Effect of biofertilizers on yield and yield components of cucumber

Transcription

1 ISSN: Journal of Biology and Earth Sciences BIOLOGY ORIGINAL ARTICLE and yield components of cucumber Faranak Moshabaki Isfahani 1, Hossein Besharati 2 1 Department of Agriculture, Fars Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran 2 Institute of Soil and Water Research, Karaj, Iran ABSTRACT Biofertilizer is defined as a substance which contains living organisms which, when applied to seed, plant surface, or soil, colonize the rhizosphere or interior of the plant and promote growth by increasing the supply or availability of primary nutrients to the host plant. Biofertilizers are well recognized as an important component of integrated plant nutrient management for sustainable agriculture and hold a great promise improve crop yield. The present study for the sake of evaluating the use of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria produced by Pseudomonas sp. and phosphate bio fertilizers produced by Pseudomonas putida strain P1 3 and Pantoea agglomerans strain P5 and chemical fertilizers in the separate treatments on yield and yield components of cucumber by using a factorial experiment in completely randomized block design with three repetition were performed in the field. The symbol of P represents chemical fertilizer by amount of respectively (0, 25%, 50%, 75%, 1 00%), B1 shows plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) and B2 indicates bio fertilizer-2. The results showed that P1 B0 has the most yield, and control treatments has the least yield. P1 00B1 has the most length of plant and P1 00B0 has the least length of plant, P25B1 has the most amount of chlorophyll and P75B2 has the least chlorophyll. P75B2 has the most shoots dry weight and P1 00B0 has the least shoots dry weight. B1 P50 has the most shoots fresh weight and P25B2 has the least shoots fresh weight. B1 P50 has the most roots dry weight and P1 00B0 has the least roots dry weight. B1 P50 has the most roots fresh weight and P25B2 has the least roots fresh weight. So the results indicate that use of biological fertilizers have caused increase yield and components yield of cucumber. Key words: biofertilizer, bacteria, cucumber, PGPR, yield. J Biol Earth Sci 201 2; 2(2): B83-B92 Corresponding author: Faranak Moshabaki Isfahani Department of Agriculture, Fars Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad university, Shiraz, Iran. Phone: faranakmoshabaki@yahoo.com Original Submission: 1 4 July 201 2; Revised Submission: 07 September 201 2; Accepted: 1 4 September Copyright Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. journals. tmkarpinski. com/index. php/jbes or strefa. pl jbes@interia. eu B83

2 INTRODUCTION Organic farmers and gardeners have long recognized the importance of soil biology. Early on, they observed the role of rhizobia, mycorrhizae, biological control organisms, and the whole of the soil food web in maintaining soil quality for crop production. Evidence of naturally occurring rhizospheric phosphorus solubilizing microorganism (PSM) dates back to [1 ]. Among the whole microbial population in soil, PSB constitute 1 to 50%, while phosphorus solubilizing funji (PSF) are only 0. 1 % to 0. 5% in P-solubilization potential [2]. The PSB are ubiquitous with variation in forms and population in different soils. Several bacteria species, in association with plant rhizosphere, are capable of increasing availability of phosphorus to plant either by mineralization of organic phosphate or by solubilization of inorganic phosphate. These bacteria are referred to as phosphate solubilizing bacteria (PSB) and have been considered to have potential use as inoculants biofertilizer to improve the plant growth and yield [2, 3]. Phosphate solubizing bacteria (PSB) are being used as biofertilizer since 1 950s [4, 5]. Phosphate solubilizing microorganisms (bacteria or fungi) are able to solubilize unavailable soil p and increase the yield of crops [6]. Population of PSB depends on different soil properties (physical and chemical properties, organic matter, and P content) and cultural activities [7]. Larger populations of PSB are found in agricultural and rangeland soils [8]. In north of Iran, the PSB count ranged from 0 to 1 07 cells g-1 soil, with 3. 98% population of PSB among total bacteria [9]. Consequently, many researchers have isolated P-solubilizing bacteria from different soil and the inoculation of these bacteria to increase p- availability of plants have been intensively studied [2, 1 0, 11 ]. Phosphorus solubilization is carried out by a large number of saprophytic bacteria and fungi acting on sparingly soluble soil phosphates, mainly by chelation-mediated mechanisms [1 2]. P-solubilization ability of microorganism is considered to be one of the most important traits associated with plant nutrition [2]. At the present, bacilli, rhizobia and pseudomonas are the best studied P-solubilizer bacteria [1 3]. Several studies have shown that bacillus spp. Inoculation to seed and soil can solubilize fixed soil p and applied p, resulting in higher crop yield and growth contributions to the enhancement of growth and productivity in different crops [ ]. Microorganisms enhance the P availability to plants by mineralizing organic P in soil and by solubilizing precipitated phosphates [ ]. High proportion of PSM is concentrated in the rhizosphere, and they are metabolically more active than from other sources [20]. MATERIALS AND METHODS This experiment was carried out during in a lowland field area of Dashti, Isfahan, Iran, located in 75 53' longitude and 32 30' latitude, with semi-arid climate. The ph of field experiment was 8 and soil texture was loamy (physical and chemical properties of soil in experiment field were presented in table 1 ). Experiment was conducted in the randomized complete block design (RCBD) with 3 replications in 45 experimental plots in four levels of chemical fertilizer (0, 25%, 50%, 75%, 1 00%) and biological fertilizers, Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria produced by Pseudomonas sp. and phosphate bio fertilizer produced by (Pseudomonas putida strain P1 3 and Pantoea agglomerans strain P5) in separate treatments. The bacterial strain used in this study obtained from soil and water study research, Karaj, Iran. Soil analyses were performed, accordingly fertilizer recommendation were super phosphate tribl 75 (kg/ha), urea 300 (kg/ha), potassium sulphate 1 00 (kg/ha). After the act of land preparation and seed inoculation with biological fertilizers snowing was done. Chemical fertilizers were used in considerate plots. All operations were done regularly during the growing season. Random samplings after eliminate the marginal effects of plots was done. Samples transfer to laboratory, yield was measured, samples were weighted (fresh weight) then they kept in Avon for 72 hour and they were weighted again (dry weight). Yield was determined, amount of chlorophyll in leaves measured. The symbol of P represents chemical fertilizer (25%, 50%, 75%, 1 00%), B1 shows Pseudomonas sp. (plant growth promoting rhizobacteria), B2 indicates (Pseudomonas putida strain P1 3 and Pantoea agglomerans strain P5) biofertilizer-2. Statistical analyses Data analysis was done by using SPSS software. The ANOVA test was used to determine significant (P<0. 05) treatment effect and Dunkan B84

3 Multiple Range Test to determine significant different between individual means. RESULTS Yield Results (Table 1, Figure 1 ) indicate that (P0B1 ) treatment of Pseudomonas sp. has the most yield (g/m 2 ) and this treatment has the most significantly difference with control. Also (B2P50) biofertilizer % chemical fertilizer has no significant difference with P0B1 treatment, it means that this treatment has also a high yield too. Control treatment has the less yield (1.40 g/m 2 ). In addition ANOVA results show that Yield has been significantly influenced by bacteria and chemical fertilizer at 5% probability level. Length of cucumber plants According to table (2), (B1 P1 00), treatment of Pseudomonas sp % chemical fertilizer has the most length of cucumber plant ( Cm), and this treatment has the most significant Fig. 1. A bar graph of weight (kg) under different percentages of fertilizer and two types of bacteria. Fig. 2. A bar graph of the length of plant (Cm) under different percentages of fertilizer and two types of bacteria. Table 1. Compare mean of cucumber s weight between two kind of bacteria and different percents of chemical fertilizer. B85

4 Table 2. Compare mean of cucumber s length between two types of bacteria and different percents of chemical fertilizer. Table 3. Dankan test: Compare mean of chlorophyll content in leaves between two kind of bacteria and different percents of chemical fertilizer. B86

5 Table 4. Dankan test: Compare mean of shoots fresh weight between two kind of bacteria and different percents of chemical fertilizer. Table 5. Dankan test: Compare mean of shoots dry weight between two kind of bacteria and different percents of chemical fertilizer. B87

