Improved Nitrogen Utilization of Faba Bean (Vicia faba L.) Roots and Plant Physiological Characteristics under the Combined Application of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Material Preparation
2.2. Experimental Design
2.3. Sample Preparation and Assays
2.3.1. Nitrogen Content and Accumulation
2.3.2. Total Nodule Number and Weight
2.3.3. Nitrate Reductase Activity
2.3.4. Activities of Glutamine Synthetase (GS) and Glutamate Synthase (GOGAT)
2.4. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Effect of Combined Application of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizer on Yield and Composition of Faba Bean Grown in Greenhouses
3.2. Effect of Combined Application of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizer on Dry Matter Accumulation and Distribution among Different Organs
3.3. Effect of Combined Application of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizer on Nitrogen Accumulation
3.3.1. Nitrogen Content
3.3.2. Nitrogen Accumulation
3.4. Effect of Combined Application of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizer on Nitrogen Utilization Efficiency
3.5. Relationship between Nitrogen Accumulation and Yield and Nitrogen Utilization Efficiency
3.6. Physiological Change as Affected by Combined Application of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizer
4. Discussion
4.1. ROT Can Increase the Green Seed Yield and Nitrogen Utilization Efficiency of Greenhouse-Grown Faba Bean
4.2. Combined Application of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers Increases the Ability to Absorb and Assimilate Nitrogen
4.3. Dry Matter Accumulation and Distribution Characteristics of Greenhouse-Grown High-Yield Faba Bean
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Merga, B.; Egigu, M.C.; Wakgari, M. Reconsidering the economic and nutritional importance of faba bean in Ethiopian context. Cogent Food Agric. 2019, 5, 1683938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, L.; Yang, T.; Liu, R.; Redden, B.; Maalouf, F. Food legume production in China. Crop J. 2017, 5, 115–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wu, C.F.; Xia, L.R.; Yi, S.Y. Study on high efficiency cultivation technology of faba bean in facility greenhouse. Shanghai Agric. Sci. Technol. 2011, 6, 82–83. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, H.; Sheng, Y.F.; Jiang, W.T.; Pan, F.B.; Wang, M.; Chen, X.S.; Shen, X.; Yin, C.M.; Mao, Z.Q. The effects of crop rotation combinations on the soil quality of old apple orchard. Hortic. Plant J. 2022, 8, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roba, T.B. Review on: The effect of mixing organic and inorganic fertilizer on productivity and soil fertility. Open Access Libr. J. 2018, 5, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, L.; Li, C.; Zhu, S.; Xu, Y.; Li, H. Combined application of organic and inorganic nitrogen fertilizers affects soil prokaryotic communities compositions. Agronomy 2020, 10, 132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chaudhary, P.; Sharma, A.; Chaudhary, A.; Khati, P.; Gangola, S.; Damini, M. Illumina based high throughput analysis of microbial diversity of maize rhizosphere treated with nanocompounds and Bacillus sp. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2021, 159, 103836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaudhary, P.; Khati, P.; Gangola, S.; Kumar, A.; Kumar, R.; Sharma, A. Impact of nanochitosan and Bacillus spp. on health, productivity and defence response in Zea mays under feld condition. 