| تعداد نشریات | 285 |
| تعداد نشریات سازمان | 83 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 3,110 |
| تعداد مقالات | 34,666 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 49,821,980 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 80,169,091 |
اثر کود نیترات آمونیوم و اسید هیومیک بر خصوصیات کمی و کیفی ارقام چغندرقند † | ||
| چغندرقند | ||
| مقاله 8، دوره 41، شماره 1، شهریور 1404، صفحه 113-132 اصل مقاله (694.24 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: کامل علمی - پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22092/jsb.2025.371538.1400 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| ابراهیم شمشیری1؛ مهدی بابائیان* 2؛ محمد خیرخواه2 | ||
| 1دانش آموخته کارشناسی ارشد اگروتکنولوژی، 'گروه مهندسی تولید وژنتیک گیاهی، دانشکده کشاورزی شیروان، دانشگاه بجنورد، بجنورد، ایران | ||
| 2گروه مهندسی تولید و ژنتیک گیاهی، دانشکده کشاورزی شیروان، دانشگاه بجنورد. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| بهمنظور بررسی اثر کاربرد کود نیترات آمونیوم و اسید هیومیک بر عملکرد کمی و کیفی ارقام چغندرقند، آزمایشی به صورت کرتهای دوبار خرد شده در قالب طرح بلوکهای کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار در سال 1400 در شهرستان فاروج، استان خراسان شمالی انجام شد. عامل اصلی رقم که شامل ارقام آریا، مارینیا و ارنستینا، عامل فرعی کود نیتروژن (نیترات آمونیوم) در سه سطح صفر، 100 و 150 کیلوگرم در هکتار و عامل فرعی دوم شامل محلولپاشی کود اسید هیومیک در سه سطح: صفر، دو و نیم و پنج لیتر در هکتار بود. نتایج نشان داد که کاربرد اسید هیومیک و نیترات آمونیوم تأثیر معنیداری بر تمامی صفات مورد مطالعه داشت. بیشترین وزن خشک اندام هوایی (48/2 تن در هکتار) و عملکرد ریشه (5/63 تن در هکتار) با مصرف 150 کیلوگرم نیترات آمونیوم به همراه پنج لیتر اسید هیومیک در هکتار حاصل شد. همچنین بالاترین عیار قند (54/23 درصد) در تیمار پنج لیتر در هکتار اسید هیومیک در رقم ارنستینا مشاهده شد. ضریب استحصال با مصرف اسید هیومیک افزایش پیدا کرد ولی محتوی سدیم و پتاسیم ریشه با کاربرد اسید هیومیک کاهش یافت. بهطور کلی رقم ارنستینا نسبت به دو رقم دیگر از لحاظ خصوصیات رشدی ریشه و اندامهای هوایی تحت تأثیر تیمارهای استفادهشده برتری داشت بنابراین در صورت استفاده از رقم مذکور، 150 کیلوگرم در هکتار نیترات آمونیوم و مصرف پنج لیتر در هکتار اسید هیومیک در شرایط مشابه این آزمایش به منظور کسب بیشترین مقدار عملکرد شکر سفید پیشنهاد میگردد. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| عملکرد ریشه؛ عیارقند؛ کود آلی؛ نیتروژن | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The effect of ammonium nitrate and humic acid fertilizers on the quantitative and qualitative traits of sugar beet cultivars | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Ebrahi Shamshiri1؛ Mahdi Babaeian2؛ Mohammad Kheirkhah2 | ||
| 1M.Sc. Graduated in Agrotechnology, Department of Plant Production and Genetics, Shirvan Faculty of Agriculture, University of Bojnord, Bojnord, Iran | ||
| 2Assistant Professor Department of Plant Production and Genetics, Shirvan Faculty of Agriculture, University of Bojnord, Bojnord, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Extended Abstract Introduction Sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) is a major industrial crop with significant economic importance, particularly in regions such as Iran, where it contributes to both agricultural output and sugar production industry. Despite its potential, average sugar beet yield remains suboptimal, emphasizing the need for improved crop management strategies. Nitrogen is a critical nutrient that enhances vegetative growth, root development, and sugar accumulation, and its efficient uptake and utilization are strongly influenced by cultivar-specific characteristics. Humic acid, as an organic amendment, has been shown to stimulate enzymatic activity, enhance nutrient absorption, and improve root architecture, thereby increasing both yield and quality. The integration of mineral nitrogen and humic substances not only boosts biomass and sugar yield but also improves nitrogen use efficiency, offering agronomic and environmental benefits. Considering these factors, the present study aimed to investigate the combined effects of ammonium nitrate and foliar-applied humic acid on the quantitative and qualitative traits of three sugar beet cultivars. Materials and Methods This study was conducted to evaluate the effects of foliar-applied humic acid and ammonium nitrate fertilizer on the quantitative and qualitative performance of three sugar beet cultivars in Farooj, Iran, during the 2021 growing season. The experiment was arranged in a split-split plot design based on a randomized complete block design with three replications. The main factor was cultivar, including Aria, Marinia, and Ernstina. The sub-factor was nitrogen fertilizer (ammonium nitrate) applied at three levels: 0, 100, and 150 kg ha⁻¹. The sub-sub-factor was foliar application of humic acid at three levels: 0, 2.5, and 5 L ha⁻¹. Planting was carried out in early April using a six-row pneumatic planter, with 50 cm row spacing and 7 cm between plants within each row. Buffer zones were established between plots and replications to minimize edge effects. Irrigation was applied using a sprinkler system immediately after planting, repeated every four days until emergence, and subsequently every 10 days. During the growing season and at harvest, root length and diameter, as well as fresh and dry biomass of roots and above-ground parts, were measured. For qualitative analysis, root pulp extracts were prepared, and sodium and potassium concentrations were determined using flame photometry, while alpha-amino nitrogen was measured with a Betalizer. White sugar yield was calculated by multiplying recoverable sugar by root weight. Data were checked for normality using XLSTAT 2016, analyzed via ANOVA in SAS 9.1, and mean comparisons were performed using LSD at P ≤ 0.05. Results and discussion Results of the variance analysis indicated that the interaction of cultivar × ammonium nitrate × humic acid was significant (P < 0.01) for shoot dry weight. Mean comparisons showed that, in all three cultivars, shoot dry weight increased with higher humic acid application under ammonium nitrate treatments. The highest shoot dry weight was recorded in Ernestina with 150 kg ha⁻¹ ammonium nitrate combined with 5 L ha⁻¹ humic acid (48.2 t ha⁻¹), whereas the lowest was observed in the control treatment (N0H0) at 25.1 t ha⁻¹. The interaction of cultivar× ammonium nitrate and humic acid× ammonium nitrate was sig nificant (P< 0.01) for root yield. Low ammonium nitrate levels resulted in the lowest root yield, and higher levels enhanced it. Ernestina exhibited superior performance across all nitrogen levels, reaching 74.61 t ha⁻¹ at N150, with the highest nitrogen use efficiency, whereas Aria required higher nitrogen levels to achieve optimal yield. The interaction of cultivar× ammonium nitrate × humic acid was also significant for root sodium and potassium contents. Increasing ammonium nitrate and decreasing humic acid led to higher accumulation, with maximum sodium and potassium contents of 2.94 and 41.7 meq per 100 g fresh weight in Ernestina under N150H0, and minimum values of 1.46 and 3.7 meq per 100 g in Aria under N0H5. The interaction of cultivar× ammonium nitrate× humic acid was significant for sugar yield, while interactions of cultivar× humic acid, cultivar× ammonium nitrate, and ammonium nitrate× humic acid significantly affected white sugar yield. Sugar yield decreased with increasing ammonium nitrate but increased with humic acid, with the lowest value of 8.43 t ha⁻¹ in Aria under N150H0 and the highest of 21.41 t ha⁻¹ in Ernestina under N0H5. White sugar yield consistently increased with humic acid across all nitrogen levels, reaching a maximum of 12.44 t ha⁻¹ in Ernestina. These findings indicate that the combination of 150 kg ha⁻¹ ammonium nitrate and 5 L ha⁻¹ humic acid produced the greatest improvements in both quantitative and qualitative traits. Integrated management of nitrogen and humic acid, considering the genetic characteristics of cultivars, plays a critical role in enhancing growth and increasing sugar beet performance. Conclusion The results of this study demonstrate that the combined application of ammonium nitrate and humic acid significantly influenced vegetative growth, root yield, and sugar quality of sugar beet. Increasing ammonium nitrate up to 150 kg ha⁻¹ enhanced shoot dry weight, root yield, and sugar production, while excessive nitrogen could reduce sugar quality. Humic acid, particularly when applied with high nitrogen levels, improved vegetative growth, sugar content, and the uptake of beneficial nutrients while reducing the accumulation of harmful compounds. Among the cultivars, Ernstina showed the highest nitrogen use efficiency, highlighting the importance of integrated management of these inputs to maximize yield. References Cao W, Sun H, Shao C, Wang Y, Zhu J, Long H, Zhang Y. Progress in the study of plant nitrogen and potassium nutrition and their interaction mechanisms. Horticulturae. 2025; 11(8):930. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae11080930. Wyszkowski M, Kordala N, Brodowska MS. Role of humic acids-based fertilisers and nitrogen fertilisers in the regulation of the macroelement content in maize biomass. Journal of Elementology. 2023; 28(4): 1289–1309. DOI: 10.5601/jelem.2023.28.4.3207. Rassam G, Dadkhah A, Yazdi AK, Dashti M. Impact of humic acid on yield and quality of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) grown on calcareous soil. Notulae Scientia Biologicae. 2015; 7(3): 367–371. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.15835/nsb739568. The results indicated that the application of humic acid and ammonium nitrate had significant effects on all studied traits. The highest root yield (63.5 t ha⁻¹), fresh shoot weight (13.5 t ha⁻¹), shoot dry weight (2.48 t ha⁻¹), root dry weight (10.89 t ha⁻¹), root diameter (14.86 cm), and leaf area index (5.24) were obtained from the application of 150 kg ha⁻¹ ammonium nitrate combined with 5 L ha⁻¹ humic acid. In addition, the highest sugar content (23.54%) was achieved from the treatment of 5 L ha⁻¹ humic acid in the Ernestina cultivar. The alkalinity coefficient and extractable sugar percentage increased with humic acid application, whereas root sodium and potassium contents decreased. Overall, the Ernestina cultivar outperformed the other two cultivars in terms of root and shoot growth characteristics in response to the applied treatments. Therefore, under conditions similar to those of the present experiment, the use of the Ernestina cultivar in combination with 150 kg ha⁻¹ ammonium nitrate and 5 L ha⁻¹ humic acid is recommended to achieve the highest pure sugar yield along with the highest sugar content. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Root yield, Sugar content, Organic fertilizer, Nitrogen | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
References
Attia K, Khalifa YAMM. Response of sugar beet grown in newly reclaimed soil to different nitrogen sources at different growth stages. Middle East Journal of Agricultural Research. 2015; 4: 467–474. Anonymous. Agricultural Statistics Yearbook 1402. Tehran: Ministry of Jihad‑e‑Agriculture; 2024 (Persian). Bečka D, Bečková L, Tomášek J, Mikšík V, Viciánová M. Effects of various nitrogen fertilisers applied in autumn on growth parameters, yield and quality of winter oilseed rape. Plant, Soil & Environment. 2024; 70(6). DOI: http://Doi.org/10.17221/68/2024‑PSE Cao W, Sun H, Shao C, Wang Y, Zhu J, Long H, Zhang Y. Progress in the study of plant nitrogen and potassium nutrition and their interaction mechanisms. Horticulturae. 2025; 11(8):930. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae11080930 Capasso S, Chianese S, Musmarra D, Iovino P. Macromolecular structure of a commercial humic acid sample. Environments. 