Next Article in Journal
Evaluation of African Maize Cultivars for Resistance to Fall Armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Larvae
Next Article in Special Issue
Transcriptional Regulation of Genes Involved in Zinc Uptake, Sequestration and Redistribution Following Foliar Zinc Application to Medicago sativa
Previous Article in Journal
Study of Sexual-Linked Genes (OGI and MeGI) on the Performance of Androecious Persimmons (Diospyros kaki Thunb.)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Lamina Cell Shape and Cell Wall Thickness Are Useful Indicators for Metal Tolerance—An Example in Bryophytes
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 10
Issue 2
10.3390/plants10020391
plants-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Biofortification of Silage Maize with Zinc, Iron and Selenium as Affected by Nitrogen Fertilization

by
Djordje Grujcic
1,
Atilla Mustafa Yazici
2,
Yusuf Tutus
2,
Ismail Cakmak
2 and
Bal Ram Singh
1,*
1
Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Science, 1432 Ås, Norway
2
Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Sabanci University, Istanbul 34956, Turkey
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2021, 10(2), 391; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10020391
Submission received: 23 January 2021 / Revised: 6 February 2021 / Accepted: 11 February 2021 / Published: 18 February 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Unraveling the Mechanisms of Zn Efficiency in Crop Plants: From Lab to Field Applications)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Agronomic biofortification is one of the main strategies for alleviation of micronutrient deficiencies in human populations and promoting sustainable production of food and feed. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of nitrogen (N)fertilization on biofortification of maize crop (Zea mays L.) with zinc (Zn), iron (Fe) and selenium (Se) grown on a micronutrient deficient soil under greenhouse conditions. Factorial design experiment was set under greenhouse conditions. The experiment consisted of two levels of each N, Zn, Fe and Se. The levels for N were 125 and 250 mg N kg−1 soil; Zn were 1 and 5 mg Zn kg−1 soil; levels of Fe were 0 and 10 mg Fe kg−1 soil; levels of Se were 0 and 0.02 mg Se kg−1 soil. An additional experiment was also conducted to study the effect of the Zn form applied as a ZnO or ZnSO4 on shoot growth, shoot Zn concentration and total shoot Zn uptake per plant. Shoot Zn concentrations increased by increasing soil Zn application both with ZnSO4 and ZnO treatments, but the shoot Zn concentration and total Zn uptake were much greater with ZnSO4 than the ZnO application. Under given experimental conditions, increasing soil N supply improved shoot N concentration; but had little effect on shoot dry matter production. The concentrations of Zn and Fe in shoots were significantly increased by increasing N application. In case of total uptake of Zn and Fe, the positive effect of N nutrition was more pronounced. Although Se soil treatment had significant effect, N application showed no effect on Se concentration and accumulation in maize shoots. The obtained results show that N fertilization is an effective tool in improving the Zn and Fe status of silage maize and contribute to the better-quality feed.

