بررسی کارآیی استفاده پتاسیم توسط ژنوتیپ های مختلف پنبه در دو خاک مختلف

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد گروه علوم خاک، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان

2 دانشیار گروه علوم خاک دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان

3 استاد گروه علوم خاک، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان

4 استادیار گروه علوم خاک، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان

5 عضو هیات علمی موسسه تحقیقات پنبه کشور، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، گرگان، ایران

چکیده

پنبه یک گیاه مهم و استراتژیک است. این گیاه نسبت به کمبود پتاسیم حساس‌است. بعضی از گیاهان مثل پنبه در جذب و استفاده پتاسیم تفاوت ژنتیکی دارند. هدف از انجام این تحقیق بررسی کارآیی جذب و کارآیی استفاده پتاسیم در چند ژنوتیپ پنبه در دو خاک مختلف و معرفی ژنوتیپ برتر می‎باشد. به این منظور یک آزمایش گلدانی بر روی 20 ژنوتیپ مختلف پنبه به‌صورت فاکتوریل در قالب طرح کاملا تصادفی در سه تکرار انجام‌شد. فاکتور اول شامل20 ژنوتیپ پنبه و فاکتور دوم سه محیط‌کشت شامل شن شسته با خاک‌های دارای رس غالب اسمکتایت (کردکوی) و ایلایت (رحمت آباد) و شاهد (شن شسته بدون خاک) بود. گیاهان تا 40 روز رشد‌کردند و سپس برداشت‌گردیدند. مقادیر وزن ماده خشک و پتاسیم در قسمت‎های برگ و ساقه گیاه اندازه‎گیری شدند. نتایج نشان‌داد ‌که ژنوتیپ‌های مختلف پنبه پاسخ‌های متفاوتی در محیط کشت‌های گوناگون داشتند. ژنوتیپ‌های سپید و N2680 درخاک رحمت‌آباد، تابلادیلا در خاک کردکوی و گلستان در تیمار شاهد بیش‌ترین جذب پتاسیم و ژنوتیپ‌های خورشید درخاک رحمت‌آباد، ارمغان در خاک کردکوی و M16 در تیمار شاهد کم‌ترین جذب پتاسیم را نشان دادند. میزان جذب پتاسیم در خاک کردکوی نسبت به دو تیمار دیگر( شاهد و رحمت‌آباد)، به‌دلیل وجود کانی غالب اسمکتایت و به‌دنبال آن تخلیه زیاد پتاسیم، کاهش یافت. نتایج نشان داد که ژنوتیپ خورشید، ارمغان و M16 با کم‌ترین وزن خشک و کم‌ترین میزان جذب پتاسیم در گروه غیر‌کارا و ژنوتیپ‌های NN2A19، N2680، SKT133 و BC244 با بیش‌ترین وزن ماده خشک و جذب متوسط پتاسیم به عنوان ژنوتیپ کارا در نظر گرفته‌شدند. ژنوتیپ سپید با بیش‌ترین عملکرد ماده خشک و بیش‌ترین جذب پتاسیم، از نظر جذب پتاسیم کارا ولی از نظر استفاده پتاسیم در گروه غیرکارا قرار‌گرفت. بقیه ژنوتیپ‌ها با وزن ماده‌خشک و جذب پتاسیم متوسط در گروه با کارآیی متوسط طبقه‌بندی شدند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Potassium use efficiency of different cotton genotypes in two different soils

نویسندگان [English]

  • Safora Shafaei 1
  • Esmaeil Dordipour 2
  • Farhad Khormali 3
  • Farshad Kiani 4
  • Abdolreza Gharanjiki 5
1 M.Sc. student, Soil Sci.Dept., Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
2 Associate Professor, Soil Sci. Dept., Faculty Of Water And Soil, Gorgan University Of Agricultural Sciences And Natural Resources, Basij Sq., Gorgan, Iran.setayesh Building, Alimohammadi 4, Gorgan, Iran
3 Professor, Soil Sci.Dept., Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
4 Assistant professor, Soil Sci.Dept., Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
5 Cotton Research Institute, Areeo, Gorgan, Iran
چکیده [English]