6 difference with control treatment. second (B2P1 00) biofertilizer % chemical fertilizer has the most length of cucumber ( Cm). (B0P1 00) 1 00% chemical fertilizer treatment has the least length of cucumber ( Cm). ANOVA results show that length of cucumber plant has been significantly influenced by bacteria and chemical fertilizer at 5% probability level. Presence of these bacteria can increase the length of cucumber plants and B1 has the maximum length. Therefore biofertilizers can increase length of cucumber plant significantly (Table 2, Figure 2). Chlorophyll content in cucumber leaves Results show that (B1 P25), treatment of Pseudomonas sp. + 25% chemical fertilizer has the most chlorophyll content (360/1 6 mg/kg) and this treatment has the most significant difference with control. Treatment of biofertilizer % chemical fertilizer (B2P75) has the least content chlorophyll (1 /24 mg/kg) (Table 3, Figure 3). ANOVA results show that chlorophyll content has been significantly influenced by bacteria and chemical fertilizer at 5% probability level. Fig. 3. A bar graph of chlorophyll (g/m 2 ) under different percentages of fertilizer and two types of bacteria. Fig. 4. A bar graph of the shoot fresh weight (g) under different percentages of fertilizer and two types of bacteria. Fig. 5. A bar graph of the shoot dry weight (g) under different percentages of fertilizer and two types of bacteria. Fig. 6. A bar graph of the root fresh weight (g) under different percentages of fertilizer and two types of bacteria. B88

7 Table 6. Dankan test: Compare mean of roots fresh weight between two kind of bacteria and different percents of chemical fertilizer. Shoot fresh weight According to (Table 4) Results show that 75% chemical fertilizer + biofertilizer-2 (B2P75) has the most shoot fresh weight ( g) and it has the most significant difference with control. Control treatment has the least shoot fresh weight ( g). Also ANOVA results show that shoot fresh weight has been significantly influenced by bacteria and chemical fertilizer at 5% probability level. According to Dunkan test mean maximum mean of shoot fresh weight is in the presence of biofertilizer- 2. Also interaction between two types of bacteria and different percentages of fertilizer is significant (P-value<0. 05). Therefore the highest amount of shoot fresh weight is observed in B2P75 treatment and the lowest shoot fresh weight is observed in control treatment. biofertilizer-2. Also interaction between two types of bacteria and different percentages of fertilizer is significant (P-value<0. 05). As a result the maximum shoot dry weight is observed in B2P75 and minimum shoot dry weight is observed in control treatment. Root fresh weight Due to table (6) plant growth promoting rhizobacteria + 50% fertilizer treatment (B1 P50) has the most fresh weight, and this treatment has the Shoot dry weight Due to the table (5) treatment of 75% chemical fertilizer + biofertilizer-2 (P75 B2) has the most dry weight and this treatment has the most significantly difference with control and 1 00% chemical fertilizer (P1 00 B0) has the least dry weight. ANOVA results show that shoot dry weight has been significantly influenced by bacteria and chemical fertilizer at 5% probability level. According to Dunkan test, mean of shoot dry weight in the presence of two types of bacteria have significant difference with control and the highest shoot dry weight is in the presence of Fig. 7. A bar graph of the root dry weight (gr) under different percentages of fertilizer and two types of bacteria. B89

8 Table 7. Dankan test: Compare mean of roots dry weight between two kind of bacteria and different percents of chemical fertilizer. most significantly difference with control. Biofertilizer % fertilizer treatment (B2P25) has the least fresh weight. Also ANOVA results show that root fresh weight has been significantly influenced by bacteria and chemical fertilizer at 5% probability level. According to Dunkan test the maximum root fresh weight is in the presence of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Root dry weight According to table (7) Pseudomonas sp. + 50% chemical fertilizer treatment (B1 P50) has the most dry weight and this treatment has the most significantly difference with control. 1 00% chemical fertilizer treatment (B0P1 00) has the least dry weight. Also ANOVA result show that root dry weight has been significantly influenced by bacteria and chemical fertilizer at 5% probability level. DISCUSSION Results showed that combination use of biologic and chemical fertilizers has increased cucumber yield, length of cucumber plants, shoot fresh weight, shoot dry weight, root fresh weight and root dry weight. So that P0B1 treatment has the most yield, P1 00B1 treatment has the most length of plant, P25B1 treatment has the most chlorophyll, P75B2 has the most shoot fresh weight, P75B2 treatment has the most shoot dry weight, P50B1 has the most root fresh weight and P50B1 treatment has the most root dry weight. In other researches the same results have been observed so that inoculation with PSB increased sugarcane yield by percent [21 ]. Sole application of bacteria increased the biological yield, while the application of the same bacteria along with mycorrhizae reached to the maximum grain weight [22]. In addition Chandrasekar observed maximum height of plant in the treatment that was treated with Azosprillum [23]. Also Mycorrhiza along with Pseudomonas putida increased leaf chlorophyll content in barley [22]. Mahfouz and Sharaf-eldin have suggested the use of biological fertilizers with chemical fertilizers increased the shoot fresh weight and shoot dry weight of corn [24]. Pseudomonas spp. Enhanced the number of noduls, dry weight of nodules, yield components, grain yield, nutrient availability and uptake in soybean crop [25, 26]. Phosphate solubilizing bacteria enhanced the seedling length of Cicer arietinum while co-inoculation of PSM and PGPR reduced P application by 50% without affecting Corn yield [27]. Inoculation with PSB increased sugar cane yield, while the application of the same bacteria along with mycorrhizae reached to the maximum grain weight [22]. Combined B90

9 inoculation of arbuscular mycorrhiza and PSB gave better uptake of both native P from the soil and P coming from the phosphatic rock [28, 29]. Higher crop yields result from solubilization of fixed soil P and applied phosphates by PSB [30]. Microorganisms with phosphate solubilizing potential increased the availability of soluble phosphate and enhance the plant growth by improving biological nitrogen fixation [31, 32]. Single and dual inoculation along with P fertilizer was 30-40% better than P fertilizer alone for improving grain yield of wheat, and dual inoculation without P fertilizer improved grain yield up to 20% against sole P fertilization [33]. CONCLUSION According to this study using biofertilizers has been increased yield and component yield of cucumber significantly. In other words, presence of these bacteria cucumber growth factors have been increased. Chemical fertilizers have unpleasant enviromental impacts such as soil and water pollution, health problems on human and other organisms, the tearing down of soil, disturbing chemical balance of soil, reduction of production potential during long-term and environmental pollution. So in order to achieve stable agriculture and reduction the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides and increasing use of biological fertilizers would be a good solution. In general according to the results of these study, biological fertilizers can reduce the econemic and environmental problems which are resulting from use of chemical fertilizers. As a result, biological fertilizers can be recommended for the sake of achieving the higher quality production. TRANSPARENCY DECLARATION The authors declare no conflicts of interest. REFERENCES Khan KS, Joergensen RG. Changes in microbial biomass and P fractions in biogenic household waste compost amended with inorganic P fertilizers. Bioresour Technol. 2009; 1 00: Chen YP, Rekha PD, Arun AB, Shen FT, Lai WA, Young CC. Phosphate solubilizing bacteria from subtropical soil and their tricalcium phosphate solubilizing abilities. Appl Soil Ecol. 2006; 34: Vessey KJ. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria biofertilizers. Plant Soil. 2003; 255: Kudashev IS. The effect of phosphobacterin on the yield and protein content in grains of Autumm wheat, maize and soybean. Dok Akad Skh Nauk ; 8: Krasilinikov NA. On the role of soil micro-organism in plant nutrition. Microbiologiya ; 26: Adesemoye AO, Kloepper JW. Plant-microbes interactions in enhanced fertilizer-use efficiency. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2009; 85: Kim KY, Jordan D, McDonald, GA. Effect of phosphate-solubilizing bacteria and vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizae on tomato growth and soil microbial activity. Biol Fert Soils ; 26: Yahya A, Azawi SKA. Occurrence of phosphate solubilizing bacteria in some Iranian soils. Plant Soil ; 11 7: Fallah A Abundance and distribution of phosphate solubilizing bacteria and fungi in some soil samples from north of Iran. 1 8th World Congress of Soil Science, July 9-1 5, 2006, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. De Freitas JR, Banerjee MR, Germida JJ. Phosphate-solubilizing rhizobacteria enhance the growth and yield but not phosphorus uptake of canola (Brassica napus L.). Biol Fertil Soils ; 24: Peix A, Boyero AAR, Mateos PF, Barrueco CR, Molina EM, Velazquez E. Growth promotion of chickpea and barley by a phosphate solubilizing strain of Mesorhizobium mediterraneum under growth chamber conditions. Soil Biol Biochem ; 33: Whitelaw MA. Growth promotion of plants inoculated with phosphate solubilizing fungi. Adv Agron. 2000; 69: Rodriguez H, Fraga R. Phosphate solubilizing bacteria and their role in plant growth promotion. Adv Biotechnol ; 1 7: Cakmakcı R, Donmez F, Aydın A, Sahin F. Growth promotion of plants by plant growth promoting rhizobacteria under greenhouse and as two different field soil conditions. Soil Biol Biochem. 2006; 38: B91