1. Introduction

Agronomic biofortification of field crops with micronutrients is one of the main strategies in sustainable production of healthy and nutrient rich food and feed [1]. Human health problems are associated with micronutrient deficiency worldwide, especially in developing countries, but also the productivity of farm animals grown in these countries is negatively affected [2,3,4]. Low amount of phytoavailable micronutrients in cultivated soils and commonly consumed food and feed crops are main reason of the high prevalence of micronutrient deficiencies in humans [5,6]. According to Hill and Shannon (2019) [7], grazing animals are often exposed to high risk of reduced Zn intake because the pastures usually contain inadequate Zn concentration for a proper animal nutrition that is associated with low amount of phytoavailable Zn in soils. Consequently, there is an increasing trend for biofortification of feed crops with Zn to contribute to better Zn nutrition of livestock. Similarly, enrichment of feed crops with Se is of great importance for animal nutrition and health [8]. Selenium and selenoproteins, such as selenomethionine and selenocysteine, play a role in several critical biological functions in human and animal body and prevent development of various important diseases [9,10]. In essence, micronutrient deficiency affects all phases of food and feed production chain, from field to the final consumer.
Thanks to successful impacts of green revolution, farmers have managed to grow more high-yielding cereal crops, leading to the increased feed and food production and decline in cereal prices. However, this trend had a negative side effect, and resulted in dilution in the concentrations of micronutrients in the food and feed and unintentionally enhanced hidden hunger problem [11,12,13].
Zinc, Fe and Se deficiencies in soils are common in both developed and developing countries [5,8,14]. Soils of Western Balkan countries differ greatly in the concentration and availability of micronutrients, such as Zn, Fe and Se, as their availability is affected by soil factors, such as pH, soil organic matter, fertilization application, micronutrient concentration [15]. Manojlovic and Singh (2012) (15) also found that some fodder crop samples contained Zn and Se below the critical deficiency level and dietary requirement for ruminants.
Dairy cattle nutrition is highly affected by Zn, Fe and Se presence in the feed, because these micronutrients have crucial role in different metabolic processes [4,16]. Many different enzymes in animal body either contain Zn or are activated by Zn. Zinc is required for up to 10% of the proteins in biological systems for their functioning and structural stability [17]. Proteins bind Zn tightly with very high affinity, from picomolar to femtomolar range, to maintain their cellular functions and interactions [18]. Zinc is involved in cell replication, hormone production and immune system and electrolyte balance [19]. Iron makes 90% part of proteins, e.g. hemoglobin. A host of biochemical reactions, especially the enzymes of the electron transport chain (cytochromes) are activated by Fe [19].
Selenium, which acts as an antioxidant, makes an integral part of several enzymes. Selenium as selenocysteine (Se-Cys) is incorporated in the active center of at least 25 selenoproteins [8,20]. Analysis of 105 sheep and 160 cow blood samples collected from different Western Balkan countries indicated low Se nutrition in animals, and therefore the need to improve animal feeds with Se to ensure a better Se nutrition of animals was highlighted [21].
Maize (Zea mays L.), the most grown field crops worldwide, provide dietary staple food for > 200 million people with about 20% of their calories needs [22,23]. Furthermore, 67% of maize produced globally is utilized, either as grain or as silage, for livestock feed [24].
In Europe Union, green maize production is also increasing, especially as silage crop, and it was grown on more than 6.4 million hectares in the EU-28 in 2019. The area increased by 0.5 million hectares (+10.9%) compared with 2011 [25]. Its production amounted to 248.6 million tons, nearly 48 million tons more than in 2010 (+23.9%) [25]. This significant increase in production of silage maize is mainly because: (i) it extends the area of tolerable climatic conditions for maize growth, (ii) has high biomass yield, (iii) it represents main component of domestic ruminants diet and (iv) recently it is used as source for biogas production in developed countries [26]. Micronutrients play an important role in producing high-quality maize silage with respect to its mineral status and therefore, to improve crop productivity and its nutritive value, adequate micronutrient concentrations are needed [27]. Maize is extremely sensitive to deficiency of Zn and Fe and therefore, farmers have made a regular agronomic practice of using micronutrient fertilizers [24,28].
New agronomic approaches have been developed to improve capacity of maize plants to absorb more Zn from soils, such as localized ammonium sulphate and superphosphate applications [29]. The form of Zn fertilizers has a significant effect on plant growth and Zn accumulation in plants, especially in high pH soils. Previously, Mortvedt (1992) [30] and Gangloff et al. (2002) [31] have highlighted that the Zn fertilizers applied in high pH soils should have at least 50% water solubility to improve growth and Zn concentrations of plants in high pH calcareous soils.
Recent research on foliar and soil application of Zn and Fe showed that agronomic biofortification is efficient in reduction of these micronutrient deficiencies, particularly in wheat and rice, as main staple crops in human nutrition [32,33,34]. In recent years, it has been shown that foliar spray of a mixture of micronutrient solution containing simultaneously Zn, Se, Fe and iodine to wheat and rice grown in different countries greatly increased grain concentrations of Zn, Se and iodine [35,36]. In these studies, the effect of foliar sprayed Fe on grain Fe was not adequately high compared to Zn, Se and iodine. In previous studies, it has been suggested that N nutritional status of plants has an important role in increasing root uptake, shoot transport and grain deposition of Fe as well as Zn [1,37]. It was interesting to notice that increasing rate of Fe application had little effect on grain Fe; but at a given Fe application rate increasing N application increased grain Fe [32]. Kutman et al. (2010) and Erenoglu et al. (2011) [38,39] showed that increasing N application promotes root uptake of Zn and Fe and increases shoot and grain concentration of these nutrients. Literature reports also suggest that, in case of maize, N application positively affects maize shoot and grain micronutrient concentrations to certain extent under different field conditions [40,41,42,43]. Agronomic biofortification, a widely accepted approach in preventing micronutrient deficiency in several food and feed crops, is not a well- known practice in Western Balkan countries [15].
Considering that, maize silage is one of basic feed component for the dairy cattle in many Balkan countries [44], it is important to investigate the effect of N fertilization on uptake and concentration of Zn, Fe and Se in maize plant. Since N, fertilization is shown to stimulate the uptake and concentration of Zn and Fe and perhaps Se in plants, this may help to produce silage of higher nutritional value, with respect to daily needs of dairy cattle. Practically this fortified silage could lead to reduce the use of different micronutrients supplements.
The present study was planned to examine the effect of N and Zn application on: (1) maize shoot dry matter yield; (2) Zn, Fe and Se concentration and uptake in maize; and (3) the relationship between the concentration of N and that of Zn and Fe in maize plants. Furthermore, the effect of the Zn form applied as a ZnO or ZnSO4 on shoot growth, shoot Zn concentration and total shoot Zn uptake was also investigated.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Greenhouse Experiment

A climate-controlled greenhouse experiment was conducted at the Sabanci University campus (40°53′24.5″ N; 029°22′46.7″ E) Turkey.
The soil used for this experiment originated from the Zn-deficient region of Central Anatolia and has clay loam texture with pH 7.6 (H2O), 1.5% organic matter, and 18% CaCO3. The diethylentriamine pentacetic acid (DTPA)-extractable Zn and Fe concentration was 0.1 mg kg−1 and 2.1 mg kg−1 soil, respectively, and 0.1 M KH2PO4 extractable Se was 0.002 mg kg−1 soil.
Two experiments were established. In the first one, the experiment consisted of two levels of each N and Zn. The levels for N were 125 and 250 mg N kg−1 soil and that of Zn were 1 and 5 mg Zn kg−1 soil. The sources of N and Zn were Ca (NO3)2 4H2O and ZnSO4 7H2O, respectively. Similarly, there were two levels of Fe, i.e., 0 and 10 mg Fe kg−1 soil and two levels of Se, i.e., 0 and 0.02 mg kg−1. Iron and Se fertilizers were applied in form of Fe-sequestrene and Na2SeO4, respectively.
Basic fertilizers added were phosphorus (P) 100 mg P kg−1 soil in the form of KH2PO4, sulfur (S) 50 mg S kg−1 in the form of K2SO4, and potassium (K) in the form of KH2PO4 and K2SO4. All these nutrients and basic fertilizers were homogeneously mixed with 3 kg soil prior to putting the mixture into plastic pots. The experiment was laid out as factorial randomized design with 4 replicates. Twelve seeds of maize (Zea mays L.cv. Shemal) were sown in each plastic pot. Shortly after emergence, number of plants was reduced to 6 plants/pot. The pots were irrigated daily with deionized water. When plants were25 days old, their shoot parts were harvested.
In the 2nd experiment, two different forms of Zn (i.e., ZnSO4 and ZnO) were used to study how these Zn sources affect the shoot growth and shoot concentration of Zn of maize plants. Zinc was applied at the rates of 0, 0.5, 1, 2.5 and 7.5 mg kg−1 soil in the forms of ZnO and ZnSO4 at the sowing time. When the plants were 35 days old, plants were harvested and analyzed for shoot production and shoot Zn concentration.

