Evaluation of biofertilizers on quality, yield and yield components of two potato (Solanum tuberosum) cultivars

Document Type : Complete scientific research article

Authors

1 Member of staff, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

2 Member of staff Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Research Center for Plant Sciences

3 Faculty of Agriculture Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

4 Mashhad Branch, Agricultural Biotechnology Research Institute of Iran (ABRII), Agricultural Research, Education, and Extension Organization (AREEO) Mashhad Iran

5 Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

Abstract

Background
Potatoes producers in Iran are widely use nitrogen, phosphorus and potash fertilizers for tuber production, but the tuber yield is less than the potential in desirable conditions. In this high cost and low efficiency farming system, soil microorganisms can play an important role in improving fertilizer efficiency and reducing costs. In addition to physical and chemical properties, soil quality has a close relationship with biological aspects. The aim of the present work was to evaluate the positive effects of potassium, phosphate solubilizing bacteria and nitrogen-fixing bacteria on potato growth, tubers yield and its dry matter, as well as saving the chemical fertilizers for healthier crop production.
Materials and Methods
This study was conducted as a split plot experiment in a randomized complete block design with three replications at Research Farm of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran in the 2016 cropping season. Treatments included nine fertilizer programs including; phosphate solubilizing bacteria (Phospho-powerbacter dayan), potassium solubilizing bacteria (Peta-powerbacter dayan), free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria (Nitro-bacter dayan), phosphate solubilizing bacteria + Triple super phosphate fertilizer, potassium solubilizing bacteria + potassium sulfate fertilizer, free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria+ nitrogen fertilizer with a source of urea 46%, phosphate solubilizing bacteria + potassium solubilizing bacteria + free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria, phosphate solubilizing bacteria + potassium solubilizing bacteria + free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria + triple super phosphate + potassium sulfate + nitrogen and control (without biological and chemical fertilizer) as main plots and two potato cultivars (Fontane and Sante) as subplots.
Results
The highest leaf area index observed in Fontane cultivar and phosphate solubilizing bacteria + potassium solubilizing bacteria + free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria. In Sante cultivar, tow treatments including free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria alone and phosphate solubilizing bacteria + potassium solubilizing bacteria + free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria showed the highest leaf area index. The highest Fontane shoot biomass was produced in phosphate solubilizing bacteria + potassium solubilizing bacteria + free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria treatment and in Sante cultivar was observed in free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria + Nitrogen fertilizer treatments. Application of phosphate solubilizing bacteria + potassium solubilizing bacteria + free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria simultaneously caused an increase in the number of tubers per plant in both cultivars. Fontane in potassium solubilizing bacteria + potassium sulfate fertilizer produced the highest tuber yield, which it was 37% more than control treatment. The highest tuber yield in Sante cultivar was obtained by application of phosphate solubilizing bacteria + potassium solubilizing bacteria + free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria + triple super phosphate + potassium sulfate + nitrogen, which was 36% more than control treatment. The highest of dry matter percentage, specific gravity and starch content in both cultivars were obtained in treatment of all bacteria with chemical fertilizers and the lowest of these characteristics was observed in control treatment. The lowest reducing sugars was obtained in the phosphate solubilizing bacteria + Triple super phosphate and phosphate solubilizing bacteria in Fontaneh and Sante cultivars, respectively. The best DPPH radical scavenging activity in Fontaneh was observed in treatment of all bacterias and in Sante cultivar in applying free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria. The highest and lowest total phenol content was observed in control treatment and application of potassium solubilizing bacteria + potassium sulfate fertilizer with 75% difference, respectively.
Conclusion
In the present study, the application of bio fertilizers in potatoes showed that these fertilizers could improve physiological, yield and quality characteristics of potato cultivars by using less chemical fertilizers. Generally, application of phosphate solubilizing bacteria + potassium solubilizing bacteria + free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria + triple super phosphate + potassium sulfate + nitrogen produced the highest potato tuber yield.

