The effects of some biofertilizers on yield, chlorophyll index and sugar content in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris var. saccharifera L.)

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 58 Sayı: 2, 163 - 170, 30.06.2021

Volkan Mehmet Çınar , Aydın Ünay

https://doi.org/10.20289/zfdergi.714633

Cited By: 4

Öz

Objective: The study was conducted to investigate the effects of commercial bio-fertilizers such as BM-Root-Pan, BM-Megaflu and BM-Coton-Plus on the yield, quality and chlorophyll content of sugar beet.
Material and Methods: The experiment was carried out in Karapınar-Konya in the 2017 sugar beet growing season. The experimental design was a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Bio-fertilizers were applied to soil twice at the stage of BBCH 16-19 and BBCH 35.
Results: The differences among control, BM-Root-Pan, BM-Megaflu and BM-Coton-Plus for root weight, root length, root diameter, per plant sugar yield and root yield were significant. The highest root weight, root length, root diameter and per plant sugar yield recorded in BM-Megaflu with Bacillus megaterium, Pantoea agglomerans and Pseudomonas fluorescens.
Conclusion: Bio-fertilizers containing plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria had capable of increasing sugar beet yield.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Chlorophyll index, plant growth promoting bacteria, sugar beet, sugar content, Bio-fertilizers

Bazı Mikrobiyal Gübrelerin Şeker Pancarında (Beta vulgaris var. saccharifera L.) Verim, Klorofil İndeksi ve Şeker İçeriğine Etkisi

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmada Türkiye'nin tarım sektörü için biyokütle bazlı biyoyakıt üretimi modellenmiş ve referans enerji sistemi geliştirilmiştir. Böylece, tarımsal biyokütle kullanılarak tarım sektörünün tüm enerji gereksiniminin karşılanması amaçlanmıştır.
Material ve Yöntem: Geliştirilen modelde, yurt içinde üretilen şeker pancarı ve kanola bitkileri enerji temin edilecek biyokaynaklar olarak belirlenmiştir. Pazar tahsisi modeli ise, ANSWER yazılımı aracılığıyla tüm girdi ve çıktıların birleştirilmesiyle oluşturulmuştur.
Araştırma Bulguları: Referans enerji sistemi, enerji kaynakları ve talepler de dâhil olmak üzere altı sütun halinde geliştirildi. Yerli kaynakların kullanımı sonucu enerjide dışa bağımlılık azaltılacak ve bu sektörde yeni bir istihdam kaynağı oluşturulacaktır. Ayrıca, biyoyakıtların üretimi ve tüketimi, fosil yakıtlara kıyasla hem maliyet açısından hem de sera gazı salınımı açısından daha uygundur.
Sonuç: Tarım arazisinin bir kısmı kullanılarak üretilen yerli biyo-kaynaklardan sağlanan enerji ile tüm tarım sektörü için gerekli enerji talepleri karşılanmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Bitki büyüme teşvik edici bakteri, şeker içeriği, şeker pancarı, Biyogübreler

