Eco-physiological Responses of Amaranthus cruentus L. to Deficit Irrigation under Different NPK 20:10:10 Fertilization Rates

Main Article Content

Pascal Tabi Tabot
Mfombep Priscilla Mebong

Abstract

The aim of this research was to investigate the responses of Amaranthus cruentus L. to deficit irrigation under fertilization, in a 2 by 3 factorial experiment with two levels of irrigation (1.5 litre/week and 0.75 litre/week) corresponding to 2600 and 1300 mm/year respectively and three levels of NPK 20:10:10 (0, 138, 275 kg ha-1). This experiment was conducted in a screen house in Cameroon, and lasted for 12 weeks after the nursery phase. Growth parameters and chlorophyll fluorescence were measured weekly for 8 weeks. Destructive sampling was done at 12 WAT to determine biomass partitioning, water use efficiency and the root/shoot ratio. Data were analyzed for variance and relationships in the MINITAB Version 17 statistical package. Within each irrigation level, plant mass decreased as fertilizer rates decreased, while root: Shoot ratio increased instead. Plant mass expressed higher values at the higher irrigation levels while root: Shoot ratio was lower compared to that at lower irrigation levels. This shows a strategy for resource re-allocation to roots under both water and nutrient deficit. Harvest index was statistically similar across irrigation and fertilizer levels. Within the higher irrigation levels, WUE of plants decreased with a decrease in fertilizer rates but not for plants subjected to deficit irrigation. While chlorophyll fluorescence values differed significantly across treatments, all values were below 0.8, indicative of stress. Factor analysis showed that growth of A. cruentus was highly fertilizer-dependent, while chlorophyll fluorescence was irrigation-dependent. This suggest that fertilizer application is essential in ameliorating the effects of deficit irrigation, and will be essential in the production of this crop under deficit irrigation.

Keywords:
Leafy vegetable, deficit irrigation, biomass partitioning, chlorophyll fluorescence, factor analysis.

Article Details

How to Cite
Tabot, P. T., & Mebong, M. P. (2021). Eco-physiological Responses of Amaranthus cruentus L. to Deficit Irrigation under Different NPK 20:10:10 Fertilization Rates. Asian Plant Research Journal, 7(1), 16-25. https://doi.org/10.9734/aprj/2021/v7i130145
Section
Original Research Article

References

Sasson A. Food security for Africa: An urgent global challenge. Agric. Food Secur. 2012;1(1).
DOI:10.1186/2048-7010-1-2.

Muthayya S, Rah JH, Sugimoto JD, Roos FF, Kraemer K, Black RE. The global hidden hunger indices and maps: An advocacy tool for action. PLoS One. 2013;8(6).
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0067860.

Ruel-Bergeron JC et al., Global update and trends of hidden hunger, 1995-2011: The hidden hunger index. PLoS One. 2015;10(12).
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0143497.

Smith LC, El Obeid AE, Jensen HH. The geography and causes of food insecurity in developing countries. Agricultural Economics. 2000;22:199-215.

López-Carr J, Suter D, Davis L. Population, poverty, environment, and climate dynamics in the developing world. Interdiscip. Environ. Rev. 2010;11(3):112-126.
DOI:10.1504/IER.2010.037902.

FAO, The future of food and agriculture: Trends and challenges, 1st ed., Rome: FAO. 2017;1.

Sweeney BW, Bott TL, Jackson JK, Kaplan LA, Newbold JD, Standley LJ, Hession WC, Horwitz RJ. Riparian deforestation, stream narrowing and loss of stream ecosystem services. PNAS. 2004;101(39):14132-4137.
DOI:10.1073pnas.0405895101.

Fahad S, Bajwa AA, Nazir U, Anjum SA, Farooq A, Zohaib A, Sadia S, Nasim W, Adkins S, Saud S, Ihsan MZ, Alharby H, Wu C, Wang D, Huang J. Crop production under drought and heat stress: Plant responses and management options. Front. Plant Sci. 2017;8:1-16.
DOI:10.3389/fpls.2017.01147.

Athar HR, Ashraf M. Strategies for crop improvement against salinity and drought stress: An overview. In: Salinity and Water Stress, M. Ashraf, Ed. Springer. 2009;1–16.

Saravia D, Farfán-Vignolo ER, Gutiérrez R, De Mendiburu F, Roland Schafleitner R, Bonierbale M, Khan MA. Yield and physiological response of potatoes indicate different strategies to cope with drought stress and nitrogen fertilization. Am. J. Potato Res. 2016;93(3):288–295.
DOI:10.1007/s12230-016-9505-9.

Bassirirad H. Kinetics of nutrient uptake by roots: Responses to global change. New Phytologist. 2000;147(1):155–169.
DOI:10.1046/j.1469-8137.2000.00682.x.

Tan ZX, Lal R, Wiebe KD. Global soil nutrient depletion and yield reduction,” J. Sustain. Agric. 2005;26(1):123-146.
DOI:10.1300/J064v26n01_10.

Monreal JA, Jimenez ET, Remesal E, Morillo-Vellarde R, Garcia-Maurino S, Echevarria C. Proline content of sugar beet storage roots: Response to water deficit and nitrogen fertilization at field conditions. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2007;60(2):257-267.

Basal O, Szabó A. The combined effect of drought stress and nitrogen fertilization on soybean. Agronomy. 2020(10):1–18.
DOI: 10.3390/agronomy10030384.

Umar S, Iqbal N, Khan NA. Nitrogen availability regulates proline and ethylene production and alleviates salinity stress in mustard. J. Plant Physiol. 2015;178:84-91.
DOI:10.1016/j.jplph.2015.02.006.

Liu F, Stutzel H. Biomass partitioning, specific leaf area, and water use efficiency of vegetable amaranth (Amaranthus spp.) in response to drought stress. Sci. Hortic. 2004;102(1):15–27.

Ejieji CJ, Adeniran K. Effects of water and fertilizer stress on the yield, fresh and dry matter production of grain Amaranth ('Amaranthus cruentus’). Austrialian J. Agric. Eng. 2010;1(1):18–23.

Fonge BA, Bechem EE, Awo EM. Fertilizer rate on growth, yield, and nutrient concentration of leafy vegetables. Int. J. Veg. Sci.2016;22(3):274–288.
DOI:10.1080/19315260.2015.1005726.

Tabot PT, Mfombep PM, Asukia MS, Bezua LC, Abeche AJ, Nyama BC, Agborante AT, Kedju NC. Growth and yield responses of tomato to irrigation in screenhouse-potted soil amended with varying levels of poultry manure. World J. Adv. Res. Rev. 2020;7(2):227–237.
DOI:10.30574/wjarr.

Law-Ogbomo KE, Ajayi SO. Growth and yield performance of Amaranthus cruentus influenced by planting density and poultry manure application. Not. Bot. Horti Agrobot. Cluj-Napoca. 2009;37(2):195–199.

Ecophysiological responses of Potato (Solanum tuberosum) to salinity and nitrogen fertilization in screenhouse, Cameroon. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems. 2018;21:547-556.

Gonzalez-Dugo V, Durand JL, Gastal F. Water deficit and nitrogen nutrition of crops. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2010;30(3):529–544.
DOI:10.1051/agro/2009059ï.

Anjum SA, Xie XY, Wang LC, Saleem MF, Man C, Lei W. Morphological, physiological and biochemical responses of plants to drought stress. African J. Agric. Res. 2011;6(9):2026–2032. DOI:10.5897/AJAR10.027.

Farooq M, Wahid A, Kobayashi N, Fujita D, Basra SMA. Plant drought stress: Effects, mechanisms and management. In: Sustainable Agriculture. Springer Netherlands. 2009;29:153–188.

Krecek M, Slamka P, Olsovska K, Brestic M, Bencikova M. Reduction of drought stress effect in spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) by nitrogen fertilization. Plant, Soil Environ. 2008;54(1):7–13.
DOI:10.17221/2781-PSE.

Chai Q, Gan Y, Zhao C, Xu H, Waskom RM, Niu Y, Siddique KHM. Regulated deficit irrigation for crop production under drought stress. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2016;36(3):1–21.
DOI:10.1007/s13593-015-0338-6.

Kim YX, Stumpf B, Sung J, Lee SJ. The relationship between turgor pressure change and cell hydraulics of midrib parenchyma cells in leaves of Zea mays. Cells. 2018;7(10):180.

Linke K, Ho FM. Water in photosystem II: Structural functional and mechanistic considerations. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta - Bioenergetics. 2014;1837:14–32.
DOI:10.1016/j.bbabio.2013.08.003.

Virgin HI. Chlorophyll formation and water deficit. Physiologia Plantarum. 1965;18:994-1000.