Effect of Different Fertilization Strategies on Infestation of Brown Wheat Mite and Wheat Productivity
by
, , and
Fatma Sh. Kalmosh
1,2,*,
M. M. A. Ibrahim
3,
Jiale Lv
1,
Ibrahim A. Saleh
4,
Jehad S. Al-Hawadie
4 and
Wahidah H. Al-Qahtani
5 1
State Key Laboratory for Biology of Plant Diseases and Insect Pests, Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
2
Department of Field Crops and Cotton Mites, Plant Protection Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Dokki, Giza 12622, Egypt
3
Department of Piercing–Sucking Insect Research, Plant Protection Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Dokki, Giza 12622, Egypt
4
Faculty of Science, Zarqa University, Zarqa 13110, Jordan
5
Department of Food Sciences & Nutrition, College of Food and Agricultural Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11352, Saudi Arabia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2024, 14(10), 2428; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14102428
Submission received: 11 July 2024
/
Revised: 10 October 2024
/
Accepted: 15 October 2024
/
Published: 19 October 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Agriculture: Plant Protection and Crop Production)
Abstract
:The brown wheat mite, Petrobia tritici, poses a significant threat to wheat fields. While fertilizers can increase crop productivity, imbalanced application may exacerbate plant susceptibility to pests. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of various NPK fertilization programs on P. tritici infestations over two consecutive cropping seasons. The results revealed significant differences in mite infestation among the treatment groups (p < 0.001). The lowest populations (1.1 and 3.0 mites/leaf) were observed in the treatments sprayed with phosphoric acid (at 0.75 and 1.00 cm/L), where the infestation appeared approximately 120 days after sowing; in contrast, it appeared early at 75 days in the other treatments. Conversely, treatments lacking potassium fertilizer presented the greatest degree of mite injury levels (49.5–57.7 mites/leaf). Although these treatments provided moderate leaf nutrition and crop yield, the highest nutritional content and total yield (10.49 and 9.71 1 t/ha for the two years) were observed in the treatment that received 224:70:100 kg fad−1 commercial fertilizers (=178:25:114 kg ha−1 NPK units) as soil fertilization, which was followed by the treatment with a foliar application of phosphoric acid (1.00 cm/L) with a total yield of 9.34 and 8.53 1 t/ha for the two years. In this treatment, the P. tritici density was moderately high at 9.40 and 6.32 mites/leaf over the two years, respectively. The consistency of P. tritici density and total yield ranking across both years indicated reliable estimates of the impact of fertilization. This study suggests that potassium sulfate application is crucial for reducing P. tritici density and that foliar phosphoric acid application instead of soil application reduces the number of P. tritici and delays its occurrence.
1. Introduction
Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is recognized globally as the most crucial cereal crop, serving as a staple food for urban and rural communities. In Egypt, despite significant increases in wheat production, current levels are insufficient to meet consumer demands, resulting in a greater dependence on imports and placing a substantial burden on the country’s balance of payments. Consequently, Egypt’s food security is subject to multiple risks. Additionally, wheat plants are vulnerable to attacks from serious pests, such as phytophagous mites, which infest wheat plants in various growing regions, causing significant damage. The brown wheat mite, Petrobia tritici (Kandeel, El-Naggar & Mohamed 2004) (Acari: Tetranychidae), and the two-spotted spider mite, Tetranychus urticae C.L. Koch, 1836 (Acari: Tetranychidae), are among the most detrimental mite species affecting wheat fields and other host plants in many regions. The infestation of these mite species typically occurs from February to the end of the season (May or June), particularly during the booting and spike emergence stages, leading to a significant reduction in grain yield [1,2,3]. Brown wheat mites tend to feed on leaf tips, causing them to dry out and die. Heavily infested fields exhibit a scorched, withered appearance and a grayish or silvery cast due to the puncturing of plant cells during mite feeding [4,5,6].
One of the main objectives of Egyptian agricultural policy is to increase wheat grain production through both horizontal and vertical expansion, including the cultivation of newly reclaimed areas and the implementation of good agricultural practices within integrated crop management (ICM) and integrated pest management (IPM). Maintaining soil fertility and ensuring the supply of essential plant nutrients in adequate and balanced amounts are crucial for increasing crop yields. Nonleguminous crops, such as wheat, require a consistent supply of the three primary nutrients: nitrogen, potassium, and phosphorus [7,8,9]. Previous studies have demonstrated that fertilizer type and amount can influence pest infestations [10] and that bio- and chemical fertilizer treatments reduce mite fecundity, whereas [11] reported that lower nitrogen levels in greenhouse strawberry plants resulted in decreased T. urticae populations. Additionally, ref. [12] reported that aphid density in wheat is positively correlated with phosphorus application. Ref. [13] demonstrated that the application of certain biofertilizers under saline soil conditions can induce resistance in wheat plants against multiple pests, including Rhopalosiphum padi (Linnaeus, 1758) (Hemiptera: Aphididae), Schizaphis graminum (Rondani, 1852) (Hemiptera: Aphididae), Thrips tabaci Lindeman, 1889 (Thysanoptera: Thripidae), and Oligonychus pratensis (Banks, 1912) (Acari: Tetranychidae. Furthermore, ref. [14] suggested splitting the application of nitrogenous fertilizer as a strategy to manage aphid populations and improve the grain yield of wheat crops.
The main objective of this study was to provide practical insights into the integration of fertilization in pest mite management for wheat yield. Therefore, a two-year field experiment was conducted to assess the impact of various fertilization treatments on P. tritici occurrence, wheat plant nutrition and crop yield.
2. Materials and Methods
Field experiments were conducted during the two winter seasons (2020/2021 and 2021/2022) in wheat fields (approximately 1400 m2/field) sown with commercial wheat grain varieties (Giza 171). The wheat grains were cultivated via broadcast methods. The wheat grains were supplied by the Wheat Research Dep., Field Crops Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Giza, Egypt.
2.1. Experimental Design
The field experiments were conducted in the Sobeih Valley, Hehia district, Sharkia Governorate, Egypt, and wheat grains (Giza 171) were sown in the third week of November (21st) during the two study seasons. The experimental area was divided into 27 plots (each measuring 1/100 of Feddan (1 Feddan= 4200 m2) which means each plot = 42 m2) could accommodate nine treatments (plots area, the interspace between and the surrounded belts) (Table 1). These included a control treatment (T1) which was fertilized following the recommendations of the Egyptian Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation (EMALR) and eight other treatments (T2–T9) with three replicates for each treatment. The study utilized a randomized block design (RBD) throughout the two study seasons. The fertilizers were weighed and adjusted according to the plot area. The fertilizers were used for soil and foliar application at the recommended times. Superphosphate 15.5% was added once during soil preparation before planting, while all other fertilizers were applied during the tillering and heading stages of wheat plants. The fertilizers included units of 178 kg N/ha−1 (224 kg ammonium nitrate 33.5% = 75 N unit/fed.), 57.12 kg K/ha−1 (50 kg potassium sulfate 48% = 24 K unit/fed.) and 36.89 kg P/ha−1 (100 kg super phosphate = 15.5 P unit/fed.) were used as a soil application. In contrast, the 85% phosphoric acid was used for foliar application at concentrations of 0.5, 0.75 and 1.0 mL/L on wheat plants in the T4, T5, and T6 treatment plots. In addition, the 48% potassium sulphate was used as a foliar application at concentrations of 0.5, 0.75, and 1.0 g/L on wheat plants in the T7, T8, and T9 treatment plots (Table 1).
