| Literature DB >> 32218586 |
Abdul Majeed1, Waqas Ahmed Minhas1, Noman Mehboob1, Shahid Farooq2,3, Mubshar Hussain1,4, Sardar Alam5, Muhammad Shahid Rizwan6.
Abstract
Malnutrition is among the biggest threats being faced globally, and Pakistan is among the countries having high malnutrition rate. Pulses grown in Pakistan have lower amounts of micronutrients, especially iron (Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32218586 PMCID: PMC7100969 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230720
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Weather data of experimental site during the whole course of experiment.
| Months | Mean monthly temperature (°C) | Mean monthly relative humidity (%) | Total monthly rainfall (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| March | 21.8 | 68.4 | 0.0 |
| April | 30.0 | 53.5 | 5.3 |
| May | 34.0 | 63.1 | 0.1 |
| June | 33.1 | 74.9 | 45.6 |
Source: Pakistan Central Cotton Committee (PCCC), Multan, Pakistan
Statistical summary of growth yield and related traits, grain-Fe concentration and economics of mungbean grown under varying iron levels and application methods.
| Crop variables | Iron levels (Fe) | Iron application methods (M) | Fe × M |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of roots/plant | NS | NS | |
| Chlorophyll density (SPAD value) | NS | NS | |
| Leaf area index | |||
| Crop growth rate (g m-2 day-1) | |||
| Number of monopodial branches/plant | |||
| Number of sympodial branches/plant | NS | ||
| Number of grains per pod | |||
| 1000-grain weight (g) | |||
| Grain yield (t ha-1) | |||
| Biological yield (t ha-1) | |||
| Gross income (US$ ha-1) | |||
| Net income (US$ ha-1) | |||
| Benefit: cost ratio |
* = Significant at p 0.05
** = Significant at p 0.01; NS = Non-significant
Fig 1Effect of different iron levels and application methods on leaf area index (A), crop growth rate (B), number of roots/ plant (C) and chlorophyll density (D) of mungbean ± SE (n = 4) Here B = Basal application of Fe; S = Side dressing of Fe; Chl = Chlorophyll; CGR = Crop growth rate.
Fig 2Effect of different iron levels and application methods on number of monopodial branches (A), sympodial branches (B) and pods per plant (C), and number of seeds per pod (D) mungbean ± SE (n = 4) Here B = Basal application of Fe; S = Side dressing of Fe.
Fig 3Effect of different iron levels and application methods on 1000-grain weight (A), grain yield (B), biological yield (C), grain-Fe concentration (D) mungbean ± SE (n = 4) Here B = Basal application of Fe; S = Side dressing of Fe.
Economic analysis growing mungbean under different Fe levels and application methods.
| Treatments | Total cost (US$ ha-1) | Gross income (US$ ha-1) | Net income (US$ ha-1) | Benefit: cost ratio | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Application methods | Iron levels (kg ha-1) | ||||
| Control (No iron application) | 463 | 1502 f | 1039 f | 3.20 f | |
| Basal application | 5 | 469 | 1552 de | 1083 de | 3.31 de |
| 10 | 471 | 1585 bc | 1114 b-d | 3.36 b-d | |
| 15 | 473 | 1567cd | 1094 c-e | 3.31 c-e | |
| Side dressing | 5 | 469 | 1552 de | 1083 de | 3.31 de |
| 10 | 471 | 1591 bc | 1120 bc | 3.38 bc | |
| 15 | 473 | 1606 b | 1133 b | 3.39 b | |
| Split application | 5 | 471 | 1575 b-d | 1104 b-d | 3.35 b-d |
| 10 | 472 | 1576 b-d | 1194 b-d | 3.33 b-e | |
| 15 | 474 | 1668 a | 1116 a | 3.52 a | |
Means not sharing the similar letters, within a column, differ significantly from each other at p ≤ 0.05