Growth, yield and nutrients of sweet cassava fertilized with zinc

IF 0.8 4区农林科学 Q3 AGRONOMY

Ciencia Rural Pub Date : 2023-01-13 DOI:10.1590/0103-8478cr20220064

Jessica Aparecida da Silva, M. Leonel, A. M. Fernandes, F. G. Garreto, J. Nunes, Ricardo Figueiredo Tajra

引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT: The application of zinc fertilizers in the soil has been an agronomic practice to correct Zn deficiency in plants, aiming to increase productivity and/or nutritional quality. This study evaluated how zinc sulfate fertilization affects plant growth, yield performance and nutrient accumulation in the cassava ‘IAC 576-70’. The experimental design was in randomized blocks with eight replications. The treatments consisted of 0, 1.5, 3.0, 4.5 and 6.0 g p1-1 ZnSO4. Results showed improvement in yield with soil fertilization with ZnSO4, with the optimal dose of 2.5 g pl-1. The uptake of nutrients in plant parts is favored with lower doses of zinc fertilizer, with maximum points ranging from 0.8 to 3.2 g pl-1 for macronutrients and 1.6 to 3.6 g pl-1 for micronutrients. The Zn content in tuberous roots increases by more than 40% with fertilization up to 2.8 g pl-1 of fertilizer, which contributes to the nutritional value of roots.

查看原文本刊更多论文

施锌对甜木薯生长、产量及营养的影响

摘要:在土壤中施用锌肥是纠正植物缺锌的一种农艺做法，旨在提高生产力和营养品质。研究了硫酸锌施肥对木薯‘IAC 576-70’植株生长、产量和养分积累的影响。试验设计为随机分组，每组8个重复。处理分别为0、1.5、3.0、4.5和6.0 g p1-1 ZnSO4。结果表明，土壤施肥ZnSO4可提高产量，最佳施肥剂量为2.5 g pl-1。较低剂量的锌肥有利于植物各部位对营养物质的吸收，大量营养素的最大值为0.8 ~ 3.2 g / l，微量营养素的最大值为1.6 ~ 3.6 g / l。施肥2.8 g / l时，块根锌含量增加40%以上，有利于块根的营养价值。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Ciencia Rural AGRONOMY-

CiteScore

1.70

自引率

0.00%

发文量

233

审稿时长

2-4 weeks

期刊介绍： The purpose of Ciência Rural is to publish the results of original research, note and reviews which contribute significantly to knowledge in Agricultural Sciences. Preference will be given to original articles that develop news concepts or experimental approaches and are not merely repositories of scientific data. The decison of acceptance for publication lies with the Editors and is based on the recommendations of Editorial Comission, Area Committee and/ or ad hoc reviewers. The editors and reviewers are external to the institution.