Name of the student : Miss. Manjusha Baban Tapkir.Reg.No. :09/ 211Discipline : Animal Science

SEMINAR ON

Influence of foliar application of micronutrients on

pulses Presented by

Miss. Ujwala Balasaheb jadhavReg no-2015A44ML

Research GuideBhagyaresha R. Gajbhiye

Assistant professorDep. Of soil sci. & Agril.chemistry

Collage of agriculture laturSeminar incharge : Dr P.H. Vaidya

*PULSES*Pulses are important source of dietary protein.*Pulses have unique property of maintaining and restoring soil fertility through biological nitrogen fixation as well as conserving and improving physical properties of soil by virtue of their deep root system and leaf fall.

*Pulse crops leave behind reasonable quantity of nitrogen in the soil and add up to 40kgN/ha. (Handbook of Agril.)

*Intensive cropping and use of heavy doses of high analysis fertilizers have induced the deficiencies of micronutrients in many part of the country.

*To achieve high yields and sustaining same over years, it becomes very necessary for the emerging nutrient deficiencies.

*Balanced fertilization is inevitable to boost the crop productivity.

*Among the micronutrients Zn, Fe, B, and Mo improved the yield appreciably and foliar spray and soil application proved to be economical in pulses (Savithri et al., 2001).

Table:1. Contribution of Micronutrients in Increasing Productivity of Different Pulse Crops

Micro-nutrients

Dose/ha Crop Increase over control (%)

Reference

Zinc 25kg ZnSO4 Chickpea 22.2 Kushwaha(1997)

25kg ZnSO4 Lentil 54.3 Mishra & Tiwari(1998)

25kg ZnSO4 Urdbean 20.1 Kushwaha(1997)

15 kg ZnSO4 Pigeonpea 16.4

Boron 10kg Borax Chickpea 33.8 Kushwaha(1997)10kg Borax Pigeonpea 4.1

Molybdenum 1kg Sodium molybdate

Chickpea 5.8 Kushwaha(1997)

1kg Sodium molybdate

Pigeonpea 18.2 Mishra & Ali(1998)

Iron 10kg FeSO4 Lentil 17.6 Singh et al.(1985)

1kg Fe(Chelated)

Pigeonpea 6.2

Thiyagarajan et al., 2003

*Importance of foliar fertilization*Definition of foliar fertilization:*The application of foliar sprays of one or more mineral

nutrients to plants to supplement traditional soil application of fertilizers.

*Foliar feeding is a technique of a feeding nutrient to plant by applying liquid fertilizer (either in solution or suspension) directly to the crop canopy. If used wisely, it can more efficient, economical environmental friendly target oriented when used supplement soil fertilization now days, foliar feeding is widely adopted strategy in modern crop management

*Foliar fertilization historically

*There is a wealth of literature about foliar fertilization which was first used as long ago as 1844 to correct plant chlorosis with foliar sprays of iron (Gris, 1844).

*Used widely and for many years in horticulture (fruit and vegetables)

*In row-crop agriculture the practice has only caught on in the past two decades, although there is still some speculation about the benefits and correct implementation of this practice

* Mechanism of foliar fertilization

*In order for a foliar fertilizer nutrient to be utilized by the plant for growth, it must first gain entry into the leaf prior to entering the cytoplasm of a cell in the leaf.

*To achieve this the nutrient must effectively penetrate the outer cuticle and the wall of the underlying epidermal cell.

*Once penetration has occurred, nutrient absorption by the cell is similar to absorption by the roots.

*Of all the components of the pathway of foliar-applied nutrients, the cuticle offers the greatest resistance

*Role of Boron

*Boron plays an important role in the development and differentiation of tissue, carbohydrate metabolism and translocation of sugar in plants.

*Boron makes up the ca deficiency to some extent.*It helps in the normal growth of plant and in absorption of nitrogen.

*Boron helps in the root development and flower and pollen grain formation.

(Kausdikar et.al)

*Deficiancy symptoms of boron*Plant growth is reduced and the leaves turn yellow or red.*Boron deficiency is often found to be associated with sterility and

malformation of reproductive organs.*B deficiency decreases the rate of water absorption and translocation of sugar

in plants *Seed also fail to mature without boron

* Role of Molybdenum

*Required for N utilization.*Legumes can not fix atmospheric N Symbiotically without Mb.

(Kausdikar et.al.)

*Deficiency symptoms of molybdenum

*Stunting and lack of vigor, very similar to N deficiency due to the key role Mb plays in N utilization.