Cotton is an important and strategic plant. This plant is susceptible to K deficiency. Some plants i.e. cotton has genetic differences in K uptake and use. The objective of the study was to investigate the K uptake and use efficiency of some cotton genotypes in two different soils and, to introduce the superior genotypes. For this purpose, a pot experiment carried out on 20 different cotton genotypes as a factorial in a completely randomized design with three replications. The first factor consisted of 20 cotton genotypes, the second factor was 3 plants growth media which included of washed sand mixed with soils that predominant in smectite (Kordkouy) and illite (Rahmatabad) and control (washed sand without soil). The results showed that the different cotton genotypes have different responses in different cultivation media. Sepid and N2680 genotypes in the Rahmat abad soil, Tabladila in the Kordkoy soil and Golestan in control had the most K uptake but, Khorshid, Armaghan and M16 genotypes showed the least K uptake in the Rahmat abad and Kordkoy soils and in the blank, respectively. The K uptake in the Kordkoy soil to other two treatments (control and Rahmat abad soil) decreased due to the dominant smectite and, followed by high potassium exhaustion. The results indicated that Khorshid, Armaghan and M16 genotypes with the least dry matter weight and the least potassium uptake categorized as an inefficient genotypes group and, NN2A19, N2680, SKT133 and BC244 genotypes with the most dry matter weight and medium potassium uptake considered as an efficient genotypes group. The genotype Sepid with the most dry matter yield and potassium uptake was efficient in potassium uptake but was inefficient in potassium use. The remaining genotypes with average dry matter weight and potassium uptake classified in a medium efficient group.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Cotton
  • Nutrient use efficiency
  • Potassium uptake

مراجع

  1. Abay, A. 2009. Potassium Fertilization of Cotton. Communications and Marketing, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Publication No. 418-025.
  2. ArabSoleimani, M., and Baniani, E. 2013. Standards codification of potential determination and damage assessment divided to managerial and coercive factor in various growth stages in Cotton farms. Agricultureal extension and education publications,Tehran, Iran. 580 page.
  3. Badraoui, M., Bloom, P.R., and Delmaki, A. 1992. Mobilization of non-exchangeable K by rye grass in five Moroccan soils with and without mica. Plant Soil 140: 55-63.
  4. Baghban-Tabiat S., and Rasouli-Sadaghiani, M. 2012. Investigation of Zn utilization and acquisition efficiency in different wheat genotypes at greenhouse conditions. J Sci. Tech. Greenhouse Culture 3: 10. 17-32. (In Persian)
  5. Bahreini Touhan, M., Dordipour, E., and Movahedi Naeini, S.A. 2010. Kinetic of Non-Exchangeable Potassium Release Using Citric Acid and CaCl2 in Dominant Farmlands Soil Series in Golestan Province  J. Sci. Technol. Agric. Nat. Resour., Water Soil Sci. 14: 53. 113-127. (In Persian)
  6. Benton Jones, Jr. and Case, V.W. 1990. Sampling, handeling and analyzing plant tissue samples. Pp. 389-428. In: R. L. Westerman (ed), Soil testing and plant analysis. 3rd ed. Book series No. 3. SSSA, Inc. Madison, WI., USA.
  7. Cassman, K.G., Kerby, T.A., Roberts, B.A., Bryant, D.C., and Higashi, S.L. 1990. Potassium nutrition effects on lint yield and fiber quality of Acala cotton. Crop Sci. 30: 672-677.
  8. Chen, J., and Gabelman, W.H. 1995. Isolation of tomato strains varying in potassium acquisition using a sand-zeolite culture system. Plant Soil 176: 65-70.
  9. Cope, J.T. 1981. Effects of 50 years of fertilization with phosphorus and potassium on soil test levels and yields at location. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 45: 342-347.

10. Damon, P.M., and Rengel, Z. 2007. Wheat genotypes differ in potassium efficiency under glasshouse and field conditions. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 58: 816–825.

11. Damon, P.M., Osborne, L.D., and Rengel, Z. 2007. Canola genotypes differ in potassium efficiency during vegetative growth. Euphytica 156: 387–397.