2.2. Estimation of Petrobia tritici Mean Numbers on Wheat Plants under Different Fertilization Treatments
Randomly selected samples of 10 leaves per plot of each treatment (30 leaves/treatment) were collected biweekly starting 45 days after the sowing date until the end of the two study seasons. The samples were transported to the laboratory in sealed paper bags and inspected using a binuclear stereo microscope (10× ocular lens and 4× objective lens), and the number of living mites individuals was recorded and tabulated as the mean mite numbers per wheat leaf.
2.3. Impact of Fertilization Treatments on Chemical Contents of Wheat Plants
Random samples of ten leaves at the heading stage were collected for analysis. The leaves were washed with distilled water, dried at 70 °C for 48 h in an oven, grounded, and wet digested. The digested samples were used to determine (1) the nitrogen and total protein levels via the micro-Kjeldahl method [15]; (2) the phosphorus content (calorimetrically measured) [16] and potassium content (using a flame photometer) [17]; and (3) the carbohydrates and total lipids contents, which were determined according to the methods established by [18,19].
2.4. Impact of Fertilization Treatments on Wheat Plants Yield
Random samples of square meters (1 m × 1 m) from the middle of each plot area (three replicates for each treatment as well as control treatment) at harvest time, the mean number of spikes per m2, mean weight per spike (in gm), grain weight (in gm), and total yield (1 t/ha) were recorded.
2.5. Statistical Analysis
The obtained data were submitted to a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) [20,21]. The mean numbers of mites in the nine treatments were compared at each investigated time using Tukey’s HSD test at a 5% probability level [21]. Pearson’s correlations between pairs of response variables were deduced using IBM SPSS Statistics. Stepwise regressions were also conducted for Psp against timing, treatment and the mean numbers of mites to estimate the impact of treatment and time on the average numbers of mites/leaf.
3. Results
3.1. Estimation of Petrobia tritici Mean Numbers on Wheat Plants under Different Fertilization Treatments
The results presented in Table 2 indicated that all treatment plots were monitored biweekly from the emergence of the wheat plants until the onset of the pest infestation, which began after 75 days of sowing and consequently until the end of the study seasons. Each treatment was replicated three times to ensure the reliability and statistical significance of the yield data. The P. tiritici mean numbers varied significantly (p < 0.001). The fertilization treatment effects throughout the investigation dates varied over the two consecutive study seasons. Regarding the seasonal mean numbers of P. tiritici in the nine tested treatments (T1–T9), the highest seasonal P. tiritici mean numbers of 57.7 and 49.5 individuals/leaf were recorded in the T1 plots (Table 2) (received the recommended fertilization program without potassium sulfate) during the two study seasons, while the relatively lowest mean numbers of 1.06 and 3.97 mite individuals/leaf were recorded in the T5 and T6 plots during the 2020/2021 season; 2.85 and 2.95 individuals/leaf were recorded in the T6, and T5 plots during 2021/2022 season (received the recommended ammonium nitrate 33.5% without potassium sulfate but sprayed with phosphoric acid at concentrations of 0.75 and 1.0 mL/L, respectively). Similarly, the relatively highest numbers of investigated mites, with mean numbers 127.99 ± 0.696 and 118.32 ± 1.15 individuals/leaf, were recorded at 135 days of age in T1 plots. Additionally, the highest P. tiritici mean numbers were observed on wheat plants at 135 and 150 days of wheat plants age with highly significant differences between the seasonal means of treatments during (p < 0.00001).
Therefore, the T4, T5, and T6, treatments, which were sprayed with phosphoric acid, presented the lowest seasonal mean numbers, indicating the role of phosphoric acid (which may be returned to enhance the reinforcement and strength of cell walls) in reducing P. tritici infestation.
In the same trend, the relatively low seasonal mean numbers followed those of previous treatments (T4, T5, and T6) with values ranging from 4.47–6.3 and 3.09–4.2 individuals/leaf recorded in the T7, T8, and T9 plots, respectively, during the two study seasons of 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 (33.5% ammonium nitrate without phosphoric acid but sprayed with potassium sulfate at concentrations of 0.5, 0.75, and 1.0 mL/L, respectively). These findings highlight the critical role of specific fertilization strategies (spraying phosphoric acid and potassium sulfate) in suppressing or reducing mite infestations and improving wheat plant health.
The data in Table 3 highlight the significantly effects of treatments on the average number of wheat mites P. tritici (p = 0.001 ***). At the same time, the day of samples has a significant impact on the mean populations (p = 0.010 **).
The interaction between treatment and timing is also significant across all measured variables for the mean populations (p-values between 0.001 ***), indicating that the effects of treatment on the seasonal mean depend on when the treatment is applied.
3.2. Impact of Fertilization Treatments on Chemical Contents of Wheat Plants
The content of macro-elements (N, P, and K) (Table 4), as well as total protein, carbohydrates, and lipid contents (Table 5), varied significantly among the wheat leaves in different fertilization treatments with consistent patterns across both seasons. In general, the highest percentages of macro-elements (N, P, and K) were recorded in wheat leaves of T3 throughout the two study seasons (2.2 and 2.6% N, 0.5% P and 2.5% K) followed by those of T9 (2.0 and 2.1% N, 0.5% P, 2.1 and 2.6 K %). In contrast, relatively low contents of 1.5% N and 1.4% K were recorded in T4, whereas 0.26% P was recorded in T7 (Table 4).
In terms of the percentages of total protein, total carbohydrates, and total lipids in wheat leaves in different fertilization treatments, the relatively highest percentages of 0.8, 41.8 and 0.3%, respectively, were recorded in the wheat leaves of T3 (total protein, carbohydrates) and T6 (lipids), respectively. Additionally, 0.7% total protein and 39.9% and 34.6% carbohydrate contents were detected in the wheat leaves of the T9 and T8 treatments, respectively. In contrast, relatively low contents of 0.4% total protein were recorded at T2,4,5, whereas 17.6% total carbohydrates were recorded at T4%, and 0.1 total lipids were recorded at T1, T2, T4, T5, and T7 (Table 5). In addition, the statistical analysis revealed highly significant differences between the means of total protein, total carbohydrates, and total lipids in the wheat leaves in the different fertilization treatments.