2.2. Plant Sampling and Chemical Analysis

Plant shoot materials, after washing with deionized water, were dried at 70 °C for the dry mater determination of shoot weight and analysis of micronutrients. Dried and ground plant samples (0.2 g) were digested with acid [a mixture containing 2 mL of 30% (v/v) H2O2 and 5 mL of 65% (v/v) HNO3] in a closed-vessel microwave system (Mars Express; CEM Corp., Matthews, NC, USA). The digested solution was diluted with DI water. For the determination of Zn, Fe and Se in the digested solution, inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) (Vista-Pro Axial, Varian Pty Ltd., Mulgrave, Australia) was used. A dry combustion method (950 °C) using a LECO Tru-Spec C/N Analyzer (Leco Corp., St Joseph, MI, USA) was used for the determination of N concentration in the samples. The certified standard reference materials, obtained from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (Gaithersburg, MD, USA), were used for checking the precision in mineral nutrient analysis.
As standard sample, the SRM 1547 peach leaves, were used and the deviation was below 2%. The total uptake per plant was calculated by multiplying the concentration with dry mater yield.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

The R commander program was used for statistical analysis of the results obtained. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to assess the significance level of the effects of treatments and their interactions on the reported traits. Tukey test at 5% level (P ≤ 0.05) was used for significant difference among means, whenever ANOVA (general linear model) indicated significant effect of treatments. The relationship between the treatments was assessed by linear regression model.

3. Results

Zinc deficiency symptoms (i.e., development of yellow or yellowish–white stripes along the midrib of younger leaves) appeared in plants grown under low supply of Zn (Figure 1). The symptoms started to develop first following 2 weeks of growth without Zn application under given conditions. Expression of these symptoms was more severe at low N than at adequate N supply. In case of Fe deficiency, uniform chlorosis on younger leaves appeared. Under low N supply, older leaves turn uniformly pale green and then whole shoot look slightly yellowish. The effect of soil N and Zn applications on maize shoot dry matter (DM) yield, shoot Zn and Fe concentrations, and their total uptake per plant was significant.
By contrast, soil N and Zn applications did not significantly affect shoot Se concentration and total Se uptake (Table 1).
Variation in N supply did not show a significant impact on the shoot dry matter yield of the plants at both low and adequate Zn treatment (Table 2), indicating that low N supply was still enough at this growth phase of maize under given experimental conditions.
On the other hand, variation in Zn soil application both under low and adequate N supply significantly affected shoot dry mater production (Table 2). Table 2 shows that the shoot dry matter of plants at low Zn and adequate N supply was 10% higher than the shoot dry matter of plants produced under low Zn and low N treatments. The shoot dry matter of plants under adequate Zn and N supply was 12% higher than those plants grown under adequate Zn but low N supply.
Both Zn concentration and total Zn uptake by shoots were increased by increasing soil Zn application (Table 3). At the low Zn application rate, the plants grown under adequate N supply showed significantly higher concentration and shoot uptake of Zn than the plants grown under low N supply. The increased soil N supply showed positive effect on the shoot Zn concentration and uptake in plants grown with adequate Zn soil application (Table 3).
Selenium soil treatment had significant effect on Se concentration and shoot Se uptake in maize shoot (Table 4), while both N and Zn application did not affect plant Se status (Table 3). Although, not statistically significant, a decrease of the Se concentration could be observed with increase of both N and Zn soil application (Table 3).
Shoot Fe concentration and uptake were greatly affected by N and Zn supply (Table 3). Both Zn and Fe uptake were positively affected by increasing soil N supply (Table 3 and Table 4). Shoot Fe concentration and uptake at adequate N application were significantly higher compared to low N application, while the shoot Fe concentration and uptake at adequate Zn supply significantly decreased compared to the low Zn treatment (Table 3). Although increase in soil N supply promoted the Zn and Fe concentration in maize shoot, the ratio between Zn and Fe was mainly affected by the level of soil Zn application (Figure 2).
The relationship between N-Zn and N-Fe concentrations in shoot is shown in Figure 3. The positive impact of N nutrition on Zn and Fe concentrations in shoot in relation to N shoot concentration is shown both under low and adequate Zn supply.
The relation between N-Zn in shoot is highly dependent on availability of N in the soil irrespective of Zn soil availability. Although Zn application decreased shoot Fe concentration (Figure 2), still increase in N supply significantly affected N-Fe relationship, and as in case of N-Zn relationship, N-Fe relationship is strengthened by the increase of N soil availability (Figure 3).
The well-documented effects of Zn nutrition on growth of plants and shoot Zn concentrations and uptake were more distinct with the soil ZnSO4 application when compared to the soil ZnO application (Table 5). A progressive increase in shoot dry matter production was observed with increasing soil Zn application, and this increase was stronger and more pronounced in case of soil ZnSO4 application. These much better effects of ZnSO4 application on shoot growth than the ZnO application are also shown in Figure 4a,b.
The plants receiving ZnO could not develop well when sol Zn application was <1 mg Zn kg−1 soil. However, shoot Zn concentrations showed a clear increase by increasing soil Zn application both with ZnSO4 and ZnO treatments. Since the enhancements in shoot dry matter by increasing soil Zn supply was more obvious by ZnSO4 application, the shoot total Zn uptake was accordingly much greater with ZnSO4 than the ZnO applications (Table 5).

4. Discussion

Maize is known to be highly sensitive to low Zn in soils [24]. In good agreement with this, decreases in Zn soil application showed detrimental effects on the shoot growth of maize plants (Table 2, Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5; Figure 4a,b). Very positive response of maize plants to increasing soil Zn application was pronounced in case of ZnSO4 application. This indicates clearly that use of water-soluble Zn fertilizers in high pH soils is highly desirable. The results presented here are similar those presented for maize plants grown in calcareous soils in the previous studies [45,46]. ZnO is known to be nearly water insoluble (e.g., 0.0016 g per liter) while ZnSO4 shows very high-water solubility (i.e., 580 g per liter) [47]. Use of water-soluble Zn fertilizer is, therefore, highly desirable for high pH soils. At least 40 to 50% of Zn in each granular fertilizer should be water soluble to achieve a positive agronomic impact on plant growth by using Zn-containing compound fertilizers in high pH soils [30,46,48]. Recently, Degryse et al. (2020) [48] emphasized importance and relevance ofwater-soluble Zn in each granular fertilizer and highlighted that water-soluble Zn rather than the total Zn should be considered in the fertilizer labeling regulations.
Studies dealing with the use of nanoparticle ZnO in Zn fertilization of plants is growing with controversial results and debates [49,50]. One critical debate is related to the very poor solubility of Zn existing in nanoparticulated ZnO. Published evidence shows that solubility and diffusion of Zn from a granular fertilizer which is coated by a bulk or nanoparticulated ZnO are not affected from the size of ZnO used [51]. Therefore, use of nanoparticulated ZnO-containing granular fertilizers in high pH soils may have a very minimal agronomic impact on plant growth and plant Zn uptake when compared to use of fertilizers containing higher percentage of water-soluble Zn.
The present study shows that besides the form of the Zn fertilizer used, the N nutritional level of the plants also influences plant Zn concentration. Although varied soil N supply only slightly affected the shoot dry matter production of plants under given experimental conditions, shoot Zn concentration as well as Zn accumulation (i.e., total Zn uptake by shoot) of plants were significantly increased through the increase in N fertilization of plants (Table 2). These results are like those published by LeBlanc et al. (1997) [40], and Xue et al. (2014) [43] for maize and Cakmak et al. (2010b) [52] for wheat grown under field conditions. Positive effects of increasing N fertilization on plant Zn concentrations have been also shown under greenhouse conditions [53].
In a short-term experiment, Erenoglu et al. (2011) [39] showed that Zn transport through root uptake and root to shoot was significantly promoted by N fertilization. An increased N nutrition of plants showed probably positive effects on abundance of Zn-chelating ligands (such as amino acids and amines) and transporter proteins involved in the root uptake and root to shoot transport of Zn in the plants such as nicotianamine, ZIP family proteins and YSL transporters [37,38]. The presented positive effect of higher soil N supply on Zn concentration and uptake is more emphasized under adequate soil Zn application. This result compares well with those found by Kutman et al. (2010) [38] in wheat. According to Kutman et al. (2010) [38] Zn and N are synergistic in their effects on increasing plant Zn concentrations and their levels in growth medium should be at enough levels to achieve the synergistic effect of N on root Zn uptake.
Like Zn, increasing soil N supply also positively affected shoot Fe concentrations, even at much higher level than Zn (Table 3 and Table 4). Losak et al. (2011) [41] in maize and Aciksoz et al. (2011a) [32] in wheat also found the positive effects of N fertilization on plant Fe concentrations. Interestingly, increasing soil Fe fertilization in the form of FeSO4 and FeEDTA had no clear effect on shoot and grain Fe concentrations of wheat plants; but at a given Fe dose, increasing N fertilization significantly improved shoot and grain Fe [32]. The N-dependent increases in plant Fe concentrations were ascribed to N-dependent increases in level of Fe-chelating and transporting nitrogenous compounds such nicotianamine and phytosiderohores. Accordingly, it was shown that improving plants N nutritional status increased root release of phytosiderophores from roots [54]. It is known that phytosiderophores play an important role in mobilization of Fe and Zn from sparingly soluble Fe and Zn sources in soils as well as in root uptake and shoot transport of Zn and Fe within plants [55,56,57].
In contrast to Zn and Fe, increasing N fertilization did not affect plant Se concentration (Table 4), which shows that the increasing effect of N fertilization on plant Zn and Fe seems to be specific. Even, an increasing N fertilization has been found to have an inhibitory effect on Se concentrations of vegetables [58]. Similarly, the concentration and uptake of Se in maize plants was not significantly affected by varied Zn supply (Table 1), which could be explained by different root uptake mechanisms for Se and Zn.
Plants are very responsive to soil Se fertilization and show substantial increases in shoot and grain concentrations of Se as shown in field-grown maize plants by Chilimba et al. (2012) [59] in Malawi, Mao et al. (2014) [60] in China and Ngigi et al. (2019) [61] in Kenya. The results presented in Table 4 compare well with those results from the field trials.
Considering the average concentrations of observed micronutrients in experimental maize plants and dietary requirement of the dairy cattle, we can suggest that biofortified maize grown on the deficient soils can meet the dairy cattle requirements to certain extent. Average Se maize shoot DM levels ranged between 0.04–0.88 mg kg−1 (Table 4), while the defined selenium requirement is 0.3 mg/kg of dietary dry matter for all categories of dairy cattle [62].
This indicates that maize silage could be very successfully Se biofortified after optimization of the application rates. In case of Zn, required dietary concentration for milking cows is 63 mg kg−1 DM, for heifers 31 mg kg−1 DM and dry cows 22.8 mg kg−1 DM [63], while the average maize shoot DM values ranged between 7–24 mg kg−1. According to this comparison, Zn biofortified silage could meet the requirements of dry cows and heifers but not those of milking cows. Required dietary concentration of Fe for milking cow is 24 mg kg−1 DM [63]. Thus, average range of maize Fe shoot concentration of 36–80 mg kg−1 DM could easily meet the dietary requirements of all cattle categories.
The present study showed that N nutritional status represents a key factor in biofortification of silage maize with Zn and Fe. It is suggested that an optimum N fertilization of feed and food crops are required to contribute to better human and animal dietary intake of Zn and Fe. The results also highlighted importance of use of water-soluble Zn fertilizers in Zn biofortification of plants grown on high pH soils.

Author Contributions

Methodology, D.G.; formal analysis, D.G., A.M.Y. and Y.T.; investigation D.G., A.M.Y. and Y.T.; resources, B.R.S. and I.C.; D.G. writing—original draft, D.G.; writing—review and editing, B.R.S. and I.C.; supervision, B.R.S. and I.C.; project administration, B.R.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The research was funded by the Norwegian State Education Loan Fund for supporting PhD fellowship to senior author, the Norwegian Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs under the Program for Higher Education, Research and Development (HERD) in Western Balkan ((project number 09/1548) (grant number 332160UA) and the COST Action FA 0905 ‘Mineral Improved Crop Production for Healthy Food and Feed’ project, supported by the European Commission. This project has also received a partial support from the HarvestZinc Project (www.harvestzinc.org) (accessed on 2 February 2021).

Institutional Review Board Statement

No approval was required for it.

Informed Consent Statement

No such statement was needed.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References

  1. Cakmak, I.; Kutman, U. Agronomic biofortification of cereals with zinc: A review. Eur. J. Soil. Sci. 2018, 69, 172–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Bouis, H.E.; Hotz, C.; McClafferty, B.; Meenakshi, J.; Pfeiffer, W.H. Biofortification: A new tool to reduce micronutrient malnutrition. Food Nutr. Bull. 2011, 32, S31–S40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Oliver, M.A.; Gregory, P.J. Soil, food security and human health: A review. Eur. J. Soil. Sci. 2015, 66, 257–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Paul, S.; Dey, A. Nutrition in health and immune function of ruminants. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 2015, 85, 103–112. [Google Scholar]
  5. Cakmak, I. Enrichment of cereal grains with zinc: Agronomic or genetic biofortification? Plant Soil. 2008, 302, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Welch, R.M.; Graham, R.D.; Cakmak, I. Linking agricultural production practices to improving human nutrition and health. In Proceedings of the ICN2 Second International Conference on Nutrition Preparatory Technical Meeting, Rome, Italy, 13–15 November 2013. [Google Scholar]
  7. Hill, G.M.; Shannon, M.C. Copper and Zinc Nutritional Issues for Agricultural Animal Production. Biol. Trace Elemres 2019, 188, 148–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Schiavon, M.; Nardi, S.; dalla Vecchia, F.; Ertani, A. Selenium biofortification in the 21st century: Status and challenges for healthy human nutrition. Plant Soil. 2020, 453, 245–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Dalgaard, T.S.; Briens, M.; Engberg, R.M.; Lauridsen, C. The influence of selenium and selenoproteins on immune responses of poultry and pigs. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2018, 238, 73–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Kang, D.; Lee, J.; Wu, C.; Guo, X.; Lee, B.J.; Chun, J.S.; Kim, J.H. The role of selenium metabolism and selenoproteins in cartilage homeostasis and arthropathies. Exp. Mol. Med. 2020, 52, 1198–1208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Welch, R.M.; Graham, R.D. A new paradigm for world agriculture: Meeting human needs and productive, sustainable, nutritious. Field Crops Res. 1999, 60, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Pingali, P.; Mittra, B.; Rahman, A. The bumpy road from food to nutrition security—Slow evolution of India’s food policy. Glob. Food Sec. 2017, 15, 77–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Rengel, Z.; Römheld, V.; Marschner, H. Uptake of zinc and iron by wheat genotypes differing in tolerance to zinc deficiency. J. Plant Physiol. 1998, 152, 433–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. White, P.J.; Broadley, M.R. Biofortification of crops with seven mineral elements often lacking in human diets—Iron, zinc, copper, calcium, magnesium, selenium and iodine. New Phytol. 2009, 182, 49–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Manojlović, M.; Singh, B.R. Trace elements in soils and food chains of the Balkan region. Acta Agric. Scand. B Soil. Plant Sci. 2012, 62, 673–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Kincaid, R.L. Assessment of trace mineral status of ruminants: A review. J. Anim. Sci. 2000, 77, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Andreini, C.; Banci, L.; Bertini, I.; Rosato, A. Zinc through the three domains of life. J. Proteome Res. 2006, 5, 31–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kluska, K.; Adamczyk, J.; Krężel, A. Metal binding properties, stability and reactivity of zinc fingers Coordination. Chem. Rev. 2018, 367, 18–64. [Google Scholar]
  19. McDonald, P.; Edwards, R.; Greenhalgh, J.; Morgan, C.; Sinclair, L.A.; Wilkinson, R.G. Animal Nutrition, 7th ed.; Prentice-Hall: London, UK, 2007; Volume 11, pp. 264–271. [Google Scholar]
  20. Rayman, M.P. Selenium and human health. Lancet 2012, 379, 1256–1268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ademi, A.; Govasmark, E.; Bernhoft, A.; Bytyqi, H.; Djikic, M.; Manojlović, M.; Loncaric, Z.; Drinic, M.; Filipovic, A.; Singh, B.R. Status of selenium in sheep and dairy cow blood in Western Balkan countries. Acta Agric. Scand. A Anim. Sci. 2015, 65, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Shiferaw, B.; Prasanna, B.; Hellin, J.; Bänziger, M. Crops that feed the world 6. Past successes and future challenges to the role played by maize in global food security. Food Sec. 2011, 3, 307–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Ranum, P.; Peña-Rosas, J.P.; Garcia-Casal, M.N. Global maize production, utilization, and consumption. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2014, 13121, 105–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Alloway, B.J. Micronutrients and Crop Production: An Introduction. In Micronutrient Deficiencies in Global Crop Production; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2008; pp. 1–39. [Google Scholar]
  25. Eurostat. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat (accessed on 20 January 2021).
  26. La Frano, M.R.; de Moura, F.F.; Boy, E.; Lönnerdal, B.; Burri, B.J. Bioavailability of iron, zinc, and provitamin A carotenoids in biofortified staple crops. Nutr. Rev. 2014, 72, 289–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Grujcic, D.; Drinic, M.; Zivanovic, I.; Cakmak, I.; Singh, B.R. Micronutrient availability in soils of Northwest Bosnia and Herzegovina in relation to silage maize production. Acta Agric. Scand. B Soil. Plant Sci. 2018, 68, 301–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Subedi, K.D.; Ma, B.L. Assessment of some major yield-limiting factors on maize production in a humid temperate environment. Field Crops Res. 2009, 110, 21–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ma, Q.; Wang, X.; Li, H.; Li, H.; Cheng, L.; Zhang, F.; Rengel, Z.; Shen, J. Localized application of NH4+-N plus P enhances zinc and iron accumulation in maize via modifying root traits and rhizosphere processes. Field Crops Res. 2014, 164, 107–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Mortvedt, J.J. Crop response to level of water-soluble zinc in granular zinc fertilizers. Fertil. Res. 1992, 33, 249–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Gangloff, W.J.; Westfall, D.G.; Peterson, G.A.; Mortvedt, J.J. Relative availability coefficients of organic and inorganic fertilizers. J. Plant Nutr. 2002, 25, 259–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Aciksoz, S.B.; Yazici, A.; Ozturk, L.; Cakmak, I. Biofortification of wheat with iron through soil and foliar application of nitrogen and iron fertilizers. Plant Soil. 2011, 349, 215–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Zou, C.Q.; Zhang, Y.Q.; Rashid, A.; Ram, H.; Savasli, E.; Arisoy, R.Z.; Ortiz-Monasterio, I.; Simunji, S.; Wang, Z.H.; Sohu, V. Biofortification of wheat with zinc through zinc fertilization in seven countries. Plant Soil. 2012, 361, 119–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Phattarakul, N.; Rerkasem, B.; Li, L.J.; Wu, L.H.; Zou, C.Q.; Ram, H.; Sohu, V.S.; Kang, B.S.; Surek, H.; Kalayci, M. Biofortification of rice grain with zinc through zinc fertilization in different countries. Plant Soil. 2012, 361, 131–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zou, C.; Du, Y.; Rashid, A.; Ram, H.; Savasli, E.; Pieterse, P.J.; Ortiz Monasterio, I.; Yazici, A.; Kaur, C.; Mahmood, K.; et al. Simultaneous biofortification of wheat with zinc, iodine, selenium, and iron through foliar treatment of a micronutrient cocktail in six countries. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2019, 67, 8096–8106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Prom-u-thai, C.; Rashid, A.; Ram, H.; Zou, C.; Guilherme, L.; Roberto, G.; Corguinha, A.P.B.; Guo, S.; Kaur, C.; Naeem, A.; et al. Simultaneous Biofortification of Rice With Zinc, Iodine, Iron and Selenium Through Foliar Treatment of a Micronutrient Cocktail in Five Countries. Front Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 15–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Cakmak, I.; Pfeiffer, W.H.; McClafferty, B. Biofortification of durum wheat with zinc and iron. Cereal Chem. 2010, 87, 10–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Kutman, U.B.; Yildiz, B.; Ozturk, L.; Cakmak, I. Biofortification of durum wheat with zinc through soil and foliar applications of nitrogen. Cereal Chem. 2010, 87, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Erenoglu, E.B.; Kutman, U.B.; Ceylan, Y.; Yildiz, B.; Cakmak, I. Improved nitrogen nutrition enhances root uptake, root-to-shoot translocation and remobilization of zinc (65Zn) in wheat. New Phytol. 2011, 189, 438–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. LeBlanc, P.V.; Gupta, U.C.; Christie, B.R. Zinc nutrition of silage corn grown on acid podzols. J. Plant Nutr. 1997, 20, 345–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Losak, T.; Hlusek, J.; Martinec, J.; Jandak, J.; Szostkova, M.; Filipcik, R.; Manasek, J.; Prokes, K.; Peterka, J.; Varga, L. Nitrogen fertilization does not affect micronutrient uptake in grain maize (Zea mays L.). Acta Agric. Scand. B Soil. Plant Sci. 2011, 61, 543–550. [Google Scholar]
  42. Wang, J.; Mao, H.; Zhao, H.; Huang, D.; Wang, Z. Different increases in maize and wheat grain zinc concentrations caused by soil and foliar applications of zinc in Loess Plateau, China. Field Crops Res. 2012, 135, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Xue, Y.; Yue, S.; Zhang, W.; Liu, D.; Cui, Z.; Chen, X.; Ye, Y.; Zou, C. Zinc, iron, manganese and copper uptake requirement in response to nitrogen supply and the increased grain yield of summer maize. PLoS ONE. 2014, 9, e93895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Randjelovic, V.; Prodanovic, S.; Tomic, Z.; Simic, A. Genotype x year effect on grain yield and nutritive values of maize (Zea mays L.). J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 2011, 10, 835–840. [Google Scholar]
  45. Amrani, M.; Westfall, D.G.; Peterson, G.A. Influence of water solubility of granular zinc fertilizers on plant uptake and growth. J. Plant Nutr. 1999, 22, 1815–1827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Shaver, T.M.; Westfall, D.G.; Ronaghi, M. Zinc fertilizer solubility and its effects on zinc bioavailability over time. J. Plant Nutr. 2007, 30, 123–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. ZINC. Available online: https://crops.zinc.org/ (accessed on 18 January 2021).
  48. Degryse, F.; da Silva, R.C.; Baird, R.; Cakmak, I.; Yazici, M.A.; McLaughlin, M.J. Comparison and modelling of extraction methods to assess agronomic effectiveness of fertilizer zinc. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2020, 183, 248–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Monreal, C.M.; DeRosa, M.; Mallubhotla, S.C.; Bindraban, P.S.; Dimkpa, C. Nanotechnologies for increasing the crop use efficiency of fertilizer-micronutrients. Biol. Fertil. Soils 2016, 52, 423–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Kopittke, P.; Lombi, E.; Wang, P.; Schjørring, J.K.; Husted, S. Nanomaterials as fertilizers for improving plant mineral nutrition and environmental outcomes. Environ. Sci. Nano 2019, 6, 3513–3524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Milani, N.; McLaughlin, M.J.; Stacey, S.P.; Kirby, J.K.; Hettiarachchi, G.M.; Beak, D.G.; Cornelis, G. Dissolution kinetics of macronutrient fertilizers coated with manufactured zinc oxide nanoparticles. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2012, 60, 3991–3998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Cakmak, I.; Kalayci, M.; Kaya, Y.; Torun, A.A.; Aydin, N.; Wang, Y.; Arisoy, Z.; Erdem, H.; Yazici, A.; Gokmen, O.; et al. Biofortification and localization of zinc in wheat grain. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2010, 58, 9092–9102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Kutman, U.B.; Yildiz, B.; Cakmak, I. Effect of nitrogen on uptake, remobilization and partitioning of zinc and iron throughout the development of durum wheat. Plant Soil. 2011, 342, 149–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Aciksoz, S.B.; Ozturk, L.; Gokmen, O.O.; Romheld, V.; Cakmak, I. Effect of nitrogen on root release of phytosiderophores and root uptake of Fe(III)- phytosiderophore in Fe-deficient wheat plants. Physiol. Plant 2011, 142, 287–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Römheld, V.; Marschner, H. Evidence for a specific uptake system for iron phytosiderophores in roots of grasses. Plant Physiol. 1986, 80, 175–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Suzuki, M.; Tsukamoto, T.; Inoue, H.; Watanabe, S.; Matsuhashi, S.; Takahashi, M.; Nakanishi, H.; Mori, S.; Nishizawa, N.K. Deoxymugineic acid increases Zn translocation in Zn-deficient rice plants. Plant Mol. Biol. 2008, 66, 609–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  57. Masuda, H.; Suzuki, M.; Morikawa, K.C.; Kobayashi, T.; Nakanishi, H.; Takahashi, M.; Saigusa, M.; Mori, S.; Nishizawa, N.K. Increase in iron and zinc concentrations in rice grains via the introduction of barley genes involved in phytosiderophore synthesis. Rice 2008, 1, 100–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Li, S.; Banuelos, G.S.; Min, J.; Shi, W. Effect of continuous application of inorganic nitrogen fertilizer on selenium concentration in vegetables grown in the Taihu Lake region of China. Plant Soil. 2015, 393, 351–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Chilimba, A.D.C.; Young, S.D.; Black, C.R.; Meacham, M.C.; Lammel, J.; Broadley, M.R. Agronomic biofortification of maize with selenium (Se) in Malawi. Field Crop Res. 2012, 125, 118–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Mao, H.; Wang, J.; Zan, Y.; Lyons, G.; Zou, C. Using agronomic biofortification to boost zinc, selenium, and iodine concentrations of food crops grown on the loess plateau in China. J. Soil. Sci. Plant Nutr. 2014, 14, 459–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Ngigi, P.B.; Lachat, C.; Masinde, P.W.; Du Laing, G. Agronomic biofortification of maize and beans in Kenya through selenium fertilization. Environ. Geochem. Health 2019, 41, 2577–2591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Hendriks, S.J.; Laven, R.A. Selenium requirements in grazing dairy cows: A review. N. Z. Vetj. 2020, 68, 13–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Council, N.R. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle, 7th ed.; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2001; p. 405. [Google Scholar]
Plants 10 00391 g001 550
Figure 1. Zinc deficiency symptoms on young leaves of maize plants.
Figure 1. Zinc deficiency symptoms on young leaves of maize plants.
Plants 10 00391 g001
Plants 10 00391 g002 550
Figure 2. Correlation between shoot Zn and Fe concentrations under different N soil supply. Data for 25. days old maize plants. N rates: low (125 mg of N/kg of soil), (---, ■), and adequate (250 mg of N/kg of soil), (---, ♦).
Figure 2. Correlation between shoot Zn and Fe concentrations under different N soil supply. Data for 25. days old maize plants. N rates: low (125 mg of N/kg of soil), (---, ■), and adequate (250 mg of N/kg of soil), (---, ♦).
Plants 10 00391 g002
Plants 10 00391 g003 550
Figure 3. Correlations between Zn, Fe and N concentrations in maize shoot under different Zn soil supply. (A) Low Zn soil supply. (B) Adequate Zn soil supply. Data for 25 days old maize plants. Fe maize shoot concentration (---, ■), Zn maize shoot concentration (---, ▲).
Figure 3. Correlations between Zn, Fe and N concentrations in maize shoot under different Zn soil supply. (A) Low Zn soil supply. (B) Adequate Zn soil supply. Data for 25 days old maize plants. Fe maize shoot concentration (---, ■), Zn maize shoot concentration (---, ▲).
Plants 10 00391 g003
Plants 10 00391 g004 550
Figure 4. (a) Effects of increasing soil Zn supply in form of ZnO on growth of maize plants on a Zn-deficient calcareous for 20 days (bottom), 27 days (middle) and 35 days (top). (b) Effects of increasing soil Zn supply in form of ZnSO4 on growth of maize plants on a Zn-deficient calcareous for 20 days (bottom), 27 days (middle) and 35 days (top). Zinc has been applied at the rates of 0, 0.5, 1, 2.5 and 7.5 mg Zn kg−1 soil in form of ZnO and ZnSO4.
Figure 4. (a) Effects of increasing soil Zn supply in form of ZnO on growth of maize plants on a Zn-deficient calcareous for 20 days (bottom), 27 days (middle) and 35 days (top). (b) Effects of increasing soil Zn supply in form of ZnSO4 on growth of maize plants on a Zn-deficient calcareous for 20 days (bottom), 27 days (middle) and 35 days (top). Zinc has been applied at the rates of 0, 0.5, 1, 2.5 and 7.5 mg Zn kg−1 soil in form of ZnO and ZnSO4.
Plants 10 00391 g004
Table
Table 1. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) of effects of soil N and Zn applications on shoot dry matter, Zn, Fe and Se concentration and Zn, Fe and Se uptake in 25-days old plants a,b.
Table 1. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) of effects of soil N and Zn applications on shoot dry matter, Zn, Fe and Se concentration and Zn, Fe and Se uptake in 25-days old plants a,b.
Source of Variation
(Treatments)		dfShoot
Dry Matter		Shoot Zn ConcentrationShoot
Zn Uptake		Shoot Fe ConcentrationShoot Fe UptakeShoot Se ConcentrationShoot Se Uptake
SSF PrSSF PrSSF PrSSF PrSSF PrSSF PrSSF Pr
Soil N (A)10.0470.461332.3<0.0013802.4<0.0016088.3<0.00167,088<0.0010.04630.5860.2210.703
Soil Zn (B)11.981<0.0011539.2<0.00119,448.5<0.0011838.8<0.00160560.0390.00190.9110.1920.722