12. Gerick, T.J., Morrison, I.E., and Chichester, F.W. 1987. Effects  of controlled-traffic on soil physical properties and crop rooting.  Agron. J. 79: 434-438.

13. Gilroy, S., and Jones, D.L. 2000. Through form to function: Root hair development and nutrient uptake. Trends Plant Sci. 5: 56–60.

14. Gormus, O., and Yucel, C. 2002. Different planting date and potassium fertility effects on cotton yield and fiber properties in Cukurova region, Turkey. Field Crop Res. 78: 141-149.

15. Gunes, A., Inal, A., Alpaslan, M., and Cakmak, I. 2006. Genotypic variation in phosphorus efficiency between wheat cultivars grown under greenhouse and field conditions. Soil Sci. Plant Nut. 52: 470-478.

16. Hajiboland, R., and Salehi, S.Y. 2006. Characterization of zinc efficiency in Iranian rice genotypes. I. Uptake efficiency. Gen. Appl. Plant physiol. 32: 3-4. 191-206.

17. Howard, D.D., Essington, M.E., Hayes, R.M., and Percell, W.M. 2001. Potassium fertilization of conventional and notill cotton. J Cotton Sci. 5: 197-205.

18. Johnson, C.M., Strout, R., Broyer, T.C., and Carlton, A.B. 1957. Comparative chlorine requirements of different plant species. Plant Soil, 8: 327–353

19. Krishnasamy, R., Jegadeeswari, D., Surendran, U., and Sudhalakshmi, C. 2005. Screening of sorghum (Sorghumbicolor) genotypes for their iron efficiency. World J. Agric. Sci. 1(1): 98-100.

20. Leigh, R.A., and Wyn Jones, R.G. 1984. A hypothesis relating critical potassium concentrations for growth to the distribution and functions of this ion in the plant cell. New Phytol. 97: 1. 1-13.

21. Leyval, C., and Berthelin, J. 1989. Interactions between Laccaria laccata, Agrobacterium radiobacter and beech roots: Influence on P, K, Mg, and Fe mobilization from minerals and plant growth. Plant Soil 117: 103-110.

22. Makhdum, M.I., Pervez, H., and Ashraf, M. 2007. Dry matter accumulation and partitioning in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) as influenced by potassium fertilization. Biol. Fertil. Soils, 43: 295-301.

23. Marschner, H. 1998. Role of root growth, arbuscular mycorrhiza, and root exudates for the efficiency in nutrient acquisition. Field Crops Res. 56: 203-207.

24. Martin, W.H., and Sparks, D.L. 1985. The behavior of non-exchangeable K in soils. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 16: 133-162.

25. Mengel, K., Rahmatullah and Dou, H. 1998. Release of potassium from the silt and sand fraction of loess-derived soils. Soil Sci. 163: 10: 805-813.

26. Noshad, H., Abdolahian, M., and Babaei, B. 2012. Effect of Nitrogen and Phosphorous Application on the Efficiency of Nitrogen Uptake and Consumption in Sugar Beet (Beta vulgaris L.). Iranian J Field Crop Sci. 43(3): 529-531.

27. Oya, K. 1972. Evaluation of potassium availability of four Michigan soils. Sci. Bull Coll. Agri. Univ. Ryukyus, 19: 123-257.

28. Page, A.L., Miller, R.H., and Keeney, D.R. 1982. Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2, Chemical and Microbiological Properties. ASA, INC. SSSA, Inc. Madison, Wisconsin, USA.

29. Pettigrew, W.T. 2003. Relationships between insufficient potassium and crop maturity in cotton. Agro. J. 95: 1323-1329.

30. Reddy, K.R., Hodges H.F., and Varco, J. 2000. Potassium nutrition of cotton. Bulletin 1094. Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station, Mississippi.

31. Rengel, Z., and Damon, M.P. 2008. Crops and genotypes differ in efficiency of potassium uptake and use. Physiol. Plant. 133: 624-636.

32. Rengel, Z., and Marschner, P. 2005. Nutrient availability and management in the rhizosphere: exploiting genotypic differences. New Phytol. 168: 305-312.