Kaynakça

• Acikgoz N., M.E. Akbas, A. Moghaddam and K. Ozcan. 1994. Turkish data based statistics programmer for PC. 1st Turkey Field Crops Congress, Ege University Press: 264–267, İzmir.
• Akcin, A., M. Mulayim, B. Yildirim, B. Sade, A. Tamkoc and M. Onder. 1992. The effects of cultivar and sowing time on yield, yield components and quality in sugar Beet. Journal of Nature Agriculture and Forestry (Current Name: Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 16(4): 73-743.
• Anonymous. 2017. World, European Union and Turkey Sugar Statistics Report. Ankara. Url: http://pankobirlik.com.tr/ISTATISTIKLER.pdf, Date of Access: 05.03.2020.
• Arslan, B., 1994. The effects of harvest date on yield and quality in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris var. saccharifera L.) cultivars in Van Province. Yüzüncü Yıl University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Field Crops, Doctoral Dissertation, Van.
• Canıgeniş, T., 2012. The effects of different nitrogen doses on tuber yield and quality of N and NZ type sugar beet varieties. Bursa Uludağ University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Field Crops, Master of Science Thesis, Bursa.
• Carter, J.N., W.D. Kemper and D.J. Traveller. 1985. Yield and quality as affected by early and late fall and spring Harvest of sugar beets. Journal of The American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists, 23(1): 8-27.
• Cakmakci, R., F. Donmez, M. Canbolat and F. Sahin. 2005. The effects of plant growth-promoting bacteria on plant growth and soil characteristics in glasshouse and different field conditions. 6st Turkey Field Crops Congres, 5-9 September, Volume (1): 45-50, Antalya.
• Cakmakci, R., A. Piskin, R. Kotan, M. Erman, H. Inan, K. Karagöz, F. Dadasoglu, M. Kutlu and J. Dabiri. 2011. The effects of plant growth-promoting bacteria inoculation and fertilizer applications on yield and quality in sugar beet. 9st Turkey Field Crops Congress, 12-15 September, Volume 2, Industrial Crops, Biotechnology, 833-838, Bursa.
• Celikel, B. 1989. A research on yield and yield components in sugar beet cultivars. Trakya University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Field Crops, Master of Science Thesis, Edirne.
• Dal Cortivo, C., G. Barion, G. Visioli, M. Mattarozzi, G. Mosca, T. Vamerali. 2017. Increased root growth and nitrogen accumulation in common wheat following PGPR inoculation: Assessment of plant-microbe interactions by ESEM. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 247: 396-408.
• Erciyes, H., S. Bulut and M. Arslan. 2016. Yield and quality characteristics of sugar beet cultivars under continental climatic condition. Current Trends in Natural Sciences, 5(9): 152-157.
• FAO, 2020. Food and Agriculture Organization Corporate Statistical Database. Url: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC, Date of Access: 20.03.2020.
• Glick B.R. 2012. Plant growth-promoting bacteria: mechanisms and applications. Scientifica, 2012: 1-15, DOI:10.6064/2012/963401, Article ID 963401.
• Glick, B.R. 2014. Bacteria with ACC deaminase can promote plant growth and help to feed the world. Microbiological Research, 169(1): 30-39.
• Höflich, G., W. Wiehe and G. Kühn. 1994. Plant growth stimulation by inoculation with symbiotic and associative rhizosphere microorganisms. Experientia, 50(10): 897-905.
• Johari, M., H. Maralian and A. Aghabarati. 2008. Effects of limited irrigation on root yield and quality of sugar Beet (Beta vulgaris var. saccharifera L.). Asian Journal of Biotechnology, 7(24): 4475-4478.
• Jorjani, M., A. Heydari, H.R. Zamanizadeh, S. Rezaee and L. Naraghi. 2011. Development of pseudomonas fluorescens and bacillus coagulans based bioformulations using organic and inorganic carriers and evaluation of their influence on growth parameters of sugar beet. Journal of Biopesticides, 4(2): 180-185.
• Karagoz, H., R. Cakmakci, A. Hosseinpour and S. Kodaz. 2018. Alleviation of water stress and promotion of the growth of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris l.) Plants by multi-traits rhizobacteria. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 16(5): 6801-6813.
• Kloepper, J. W. 1992. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria as biological control agents. Soil Microbial Ecology, F.B. Jr., Metting, ed., Marcel Dekker inc., N.Y., pp.255-273.
• Kulan, E.G., M.D. Kaya and E. Karas. 2016. The Performance of Some Sugar Beet Cultivars in Eskisehir Conditions. Journal of Field Crops Central Research Institute, 2016, 25(Special edition-2): 67-70.
• Kumar, A., E. Rangaswamy, S. Khanagoudar and K.R. Sreeramulu. 2014. Effect of microbial inoculants on the nutrient uptake and yield of beetroot (Beta vulgaris var. saccharifera L.). Current Agriculture Research Journal, 2(2): 123-130.
• Kurtcebe, S. 1999. The determine of suitable monogerm sugar beet cultivars to region of lakes. Suleyman Demirel University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Field Crops, Master of Science Thesis, Isparta.
• Lazarovits, G. and J. Nowak. 1997, Rhizobacteria for improvement of plant growth and establishment, HortScience, 32: 188-192.
• Loper, J. E. and M.N. Schroth. 1986. Influence of bacterial sources of indole-3-acetic acid on root elongation of sugar beet. Phytopathology, 76(4): 386-389.
• Lucy, M., E. Reed and B.R. Glick. 2004. Applications of free living plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, 86: 1-25.
• Mrkovacki, N., S. Mezei, I. Veresbaranji, M. Popovic, Z. Saric and L. Kovacev. 1997. Associations of sugar beet and nitrogen-fixing bacteria in vitro. Biologia Plantarum, 39(3): 419-425.
• Parlakova, F. and A. Dursun. 2019. Effects of nitrogen fixing and phosphate solubilizing bacteria on growth and bulbs production of tulip cultivars. Journal of Agriculture Faculty of Ege University, 56(2): 241-248.
• Saglam, G. 1996. A research on some agronomic and quality characteristics of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) in four different sowing areas of Burdur province Through the vegetation period. Akdeniz University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Field Crops, Master of Science Thesis, Antalya.
• Sefaoglu, F., K. Canan and A. Karakuş. 2016. The determination of yield and yield components of sugar beet genotypes (Beta vulgaris saccharifera L.) harvested at different dates. Journal of Field Crops Central Research Institute, 25(Special edition-2): 61-66.
• Soler Rovira, J., J.M. Arroyo Sanz, H. Conde Marcos, C. Sanz Zudaire and A. Mesa Moreno. 2009. Chlorophyll content variability in different sugar beet crop cultivars. Department of Agronomy, Madrid Technical University.
• Steel, R.G.D. and J.H. Torrie. 1980. Principles and procedures of statistics. A Biometrical Approach. Second Edition. McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.
• Sahin, F., R. Cakmakçi and F. Kantar. 2004. Sugar beet and barley yields in relation to inoculation with N2-fixing and phosphate solubilizing bacteria. Plant and Soil, 265: 123-129.
• TUIK, 2020. Turkey Statistic Institute. Crop Production Statistics (www.turkstat.gov.tr). Date of access: 15.03.2020.
• Turgut, T., 2012. Researching the effects of differences in variety and location conditions on the yield and quality characteristics of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris saccharifera L.). Namık Kemal University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Field Crops, Master of Science Thesis, Tekirdağ.
• Wang, M., Y. Xu, W. Wang, Z. Wu, W. Xing and H. Zhang. 2019. Quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping of sugar yield-related traits in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.). Sugar Tech, 21(1): 135-144.