3.3. Impact of Fertilization Treatments on Wheat Plants Yield
The wheat yield data summarized in (Table 6) indicate that the highest number of 361 spikes/m2 was observed in T6, while a relatively high mean spike weight of 3.4 g/spike was recorded for T3, which was followed by 3.2 gm/spike for T8 and T9. Similarly, relatively high grain weights of 1.1 g/spike grain were recorded in T3, which led to the highest final yield of 10.49 tons grain/ha, which was followed by T8 with 9.34 ton grain/ha., T5 with 8.56-ton grain/ha, and T9 with 8.53 ton grain/ha.
The data in Table 7 show the statistical analysis of wheat leaves content and yield concerning different treatments and seasons. Their interaction reveals that treatments significantly impact all measured variables, including nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, total protein, carbohydrates, and yield-related factors such as spike number, grain weight, and total yield (p ≤ 0.0000 *** for most variables). Seasonal variations also show a notable influence on these parameters, particularly on yield components like grain weight and total yield, although some nutritional contents, such as total protein and lipids, remain unaffected by seasonal changes. Interestingly, the interaction between treatments and seasons is significant for certain factors like nutrient content, indicating that the combined effects of these variables can alter nutrient accumulation but have a minimal influence on yield-related traits. This suggests that while treatments consistently enhance wheat productivity, their impact on nutrient content can be modulated by seasonal factors. This underscores that appropriate treatment selection based on seasonal variations is crucial, providing insights for optimizing wheat cultivation strategies across different environmental conditions.
The correlation analysis revealed strong positive correlations among N, P, K, and total protein levels in wheat leaves as well as high positive correlations between these factors and spike weight, grain weight, and total yield, which were significantly correlated with nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and total protein. These findings indicate that these nutrients are associated with better yield outcomes (Table 8). The lack of a clear correlation between nutritional status and mite infestation in our study underscores the complexity of these interactions. While nutrient deficiencies can increase the susceptibility of plants to pests, excessive fertilization can also lead to increased pest populations by providing more resources for their growth and reproduction. Therefore, achieving a balance in nutrient management is crucial for sustainable crop production. Our findings suggest that while phosphoric acid may offer some benefits in reducing mite infestation, it is not a substitute for a well-balanced fertilization regime. The use of a full formula of chemical fertilizers appears to be more effective in promoting high yields and maintaining plant health. However, the sustainability of relying solely on chemical fertilizers is a concern, and further research is needed to explore the potential of integrating organic and biofertilizers into fertilization programs.
Our study highlights the importance of a holistic approach to fertilization that considers the complex interactions among nutrient management, pest dynamics, and crop yield. Future research should focus on optimizing fertilization strategies to enhance both plant health and pest resistance while also considering the long-term sustainability of agricultural practices.
4. Discussion
In this study, we investigated the natural infestation of P. tritici in wheat under nine different fertilization treatments in the Hehia district of the Sharkeia Governorate in Egypt. Our findings indicated that a foliar application of phosphoric acid rather than soil application is beneficial for reducing the number of P. tritici and delaying its occurrence. However, we did not observe any significant correlation between the density of P. tritici and the nutritional content of wheat leaves or wheat yield. An increased soil application of potassium sulfate was associated with increased levels of leaf nutrition, decreased mite numbers, and improved wheat yield.
Many previous studies showed that pest density and suitability are affected by fertilizer. Some studies have shown that higher fertilizer levels [22,23] might induce higher levels of pest infestation [11,12], whereas other studies have shown that N and P levels have limited positive effects on Oligonychus pratensis (Banks) (Acari: Tetranychidae) on corn and sorghum [24,25]. Refs. [26,27] revealed that the excessive use of nitrogen decreases crop resistance to pests, while potassium increases crop resistance. Ref. [28] reported that relatively low numbers of soil mites with relatively high N contents were recorded in soils cultivated with soybean plants. In this study, we used the suggested application rate of ammonium nitrate in all the treatments. Our results showed that phosphoric acid application also affects pest density in wheat, which is consistent with results in other crops. Ref. [13] demonstrated that the application of a biofertilizer, Azospirillum brasiliense, in conjunction with humic acid effectively induced resistance in wheat plants against multiple pests, including Rhopalosiphum padi (Hemiptera: Aphididae), Schizaphis graminum (Hemiptera: Aphididae), Thrips tabaci (Thysanoptera: Thripidae), and Oligonychus pratensis (Acari: Tetranychidae), in saline soil conditions.
The mite population on the wheat plants was initially low, increased gradually, and peaked at 135 days after sowing. After that, the population slowly decreased until no population was recorded after 165 days of sowing. These population dynamics were consistent with previous studies, such as [29], which reported that the population of P. tritici on wheat plants was low in February, increased gradually, peaked on ca. 20th, and then declined. No population was recorded after the 7th of April. Our results demonstrate that P. tritici is only a pest of arid climates, and its harm resembles that of drought.
Correlations between pest mite density and leaf nutrient content and yield have been reported in other studies. For example, ref. [22] noted a negative response by Banks grass mites to different concentrations of carbohydrates and the total leaf N in sorghum plants. Ref. [30] reported that the number of wheat seeds and seed weight were affected by T. urticae, where yield loss increased with increasing infestation. No such correlation was observed in the present study, which is possibly because the overall naturally occurring mite population is not high.
Ref. [3] reported that the economic injury level of P. tritici on wheat plants in Sharkia and Beheira ranged from 3 to 5 mites/leaf. In the present study, only T5 had a mean P. tritici density lower than 3 mites/leaf in the 1st season. The mean P. tritici density for T3, the treatment with the highest yield, was 9.4 and 6.3 mites/leaf for the two seasons, whereas the highest density in this treatment was 35.4 and 27.2 mites/leaf. In contrast, in T4, the treatment with the lowest yield, the mean P. tritici density was only 4.6 and 3.2 mites/leaf. The yield in T4 was ca. 65% of that in T3. Our results suggested that the economic injury level of P. tritici might be much greater than that of [3], but it depends on the fertilization level. Different fertilizers have varying effects on the population of mite-infested wheat [31]. Ref. [32] reported that the application of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium fertilizers resulted in significantly lower aphid infestations on wheat crops and increased yields. In a similar study, ref. [33] reported that increasing levels of nitrogen fertilizer led to an increase in Hessian fly infestation on wheat plants. Additionally, the use of balanced NPK doses was found to decrease aphid populations on wheat crops [34]. Ref. [35] concluded that optimal soil fertility and balanced nutrient management through organic practices can increase crop resistance to pests, whereas excessive inorganic fertilization may increase plant susceptibility. Ref. [36] evaluated the effects of different NP levels and organic fertilizers on wheat yield, and they revealed that applying an NP ratio of 130:100 kg ha−1 in conjunction with 6 tons ha−1 poultry manure significantly enhanced wheat productivity. This combination yielded the highest values for productive tillers, spike length, grains per spike, 1000-grain weight, and biological yield. These findings underscore the importance of optimizing NP levels and incorporating organic fertilizers to increase wheat yield. Ref. [14] reported that the increase in the aphid population on wheat crops was positively correlated with the number of split applications of nitrogenous fertilizer. Nonetheless, among various split applications, dividing the nitrogen into two doses, with half applied at sowing and the remaining half at the first irrigation, yielded superior outcomes in terms of reduced aphid infestation and contributed to an increase in grain yield. Overall, the choice and application of fertilizers can have varying effects on mite populations in wheat crops with some fertilizers potentially reducing infestations, whereas others may have no significant impact. Ref. [37] investigated the impact of fertilizers enriched with humic acids and silicon on spring wheat by comparing two fertilizer treatments on calcari–endohypogleyic luvisol soil: one without and one with humic acids and silicon. Consequently, the incorporation of humic acids and silicon into fertilizers improved both the growth and quality of spring wheat, suggesting a beneficial strategy for mitigating the negative impacts of intensive farming on soil health and crop productivity.