33. Rauzati, M. 1975. Results of chemical fertilizers trials on wheat, cotton and sugar beet in Esfahan. Technical bulletin No. 359, Soil and Water Research Institute, Tehran, Iran.

34. Salardini, A.A. 2003. Soil fertility. Tehran University Press, 410p.

35. Sale, P.W.G., and Campbell, L.C. 1987. Differential responses to K deficiency among soybean cultivars. Plant Soil 104: 183–190.

36. SAS Institute. 1988. SAS/STAT Users Guide, Release 6.03. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.

37. Sattelmacher, B., Horst, W.J., and Becker, H.C. 1994. Factors that contribute to genetic variation for nutrient efficiency of crop plants. J Plant Nut. Soil Sci. 157(3): 215-224.

38. Shea, P.E., Gerloff, G.C., and Gabelman, W.H. 1968. Differing efficiencies of potassium utilization in strains of snapbeans, Phaseolus vulgaris L. Plant Soil 28: 337-346.

39. Shiranirad, A.H., Alizadeh, A., and Hashemi-Dezfuli, A. 2000. The Study of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizae fungi, phosphorus and drought stress effects on nutrient uptake efficiency in wheat. Seed and Plant Improvement journal 16: 3. 327-349. (In Persian)

40. Suelter, C.H. 1985. Role of potassium in enzyme catalysis. Pp. 337-350. In: R.D. Munson (ed.). Potassium in agriculture. ASA, CSSA, SSSA, Madison, WI., USA.

41. Syers, J.K. 1998. Soil and plant potassium in agriculture. Proc. the Fertiliser Society Series. Pub. Int. Fertil. Soc. 32p.

42. Tataro, A. 1972. Results of chemical fertilizers trials on wheat, cotton and sugar beet. Technical bulletin No. 337, Soil and water research institute, Tehran, Iran.

43. US-National Cotton Council. 2015. Production Ranking MY 2014. National cotton council. Available from http://www.cotton.org/econ/cropinfo/cropdata/rankings.cfm, Internet, Accessed 8 April 2015.12.26.

44. Varco, J.J. 2000. No-tillage cotton responds to potassium fertilization on high CEC soils. Better Crops 84: 4. 21-23.

45. Wang, L., Cheng, F., and Wang, K.Y. 2010. Progress and expectation of the research on plant K efficiency and its evaluation. Soils 42(2): 164-170. (In Chinese)

46. Wang, X., Mohamed, I., Xia, Y., and Chen, F. 2014. Effects of water and potassium stresses on potassium utilization efficiency of two cotton genotypes. J Soil Sci. Plant Nut. 14(4): 833-844.

47. White, C.C. 1991. Contrasting patterns of boll development in relation to potassium supply in two contrasting cultivars of acala cotton. M.Sc. Thesis, University of California, Davis.

48. Xia, Y., Jiang, C.C., Chen, F., Lu, J.W., and Wang, Y.H. 2011. Differences in growth and potassium-use efficiency of two cotton genotypes. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 42:132-143.

49. Xia, Y., Jiang, C.C., Wang, X., and Chen, F. 2013. Studies on potassium uptake and use efficiency of different cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) genotypes by grafting. J. Food, Agric. Environ. 11(1): 472– 476.

50. Yang, X.E., Liu, J.X., Wang, W.M., Ye, Z.Q., and Luo, A.C. 2004. Potassium internal use efficiency relative to growth vigor, potassium distribution, and carbohydrate allocation in rice genotypes. J Plant Nutr. 27: 837-852.

51. Yang, F.Q., Wang, G.W., Zhang, Z.Y., Eneji, A.E., Duan, L.S., Li, Z.H., Tian, X.L. 2010. Genotypic variations in potassium uptake and utilization in cotton. J. Plant Nut. 34: 83-97.

52. Zhang, Z., Tian, X., Duan, L., Wang, B., He, Z., and Li, Z. 2007. Differential responses of conventional and Bt-transgenic cotton to potassium deficiency. J. Plant Nut. 30: 659-670.

53. Zia-ul-hassan, Arshad, M. and Khalid, A. 2011. Evaluating potassium use-efficient cotton genotypes using different ranking methods. J. Plant Nut. 34: 1957-1972. 

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار