4.5 Article

Different Sources of Silicon by Foliar Spraying on the Growth and Gas Exchange in Sorghum

Journal

JOURNAL OF SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT NUTRITION
Volume 19, Issue 4, Pages 948-953

Publisher

SPRINGER INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING AG
DOI: 10.1007/s42729-019-00092-1

Keywords

Beneficial element; Soluble sources; Si foliar; Sorghum bicolor L

Funding

  1. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The efficiency of silicon (Si) foliar spraying in sorghum plants can be increased with new sources that may enhance the uptake of the beneficial element with reflexes in physiology. This study investigated the effect of foliar application of Si on different sources of absorption, gas exchange, and growth in sorghum plants, based on the hypothesis that there is a differential response to specific sources and concentrations of Si. An experiment was conducted in a completely randomized design with three replicates (in triplicate). The treatments consisted of five Si sources (nanosilica, silicic acid, stabilized sodium, potassium silicate, and potassium silicate) and four concentrations of Si (0, 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 g L-1 of Si). Foliar spraying of Si on sorghum plants was effective at increasing the absorption of the beneficial element and the gas exchange of the plant. Nanosilica stood out as an alternative source of Si, and a promising option for foliar spraying in sorghum crops, as it promoted high uptake of the element by the plant. This source also promoted a high photosynthetic rate for both potassium silicate and alkaline silicate. In this study, spraying of 0.88 g L-1 (Si-alkali) and 0.84 g L-1 (Si-potassium) on sorghum at the phenological stages V-4 and V-8 (four and eight fully expanded leaves respectively) and R-1 (beginning of flowering) was promising because it increased plant growth, reduced water loss through transpiration, and had a positive impact on gas exchange.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available