| Literature DB >> 29253886 |
Xiaoguang Chen1, Meng Kou1,2, Zhonghou Tang1, Aijun Zhang1, Hongmin Li1, Meng Wei1.
Abstract
Humic acid (HA), not only promote the growth of crop roots, they can be combined with nitrogen (N) to increase fertilizer use efficiency and yield. However, the effects of HA urea fertilizer (HA-N) on root growth and yield of sweet potato has not been widely investigated. Xushu 28 was used as the experimental crop to investigate the effects of HA-N on root morphology, active oxygen metabolism and yield under field conditions. Results showed that nitrogen application alone was not beneficial for root growth and storage root formation during the early growth stage. HA-N significantly increased the dry weight of the root system, promoted differentiation from adventitious root to storage root, and increased the overall root activity, total root length, root diameter, root surface area, as well as root volume. HA-N thus increased the activity of superoxide dismutase (SOD), peroxidase (POD), and Catalase (CAT) as well as increasing the soluble protein content of roots and decreasing the malondialdehyde (MDA) content. HA-N significantly increased both the number of storage roots per plant increased by 14.01%, and the average fresh weight per storage root increased by 13.7%, while the yield was also obviously increased by 29.56%. In this study, HA-N increased yield through a synergistic increase of biological yield and harvest index.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29253886 PMCID: PMC5734739 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189715
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Yield and yield component factors under different types of nitrogen fertilizer.
| Treatments | 2014 | 2015 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of storage root | Average fresh weight per storage root | Fresh yield | Number of storage root | Average fresh weight per storage root | Fresh yield | |
| C | 2.71c | 205.26c | 27.81d | 2.50c | 202.17b | 25.27c |
| HA | 2.84b | 195.77c | 27.80d | 2.73b | 206.69b | 28.21b |
| N | 2.69c | 220.24b | 29.62c | 2.38c | 227.87a | 27.11b |
| HA+N | 2.96ab | 221.35b | 32.76b | 2.75b | 230.64a | 31.71a |
| HA-N | 3.08a | 230.39a | 35.48a | 2.86a | 232.85a | 33.29a |
Means values marked with different small letters indicate significant difference at P = 0.05 levels
Root and shoot dry matter and vines to tuberous roots of sweet potato.
| Years | Treatments | 40d | 80d | 120d | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Root dry matter | Storage root dry matter | Shoot dry matter | Ratio of vines to tuberous roots | Root dry matter | Storage root dry matter | Shoot dry matter | Ratio of vines to tuberous roots | Root dry matter | Storage root dry matter | Shoot dry matter | Ratio of vines to tuberous roots | ||
| 2014 | C | 4.17a | 12.20c | 34.41c | 2.82b | 5.16b | 34.96d | 85.89c | 2.46a | 4.43c | 114.92d | 96.68d | 0.84a |
| HA | 4.22a | 15.42b | 41.19c | 2.67c | 5.36b | 44.68c | 97.25b | 2.18b | 5.08ab | 125.25b | 105.49c | 0.84a | |
| N | 3.94b | 9.62d | 62.96a | 6.54a | 5.28b | 45.48bc | 112.24a | 2.47a | 4.83b | 128.49c | 107.47c | 0.84a | |
| HA+N | 4.04ab | 17.79b | 54.34b | 3.05b | 5.65a | 51.26b | 106.16b | 2.07b | 5.12a | 133.78b | 112.83a | 0.84a | |
| HA-N | 3.99b | 20.22a | 55.88b | 2.76bc | 5.99a | 67.12a | 109.83ab | 1.64c | 5.24a | 142.95a | 115.41a | 0.81b | |
| 2015 | C | 4.42a | 14.33b | 42.80c | 2.99d | 5.42c | 41.94d | 119.72c | 2.85a | 4.61c | 106.14c | 93.78d | 0.88a |
| HA | 4.36a | 15.22b | 69.57ab | 4.57b | 5.56c | 53.77c | 98.87d | 1.83d | 5.21b | 121.00b | 108.87b | 0.90a | |
| N | 4.28a | 9.10c | 74.54a | 8.19a | 5.39c | 52.93c | 135.46b | 2.55b | 4.75c | 132.84b | 116.49b | 0.88a | |
| HA+N | 4.29a | 17.62ab | 66.65b | 3.78c | 5.84b | 65.24b | 138.46ab | 2.12c | 5.31ab | 144.83ab | 129.48a | 0.90a | |
| HA-N | 4.32a | 20.02a | 64.41b | 3.22d | 6.26a | 71.2a | 146.87a | 2.06c | 5.59a | 153.67a | 134.79a | 0.88a | |
Means values marked with different small letters indicate significant difference at P = 0.05 levels.
Root morphological and physiological characteristics of root (2014).
| Treatments | Early growing stages(40d) | Harvest stages(120d) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TRL | RD | TRN | TRSA | TRV | TRL | RD | TRN | TRSA | TRV | |
| C | 1307a | 0.70c | 1452a | 456.7b | 26.42a | 923d | 0.91c | 882c | 322.8d | 17.28d |
| HA | 1204ab | 0.91b | 1249b | 412.13b | 26.58a | 1168c | 0.98b | 1084b | 368.4c | 18.96bc |
| N | 846c | 0.62c | 1106c | 308.86d | 25.38b | 1117c | 0.94bc | 896c | 364.6c | 18.15c |
| HA+N | 987c | 1.01ab | 1308ab | 364.7c | 25.54b | 1219b | 1.31a | 1448a | 488.3b | 19.62b |
| HA-N | 1182b | 1.08a | 1426a | 516.3a | 26.33a | 1385a | 1.28a | 1554a | 603.4a | 24.71a |
TRL-Total root length; RD-Diameter of root; TRN-Total root number; TRSA-Total root surface area; TRV-Total root volume.
Means values marked with different small letters indicate significant difference at P = 0.05 levels
Root vigor and soluble protein content under different types of nitrogen fertilizer.
| Years | Treatments | Root vigor(ugg-1h-1Fw) | Soluble protein content(mgg-1FW) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40d | 80d | 120d | 40d | 80d | 120d | ||
| 2014 | C | 77.13c | 182.11d | 68.46b | 0.87c | 1.42d | 0.93c |
| HA | 85.01b | 207.23bc | 72.61b | 1.09ab | 1.84b | 0.97c | |
| N | 90.96ab | 198.44c | 71.58b | 1.14a | 1.68c | 0.95c | |
| HA+N | 95.58a | 217.57b | 82.49a | 1.13a | 1.76b | 1.21b | |
| HA-N | 87.35b | 246.56a | 80.74a | 0.98b | 1.99a | 1.42a | |
| 2015 | C | 71.41c | 211.57c | 66.74c | 0.99c | 1.29d | 0.94c |
| HA | 81.20ab | 232.70b | 78.08b | 1.08b | 1.74bc | 1.10b | |
| N | 83.72a | 216.24c | 70.19c | 1.19a | 1.64c | 1.05b | |
| HA+N | 82.98a | 236.86b | 77.62b | 1.17a | 1.82b | 1.23a | |
| HA-N | 77.04b | 259.74a | 92.04a | 1.03bc | 2.05a | 1.31a | |
FW-fresh weight.
Means values marked with different small letters indicate significant difference at P = 0.05 levels
Fig 1Activities of SOD, POD, CAT and MDA content under different types of nitrogen fertilizer.