*Marginal cupping and scorching of leaves. Whiptail in cauliflower and yellow spotting in citrus.

* Role of Copper

*It is imp constituent of chlorophyll and thus help in synthesis of chlorophyll.

*It acts as catalyst in respiration.*Aids in root metabolism.*It has a role in enzyme reactions. However, the specific

function in growth and development of plant

*Deficiency symptoms*Light yellowing, leaf tips turn brown.*Sometimes twisted young leaves looked wilted.

*Role of Manganese *Manganese has a role in the formation of the plants naturally

occurring antifungal compounds, helping to fight disease infection.

*It is involved in the enzymes that govern many biological reactions in plant tissue.

*Manganese is also required for lignin formation, which along with cellulose

*Foliar application are the most effective to prevent manganese deficiency.

*Deficiency Symptoms

*Yellowing between the veins of new leaves (similar to iron deficiency)

*Role of Iron

*iron is essential for the Maintenance of chlorophyll.*Iron is also an essential component of the hemoglobin

molecule.*In soybean plants, hemoglobin is a component of the

nodules.*This may explain the lack of nodulation in field situations

where IDC is a serious problem.

*Dificiency symptoms of iron

*Leaves Yellowish ,veins green, affected leaves curl up.

*Zinc

*This micronutrient is essential for enzymes that are involved in many metabolic reactions.

*Necessary for chlorophyll production.*Necessary for starch formation.*Aids in seed formation

*Deficiancy symptoms*Shorter growth, with reduced internode length, new leaves

are smaller.*Interveinal chlorosis of the foliage.

*Advantages of Foliar Fertilization

* Can react rapidly to symptoms or tissue analysis* Rapid plant response for correcting deficiency* Avoids soil problems* Relatively low cost* Only use small amounts of fertilizer* No foliar burn (with KNO3 or K2SO4)* Improved yield and fiber quality parameters

*Disadvantages of Foliar Fertilization

*Only a limited amount of the nutrient can be*applied at one time.* Cost of multiple applications can be prohibitive.* Possibility of foliar burn (with high*concentrations).* Low solubility of some fertilizers especially in cold water.

* Incompatibility with certain other

* Table 2-Raw seed yield and graded seed yield (q/ha) as influenced by different micronutrient treatment in soybean

Treatment Plant height (cm)

Number of functional leave

Leaf area (dm)

Number of branches

Dry matter (g day-1)

Number of pod plant-1

Number of nodule plant-1

T1: 23.83 12.57 0.65 5.87 19.02 17.80 46.00

T2 26.72 14.69 0.87 7.27 21.83 20.93 51.17

T3 26.12 14.59 0.86 7.13 21.79 20.33 50.33

T4 25.89 14.35 0.81 7.00 21.91 20.27 48.33

T5 28.56 15.03 0.93 8.60 23.54 23.33 52.00

T6 27.93 15.00 0.88 8.47 23.37 23.00 51.33

T7 28.19 14.98 0.91 8.13 23.32 23.20 51.83

T8 28.70 15.13 0.99 8.73 23.70 23.59 52.33

T9 30.30 16.22 1.15 9.67 24.95 25.23 53.67

T10 29.68 16.09 1.13 9.20 24.64 25.19 53.50

T11 29.48 16.00 1.04 9.07 24.31 25.13 53.33

T12 31.30 17.56 1.23 9.87 26.79 27.37 62.00

s.Em_+ 0.64 0.62 0.05 0.34 0.73 0.80 0.71

C.D at 5% 1.85 1.79 0.15 0.99 2.13 2.34 2.07

Mean 28.06 15.19 0.95 8.25 23.26 22.95 52.15

C.O.A Latur. (2006) Bahure et.al.

*Treatments T1:RDF

T2:RDF + ZnSO4 20 kg ha

T3:RDF + FeSO4 20 kg ha-1,

T4:RDF+ MgSO4 20 kg ha

T5:RDF + ZnSO4 20 kg ha-1 + FeSO4 20 kg ha

T6:RDF + FeSO4 20 kg ha-1 + MgSO4 20 kg ha-

T7:RDF + MgSO4 20 kg ha-1 + ZnSO4 20 kg ha-

T8:RDF + ZnSO4 20 kg ha-1 + FeSO420 kg ha-1 + MgSO4 20 kg ha-1,

T9:RDF + ZnSO410 kg ha-1 + 1% ZnSO4

T10:RDF + FeSO410 kg ha-1 + 1% FeSO4

T11:RDF + MgSO410 kg ha-1 + 1% MgSO4

T12:RDF + ZnSO4 10 kg ha-1 + FeSO4 10 kg ha-1 + MgSO4 10 kg ha-1 + 1.5 % znso4

s.Em_+C.D at 5%

Mean

* Table-3 Response of Micronutrient to soybean yield and nutrient uptake

Treatment Yield (q ha-1)

Grain

Uptake of major

nutrient (kg ha-1)

Uptake of micronutrient (g ha-1)

Grain Straw N P K Zn Fe Mo

T1: Control 16.62 11.18 60.6 12.0 96.7 140.0 339.4 160.6

T2: Water 18.19 11.97 62.1 12.4 98.6 153.8 341.4 164.4

T3: FeSO4 (0.5%) 18.50 13.26 63.2 12.6 104.5 157.2 353.7 167.1

T4: ZnSO4 (0.5%) 17.87 13.41 67.4 12.6 108.9 158.5 344.5 164.7

T5: Seed fortification with Na2MoO4

19.94 13.43 70.0 13.4 110.5 144.6 361.7 176.4

T6: FeSO4 (0.5%) + ZnSO4 (0.5%)

22.65 19.66 84.7 16.6 122.8 172.1 399.4 187.3

T7: FeSO4 (0.5%) + Na2MoO4 20.90 15.84 73.8 15.4 121.3 157.0 385.6 181.0

T8: ZnSO4 (0.5%) + Na2MoO 20.33 15.67 80.0 14.0 118.7 158.3 365.9 187.1

T9: FeSO4 (0.5%) + ZnSO4 (0.5%) + Na2MoO4

20.92 16.13 83.6 15.4 119.4 162.6 398.8 188.4

S.E. ± 1.054 1.395 5.07 0.95 2.07 5.57 9.38 6.74

C.D. (P=0.05) 3.16 4.18 15.2 2.85 6.20 16.7 28.1 20.2

(2013) Reshma sale et.AlC.O.A. Dhule

* Table-4 Effect of foliar application of nitrogen and zinc on chlorophyll content and nutrient uptake (kg /ha) by soybean

Treatment Chlorophyll

content

Nutrient uptake

30DAS 60DAS N ZN

T1: Control, 26.2 38.0 66.9 0.2T2:ZnSO4 @ 50 kg /ha as soil application 31.3 43.0 99.4 0.6T3:2% urea spray at flowering (25-30 DAS), 31.2 42.1 94.5 0.6T4: 0.5% ZnSO4 spray at flowering 30.0 40.5 88.6 0.4

T5: 2% urea + 0.5% ZnSO4 spray at flowering 27.4 38.6 77.6 0.3

T6: 2% urea spray at early pod development 28.4 39.0 81.9 0.4T7: 0.5% ZnSO4 spray at early pod development (55-60 DAS)

28.6 39.9 84.5 0.4

T8: 2% urea + 0.5% ZnSO4 spray at early pod development 30.2 40.6 92.0 0.4T9: 2% urea spray at flowering and at early pod developmen 32.0 43.6 110.7 0.7

T10: 0.5% ZnSO4 spray at flowering and at early pod development

30.4 40.8 93.6 0.5

SEm± 0.5 0.6 2.8 0.03CD (P=0.05) 1.4 1.5 8.0 0.1

Agriculture Collage ,Baptala-522, Andhra pradesh (2013) Nagajyothi et.al

* Table-5: Effect of foliar Application of Nitrogen and Zinc on yield attributes,yield and Quality of soybean

Treatment No.of pods/plant

100 seed weight (g)

Grain yield(kg/ha)

Haulam yield (kg/ha

Harvest Index (%)

Protein Content (%)

Oil content (%)

T1: 20 8.1 707 1460 32.5 39.5 16.1

T2: 29 10.2 1026 1759 36.7 43.3 19.5

T3 28 9.7 979 1739 35.9 42.5 19.2

T4 26 9.2 895 1644 34.1 41.5 17.6

T5 23 8.8 810 1565 34.1 39.9 16.3

T6: 23 8.8 836 1602 34.2 40.3 16.7

T7 23 9.1 882 1637 34.8 40.7 17.4

T8 27 9.3 907 1692 35.2 42.0 18.2T9 30 10.3 1109 1779 38.2 43.9 20.9

T10 27 9.4 942 1704 35.6 42.2 18.6

SEm± 0.9 0.2 33.3 33.5 0.2 0.5 0.5CD (P=0.05) 2 0.5 95 96 0.5 1.5 1.3Agriculture collage ,Baptala,Andhra pradesh (2013)

Naga Jyothi et .al.

*TreatmentsT1:Control

T2:ZnSO4 @ 50 kg /ha as soil application

T3:2% urea spray at flowering

T4:0.5% ZnSO4 spray at flowering

T5:2% urea + 0.5% ZnSO4 spray at flowering

T6:2% urea spray at early pod development

T7:0.5% ZnSO4 spray at early pod development (55-60 DAS)

T8:2% urea + 0.5% ZnSO4 spray at early pod developmen

T9:2% urea spray at flowering and at early pod development

T10:0.5% ZnSO4 spray at flowering and at early pod development

SEm±

CD (P=0.05)

* Table -7 Effect of Foliar Spray Treatments with urea and Micronutrients on yield and quality componants of Mungbean

Treatments No.of pods

/plant

Pod weight

(g/plant)

No.of seeds/pod

Seed yield (g/plant)

100-seed weight

(g)

Seed yield(Kg/ha)

Control(water spray)

15.00 11.90 8.70 4.10 2.80 1676.60

Urea:1% 15.60 16.80 11.20 4.80 3.70 1730.60

Fe:0.5% 15.00 17.50 12.00 7.30 3.90 2377.20

Mn:0.2% 20.60 16.60 11.00 6.50 3.40 1833.80

Zn:0.1% 17.80 19.00 12.20 5.40 3.70 2254.60

Cu:0.05% 15.70 17.50 11.20 4.20 4.00 1825.00

Urea 1%+Fe 14.70 21.20 11.50 7.10 3.40 2200.80

Urea1%+Mn 14.70 22.30 11.70 5.70 3.70 2098.60

Urea 1% +Zn 22.00 22.50 11.50 6.70 3.40 2223.60

Urea 1%+Cu 16.10 20.70 11.50 5.20 2.60 1828.40

L.S.D 4.40 3.80 0.60 0.30 0.20 103.00

Field crop research Deparetment,Agril.Div. National Res.Center,Dokki-Cairo-Egypt

Latif et.al(2006)

* Table-8 Effect of Different Concentration of Zinc on growth and Yield Charactar of Mungbean (2012)

Pant Mung-4 Height(cm)/plant

No. oftillers/plant

No. ofleaves/plant

Leaf area(sq. cm.)/plant

Dry weight

(g)/plant

No. ofpods/plant

Yield ofseed/ plant

1000 seedsweight (g

T1:Control (c)

32.1 13 29.3 387 56.3 45.8 62.07 65.3

T2:Zn 5 ppm 37.0 14 30.7 432 61.0 48.7 65.00 65.8

T3:Zn 10 ppm

39.5 15 31.7 508 68.0 54.2 69.30 67.4

T4:Zn 15 ppm

43.9 16 33.3 550 81.3 60.0 74.10 69.7

T5:Zn 20 ppm

46.5 17 34.3 612 94.3 70.5 78.20 72.5

Narendra-1T1:Mo 1 ppm 27.1 9 28.0 380 55.1 46.7 60.08 63.4

T2:Mo 2 ppm 30.1 10 28.3 419 56.2 51.2 63.50 64.2

T3:Mo 3 ppm 33.6 11 30.0 467 65.4 57.0 67.26 65.0

T4:Mo 5 ppm 36.2 12 31.3 522 77.7 63.0 70.50 67.2

T5:Urea 1% 38.4 13 32.7 587 89.1 75.0 73.75 70.5

2Raja Mahendra Pratap PostGraduate College, Gurukul-Narsan,HARIDWAR (UTTARAKHAND

Malik et.al (2015)

* Table 9 : Effect of different concentrations of molybdenum on growth and yield characters of mungbean (2012)

Pant Mung-4 Height(cm)/plant

No. oftillers/plant

No. ofleaves/plant

Leaf area(sq. cm.)/ plant

Dry weight(g)/plant

No. ofpods/plant

Yield ofseed/ plant

1000 seedsweight (g)