A × B10.0580.74934.20.172564.70.09341.50.576320.8780.02990.6610.3420.635
Experimental error443.756 783.6 8472.5 5752.5 59400 6.7965 66.2
a Data of 25 days old maize (Zea mays) plants grown under greenhouse conditions. b ANOVA test values: df, SS and F Pr.
Table
Table 2. Effect of varied N supply on shoot dry matter production of 25-days-old maize grown at low and adequate Zn levels.
Table 2. Effect of varied N supply on shoot dry matter production of 25-days-old maize grown at low and adequate Zn levels.
N Treatment aShoot Dry Matter (g plant−1) b,c
Low ZnAdequate Zn
Low2.99 ± 0.28 Aa3.27 ± 0.29 Ab
Adequate3.02 ± 0.12 Aa3.37 ± 0.41 Ab
a N treatments: low (125 mg of N kg−1 of soil) and adequate (250 mg of N kg−1 of soil). b Data for 25 days old maize plants grown at low (1 mg of Zn kg−1 of soil) and adequate (5 mg of Zn kg−1 of soil) Zn supply on a Zn-deficient soil under greenhouse conditions. c The average of 4 independent replicates makes the mean values presented and those in column followed by different uppercase letters and in a row followed by different lowercase letters are significantly different by Turkey test at the 5% level.
Table
Table 3. Effect of varied N and Zn supply on the shoot concentration and uptake of Zn, Fe and Se in 25-days-old maize plants.
Table 3. Effect of varied N and Zn supply on the shoot concentration and uptake of Zn, Fe and Se in 25-days-old maize plants.
MicronutrientZn
Treatment a		Shoot Concentration c,eShoot Uptake d,e
Low N bAdequate N bLow N bAdequate N b
ZnLow7.2 ± 0.5 Aa10.8 ± 0.5 Ab21.4 ± 2.3 Aa32.5 ± 2.4 Ab
Adequate16.8 ± 1.1 Ba23.8 ± 1.2 Bb54.9 ± 4.3 Ba80.1 ± 11.8 Bb
FeLow51.4 ± 5.5 Aa80.0 ± 7.3 Ab153.5 ± 16.1 Aa241.6 ± 25.3 Ab
Adequate36.3 ± 2.5 Ba57.2 ± 3.0 Bb118.3 ± 11.8 Ba192.8 ± 27.1 Bb
SeLow0.83 ± 0.06 Aa0.80 ± 0.12 Aa2.4 ± 0.30 Aa2.5 ± 0.32 Aa
Adequate0.88 ± 0.03 Aa0.71 ± 0.07 Aa2.8 ± 0.25 Aa2.4 ± 0.37 Aa
a Data for 25 days old maize plants grown at low (1 mg of Zn kg−1 of soil) and adequate (5 mg of Zn kg−1 of soil) Zn supply on a Zn-deficient soil under greenhouse conditions. b N treatments: low (125 mg of N kg−1 of soil) and adequate (250 mg of N kg−1 of soil). c Concentration measured in mg kg −1 per micronutrient. d Uptake measured as μg of micronutrient/plant.e The average of 4 independent replicates makes the mean values presented and those in column followed by different uppercase letters and in a row followed by different lowercase letters are significantly different by Turkey test at the 5% level.
Table
Table 4. Effect of varied N supply on the shoot concentration and uptake of Fe and Se in 25-days-old maize plants grown under different Fe and Se soil treatments.
Table 4. Effect of varied N supply on the shoot concentration and uptake of Fe and Se in 25-days-old maize plants grown under different Fe and Se soil treatments.
MicronutrientMicronutrient
Treatment a		Shoot Concentration c,eShoot Uptake d,e
Low N bAdequate N bLow N bAdequate N b
FeNo treatment29.2 ± 2.8 Aa47.2 ± 3.7 Ab92.3 ± 4.4 Aa147.4 ± 17.9 Ab
Adequate42.6 ± 2.5 Ba71.0 ± 2.9 Bb137.7 ± 9.6 Ba222.3 ± 25.6 Bb
SeNo treatment0.04 ± 0.01 Aa0.05 ± 0.01 Aa0.1 ± 0.0 Aa0.2 ± 0.0 Aa
Adequate0.85 ± 0.03 Ba0.88 ± 0.08 Ba2.7 ± 0.2 Ba2.8 ± 0.4 Ba
a Data for 25 days old maize plants grown at different Fe (0 and 10 mg of Fe kg−1 of soil) and Se (0 and 0.02 mg of Se kg−1 of soil) supply on micronutrient deficient soil under greenhouse conditions. b N treatments: low (125 mg of N kg−1 of soil) and adequate (250 mg of N kg−1 of soil). c Concentration measured in mg kg −1 per micronutrient. d Uptake measured as μg of micronutrient/plant. e Values are means of four independent replicates. e The average of 4 independent replicates makes the mean values presented and those in column followed by different uppercase letters and in a row followed by different lowercase letters are significantly different by Turkey test at the 5% level.
Table
Table 5. Effects of increasing soil Zn supply as ZnO and ZnSO4 on shoot dry matter production, shoot Zn concentration and total Zn uptake of 34-days-old maize plants grown on a Zn-deficient calcareous soil. Zinc has been applied at the rates of 0, 0.5, 1, 2.5 and 7.5 mg Zn kg−1 soil in form of ZnO and ZnSO4.
Table 5. Effects of increasing soil Zn supply as ZnO and ZnSO4 on shoot dry matter production, shoot Zn concentration and total Zn uptake of 34-days-old maize plants grown on a Zn-deficient calcareous soil. Zinc has been applied at the rates of 0, 0.5, 1, 2.5 and 7.5 mg Zn kg−1 soil in form of ZnO and ZnSO4.
Zn SourceZn Supply mg/kgDry Matter (g plant−1)Shoot Zn (mg kg−1)Shoot Zn Uptake (µg plant−1)
ControlNo Zn0.60 ± 0.025.65 ± 0.103.4 ± 0.1
ZnO0.50.98 ± 0.115.01 ± 0.654.9 ± 1.1
11.28 ± 0.326.32 ± 0.298.1 ± 1.9
2.52.52 ± 1.358.09 ± 0.3620.7 ± 11.9
7.54.64 ± 1.979.24 ± 1.1044.5 ± 23.3
ZnSO40.52.21 ± 0.486.88 ± 0.7715.3 ± 4.3
13.97 ± 0.607.24 ± 0.5428.7 ± 4.6
2.56.16 ± 0.248.36 ± 0.2751.5 ± 2.7
7.57.43 ± 0.3013.55 ± 1.3299.6 ± 8.6
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Grujcic, D.; Yazici, A.M.; Tutus, Y.; Cakmak, I.; Singh, B.R. Biofortification of Silage Maize with Zinc, Iron and Selenium as Affected by Nitrogen Fertilization. Plants 2021, 10, 391. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10020391

AMA Style

Grujcic D, Yazici AM, Tutus Y, Cakmak I, Singh BR. Biofortification of Silage Maize with Zinc, Iron and Selenium as Affected by Nitrogen Fertilization. Plants. 2021; 10(2):391. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10020391

Chicago/Turabian Style

Grujcic, Djordje, Atilla Mustafa Yazici, Yusuf Tutus, Ismail Cakmak, and Bal Ram Singh. 2021. "Biofortification of Silage Maize with Zinc, Iron and Selenium as Affected by Nitrogen Fertilization" Plants 10, no. 2: 391. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10020391

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop