Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userدراسة مقارنة بين الفطور الميكوريزية وبعض أحياء التربة الدقيقة في إتاحة الفوسفور لمحصول الذرة الصفراء
554
0 0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
جامعة الفرات رسالة ماجستير
Publication date
2014
fields
Agricultural Engineering
and research's language is
العربية
Created by
Shamra Editor
Ask ChatGPT about the research
دراسة مقارنة بين الفطور الميكوريزية وبعض أحياء التربة الدقيقة في إتاحة الفوسفور لمحصول الذرة الصفراء
No English abstract
References used
امرير علي شريف حمادي حسن (2011) اثر بعض المواد العضوية في التركيب النوعي والكمي لجراثيم الأكتيمومايس في ترب المنطقة الشرقية - سوريا
rate research
Read More
An experiment was conducted on maize crop (Zea mays L.) in plastic pots in two
different soils (Qurna soil, which is poor organic matter and the other soil from
Maysan marshes, which is rich in organic matter), to study the effect of selenium,
sul
fur and phosphate and their interaction on dry weight of shoot of maize crop.
Selenium was added at four levels (0, 10, 20 and 40 g Se ha), sulfur at three
levels (0, 30 and 60 kg S ha), and phosphorus at three levels (0, 60 and 120 kg P
ha).
A pots experiment was carried out using two soil types (clay loam and sand
soil) to study the interaction between VA-mycorrhizal (My) and some soil fungi
under the effect of rock phosphat on growth of onion plant.
The interaction between mycorrhiz
al (My) and other soil fungi increased
the fresh weight of root in comparison with mycorrhizal (My) alone, however
the differences were not significant except for (Saccharomyces+Mycorrhiza)
(Sac+My) similar results were obtained in sandy loam soil.
The percentage of root colonization on the growth of onion plant was not
effected by the interaction between mycorrhiza (My) and other osil fungi
(Actinomucor, Aspergillus, Penicillium, Saccharomyces) (Act, Asp, P, Sac). This
value, however was high in the second harvest in treatment mycorrhiza (My)
and (My+Sac) (My+Act) The VAM- fungus alone and their interaction with
other soil fungi increased the plant growth.
أجريت التجرية الحقلية في محطة بحوث المريعية بدير الزور لمدة خمس سنوات (2003-2008) حيث تم اضافة الفوسفوجبسيوم بمعدلات مختلفة
A pot exrpriment was conducted in a greenhouse in Tishreen University. The
experiment included three soils differ in their chemical properties: 1) heavy clay red soil
rich in iron oxides; 2) a silty loam basiltic soil; 3) a heavet clay red soil ric
h in total
calcium carbonate (34.8 %). Treatments include application of different levels of triple
super phosphate (TSP, 46 % P2O5) ranged from 0, 20, 40, 60, 80, 100, 150, to 200 mg P/kg
soil. Pots were sowned with maize (2 plants/pot) and grown for 48 days. At harvest, plant
were hatvested before flowering by cutting shoots and extracting roots which were oven
dried and weight were recorded prior to digestion and P determination in shoot and root
tissues. Samples of rhizosphere soils from each pot replicate were taken for P fractionation
and determination.
The response of maize to P application differs at period test according to soil type.
The increase in growth was linear with increasing P level of application in theheavy red
and calcareous red soils, while was polynomial in basilitic soil. The speed of growth
increase in response to P application was influenced by native available P in the soil prior
to application. The application of P led to linear increase in resin-P and MRP fraction in
the bicarbonate extract, but not the Po fraction of the bicarbonate extract. The quantities of
fixed applied P varied according to level of P application, the ratio of P uptake by maize
plants, and chemical properties of the soil type. The proportion of applied P that was fixed
increased linerarly with increasing level of P application. It constitutes 41.7,68.5 and66%
at level of P application (20 mg/kg soil), and decreasing to30.2, 41.9 and 59.1% at level of
P application (200 mg/kg soil) for red, basiltic, and calcerous red soils, respectively.
Maize was domesticated from teosinte in Mexico some 7,000 to 10,000 years ago and quickly spread through the Americas. It has become one of the most
important crops at a local and global level. Two types, Northern Flint corn and Southern Dent corns
provided the basis of the genetic background of modern maize hybrids. The development of hybrids, first double-cross and
later single-cross hybrids, along with a transition to high input farming provided huge yield increases, which have continued to improve with improving technology. Increase in maize production also caused a rise in Western corn Rootworm
(Diabrotica virgifera virgifera LeConte). As maize cultivation increased it spread from Eastern Colorado into Nebraska in the 50’s, Indiana by the 70’s and the East coast by the 90’s, and even Europe in 1992. A broadcast soil
application of organochlorine insecticides was a common control tactic beginning in the late 40s.
By 1959 control failures were noted and resistance spread with the concurrent corn rootworm range expansion. Resistance spread into areas where organochlorine insecticides had never been used. New modes of action were adopted and, more importantly, new management practices reducing selective pressure. In 2003 Bt traits for rootworm control were released, but by 2009 resistance was documented. The Western corn rootworm has proven highly adaptable to control measures, including rotation. Many challenges face agriculture in the future including water use, soil degradation, pest and disease control issues, and stagnant yield potentials. Despite these challenges, a great deal of technological advances such as precision agriculture, improved molecular techniques, and better adoption and implementation of Integrated Pest Management will provide effective tools for addressing these challenges. Addressing the challenges of the future is not an issue of technology.
Maize is more than a commodity; it has been and continues to be an essential part of our culture. The objective of this work is to illustrate that addressing the human dimension of these challenges will be crucial to addressing the current and future issues in agricultural production. Two separate examples of how this is being addressed are discussed.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
