, 2019-2020.
- Sultana, S., Kashem, M.A. and Mollah, A.K.M.M. (2015). Comparative Assessment of Cow Manure, Vermicompost and NPK Fertilizers and on the Growth and Production of Zinnia (Zinnia Elegans) Flower. Open Journal of Soil Science. 5: 193-198.
- Shimeles, D. (2006). Characterization and Classification of the Soils of Tenocha-Wenchancher Micro-catchment, Southwest Shewa. MSc Thesis, Haramaya University. Haramaya, Ethiopia.
- Tekalign, T. (1991). Soil, plant, water, fertilizer, animal manure and compost analysis. Working Document No. 13. International Livestock Research Center for Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
- Tolera, A. (2016). Maize Response to Fertilizer Application in Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Natural Resources. 16 (1 and 2): 25-41.
- Tuma, A. (2007). Effects of fruit-based land use systems on soil physicochemical properties: The case of smallholders farming **systems in GamoGofa, Southern Ethiopia. MSc. Thesis. School of Graduate Studies, Hawassa University, Ethiopia.
- Van, R.L.P. (1993). Procedure for Soil Analysis. 4th Edition. International Soil Reference Center Wageningen. (ISRIC) Technical Paper no. 9.The Netherlands.
- Van, I.M.K., Cassman, K.G., Grassini, P., Wolf, J., Tittonell, P., Hochman, Z. (2013). Yield gap analysis with local to global relevance-a review. Field Crops Res. 143: 4-17.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.