3 Biotech 2021, 11, 237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaudhary, P.; Khati, P.; Chaudhary, A.; Gangola, S.; Kumar, R.; Sharma, A. Bioinoculation using indigenous Bacillus spp. improves growth and yield of Zea mays under the infuence of nanozeolite. 3 Biotech 2021, 11, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mng’omba, S.A.; Akinnifesi, F.K.; Kerr, A.; Salipira, K.; Muchugi, A. Growth and yield responses of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) to inorganic and organic fertilizers in southern Malawi. Agrofor. Syst. 2017, 91, 249–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Q.; Liu, P.; Dong, S.; Zhang, J.; Zhao, B. Combined application of organic and inorganic fertilizers mitigates ammonia and nitrous oxide emissions in a maize field. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosys. 2020, 117, 13–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Devkota, S.; Rayamajhi, K.; Yadav, D.R.; Shrestha, J. Effects of different doses of organic and inorganic fertilizers on cauliflower yield and soil properties. J. Agric. Nat. Resour. 2021, 4, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, M.; Sun, D.; Niu, Z.; Yan, J.; Zhou, X. Effects of combined organic/inorganic fertilizer application on growth, photosynthetic characteristics, yield and fruit quality of Actinidia chinesis cv ‘Hongyang’. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2020, 22, e00997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, N.K.; Kumar, A.; Yadav, V.K. Integrated effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers on yield and quality of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Res. Crop 2008, 9, 338–341. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, Q.L.; Zheng, F.X.; Jia, X.C.; Liu, P.; Dong, S.T.; Zhao, B. The combined application of organic and inorganic fertilizers increases soil organic matter and improves soil microenvironment in wheat-maize field. J. Soils Sediments 2020, 20, 2395–2404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Konieczynski, P.; Wesolowsk, M.I. Fractionation of nitrogen and phosphorus compounds from medicinal plant samples. Chem. Anal.-Wars. 2007, 52, 243–252. [Google Scholar]
- Meng, T.Y.; Ge, J.L.; Zhang, X.B.; Wei, H.H.; Lu, Y. A dynamic model and its characteristics for nitrogen accumulation after transplanting in medium-maturity types of Yongyou japonica/indica hybrids. Acta Agron. Sin. 2020, 46, 798–806. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, H.; Huang, L. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer application rate on nitrate reductase activity in maize. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 2020, 18, 2879–2894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Castro, S.A.Q.; Kichey, T.; Persson, D.P.; Schjoerring, J.K. Leaf Scorching following Foliar Fertilization of Wheat with Urea or Urea-Ammonium Nitrate Is Caused by Ammonium Toxicity. Agronomy 2022, 12, 1405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Z.Y.; Zhu, Y.A.; Dong, Y.; Tang, L.; Zheng, Y.; Xiao, J.X. Interspecies interaction for nitrogen use efficiency via up-regulated glutamine and glutamate synthase under wheat-faba bean intercropping. Field Crops Res. 2021, 274, 108324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mo, L.Y.; Wu, L.H.; Tao, Q.N. Research Progress on GS/GOGAT Cycle in Higher Plants. J. Plant Nutr. Fert. 2001, 7, 223–231. [Google Scholar]