Keywords

References

1.Abe, N., Murata, T., and Hirota, A. 1998. Novel DPPH radical scavengers, bisorbicillinol and demethyltrichodimerol, from a fungus. Bioscience, Biotechnology and Biochemistry. 62:4. 661-666.
2.Alexopoulos, A.A., Akoumianakis, K.A., and Passam, H.C. 2006. Effect of plant growth regulators on the tuberisation and physiological age of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) tubers grown from true potato seed. Can. J. Plant Sci. 86:4. 1217-
3.Bacon, C.W., and Hinton, D.M. 2006. Bacterial endophytes: The endophytic niche, its occupants, and its utility.
P 155-194. In: S.S. Gnanamanickam, (ed). Plant-Associated Bacteria. Springer; Netherlands.
4.Brown, C.R. 2005. Antioxidants in potato. Amer. J. Potato Res. 82: 2. 163-172.5.Bucher, M., and Kossmann, J. 2007. Molecular physiology of the mineral nutrition of the potato. P 311-329. In: D. Vreugdenhil, (ed.): Potato Biology and Biotechnology. Advances and Perspectives. Elsevier, Oxford.
6.Burton, W.G. 1948. Thepotato. Chapman and Hall. London. 319p.
7.Cantos, E., Tudela, J.A., Gil, M.I., and Espin, J.C. 2002: Phenolic compounds and related enzymes are not rate-limiting in browning development of fresh-cut potatoes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 50: 3015-3023.
8.Dawwam, G.E., Elbeltagy, A., Emara, H.M., Abbas, I.H., and Hassan, M.M. 2013. Beneficial effect of plant growth promoting bacteria isolated from the roots of potato plant. Annals of Agricultural Sciences. 58: 2. 195-201.
9.Farzana, Y., Radziah, O., Kamaruza-Man, S., and Saad, M.S. 2007. Effect of PGPR inoculation on growth and yield of sweet potato. J. Biol. Sci. 7: 421-424.
10.Fazeli Sabzevar, R., Mirabdulbaghi, M., Zarghami, R., and Pakdaman Sardrood, B. 2007. Mini-tuber production as affected by planting bed composition and node position in tissue cultured plantlet in two potato cultivars. Inter. J. Agric. Biol. 9: 3. 416-418.
11.Freitas, S.T., Pereira, E.I.P., Gomez, A.C.S., Brackmann, A., Nicoloco, F., and Bisognin, D.A. 2012. Processing quality of potato tubers produced during autumn and spring and stored at different temperatures. Horticultura Brasileira. 30: 91-98.
12.Friedrich, S., Platonova, N.P., and Karavaiko, G.I. 1991. Chemical and microbiological solubilization of silicates. Acta Biotechnologica. 3: 187-196.
13.Gething, P.A. 1993. The potassium –nitrogen partnership. Improving Returns from nitrogen fertilizer. IPI Research Topics No. 13. 2nd Revised Edition. International Potash Institute, Basel, 51p.
14.Gould, W. 1995. Specific gravity its measurement and use. Chipping Potato Handbook, Pp: 18-21.
15.Gulati, A., Sharma, N., Vyas, P., Sood, S., Rahi, P., Pathania, V., and Prasad, R. 2010. Organic acid production and plant growth promotion as a function of phosphate solubilization by Acinetobacter rhizosphaerae strain BIHB 723 isolated from the cold deserts of the trans-Himalayas. Arch. Microbiol. 192: 975-983.
16.Haddad, M., Bani-Hani, N.M., Al-Tabbal, J.A., and Al-Fraihat, A. H. 2016. Effect of different potassium nitrate levels on yield and quality of potato tubers. J. Food Agric. Environ. 14: 1. 101-107.
17.Hamouz, K., Lachman, J., Hejtmankova, K., Pazderu, K., Cizek, M., and Dvorak, P. 2010. Effect of natural and growing conditions on the content of phenolics in potatoes with different flesh colour. Plant, Soil and Environment. 56: 8. 368-374.
18.Herlihy, M., and Carroll, P.J. 1969. Effects of N, P and K and their interactions on yield, tuber blight and quality of potatoes. J. Sci. Food Agriculture. 20: 9. 513-517.
19.Katoh, A., Ashida, H., Kasajima, I., Shigeoka, S., and Yokota, A. 2015. Potato yield enhancement through intensification of sink and source performances. Breeding science. 65: 1. 77-84.