10 Orhan E, Esitken A, Ercisli S, Turan M, Sahin F. Effects of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on yield, growth and nutrient contents in organically growing raspberry. Sci Horticult. 2006; 111 : Canbolat MY, Bilen S, Cakmakcı R, Ahin F, Aydın A. Effect of Plant growth-promoting bacteria and soil compaction on barley seedling growth, nutrient uptake, soil properties and rhizosphere microflora. Biol Fertil Soils. 2006; 42: Chen YP, Rekha PD, Arunshen AB, Lai WA, Young CC. Phosphate solubilizing bacteria from subtropical soil and their tricalcium phosphate solubilizing abilities. Appl Soil Ecol. 2006; 34: Kang SC, Hat CG, Lee TG, Maheshwari DK. Solubilization of insoluble inorganic phosphates by a soil-inhabiting fungus Fomitopsis sp. PS Curr Sci. 2002; 82: Pradhan N, Sukla, LB. Solubilization of inorganic phosphate by fungi isolated from agriculture soil. Afr J Biotechnol. 2005; 5: Vazquez P, Holguin G, Puente M, Cortes AE, Bashan Y. Phosphate solubilizing microorganisms associated with the rhizosphere of mangroves in a semi arid coastal lagoon. Biol Fert Soils. 2000; 30: Sundara B, Natarajan V, Hari K. Influence of phosphorus solubilizing bacteria on the changes in soil available phosphorus and sugarcane yields. Field Crops Res. 2002; 77: Mehrvarz S, Chaichi MR, Alikhani, HA. Effects of phosphate solubilizing microorganisms and phosphorus chemical fertilizer on yield and yield components of Barely (Hordeum vulgare L.). Am- Euras J Agric Environ Sci. 2008; 3: Chandrasekar BR, Ambrose G, Jayabalan N. Influence of biofertilizers and nitrogen source level on the growth and yield of Echinochloa frumentacea (Roxb.) Link J Agric Technol. 2005; 1 : Mahfouz SA, Sharaf-Eldin MA. Effect of mineral vs. biofertilizer on growth, yield and essential oil content of fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Mill.). Int Agrophys. 2007; 21 : Son TTN, Diep CN, Giang TTM. Effect of bradyrhizobia and phosphate solubilizing bacteria application on Soybean in rotational system in the Mekong delta. Omonrice. 2006; 1 4: Sharma K, Dak G, Agrawal A, Bhatnagar M, Sharma R. Effect of phosphate solubilizing bacteria on the germination of Cicer arietinum seeds and seedling growth. J Herb Med Toxicol. 2007; 1 : Yazdani M, Bahmanyar MA, Pirdashti H, Esmaili MA. Effect of Phosphate solubilization microorganisms (PSM) and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on yield and yield components of Corn (Zea mays L.). Proc World Acad Sci Eng Technol. 2009; 37: Goenadi D, Siswanto H, Sugiarto Y. Bioactivation of poorly soluble phosphate rocks with a phosphorussolubilizing fungus. Soil Sci Soc Am.J. 2000; 64: Cabello M, Irrazabal G, Bucsinszky AM, Saparrat M, Schalamuck S. Effect of an arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus, G. mosseae and a rock-phosphatesolubilizing fungus, P. thomii in Mentha piperita growth in a soiless medium. J Basic Microbiol. 2005; 45: Zaidi A Synergistic interactions of nitrogen fixing microorganisms with phosphate mobilizing microorganisms. Ph.D. Thesis, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India. Kucey RMN, Janzen HH, Legget ME. Microbial mediated increases in plant available phosphorus. Adv Agron ; 42: Ponmurugan P, Gopi C. Distribution pattern and screening of phosphate solubilizing bacteria isolated from different food and forage crops. J Agron. 2006; 5: Afzal A, Bano A. Rhizobium and phosphate solubilizing bacteria improve the yield and phosphorus uptake in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Int J Agri Biol. 2008; 1 0: B92