- Abid, M.; Ahmed, R.; Umair, A.; Islam, M. Effect of integrated nutrient application on growth and yield of maize. Pak. J. Sci. Ind. Res. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 2015, 58, 122–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, Y.D. Effects of organic manure constituent with n,p fertilizer on growth and root rot disease of pea. Sci. Agric. Sin. 1994, 136, 43–45. [Google Scholar]
- Cuccia, G.; Lacollaa, G.; Summob, C.; Pasqualoneb, A. Effect of organic and mineral fertilization on faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Sci. Hortic. 2019, 243, 338–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.; Wang, P.; Liu, S.Y.; Kang, H.L.; Wang, R. Effects of organic and chemical fertilization on dry biomass, grain yield, nutrient uptake and fertilizer utilization efficiency of faba bean in northwest hemi-dry-land. J. Arid Land Resou. Environ. 2017, 31, 154–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, B.; Bai, Z.H.; Bao, L.J.; Xue, L.X.; Zhang, S.W.; Wei, Y.X.; Zhang, Z.Y.; Zhuang, G.Q.; Zhuang, X.L. Bacillus subtilis biofertilizer mitigating agricultural ammonia emission and shifting soil nitrogen cycling microbiomes. Environ. Int. 2020, 144, 105989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cassman, K.G.; Peng, S.; Olk, D.C.; Ladha, J.K.; Reichardt, W.; Dobermann, A.; Singh, U. Opportunities for increased nitrogen-use efficiency from improved resource management in irrigated rice systems. Field Crop Res. 1998, 56, 7–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Owusu-Sekyere, A. Micronutrients use efficiency and dry matter yield of annual crops as affected by inorganic and organic amendments. J. Plant Nutr. 2021, 44, 2245–2257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pathan, S.I.; Scibetta, S.; Grassi, C.; Pietramellara, G.; Orlandini, S.; Ceccherini, M.T.; Napoli, M. Response of Soil Bacterial Community to Application of Organic and Inorganic Phosphate Based Fertilizers under Vicia faba L. Cultivation at Two Different Phenological Stages. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matson, P.A.; Parton, W.J.; Power, A.G.; Swift, M.J. Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Science 1997, 277, 504–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Reganold, J.P.; Glover, J.D.; Andrews, P.K.; Hinman, H.R. Sustainability of three apple production systems. Nature 2001, 410, 926–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wei, W.L.; Yan, Y.; Cao, J.; Christie, P.; Zhang, F.S. Effects of combined application of organic amendments and fertilizers on crop yield and soil organic matter: An integrated analysis of long-term experiments. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2016, 225, 86–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, H.; Feng, W.T.; He, X.H.; Zhu, P.; Gao, H.J.; Sun, N.; Xu, M.G. Chemical fertilizers could be completely replaced by manure to maintain high maize yield and soil organic carbon (SOC) when SOC reaches a threshold in the Northeast China Plain. J. Integ. Agric. 2017, 16, 937–946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, S.H.; Cao, W.X.; Ding, Y.F.; Tian, Y.C.; Jiang, D. Interactions of water management and nitrogen fertilizer on nitrogen absorption and utilization in rice. Agric. Sci. China 2003, 10, 33–38. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, J.; Liu, Z.; Zhao, B.; Dong, S.T.; Liu, P.; Zhang, J.W. Shade stress decreased maize grain yield, dry matter, and nitrogen accumulation. Agron. J. 2020, 112, 2768–2776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daur, I.; Sepetoǧlu, H.; Marwat, K.B.; Geverek, M.I. Nutrient removal, performance of growth and yield of faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Pak. J. Bot. 2010, 42, 3477–3484. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, Z.X.; Gao, F.; Yang, J.Q.; Zhen, X.Y.; Li, Y.; Zhao, J.H.; Li, J.R.; Qian, B.C.; Yang, D.Q.; Li, X.D. Photosynthetic characteristics and uptake and translocation of nitrogen in peanut in a wheat–peanut rotation system under different fertilizer management regimes. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, M.M.; Ishibashi, Y.; Nakagawa, A.C.S.; Tomita, Y.; Zhao, X.; Iwaya-Inoue, M.; Arima, S.; Zheng, S.H. Nitrogen manipulation affects leaf senescence during late seed filling in soybean. Acta Physiol. Plant. 2017, 39, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Treatment | Organic N (kg ha−1) | Urea N (kg ha−1) | Organic N Ratio % |
---|---|---|---|
0% OF (CK) | 0.0 | 97.5 | 0% |
25% OF | 24.4 | 73.1 | 25% |
50% OF | 48.8 | 48.8 | 50% |
75% OF | 73.1 | 24.4 | 75% |
100% OF | 97.5 | 0.0 | 100% |
Year | Treatment | No. of Effective Branches per Plant | No. of Pods per Plant | Seeds per Pod | 100-Seed Weight | Green Seed Yield |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(No. Plant−1) | (No. Plant−1) | (No. Pod−1) | (g) | (kg ha−1) | ||
2018 | 0% OF (CK) | 11.5 ± 0.3 c | 30.2 ± 0.8 b | 1.8 ± 0.2 a | 291.2 ± 16 c | 5603.69 ± 308.63 d |
25% OF | 17 ± 0.6 b | 38 ± 0.6 a | 2 ± 0.2 a | 326.9 ± 18 b | 8720.38 ± 480.28 b | |
50% OF | 19.3 ± 0.9 a | 39 ± 1.2 a | 2 ± 0.2 a | 362.7 ± 20 a | 10,337.39 ± 569.34 a | |
75% OF | 15.3 ± 0.3 b | 34 ± 1.2 ab | 1.9 ± 0.2 a | 321.2 ± 17.7 b | 7627.09 ± 420.07 bc | |
100% OF | 12.7 ± 0.3 c | 33 ± 0.6 ab | 1.9 ± 0.2 a | 298.3 ± 16.4 c | 6556.04 ± 361.08 cd | |
2019 | 0% OF (CK) | 10 ± 0.3 d | 32.8 ± 1.5 c | 1.4 ± 0.2 b | 285.7 ± 15.7 c | 4801.12 ± 264.43 c |
25% OF | 12.5 ± 0.8 c | 37.2 ± 0.6 ab | 1.6 ± 0.2 b | 343.7 ± 18.9 b | 7586.65 ± 417.84 b | |
50% OF | 22 ± 0.6 a | 40 ± 0.6 a | 2.4 ± 0.3 a | 394.2 ± 21.7 a | 13,595.37 ± 748.77 a | |
75% OF | 16 ± 0.6 b | 33 ± 0.6 bc | 1.7 ± 0.2 b | 366 ± 20.2 b | 7391.06 ± 407.07 b | |
100% OF | 16 ± 0.6 b | 32.4 ± 0.9 bc | 1.6 ± 0.2 b | 308.8 ± 17 c | 5586.33 ± 307.67 c | |
ANOVA | ||||||
Year | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | |
Treatment | * | ** | NS | ** | * |
Year | Treatment | Shoot Dry Matter Accumulation | Shoot Dry Matter Accumulation | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
at Different Stages | ||||||||||
15 DAT | 40 DAT | 80 DAT | 170 DAT | 200 DAT | 15–40 | 40–80 | 80–170 | 170–200 | ||
DAT | DAT | DAT | DAT | |||||||
2018 | 0% OF (CK) | 18.7 ± 1 c | 94.5 ± 5.2 c | 463.5 ± 25.5 d | 2428.3 ± 133.7 e | 9976.2 ± 549.4 d | 75.8 | 369.0 | 1964.8 | 7547.9 |
25% OF | 25 ± 1.4 b | 160.2 ± 8.8 b | 880.2 ± 48.5 b | 9620.5 ± 529.9 c | 14,738.5 ± 811.7 c | 135.2 | 720.0 | 8740.3 | 5118.1 | |
50% OF | 36 ± 2 a | 207.5 ± 11.4 a | 1141.2 ± 62.9 a | 14,719.9 ± 810.7 a | 26,994.3 ± 1486.7 a | 171.5 | 933.8 | 13,578.7 | 12,274.4 | |
75% OF | 29.5 ± 1.6 ab | 137.7 ± 7.6 b | 771.3 ± 42.5 b | 11,613.7 ± 639.6 b | 18,954.7 ± 1043.9 b | 108.2 | 633.6 | 10,842.4 | 7341.0 | |
100% OF | 22.7 ± 1.3 bc | 104.9 ± 5.8 c | 570.6 ± 31.4 c | 4444.5 ± 244.8 d | 17,664.8 ± 972.9 b | 82.1 | 465.8 | 3873.9 | 13,220.3 | |
2019 | 0% OF (CK) | 17.5 ± 1 d | 45.5 ± 2.5 d | 419.4 ± 23.1 d | 2743.4 ± 151.1 e | 10,826.1 ± 596.3 d | 28.0 | 374.0 | 2324.0 | 8082.7 |
25% OF | 18.7 ± 1 cd | 64.4 ± 3.5 c | 618.3 ± 34.1 bc | 9467.3 ± 521.4 c | 15,864.3 ± 873.7 c | 45.7 | 554.0 | 8849.0 | 6397.0 | |
50% OF | 27.9 ± 1.5 a | 272.1 ± 15 a | 1476.2 ± 81.3 a | 14,760.9 ± 813 a | 27,029 ± 1488.6 a | 244.3 | 1204.1 | 13,284.7 | 12,268.1 | |
75% OF | 23.7 ± 1.3 ab | 102.6 ± 5.7 b | 631.8 ± 34.8 b | 11,318 ± 623.3 b | 20,034.9 ± 1103.4 b | 78.9 | 529.2 | 10,686.2 | 8716.9 | |
100% OF | 21 ± 1.2 bc | 63.9 ± 3.5 c | 560.5 ± 30.9 c | 4995.2 ± 275.1 d | 19,311.9 ± 1063.6 b | 42.9 | 496.6 | 4434.8 | 14,316.6 | |
ANOVA | ||||||||||
Year | NS | * | NS | NS | NS | |||||
Treatment | * | ** | ** | * | * |
Year | Treatment | Stem | Leaf | Pod Shells | Green Seed |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2018 | % OF (CK) | 54.1 ± 3 a | 19.2 ± 1.1 b | 15.9 ± 0.9 a | 1.8 ± 0.1 c |
25% OF | 44.1 ± 2.4 b | 15.5 ± 0.9 b | 13.9 ± 0.8 a | 26.5 ± 1.5 a | |
5% OF | 42.3 ± 2.3 bc | 16.5 ± 0.9 b | 14.4 ± 0.8 a | 26.8 ± 1.5 a | |
75% OF | 35.9 ± 2 c | 26.8 ± 1.5 a | 15.9 ± 0.9 a | 21.4 ± 1.2 b | |
1% OF | 34.6 ± 1.9 c | 3.1 ± 0.2 a | 14.4 ± 0.8 a | 2.9 ± 0.2 b | |
2019 | % OF (CK) | 53.1 ± 2.9 a | 18.2 ± 1 b | 16.9 ± 0.9 a | 11.8 ± 0.6 c |
25% OF | 43.9 ± 2.4 ab | 15.5 ± 0.9 b | 12.9 ± 0.7 a | 27.6 ± 1.5 ab | |
5% OF | 41 ± 2.3 b | 17.5 ± 1 b | 13.4 ± 0.7 a | 28 ± 1.5 a | |
75% OF | 34.9 ± 1.9 c | 24.8 ± 1.4 ab | 16.9 ± 0.9 a | 23.4 ± 1.3 b | |
1% OF | 33.6 ± 1.9 c | 3.1 ± 0.2 a | 16.4 ± 0.9 a | 19.9 ± 1.1 b | |
ANOVA | |||||
Year | NS | NS | NS | NS | |
Treatment | * | * | NS | * |
Dry Matter Accumulation (DAT) | Shoot Dry Matter Accumulation between Different Stages | Dry Matter Distribution at Green Seed Harvest | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
15 | 40 | 80 | 170 | 200 | 15–40 DAT | 40–80 DAT | 80–170 DAT | 170–200 DAT | Stem | Leaf | Pod Shells | Green Seed | |
Yield | 0.690 * | 0.946 ** | 0.983 ** | 0.862 ** | 0.798 ** | 0.949 ** | 0.982 ** | 0.842 ** | 0.181 | −0.183 | −0.408 | −0.653 ** | 0.759 ** |
Treatment | Stem | Leaf | Pod Shells | Green Seed | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2018 | 2019 | 2018 | 2019 | 2018 | 2019 | 2018 | 2019 | |
0% OF (CK) | 1.17 ± 0.06 bc | 1.14 ± 0.06 b | 3.37 ± 0.19 a | 3.08 ± 0.17 a | 2.37 ± 0.13 b | 2.22 ± 0.12 c | 3.03 ± 0.17 c | 3.16 ± 0.17 c |
25% OF | 1.1 ± 0.06 cd | 1.03 ± 0.06 c | 2.5 ± 0.14 c | 2.62 ± 0.14 b | 2.6 ± 0.14 ab | 2.76 ± 0.15 ab | 3.43 ± 0.19 b | 3.48 ± 0.19 b |
50% OF | 1.03 ± 0.06 d | 1.08 ± 0.06 c | 2.1 ± 0.12 c | 2.17 ± 0.12 b | 1.6 ± 0.09 c | 1.79 ± 0.1 d | 4 ± 0.22 a | 3.73 ± 0.21 a |
75% OF | 1.2 ± 0.07 b | 1.15 ± 0.06 b | 3.03 ± 0.17 b | 3.3 ± 0.18 a | 2.97 ± 0.16 a | 2.94 ± 0.16 a | 3.37 ± 0.19 b | 3.46 ± 0.19 b |
100% OF | 1.4 ± 0.08 a | 1.49 ± 0.08 a | 3.1 ± 0.17 b | 3.07 ± 0.17 a | 2.57 ± 0.14 ab | 2.47 ± 0.14 b | 3.4 ± 0.19 b | 3.42 ± 0.19 b |
ANOVA | ||||||||
Year | NS | NS | NS | NS | ||||
Treatment | * | * | ** | * |
Stem | Leaf | Pod Shells | Green Seed | Total | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Treatment | 2018 | 2019 | 2018 | 2019 | 2018 | 2019 | 2018 | 2019 | 2018 | 2019 |