5. Conclusions
The present study investigated the impact of different levels of NPK fertilization on the infestation of the brown wheat mite Petrobia tritici over two cropping seasons. The mean number of mites varied significantly among the treatments with the lowest mean number recorded in the treatments utilizing phosphoric acid and potassium sulfate as foliar applications. Treatments with balanced fertilization, including potassium sulfate, resulted in reduced mite density and delayed occurrence. Overall, this study highlights the importance of potassium sulfate application in mitigating P. tritici infestation and suggests that a foliar application of phosphoric acid can effectively reduce mite numbers and delay their occurrence.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, F.S.K., M.M.A.I. and J.L.; Formal analysis, F.S.K.; Idea, F.S.K. and M.M.A.I.; Investigation, F.S.K. and M.M.A.I.; Methodology, F.S.K.; Resources, F.S.K., M.M.A.I. and J.L.; Writing—original draft, W.H.A.-Q. Review; I.A.S. and J.S.A.-H. editing, Funding acquisition. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This work was funded by the Researchers Supporting Project Number (RSP-2024/293) at King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Data Availability Statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to Xuenong Xu, State Key Laboratory for Biology of Plant Diseases and Insect Pests, Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, China, for his help in reviewing and finalizing this manuscript by providing valuable comments. The reviewers’ and editor’s comments are highly appreciated. This work was funded by the Researchers Supporting Project Number (RSP-2024/293) at King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Conflicts of Interest
No conflict of interest has been declared by the authors.
References
- Mohamed, O.M.O. Ecological and biological studies on some mites associated with field crops in new reclaimed areas at Sharkia Governorate. Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, Al-Azahar University, Cairo, Egpyt, 2004; p. 229. [Google Scholar]
- Ibrahim, M.M.A.; Megahed, H.E.; Mohamed, O.M.O. Susceptibility of three wheat cultivars to mite infestation and some mite control measurements in wheat fields at Sharkia Governorate. J. Prod. Devl. 2007, 12, 689–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalmosh, F.S. Population Density, Economic Threshold and Injury Levels of Tetranychus urticae and Petrobia tritici Infesting Wheat Plants at Sharkia and Beheira Governorates, Egypt. Acarines 2018, 12, 99–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walter, D.E.; Proctor, H.C. Mites: Ecology, Evolution and Behaviour: Life at A Microscale; Springer Science Business Media Dordrecht: Van Godewijckstraat, The Netherlands, 2013; p. 281. [Google Scholar]
- Royer, T. Mites in Small Grains; Oklahoma State University Extension: Stillwater, OK, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Sloderbeck, P.; Michaud, E.; Whitworth, R.J. Wheat Pests; Department of Entomology, Kansas State University: Kansas, MA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Mattos, J.D.; Quaggio, J.A.; Cantarella, H.; Carvalho, S.A. Response models of ’Murcott’ tangor to N, P, and K fertilization. Rev. Bras. De Frutic. 2005, 26, 164–167. [Google Scholar]
- Diacono, M.; Rubino, P.; Montemurro, F. Precision nitrogen management of wheat; a review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2013, 33, 219–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piccinin, G.G.; Braccini, A.L.; Dan, L.G.M.; Scapim, C.A.; Ricci, T.T.; Bazo, G.L. Efficiency of seed inoculation with Azospirillum brasilense on agronomic characteristics and yield of wheat. Ind. Crops Prod. 2013, 43, 393–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tulisalo, U. Free and bound amino acids of three host plant species and various fertilizer treatments affecting the fecundity of the two-spotted spider mite, Tetranychus urticae Koch. Ann. Ent. Fenn. 1971, 37, 155–163. [Google Scholar]
- Alizade, M.; Hosseini, M.; Awal, M.M.; Gol-dani, M.; Hosseini, A. Effects of nitrogen fertilization on population growth of two-spotted spider mite. Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2016, 21, 947–956. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, C.; Tian, B.; Yu, Z.; Ding, J. Effect of Different Combinations of Phosphorus and Nitrogen Fertilization on Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and Aphids in Wheat. Insects 2020, 11, 365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alakhdar, H.H.; Shaban, K.A.; Esmaeil, M.A.; Abdel Fattah, A.K. Influence of Organic and Biofertilizers on Some Soil Chemical Properties, Wheat Productivity and Infestation Levels of Some Piercing-Sucking Pests in Saline Soil. Middle East J. Agric. Res. 2020, 9, 586–598. [Google Scholar]
- Asghar, M.; Baig, M.M.Q.; Chaudhary, S.; Waqar, M.Q.; Ali, M.A. Impact of split application of urea on the management of wheat aphid. Int. J. Sci. Environ. Tech. 2019, 5, 3623–3629. [Google Scholar]
- Cottenie, A.; Verloo, M.; Kiekens, L.; Velgh, G.; Camerlynch, R. Chemical Analysis of Plants and Soils, Lab. Anal Agrochem; State Ghent University: Sint-Pietersnieuwstraat, Belgium, 1982; Volume 63. [Google Scholar]
- Chapman, H.D.; Pratt, P.F. Methods of Analysis for Soils, Plants and Waters; University of California: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 1961; Volume 61, pp. 150–179. [Google Scholar]
- Ryan, J.; Garabet, S.; Harmsen, K.; Rashid, A. Soil and Plant Analysis. In Manual Adapted for the West Asia and North Africa Region; ICARDA: Aleppo, Syria, 1996; 140p. [Google Scholar]
- A.O.A.C. Official Methods of Analysis, 15th ed.; Association of Official Agricultural Chemists 12th Ed.: Washengton, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Costat statistically software. Microcomputer Program Analysis, Version 6.331; coHort software: Monterey, CA, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Snedecor, G.W.; Cochran, W.G. Statistical Methods, 11th ed.; Iowa State University Press: Ames, IA, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Boel, E.; Huge-Jensen, B.; Christensen, M.; Thim, L.; Fill, N.P. Rhizomucor miehei triglyceride lipase is synthesized as a precursor. Lipids 1988, 23, 701–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bligh, E.G.; Dyer, W. Total Lipid Extraction and Purification. Can. J. Biochem. Physiol. 1989, 37, 911. [Google Scholar]
- Perring, T.M.; Archer, T.L.; Johnson, J.W.; Phillips, J.M. Evaluation of several grain sorghum characteristics for resistance to the Banks grass mite I. J. Econ. Entomol. 1982, 75, 257–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perring, T.M.; Archer, T.L.; Krieg, D.L.; Johnson, J.W. Relationships between the Banks grass mite (Acariformes: Tetranychidae) and physiological changes of maturing grain sorghum. Environ. Entomol. 1983, 12, 1094–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Archer, T.L.; Bynum, E.D., Jr.; Peterson, G.C. Importance of plant senescence on grain sorghum resistance to the Banks grass mite (Acari: Tetranychidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 1986, 79, 15–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Archer, T.L.; Bynum, E.D., Jr.; Peterson, G.C. Influence of sorghum maturity on abundance and damage potential of Banks grass mite, Oligonychus pratensis (Banks). Exp. Appl. Acarol. 1986, 2, 217–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Archer, T.L.; Bynum, E.D., Jr.; Onken, A.B. Abundance of Banks Grass Mites (Acari: Tetranychidae) on Corn and Sorghum Fertilized with Different Rates of Nitrogen and Phosphorus. J. Econ. Entomol. 1988, 81, 300–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Archer, T.L.; Onken, A.B.; Bynum, E.D.; Peterson, G.C. Banks grass mite (Oligonychus pratensis) abundance on sorghum cultivars with different levels of nitrogen use and metabolism efficiency. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 1990, 9, 177–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, V.; Sood, A.K. Plant Nutrition: A tool for the management of hemipteran insect-pests-A review. Agric. Rev. 2017, 38, 260–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farook, U.B.; Khan, Z.H.; Ahad, I.; Maqbool, S.; Yaqoob, M.; Rafieq, I.; Rehman, S.A.; Sultan, N. Review on insect pest complex of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). J. Entomol. Zool. Stud. 2019, 7, 1196–1198. [Google Scholar]
- Suekane, R.; Degrande, P.E.; Melo, E.P.D.; Bertoncello, T.F.; Lima Junior, I.D.S.D.; Kodama, C. Damage level of the two-spotted spider mite Tetranychus urticae Koch (acari: Tetranychidae) in soybeans. Rev. Ceres 2012, 59, 77–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, C.; Ouyang, F.; Liu, X.; Ma, J.; Zhao, F.; Ouyang, Z.; Ge, F. Effect of coupled reduced irrigation and nitrogen fertilizer on soil mite community composition in a wheat field. Ecol. Evol. 2019, 9, 11367–11378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faheem, M.; Sajjad, A.; Shafique, R.M. Balanced use of fertilizers can reduce aphid infestation and improve yield in wheat crop. Asian J. Agric. Biol. 2015, 3, 50–55. [Google Scholar]
- Ali, L.; Ali, M.A.; Mushtaq, A.; Waqar, M.Q. Inorganic fertilization of wheat in relation to aphid infestation, natural enemies population, growth and grain yield. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 2013, 15, 719–724. [Google Scholar]
- Kashif, M.; Javed, M.; Rahman, W.U.; Alam, A.; Abas, S. Assessing Impact of different NP levels and Organic Fertilizers on wheat crop productivity. GSJ 2023, 11, 2908–2921. [Google Scholar]
- Altieri, M.A.; Nicholls, C.I. Soil fertility management and insect pests: Harmonizing soil and plant health in agroecosystems. Soil Tillage Res. 2003, 72, 203–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jodaugienė, D.; Čepulienė, R.; Mažuolytė-Miškinė, E.; Vagusevičienė, I. The effect of humic acids and silicon on spring wheat productivity. In Rural Development: Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference; Vytautas Magnus University Agriculture Academy: Kaunas, Lithuania, 2023; pp. 15–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1.
Fertilization treatments in wheat plants plots cultivated with the Giza 171 variety.
| Treatment | Units of N in kg ha−1 (Soil Application) | Units of K in kg ha−1 (Soil Application) | Units of P in kg ha−1) Soil Application | Phosphoric Acid (ml/L) Foliar Application | Potassium Sulfate (g/L) Foliar Application |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | 178 | 0.0 | 36 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| T2 | 178 | 28 | 36 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| T3 | 178 | 85 | 36 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| T4 | 178 | 57 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.00 |
| T5 | 178 | 57 | 0.0 | 0.75 | 0.00 |
| T6 | 178 | 57 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 0.00 |
| T7 | 178 | 57 | 36 | 0.00 | 0.5 |
| T8 | 178 | 57 | 36 | 0.00 | 0.75 |
| T9 | 178 | 57 | 36 | 0.00 | 1.0 |
The amount of NPK located in the table as units of nutrient elements not as commercial fertilizers KGs. T: is the treatment.
Table 2.
Effect of nine fertilization treatments in Petrobia tritici density on wheat plants during 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 seasons.
Table 2.
Effect of nine fertilization treatments in Petrobia tritici density on wheat plants during 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 seasons.
| Season | Days after Sowing | Treatments | p | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | T5 | T6 | T7 | T8 | T9 | |||
| 2020/2021 | 45 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | - |
| 60 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | |
| 75 | 41.3 ± 0.7 a | 2.2 ± 0.6 b | 1.1 ± 0.5 bc | 0.00 d | 0.00 d | 0.00 d | 0.00 d | 0.4 ± 0.1 c | 0.9 ± 0.4 c | <0.001 | |
| 90 | 95.3 ± 1.3 a | 11.8 ± 0.3 b | 4.4 ± 0.4 c | 0.6 ± 0.3 e | 0.00 f | 0.00 f | 1.6 ± 0.7 de | 2.5 ± 1.0 cd | 3.6 ± 0.5 c | <0.001 | |
| 105 | 80.3 ± 0.4 a | 9.2 ± 0.9 b | 5.6 ± 1.4 c | 1.4 ± 0.6 de | 0.00 f | 1.1 de | 2.3 ± 0.4 d | 2.5 ± 1.1 d | 5.0 ± 0.9 c | <0.001 | |
| 120 | 94.1 ± 1.6 a | 8.3 ± 1.3 b | 5.7 ± 0.4 bc | 2.6 ± 0.2 de | 0.4 ± 0.1 e | 1.4 ± 0.5 e | 5.0 ± 0.9 cd | 2.8 ± 0.7 de | 4.7 ± 1.3 cd | <0.001 | |
| 135 | 127.99 ± 0.7 a | 49.3 ± 2.1 b | 30.8 ± 1.3 c | 18.0 ± 0.8 de | 5.3 ± 1.3 f | 17.4 ± 1.4 de | 16.2 ± 2.1 e | 21.6 ± 2.3 c | 21.1 ± 1.1 c | <0.001 | |
| 150 | 64.2 ± 1.0 a | 47.6 ± 1.8 b | 35.4 ± 1.7 c | 16.9 ± 0.6 def | 3.8 ± 0.4 g | 15.8 ± 0.8 ef | 14.1 ± 2.1 f | 18.2 ± 0.6 de | 20.2 ± 1.3 d | <0.001 | |
| 165 | 15.7 ± 0.7 a | 3.4 ± 0.7 b | 1.7 ± 0.6 c | 1.1 ± 0.5 bc | 0.00 d | 0.00 d | 1.0 ± 0.6 c | 1.2 ± 0.6 c | 1.4 ± 1.0 c | <0.001 | |
| seasonal mean | 57.70 a | 14.64 b | 9.40 bc | 4.56 bc | 1.06 c | 3.97 bc | 4.47 bc | 5.48 bc | 6.32 bc | ||
| 2021/2022 | 45 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | - |
| 60 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | |
| 75 | 28.1 ± 1.9 a | 1 ± 0.6 b | 0.2 ± 0.1 b | 0.00 c | 0.00 c | 0.00 c | 0.00 c | 0.8 ± 0.3 b | 0.7 ± 0.3 b | <0.001 | |
| 90 | 89.6 ± 1.9 a | 5.6 ± 0.8 b | 2.8 ± 0.9 c | 0.00 e | 0.00 e | 0.00 e | 0.2 ± 0.2 d | 0.8 ± 0.1 cd | 1.9 ± 0.5 cd | <0.001 | |
| 105 | 74.8 ± 1.2 a | 7.0 ± 1.2 b | 4.1 ± 1.0 c | 0.6 ± 0.1 de | 0.00 e | 0.4 ± 0.2 de | 1.2 ± 0.6 de | 2.3 ± 0.3 cd | 1.7 ± 0.6 de | <0.001 | |
| 120 | 80.2 ± 1.1 a | 7.1 ± 1.0 b | 4.4 ± 0.7 c | 1.2 ± 0.5 de | 0.00 f | 0.8 ± 0.3 de | 2.4 ± 0.6 cd | 2.3 ± 1.1 cde | 2.3 ± 1.2 cde | <0.001 | |
| 135 | 118.2 ± 1.2 a | 22.9 ± 1.4 b | 17.8 ± 1.2 c | 12.1 ± 1.0 d | 12.4 ± 0.6 d | 13.7 ± 1.8 d | 12.2 ± 1.5 d | 15.8 ± 2.3 cd | 15.2 ± 0.5 cd | <0.001 | |
| 150 | 44.1 ± 0.6 a | 37.4 ± 1.2 b | 27.2 ± 1.6 c | 13.6 ± 0.4 def | 14.1 ± 0.4 de | 10.8 ± 1.1 f | 11.22 ± 1.2 ef | 14.1 ± 0.9 de | 15.2 ± 1.7 d | <0.001 | |
| 165 | 10.2 ± 1.1 a | 1.4 ± 0.5 b | 0.2 ± 0.1 bc | 0.4 ± 0.1 bc | 0.00 d | 0.00 d | 0.6 ± 0.1 bc | 0.7 ± 0.4 bc | 0.8 ± 0.3 bc | <0.001 | |
| seasonal mean | 49.50 a | 9.14 b | 6.31 c | 3.10 def | 2.95 ef | 2.85 f | 3.09 def | 4.08 de | 4.20 d | ||
Note: means (±SE) with different lower-case letters indicate significant differences with p < 0.05, p = probability.
Table 3.
Impact of treatment and timing on average number of mite P. tritici. Generalized linear models (GLMs) were used to analyze the data. ** p < 0.01; ***, p < 0.001.
Table 3.
Impact of treatment and timing on average number of mite P. tritici. Generalized linear models (GLMs) were used to analyze the data. ** p < 0.01; ***, p < 0.001.
| Average Number of P. tritici | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SI | SII | ||||||
| Factors | df | p | F | p | df | F | |
| Trt. | 8 | 0.001 *** | 12.97 | 0.001 *** | 8 | 10.35 | |
| Timing | 8 | 0.001 *** | 5.89 | 0.010 ** | 8 | 6.04 | |
| Trt.× Timing | 64 | 0.001 *** | 300.39 | 0.001 *** | 84 | 245.24 | |
| Error | 0.00 | ||||||
SI: is the first season, SII: is the second season.
Table 4.
Wheat leaves content of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) under tested fertilization treatments and natural infestation levels of Petrobia tritici at Sharkia governorate during the 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 seasons.
Table 4.
Wheat leaves content of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) under tested fertilization treatments and natural infestation levels of Petrobia tritici at Sharkia governorate during the 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 seasons.
| Treatments | N% | P% | K% | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SI | SII | General Mean | SI | SII | General Mean | SI | SII | General Mean | |
| T1 | 1.8 ± 0.01 de | 1.9 ± 0.1 cd | 1.81 cd | 0.4 ± 0.0 c | 0.41 ± 0.01 d | 0.38 b | 2.0 ± 0.04 b | 2.2 ± 0.15 b | 2.05 cd |
| T2 | 1.7 ± 0.1 e | 1.7 ± 0.02 de | 1.67 de | 0.3 ± 0.0 d | 0.3 ± 0.005 g | 0.28 c | 1.4 ± 0.0 d | 1.6 ± 0.02 de | 1.51 g |
| T3 | 2.2 ± 0.1 a | 2.6 ± 0.2 a | 2.40 a | 0.5 ± 0.01 ab | 0.5 ± 0.02 a | 0.51 a | 2.5 ± 0.1 a | 2.7 ± 0.02 a | 2.61 a |
| T4 | 1.5 ± 0.04 f | 1.6 ± 0.01 e | 1.50 e | 0.3 ± 0.02 d | 0.3 ± 0.01 g | 0.26 c | 1.4 ± 0.1 d | 1.4 ± 0.1 e | 1.41 g |
| T5 | 1.8 ± 0.1 cde | 1.9 ± 0.1 bc | 1.84 bcd | 0.41 ± 0.03 bc | 0.4 ± 0.02 ef | 0.39 b | 1.7 ± 0.0 c | 1.9 ± 0.1 c | 1.76 ef |
| T6 | 1.9 ± 0.01 bcd | 1.9 ± 0.01 bc | 1.91 bc | 0.4 ± 0.05 c | 0.4 ± 0.01 de | 0.39 b | 1.7 ± 0.03 c | 2.0 ± 0.04 c | 1.84 de |
| T7 | 1.7 ± 0.0 e | 1.7 ± 0.01 de | 1.69 de | 0.26 ± 0.0 d | 0.4 ± 0.0 f | 0.30 c | 1.53 ± 0.1 cd | 1.7 ± 0.01 d | 1.61 fg |
| T8 | 1.9 ± 0.0 bc | 1.9 ± 0.05 bc | 1.92 bc | 0.47 ± 0.0 ab | 0.5 ± 0.0 c | 0.47 a | 2.1 ± 0.0 b | 2.3 ± 0.1 b | 2.18 bc |
| T9 | 2.0 ± 0.01 b | 2.1 ± 0.1 b | 2.05 b | 0.5 ± 0.03 a | 0.5 ± 0.01 b | 0.50 a | 2.1 ± 0.14 b | 2.6 ± 0.03 a | 2.37 b |
Note: means (±SE) with different lower-case letters indicate significant differences with p < 0.05. T: is the Treatment, SI: is the first season, SII: is the second season.
Table 5.
Wheat leaves contents of total protein, total carbohydrates and total lipids percentages under tested fertilization treatments and natural infestation of Petrobia tritici at Sharkia governorate during the 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 seasons.
Table 5.
Wheat leaves contents of total protein, total carbohydrates and total lipids percentages under tested fertilization treatments and natural infestation of Petrobia tritici at Sharkia governorate during the 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 seasons.
| Treatments | Total Protein% | Total Carbohydrates % | Total Lipids % | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | S2 | General Mean | S1 | S2 | General Mean | S1 | S2 | General Mean | |
| T1 | 0.6 ± 0.03 c | 0.6 ± 0.01 c | 0.57 c | 31.1 ± 0.01 d | 31.4 ± 0.03 d | 31.21 c | 0.1 ± 0.0 ab | 0.1 ± 0.0 b | 0.14 ab |
| T2 | 0.5 ± 0.01 e | 0.4 ± 0.0 ef | 0.43 e | 19.4 ± 1.2 f | 21.8 ± 0.1 e | 20.61 e | 0.1 ± 0.0 b | 0.1 ± 0.0 b | 0.11 b |
| T3 | 0.7 ± 0.01 a | 0.8 ± 0.0 a | 0.74 a | 41.8 ± 0.01 a | 40.7 ± 0.4 a | 41.22 a | 0.2 ± 0.0 ab | 0.2 ± 0.0 b | 0.16 ab |
| T4 | 0.5 ± 0.0 e | 0.4 ± 0.0 f | 0.41 e | 16.8 ± 0.5 g | 17.6 ± 0.0 f | 17.22 f | 0.1 ± 0.0 b | 0.1 ± 0.01 b | 0.11 b |
| T5 | 0.6 ± 0.0 c | 0.4 ± 0.0 e | 0.49 d | 21.5 ± 0.4 e | 30.9 ± 0.7 d | 26.21 d | 0.1 ± 0.0 b | 0.1 ± 0.0 b | 0.13 b |
| T6 | 0.5 ± 0.0 de | 0.5 ± 0.01 d | 0.51 d | 31.4 ± 0.01 d | 33.1 ± 1.2 c | 32.26 c | 0.3 ± 0.11 a | 0.1 ± 0.0 b | 0.18 ab |
| T7 | 0.5 ± 0.02 cd | 0.5 ± 0.02 d | 0.50 d | 19.2 ± 1.3 f | 22.3 ± 0.2 e | 20.71 e | 0.1 ± 0.0 b | 0.1 ± 0.0 b | 0.12 b |
| T8 | 0.63 ± 0.01 b | 0.7 ± 0.02 b | 0.66 b | 34.6 ± 0.1 c | 36.5 ± 0.6 b | 35.55 b | 0.1 ± 0.0 ab | 0.2 ± 0.120 a | 0.25 a |
| T9 | 0.6 ± 0.0 ab | 0.7 ± 0.01 b | 0.69 ab | 39.7 ± 0.0 b | 39.9 ± 0.17 a | 39.81 a | 0.2 ± 0.0 ab | 0.1 ± 0.0 b | 0.16 ab |
| p value | ˂0.001 | ˂0.001 | <0.00001 | ˂0.001 | ˂0.001 | <0.00001 | ˂0.05 | ˂0.001 | <0.0120 |
Note: means (±SE) with different lower-case letters indicate significant differences with p < 0.05. T: is the Treatment, SI: is the first season, SII: is the second season.
Table 6.
Effect of tested fertilization treatments and natural infestation levels of Petrobia tritici on wheat plants yield.
Table 6.
Effect of tested fertilization treatments and natural infestation levels of Petrobia tritici on wheat plants yield.
| Treatments | Number of Spikes per m2 | Spike Weight (g) | Grain Weight (g) | Total Yield (t/ha−1) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | SII | General Mean | S1 | SII | General Mean | S1 | SII | General Mean | S1 | SII | General Mean | |
| T1 | 283.81.0 de | 302.1 ± 1.1 cd | 292.93 d | 2.5 ± 0.1 b | 2.3 ± 0.1 bc | 2.39 bc | 0.8 ± 0.0 d | 0.7 ± 0.0 d | 0.73 d | 7.56 ± 0.2 f | 6.71 ± 0.2 d | 19.26 d |
| T2 | 280.9 ± 0.8 e | 294.4 ± 2.2 d | 287.58 de | 2.4 ± 0.1 b | 2.1 ± 0.1 bcd | 2.29 bc | 0.7 ± 0.0 e | 0.6 ± 0.0 e | 0.68 e | 7.08 ± 0.0 g | 6.34 ± 0.1 e | 18.07 e |
| T3 | 318.5 ± 2.3 a | 320.7 ± 2.6 b | 319.59 b | 3.4 ± 0.2 a | 3.1 ± 0.0 a | 3.27 a | 1.1 ± 0.0 a | 1.0 ± 0.0 a | 1.09 a | 10.49 ± 0.2 a | 9.71 ± 0.2 a | 27.24 a |
| T4 | 290.5 ± 0.6 c | 321.8 ± 6.2 b | 306.14 c | 2.4 ± 0.3 b | 1.8 ± 0.1 cd | 2.12 bc | 0.7 ± 0.0 f | 0.6 ± 0.0 e | 0.64 e | 6.75 ± 0.2 h | 6.15 ± 0.5 e | 17.39 e |
| T5 | 307.7 ± 1.8 b | 307.3 ± 2.5 c | 307.53 c | 2.6 ± 0.1 b | 2.7 ± 0.1 ab | 2.65 ab | 0.9 ± 0.0 c | 0.8 ± 0.01 c | 0.83 c | 8.56 ± 0.0 d | 7.82 ± 0.1 c | 22.07 c |
| T6 | 320.2 ± 2.7 a | 361.8 ± 3.6 a | 340.99 a | 2.4 ± 0.2 b | 1.5 ± 0.7 d | 1.93 c | 0.9 ± 0.0 c | 0.8 ± 0.0 c | 0.82 c | 8.27 ± 0.2 e | 7.61 ± 0.4 c | 21.41 c |
| T7 | 211.7 ± 1.8 g | 250.0 ± 0.3 f | 230.83 g | 2.6 ± 0.2 b | 2.1 ± 0.0 bcd | 2.37 bc | 0.6 ± 0.0 g | 0.5 ± 0.0 f | 0.55 f | 5.52 ± 0.2 i | 5.19 ± 0.1 f | 14.49 f |
| T8 | 287.1 ± 1.1 cd | 273.2 ± 2.0 e | 280.14 e | 3.2 ± 0.1 a | 3.1 ± 0.1 a | 3.19 a | 0.9 ± 0.0 bc | 0.9 ± 0.0 b | 0.89 b | 9.04 ± 0.2 c | 8.30 ± 0.2 b | 23.55 b |
| T9 | 269.5 ± 3.1 f | 270.8 ± 1.5 e | 270.19 f | 3.2 ± 0. a | 3.2 ± 0.2 a | 3.24 a | 0.9 ± 0.0 b | 0.9 ± 0.0 b | 0.91 b | 9.34 ± 0.1 b | 8.53 ± 0.1 b | 24.08 b |
Note: means (±SE) with different lower-case letters indicate significant differences with p < 0.05, T: is the treatment, SI: is the first season, SII: is the second season.