T1:Control (c) 32.1 13 29.3 387 56.3 45.8 62.07 65.3

T6:Mo 1 ppm 33.6 14 30.3 407 56.3 47.6 62.07 65.5

T7:Mo 2 ppm 35.6 14 31.3 455 63.0 53.2 66.80 68.0

T8:Mo 3 ppm 37.3 16 32.3 556 69.6 68.6 88.92 74.5

T9:Mo 5 ppm 36.1 14 31.3 502 65.0 60.0 61.20 71.4

Narendra-1

T1:Control (c) 27.1 9 28.0 387 55.1 46.7 60.08 63.4

T6:Mo 1 ppm 28.9 10 28.7 401 53.0 50.4 60.08 63.7

T7:Mo 2 ppm 30.1 10 29.6 448 61.0 56.2 64.80 65.8

T8:Mo 3 ppm 31.7 12 31.3 543 67.6 71.4 85.50 71.5

T9:Mo 5 ppm 30.4 10 29.6 491 63.9 62.3 59.10 69.7

2Raja Mahendra Pratap PostGraduate College, Gurukul-Narsan,HARIDWAR

Malik et.al. (2015)

Table :11. Effect s of foliar application of zinc on yield attributes and seed yield of lentil

Treatment Shoot dry

(g/plant)weight

Branches/

plant

Pods/plant

Biomass

(kg/ha)

Seed yield

(kg/ha)

Harvest

index

1000 grainwt (g)

Control Zn1 (0.0%)

3.23 14.4 45.9 2 537.5

1 063.1 0.40 24.7

Zn2 (0.02%)

3.67 15.9 54.2 2 825.6

1 171.2 0.39 24.7

Zn3 (0.04%)

4.11 16.3 58.0 2 902.6

1 238.6 0.39 24.8

Zn4 (0.08%)

4.37 16.2 63.8 2 942.1

1 208.6 0.38 25.0

CD (P=0.05)

0.18 1.9 8.6 87.5 35.2 NS NS

ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region, Patna, Bihar

Singh .et.al. (2014)

Table : 12 .Effect of zinc sulphate and thiourea spray on yield attributes and yield of chickpeaTreatments Grain

yield(q/ha)

Fodderyield(q/ha

Plantheigh

t(cm)

Number of

primarybranch

es

Number of

totalbranches

Number of

pods/plant

T1- Control (No spray 12.4 11.4 64.5 7.5 20.6 25.5

T2- 0.5% Zinc sulphate spray atvegetative and reproductive

stage

14.0 12.9 66.6 8.6 22.3 27.1

T3- 500 ppm thiourea spray atvegetative and reproductive

stage

13.2 11.5 66.2 8.4 22.7 26.4

T4- 500 ppm thiourea+ 0.2 %Zinc sulphate (mixed solution)

spray at vegetative andreproductive stage

15.4 13.3 68.3 9.1 23.9 29.2

SEm ± 0.482 0.362 1.252 0.548 1.102 1.18

CD (P=0.05) 1.40 1.05 3.983 1.591 3.197 3.428

Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Dausa (Rajasthan)Jat et.al.

(2014)

Table:13. Effect of foliar Application of Zn and Fe on growth and yield attributes of cowpea

Treatment Height(cm)

No.Of Branches

BhusaYield

kg ha-1

Podslength(cm)

PodPer

plant

Seedsperpod

T1:Control 40.16 2.80 674.71 2.96 14.16 11.76

T2:0.5% FeS04 spray at 25DAS

42.30 2.76 792.17 2.96 15.30 12.23

T3:0.5% FeS04 spray at 45DAS

47.26 2.86 821.33 3.30 15.66 13.16

T4:T2+T3 44.90 2.36 816.66 3.36 15.06 13.00

T5:0.5% ZnS04 spray at 25DAS

45.93 2.53 747.70 3.40 16.00 12.96

T6:05%ZnS04 spray at 45DAS

46.23 2.83 745.96 3.68 15.30 12.40

T7:T5 +T6 47.96 2.60 837.36 3.66 15.83 13.30

T8:T2+T5 47.61 2.83 859.73 3.73 15.83 13.50

T9:T3 +T6 45.63 2.70 914.56 3.93 16.16 13.90

CD at 5% NS NS 101.37 0.63 NS NSRegional Agricultural Research Station,Kerala Agricultural University, Pattambi - 679 306, Kerala, India

Anitha et.al.(2005)

Conclusion.• Application of micronutrient Zn ,Fe, and Mg resulted in the

growth attributes & better uptake and translocation of better nutrients.

• Spraying of 500ppm thiourea+ 0.2% zinc sulphate at vegetative and reproductive stage increased the yield of chickpea.

• Micronutrient application had significant effect on grain and straw yield, nutrient uptake, oil and protein content of soybean

• foliar application of Fe and Zn gives the maximum oil and protein percentage