0% OF (CK) | 63 ± 3.5 d | 65.4 ± 3.6 c | 64.5 ± 3.6 c | 60.7 ± 3.3 c | 37.6 ± 2.1 d | 40.6 ± 2.2 c | 32.6 ± 1.8 d | 40.3 ± 2.2 d | 197.7 ± 10.9 d | 207 ± 11.4 d |
25% OF | 71.4 ± 3.9 c | 72.1 ± 4 c | 57.3 ± 3.2 c | 64.6 ± 3.6 c | 53.3 ± 2.9 c | 56.6 ± 3.1 c | 134 ± 7.4 bc | 152.3 ± 8.4 b | 316 ± 17.4 c | 345.6 ± 19 c |
50% OF | 117.9 ± 6.5 a | 119.6 ± 6.6 a | 93.8 ± 5.2 b | 103.1 ± 5.7 b | 62.1 ± 3.4 b | 64.7 ± 3.6 b | 289.5 ± 15.9 a | 283 ± 15.6 a | 563.3 ± 31 a | 570.3 ± 31.4 a |
75% OF | 81.6 ± 4.5 bc | 80.2 ± 4.4 b | 154.1 ± 8.5 a | 164.8 ± 9.1 a | 89.3 ± 4.9 a | 99.5 ± 5.5 a | 136.7 ± 7.5 b | 162.5 ± 8.9 b | 461.8 ± 25.4 b | 507 ± 27.9 ab |
100% OF | 85.7 ± 4.7 b | 96.7 ± 5.3 b | 164.8 ± 9.1 a | 178.7 ± 9.8 a | 65.4 ± 3.6 b | 78.4 ± 4.3 ab | 125.3 ± 6.9 c | 131.3 ± 7.2 c | 441.1 ± 24.3 b | 485.1 ± 26.7 bc |
ANOVA | ||||||||||
Year | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | |||||
Treatment | * | * | * | ** | * |
Treatment | PFP | NHI | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
N Partial Factor Productivity | N Harvest Index | |||
(kg kg−1) | (%) | |||
2018 | 2019 | 2018 | 2019 | |
0% OF (CK) | 124.9 ± 6.9 d | 107 ± 5.9 d | 16.51 ± 0.9 d | 19.48 ± 1.1 c |
25% OF | 194.4 ± 10.7 b | 169.2 ± 9.3 b | 42.41 ± 2.3 b | 44.06 ± 2.4 a |
50% OF | 230.5 ± 12.7 a | 303.1 ± 16.7 a | 51.4 ± 2.8 a | 49.61 ± 2.7 a |
75% OF | 170.1 ± 9.4 bc | 164.8 ± 9.1 b | 29.6 ± 1.6 c | 32.05 ± 1.8 b |
100% OF | 146.2 ± 8.1 cd | 124.6 ± 6.9 c | 28.4 ± 1.6 c | 27.07 ± 1.5 b |
ANOVA | ||||
Year | NS | NS | ||
Treatment | * | ** |
Parameter | Treatments | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0% OF | 25% OF | 50% OF | 75% OF | 100% OF | |
Total nodule number (No./plant) | 21.7 ± 1.2 d | 24.9 ± 1.4 c | 33.1 ± 1.8 a | 27.4 ± 1.5 b | 26.2 ± 1.4 bc |
Nodule weight (g FW/plant) | 5.2 ± 0.3 c | 6.4 ± 0.4 c | 8.1 ± 0.4 a | 7.5 ± 0.4 b | 7.2 ± 0.4 bc |
NRA [μmol NO2−/(g FW h)] | 6.04 ± 0.3 d | 6.37 ± 0.4 c | 10.31 ± 0.6 a | 8.74 ± 0.5 b | 7.55 ± 0.4 c |
GS activity [μmol/(g FW h)] | 380.82 ± 21 d | 384.94 ± 21.2 c | 450.31 ± 24.8 a | 410.15 ± 22.6 b | 390.34 ± 21.5 bc |
GOGAT activity [μmol/(g FW h)] | 70.38 ± 3.9 c | 80.58 ± 4.4 bc | 100.22 ± 5.5 a | 92.31 ± 5.1 ab | 77.62 ± 4.3 c |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liu, Z.; Xing, Y.; Jin, D.; Liu, Y.; Lu, Y.; Chen, Y.; Chen, D.; Zhang, X. Improved Nitrogen Utilization of Faba Bean (Vicia faba L.) Roots and Plant Physiological Characteristics under the Combined Application of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers. Agriculture 2022, 12, 1999. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12121999
Liu Z, Xing Y, Jin D, Liu Y, Lu Y, Chen Y, Chen D, Zhang X. Improved Nitrogen Utilization of Faba Bean (Vicia faba L.) Roots and Plant Physiological Characteristics under the Combined Application of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers. Agriculture. 2022; 12(12):1999. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12121999
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiu, Zhenyu, Yutong Xing, Dian Jin, Yuting Liu, Yi Lu, Yuan Chen, Dehua Chen, and Xiang Zhang. 2022. "Improved Nitrogen Utilization of Faba Bean (Vicia faba L.) Roots and Plant Physiological Characteristics under the Combined Application of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers" Agriculture 12, no. 12: 1999. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12121999