2020 Apr 15;7(4):32.https://doi.org/10.3390/environments7040032 Cook DA, Scott RK. Sugar beet crop: Principle and practice. Chapman and Hall. 1993. Ebmeyer H, Hoffmann CM. Efficiency of nitrogen uptake and utilization in sugar beet genotypes. Field Crops Research. 2021 Dec 1; 274:108334. DOI: http://dx.Doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2021.108334 El-Hady A, Fergany MA, El-Temsah M. Influence of integration between mineral nitrogen and humic acid fertilizers on productivity and nitrogen partitioning dynamic in maize plants. Egyptian Journal of Agronomy. 2017; 39(2): 195–202. DOI: http://Doi.org/10.21608/agro.2017.1168.1064 El-Hassanin AS, Samak MR, Moustafa N, Shafika NK, Inas MI. Effect of foliar application with humic acid substances under nitrogen fertilization levels on quality and yields of sugar beet plant. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2016; 5(11): 668–680. DOI: http://Doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2016.511.078 Ferrara G, Brunetti G. Effects of the times of application of a soil humic acid on berry quality of table grape (Vitis vinifera L.) cv. Italia. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research. 2010; 8(3): 817–822. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.5424/1283 Hanafy Ahmed AH, Nesiem MR, Hewedy AM, Sallam HE. Effect of some simulative compounds on growth, yield and chemical composition of snap bean plants grown under calcareous soil conditions. Journal of American Science. 2010;6(10):552-69. Hozayn M, Korayem A, El-Saady A, Darwish MA, Abd El-Monem AA, Abd El-Lateef EM. Sugar beet productivity as influenced by sources and overdoses of nitrogen fertilizers grown in clay soil. Middle East Journal of Agriculture Research. 2014; 3(4): 1189–1195. Khan SA, Khan SU, Qayyum A, Gurmani AR, Khan A, Khan SM, Amin BAZ. Integration of humic acid with nitrogen yields an auxiliary impact on physiological traits, growth, and yield of maize (Zea mays L.) varieties. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research. 2019; 17(3). DOI: http://Doi.org/10.15666/aeer/1703_67836799 Kong B, Wu Q, Li Y, Zhu T, Ming Y, Li C, Dong Z. The application of humic acid urea improves nitrogen use efficiency and crop yield by reducing nitrogen loss compared with urea. Agriculture. 2022; 12(12): 1996. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12121996 Lamb JA, Bredehoeft MW, Dunsmore C. Nitrogen management strategies for increasing sugarbeet root quality. Sugar beet Research and Extension Reports. 2013; 43:91-9. Lamlom SF, Abdelghany AM, El-Banna AA, El-Manhaly MM, Elsheikh AM, Bassiony NA, Feng G. Cultivar-specific nitrogen and potassium recommendations optimize yield and quality attributes in sugar beet. Scientific Reports. 2025; 15(1): 27550. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-10918-x Li Z, Jian C, Guo X, Tian L, Han K, Li Y, Su W. Effects of different ratios of nitrogen base fertilizer to topdressing on soil nitrogen form and enzyme activity in sugar beet under shallow drip irrigation. PeerJ. 2024; 12: e18219. https://Doi.org/10.7717/peerj.18219 Ma Y, Cheng X, Zhang Y. The impact of humic acid fertilizers on crop yield and nitrogen use efficiency: A meta-analysis. Agronomy. 2024; 14(12): 2763. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14122763 Marchetti R, Castelli F. Mineral nitrogen dynamics in soil during sugar beet and winter wheat crop growth. European Journal of Agronomy. 2011; 35: 13–21. Nazli RI, Tansi V, Gulnaz O, Kafkas E, Kusvuran A, Ozturk HH, Bostan Budak D. Interactive effects of nitrogen and humic substances applications on bioethanol production from sweet sorghum and combustion characteristics of its bagasse. Agronomy. 2020; 10(9): 1397. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10091397 Nemeat Alla H, Helmy SA, Bassiony NA. Response of some sugar beet varieties to nitrogen and zinc application in sandy soil. Environment, Biodiversity and Soil Security. 