4.3 Article

Nitrogen and potassium nutrition affect yield, dry weight partitioning, and nutrient-use efficiency of sweet potato

Journal

COMMUNICATIONS IN SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT ANALYSIS
Volume 33, Issue 1-2, Pages 287-301

Publisher

MARCEL DEKKER INC
DOI: 10.1081/CSS-120002394

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The effects of nitrogen (N) and potassium (K) nutrition on yield, dry weight partitioning, and N- and K-use efficiency of three sweet potato [Ipomoea batatas L. (Lam.)] cultivars (Centennial, Regal, and Jewel) were investigated in field and container studies. Differences in yield among cultivars depended on the N and K rates. Overall, Regal was the highest yielding cultivar. Yield of Regal was higher than Jewel at most of the N X K rate combinations, and hi(,her than Centennial at one N X K rate combination. There were no significant differences in yield between Centennial and Jewel. Significant cultivar X nutrient interactions were found for dry weight expressed on a per plant basis, but interactions were not significant when expressed as % of the total dry weight. Jewel was the most efficient in terms of dry weight partitioning to the storage roots (67%), followed by Regal (64%) and Centennial (62%). Centennial had significantly higher K-use efficiency in comparison to Jewel or Regal. Cultivars did not differ significantly in N use efficiency. Dry weight partitioning to the storage roots, and N- and K-use efficiency decreased with each increment in the N rate, With each increment in the K rate, dry weight partitioning to the storage roots and N use efficiency increased, while K-use efficiency decreased. Yield, dry weight partitioning, or nutrient-use efficiency can be increased by manipulating nitrogen and potassium nutrition. The variability among cultivars in K-use efficiency and dry matter partitioning suggest that the development of cultivars with improved nutrient utilization is possible.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available