Table 7.
The interaction between treatments and seasons on wheat leaf nutrient contents and plant yields.Generalized linear models (GLMs) were used to analyze the data. *, p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01, ***, p < 0.001, n.s: non significant.
Table 7.
The interaction between treatments and seasons on wheat leaf nutrient contents and plant yields.Generalized linear models (GLMs) were used to analyze the data. *, p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01, ***, p < 0.001, n.s: non significant.
| Factors | Wheat Leaves Contents | Wheat Plants Yield | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Spicks NO./m2 | Spike Grain Weight | Grain Weight | Total Yield | N | P | K | Total Protein | Total Carbohydrates | Total Lipids | ||
| Treatments | p | 0.0000 *** | 0.0000 *** | 0.0000 *** | 0.0000 *** | 0.0000 *** | 0.0000 *** | 0.0000 *** | 0.0000 *** | 0.0000 *** | 0.0120 * |
| df | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | |
| F | 327.19 | 13.25 | 211.53 | 643.49 | 33.29 | 59.88 | 72.23 | 105.68 | 444.84 | 2.95 | |
| Seasons | p | 0.0000 *** | 0.0020 ** | 0.0000 *** | 0.0000 *** | 0.0045 ** | 0.0016 ** | 0.0000 *** | n.s | 0.0000 *** | n.s |
| df | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| F | 159.96 | 11.13 | 82.93 | 312.60 | 9.17 | 11.58 | 41.92 | 0.36 | 56.31 | 0.22 | |
| Trt × seasons | p | 0.0000 *** | n.s | n.s | n.s | 0.0226 * | 0.0254 * | n.s | 0.0000 *** | 0.0000 *** | 0.0239 * |
| df | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | |
| F | 30.22 | 1.25 | 1.42 | 1.69 | 2.62 | 2.56 | 1.60 | 15.47 | 13.15 | 2.59 | |
Table 8.
Pearson’s correlations between Petrobia tritici density, wheat leaf nutritional content, and wheat yield.
Table 8.
Pearson’s correlations between Petrobia tritici density, wheat leaf nutritional content, and wheat yield.
| P. tritici Density | N | P | K | Total Protein | Total Carbohydrates | Total Lipids | Number of Spikes | Spike Weight | Grain Weight | Total Yield | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P. tritici density | Pearson’s correlation | 1 | −0.066 | −0.060 | 0.105 | 0.044 | 0.107 | 0.016 | −0.025 | −0.096 | −0.096 | −0.111 |
| N | Pearson’s correlation | 1 | 0.867 ** | 0.893 ** | 0.829 ** | 0.042 | 0.497 * | 0.262 | 0.601 ** | 0.807 ** | 0.770 ** | |
| P | Pearson’s correlation | 1 | 0.916 ** | 0.864 ** | 0.130 | 0.516 * | 0.212 | 0.672 ** | 0.821 ** | 0.824 ** | ||
| K | Pearson’s correlation | 1 | 0.892 ** | 0.011 | 0.403 | 0.169 | 0.656 ** | 0.761 ** | 0.738 ** | |||
| Total protein | Pearson’s correlation | 1 | 0.172 | 0.433 | −0.071 | 0.772 ** | 0.742 ** | 0.728 ** | ||||
| Total carbohydrates | Pearson’s correlation | 1 | 0.452 | −0.104 | 0.439 | 0.460 | 0.469 * | |||||
| Total lipids | Pearson’s correlation | 1 | 0.165 | 0.362 | 0.553 * | 0.545 * | ||||||
| Number of spikes | Pearson’s correlation | 1 | −0.305 | 0.383 | 0.381 | |||||||
| Spike weight | Pearson’s correlation | 1 | 0.721 ** | 0.728 ** | ||||||||
| Grain weight | Pearson’s correlation | 1 | 0.992 ** | |||||||||
| Total yield | Pearson’s correlation | 1 |
Bold numbers indicate significant differences with *, p < 0.05; **, p < 0.01.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 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
MDPI and ACS Style
Kalmosh, F.S.; Ibrahim, M.M.A.; Lv, J.; Saleh, I.A.; Al-Hawadie, J.S.; Al-Qahtani, W.H. Effect of Different Fertilization Strategies on Infestation of Brown Wheat Mite and Wheat Productivity. Agronomy 2024, 14, 2428. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14102428
AMA Style
Kalmosh FS, Ibrahim MMA, Lv J, Saleh IA, Al-Hawadie JS, Al-Qahtani WH. Effect of Different Fertilization Strategies on Infestation of Brown Wheat Mite and Wheat Productivity. Agronomy. 2024; 14(10):2428. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14102428
Chicago/Turabian StyleKalmosh, Fatma Sh., M. M. A. Ibrahim, Jiale Lv, Ibrahim A. Saleh, Jehad S. Al-Hawadie, and Wahidah H. Al-Qahtani. 2024. "Effect of Different Fertilization Strategies on Infestation of Brown Wheat Mite and Wheat Productivity" Agronomy 14, no. 10: 2428. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14102428
APA StyleKalmosh, F. S., Ibrahim, M. M. A., Lv, J., Saleh, I. A., Al-Hawadie, J. S., & Al-Qahtani, W. H. (2024). Effect of Different Fertilization Strategies on Infestation of Brown Wheat Mite and Wheat Productivity. Agronomy, 14(10), 2428. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14102428
Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