2023; 7: 205–217. Doi:https://Doi.org/10.21608/jenvbs.2023.228951.1227 Nemeata Alla H, Sasy A, Helmy SA. Effect of potassium humate and nitrogen fertilization on yield and quality of sugar beet in sandy soil. Journal of Plant Production. 2018; 9(4): 333–338. Doi:https://Doi.org/ 10.21608/jpp.2018.35707 Pélissier P M, Parizot B, Jia L, De Knijf A, Goossens V, Gantet P, ... & Motte H. Nitrate and ammonium, the yin and yang of nitrogen uptake: a time-course transcriptomic study in rice. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2024; 15, 1343073. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2024.1343073 Pitann B, Khan K, Mühling KH. Does humic acid foliar application affect growth and nutrient status of water-stressed maize? Plant-Environment Interactions. 2024; 5(3): e10156. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.1002/pei3.10156 Rahimi A, Kiralan M, Ahmadi F. Effect of humic acid application on qualitative parameters of sugar beet Cv. Shirin. The Middle East Journal. 2020; 9(1): 121–129. Doi:https://Doi.org/10.21608/asejaiqjsae.2020.79757 Rassam G, Dadkhah A, Yazdi AK, Dashti M. Impact of humic acid on yield and quality of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) grown on calcareous soil. Notulae Scientia Biologicae. 2015; 7(3): 367–371. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.15835/nsb739568 Rathor P, Upadhyay P, Ullah A, Gorim LY, Thilakarathna MS. Humic acid improves wheat growth by modulating auxin and cytokinin biosynthesis pathways. AoB Plants. 2024; 16(2): plae018. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/plae018 Sadeghi-Shoae, M., Paknejad, F., Hassanpour Darvishi, H., Mozafari, H., Moharramzadeh, M., & Tookalloo, M. R. Effect of intermittent furrow irrigation, humic acid and deficit irrigation on water use efficiency of sugar beet. Annals of Biological Research, 2013; 4(3), 187-193. Shaban KH, Abdel Fatah EM, Syed DA. Impact of humic acid and mineral nitrogen fertilization on soil chemical properties and yield and quality of sugar beet under saline soil. Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering. 2014; 5(10): 1335–1353. DOI: http://Doi.org/10.21608/jssae.2014.49752 Suleimenov B, Kaisanova G, Suleimenova M, Tanirbergenov S. Influence of organic humic fertilizer “Tumat” on the productivity of sugar beet. Agronomy. 2024; 14(6): 1100. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14061100 Tsaltas JT, Maslaris N. Nitrogen effects on yield, quality and K/Na selectivity of sugar beets grown on clays under semi-arid, irrigated conditions. International Journal of Plant Production. 2013; 7(3): 355–371. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.22069/ijpp.2013.1109 Wilczewski E, Szczepanek M, Wenda-Piesik A. Response of sugar beet to humic substances and foliar fertilization with potassium. Journal of Central European Agriculture. 2018; 19(1): 879–891. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.5513/JCEA01/19.1.2033 Wyszkowski M, Kordala N, Brodowska MS. Role of humic acids-based fertilisers and nitrogen fertilisers in the regulation of the macroelement content in maize biomass. Journal of Elementology. 2023; 28(4): 1289–1309. DOI: 10.5601/jelem.2023.28.4.3207 Xu J, Mohamed E, Li Q, Lu T, Yu H, Jiang W. Effect of humic acid addition on buffering capacity and nutrient storage capacity of soilless substrates. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2021; 12: 644229. https://Doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.644229 Ye JY, Tian WH, Jin CW. Nitrogen in plants: From nutrition to the modulation of abiotic stress adaptation. Stress Biology. 2022; 2(1): 4. DOI: http://dx.Doi.org/10.1007/s44154-021-00030-1 Yildirim E. Foliar and soil fertilization of humic acid affect productivity and quality of tomato. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B - Soil and Plant Science. 2007; 57(2): 182–186. DOI: https://Doi.org/10.1080/09064710600813107
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 5 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 2 |
||