3.8 Article

Interactive Performance of Wheat Nitrogen Fertilization and Inoculation with Growth-Promoting Bacteria

期刊

出版社

AMG TRANSCEND ASSOC
DOI: 10.33263/BRIAC134.304

关键词

biological nitrogen fixation; byproducts management; growth-promoting bacteria; subcritical water hydrolysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the effects of inoculating wheat with Azospirillum brasilense via foliar application at different nitrogen doses and explored the content of reducing sugars in wheat siliqua through physicochemical analysis. The results showed that proper nitrogen management is a key factor in increasing wheat yield. This indicates the crucial role of the association of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) in maximizing plant potential.
The exploitation of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) emerges as an important strategy for fixing atmospheric nitrogen (N) and making it available to plants. Correspondingly, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the inoculation with Azospirillum brasilense via foliar with distinct N doses (40, 20, and 0 kg/ha) for different wheat cultivars (Sossego, Toruk, and Quartzo). The experiment was conducted during the 2020 harvest at the State University of Rio Grande do Sul, Cachoeira do Sul, Brazil. A completely randomized design (CRD) in a 3x6 factorial scheme with four replications was applied. Yield components and grain yield were established. Furthermore, the physicochemical characterization of wheat siliqua biomass was executed based on subcritical water hydrolysis (SWH). Gluten and mass analysis was established. Appropriately, the grain yield was up to 3197.05 kg/ ha for the Sossego cultivar with the N dose of 40 kg/ ha. Up to 0.84 g reducing sugars/ 100 g wheat siliqua was obtained based on the SWH. Finally, this study promoted N management as a key factor in increasing grain yield. This scenario reports the importance of the association of PGPRs as a fundamental promoter of N for plants to express their maximum potential.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据