20.Kaur, C., and Kapoor, H.C. 2002. Anti-oxidant activity and total phenolic content of some Asian vegetables. Inter. J. Food Sci. Technol. 37: 153-161.
21.Khan, Z., and Doty, S.L. 2009. Characterization of bacterial endophytes of sweet potato plants. Plant and Soil, 322: 1-2. 197-207.
22.Laboski, C.A.M., and Kelling, K.A. 2007. Influence of fertilizer management and soil fertility on tuber specific gravity: a review. Amer. J. Potato Res. 84: 83-290.
23.Mani, F., Bettaieb, T., Doudech, N.,and Hannachi, C. 2014. Physiological mechanisms for potato dormancy release and sprouting: a review. Afric. Crop Sci. J. 22: 2. 155-174.
24.Martinez-Viveros, O., Jorquera, M.A., Crowley, D.E., Gajardo, G., and Mora, M.L. 2010. Mechanisms and practical considerations involved in plant growth promotion by rhizobacteria. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 10: 3. 293-319.
25.Mirshekari, B. 2012. Effect of seed bio-fertilization on tuber yield and yield components of three potato cultivars. Agroecol. J. 8: 4. 77-91. (In Persian)
26.Nahas, E. 1996. Factors determining rock phosphate solubilization by microorganisms isolated from soil. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 12: 567-572.
27.Nelson, L.M. 2004. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): Prospects for new inoculants. Crop Management. 3: 1. 0-0.
28.Niggeweg, R., Michael, A.J., and Martin, C. 2004. Engineering plants with increased level of the antioxidant chlorogenic acid. Nature Biotechnology. 22: 746-754.
29.Podile, A.R., and Kishore, G.K. 2007. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Springer, Dordrecht, Pp: 195-230.
30.Rodriguez, H., Fraga, R., Gonzalez, T., and Bashan, Y. 2006. Genetics of phosphate solubilization and its potencial applications for improving plant growth-promoting bacteria. Plant Soil. 287: 15-21.
31.Ross, A. 1959. Dinitrophenol method for reducing sugars. Potato processing. 1: 492-493.
32.Singleton, V., and Rossi, J.A. 1965. Colorimetry of total phenolics with phosphomolybdic-phosphotungstic acid reagents. Amer. J. Enol. Viticul.16: 3. 144-158.
33.Smith, N.R. 1975. Specific Gravity Potato Processing. The AVI Publishing Comp. Inc. Pp: 43-66.
34.Spaepen, S., Vanderleyden, J., and Remans, R. 2007. Indole-3-acetic acid in microbial and microorganism–plant signaling. FEMS microbiology Reviews. 31: 425-448.
35.Stark, J.C., and Love, S.L. 2003. Tuber quality. P 329-343. In J.C. Stark and S.L. Love, (eds.): Potato Production Systems. University of Idaho Extension, Moscow.
36.Stevenson, F.J., and Cole, M.A. 1999. Cycles of soil: carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur, micronutrients, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York. 67p.
37.Storey, R.M.J., and Davies, H.V. 1992. Tuber quality. P 507-569. In P.M. Harris (ed): The Potato Crop. The scientific basis for improvement.Second edition. Chapman & Hall, London.
38.Sziderics, A.H., Rasche, F., Trognitz, F., Sessitsch, A., and Wilhelm, E. 2007. Bacterial endophytes contribute to abiotic stress adaptation in pepper plants (Capsicum annuum L.). Can. J. Microbiol. 53: 195-202.
39.Wang, Y., Snodgrass, L.B., Bethke, P.C., Bussan, A.J., Holm, D.G., Novy, R.G., and Sathuvalli, V. 2017. Reliability of Measurement and Genotype× Environment Interaction for Potato Specific Gravity. Crop Science. 57: 4. 1966-1972.
40.Welch, S.A., Barker, W.W., and Barfield, J.F. 1999. Microbial extracellular polysaccharides and plagioclase dissolution. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta.63: 1405-1419.
Journal of Soil Management and Sustainable Production
Volume 9, Issue 2
July 2019
Pages 65-84

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics